Personally I don't see any diff in having to google 'greenbriar' to come up with the name 'smilax' or google 'post oak' to come up with 'Quercus stellata'. It makes for "fun" reading and I have a lot more trouble just getting the spelling right when typing in something like Krascheninnikovia lanata or Chamaebatiaria millefolium or Symphyotrichum falcatus var. commutatus or Philostrophe tagetina or better yet when they are going through yet another name change like Chrysothamnus nauseosus (Ericameria nauseosa) than I do with googling an easy to spell name like greenbriar. I typically end up in the same place either way. Its even more fun when the book is new and I'm trying to manipulate the book to stay open long enough with one hand and type out a 30+ letter name with the other hand without it falling on the floor. That gets old quick. As far as those newly invented 'come hither--you need this latest creation' commercial TM names are concerned, a lot of them get on my nerves. Maybe I'm just jaded having been in the commercial art biz too long but its so obviously manipulating. I recently saw a poor echinacea on this very forum so over-bred into an effete fluffy pink monstrosity which was so genetically dolled up that it no longer resembled a noble echinacea at all -- I thought the more fitting cultivar name should be 'Jon Benet Ramsey' to reflect how ridiculously artificial looking some of these creations of genetic manipulating have become. I don't mind a reasonable improvement but come on, there is a limit. Names aside, I am more concerned with the direction of artificiality of the plants themselves and flowers that look like falsies bred for customers who seem to be ever more demanding with their whims & need for novelty. If I was reading a book and all the plant names in the text were only the Linneaen ones I'd be spending more time on google than reading the book and that would be more irritating than the other way around. My preference is having both names, one on top of the other (preferably under a picture) but it wouldn't bother me a bit if the formal names were in the index and not the text at all. If I needed to get more specific it would be easy enough to flip to the back of the book. Otherwise, I'd just google.

Sometimes I wonder about you, linn z ... But ... you're not linn zz-z-z, asleep at the switch, as it looks as though you're onto this Colorado web ... whatever it may be! Congratulations on your gumshoe capabilities. Anyone else agree with you? ole joyful P.S. Maybe it's the rarefied air? o j

The Defenses opening statement was Caylee died on June 16th due to drowning in the family's backyard pool. Casey suffered years of abuse (sexual) from her Father and also her Brother. Because of that she lived in denial and learned to act if everything was normal and she lied about everything to make it so. They claim Casey's Father found her in the pool and disposed of the body because Casey's Mother would never forgive her. He then tried to 'frame' Casey to make it look like murder. Somehow they are tying the meter reader who found the body into this as well. Her lawyer repeated a few times 'follow the duct tape trail'. We shall see. Imagine if they can find a link between George (Casey's Father) and the meter reader! This case would be turned upside down!!!! Say George did hide the body, told the meter reader where it was and asked him to report it and keep the reward!!???!!! That would explain the 3 calls he made over a period of months. He called but the police didn't find the body. One cop was fired over not taking the call seriously. Remember Dominic Casey (the Parents lawyer) was seen walking around that area with a cell phone prior to the body being discovered. She cries during the testimony when the jurors are present, but laughs and jokes when they leave the room at times. This case has so many twists and turns I can't help but watch and speculate.

I watched the CBS shows and I've watched the Dateline and some of the Dr. Phil. I don't know what to think, other than believing an intruder is the least-likely scenario. Not impossible, but very unlikely, due to the way the note was written, the way the body was discovered, and Burke's interviews shortly after the crime and 18 months after the crime. Burke said he heard his mother come into his room and then go out of it looking for JonBenet, and then he heard her in hysterics (as he said in the interview afterward "going psycho") and just stayed in bed pretending to sleep or trying to sleep, rather than go try to find out what had happened. Picture your own kids. You burst into your 9 year old's room and then just as suddenly depart. You are frantically crying and screaming, alerting your spouse and then placing a 911 call. Your 9 year old doesn't freeze with fear. They don't hide. They also don't come ask you what's wrong. They don't go find dad and ask what's wrong. They just stay in bed and wait. The only reason I can think of for him to do this is either that he was used to the sound of adults "going psycho" in other parts of the house and did not find that unusual/alarming--or he knew what the problem was and was waiting to find out how his parents were going to handle it.