On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 14:43:01 +0100, "Des Higgins"
wrote:


"Geoff" wrote in message
.. .
On 19 Sep 2006 09:55:36 -0700, "Bill" wrote:


BAC wrote:
"Bill" wrote in message
oups.com...

BAC wrote:

Don't panic, it's been here for 250 years or so without 'taking
over'.

But the climate has heated up at an accelerated rate and now it might
be more sympathetic to this trees native conditions.


It may indeed, but that doesn't mean it will inevitably become a problem
here.

Good point.

(I probably got sucked into the Observer's screaming article title...
next time i'll buy the Mail on Sunday)


No doubt happily spread by CONservation hooligans, trying to hold back
the tide of evolution.


It is actually undoing millions of years of evolution by letting species mix
willy nilly.
Over long time spans, you get more and more species and species mixtures
evolving that are highly specific to particular locations and habitats and
which can do this because they are isolated
Then when we come along and mix them with each other you get species warfare
and you end up with fewer species as one species replaces others either
directly through competition or indirectly through habitat loss/change (e.g.
Rhodendron ponticum in SW Ireland are replacing Oakwoods and all the mosses
and liverworts that live in them). That is backwards evolution towards the
kind of species mix you get in supermarket carparks.

Disgruntled of Dublin

I agree. Just take a look at mankind, and what happened.