I have had discussion in another thread about this very sort of thing, that your average liver of life (who may or may not have any actual higher education) could tell you what's what. Instead, we usually get some researcher who goes out and does it all over again, starting from scratch with an obviously faulty premise, and reaches a totally ridiculous conclusion that wouldn't convince anyone (much less your own Grandma). Then these same funded and published researchers end up arguing endlessly about their faulty starting premise as if they can convince Grandma by the sheer [non]weight of sheepskins! [Grandma sez: Junior, just eat your Wheaties and leave the venomous serpents to us grown-ups.]

I'm not afraid of snakes. Never have been, since I knew I was alive and there was a world to explore that contained snakes. I did pay attention when Grandma said there's snakes that kill. That just made me even more interested, even if I was indeed more careful. It's a little strange when others (including those who are speaking with 'authority') are afraid, but you are not.

I'm Grandma now. Matriarch of the family. I can say with some emphasis and a significant degree of confidence in my authority to say so that there are snakes that kill, along with snakes that are welcome. When I say "watch out for snakes," I expect 'em to do so, because it's snake season. The live-in grandson knows he should listen to me, and is a valuable 2nd man in the eradication process - has been since he was a single-digit midget and knows a welcome snake from a foe. He's never been bit by either variety, and spends a lot of his time in summer guarding his younger and less experienced charges (with varying degrees of success, unfortunately).

The visiting city relatives have no idea what it is they're supposed to be looking out for. They might be afraid of any snake they see, but if they don't see snakes, what good is it?

If it were some sort of inbred instinct, they would see 'em and be afraid. If spotting the snake (and triggering a fear response) were the reason for good eyesight, city kids could spot snakes as well as we can. They can't, and that's a fact.

chunkdz - Chunk, I couldn't get anything to load from your link but some little award graphic. Just like I couldn't get the link to the pdf provided by the poster "razib" at Mesk's link. Can you just tell me what kinda snake you're talking about?

Not all evolution advocates find this sort of story-telling useful - see, for instance, razib at GNXP.

Mesk.

I've always been fond of snakes (and lizards, newts, efts and such), ever since I can remember. I'm also the only official Girl Scout expel-ee I've ever heard of. Got mad at the ringleader of the "Cooler-Than-Thou" crowd in my cabin at camp one year, put a black snake I'd befriended under her pillow just to see her lose it completely. The counselor who had to drive me home in the middle of the night laughed the whole way, said it was the absolute best thing she'd ever seen any scout do in all her years.

I don't have a problem with evolution. I just have problems with Neodarwinism's ridiculous version of it. As I said, I don't kill snakes unless they're venomous and in my immediate space. I don't kill non-venomous vermin-eaters or venomous ones outside my space. I think about it like I think about sic'ing the cats on mice in the house, killing mosquitoes, ticks, fleas, ants, carpenter bees, hornets, wasps and all other in-space vermin. I'm no Jain, even though I'm a vegetarian. It's my karmic duty to 'liberate' such vermin so they can come back as something more advanced next time… §;o)

I just realized who Harry Greene is. If you haven't already read it, I highly recommend Greene's book Snakes: The Evolution of Mystery in Nature. Even if you are inclined to doubt Darwinian explanations, the book is worthwhile for Greene's anecdotes of his field work, the descriptions of all the major snake groups and their natural history, and the absolutely gorgeous photographs.

It's a bit pricey on Amazon, but I once found a cheap copy on the sales table at Barnes and Noble. I'm sure a lot of libraries have it, too.

This city slicker is just no good around reptiles.

In that case, the best thing to do probably is "run away! run away!" or walk, so you don't trip and break your ankle!

If you aren't confident about identifying the snakes, it is easy to confuse cottonmouth/water moccasins with large watersnakes and copperheads with species like the beneficial mole kingsnakes, milksnakes, and cornsnakes. Even if you choose to kill the venomous guys, you don't want to kill the non-venomous rodent eaters.

When I lived in PA, a lot of the local guys swore up and down that they saw dangerous "water moccasins" on the Delaware river. What they were actually seeing were northern watersnakes, bad tempered critters but non-venomous. I've also seen a baby ratsnake doing his best rattlesnake impression complete with vibrating tail. It was cute, once I was sure that he wasn't a baby massassauga - since he was on the floor of my bathroom, I wanted to be sure.

The biggest venomous snakes are King Cobras (record is 24 feet, average 12). They have good eyesight - can track a human at 300 feet, and kill lots of people in India every year. But they don't eat people (or other primates) - they're cannibals. The latin name means "snake-eater."

The largest vipers in North America are the Timber Rattlers we have in these parts. They like rodents, rabbits, squirrels and such. The world's largest viper is the Central/South American Bushmaster. Average 6 feet long (record is 14), aggressive, heavy-bodied. Its primary prey are small rodents, birds, frogs, large insects and other snakes. The largest old world viper is the Gaboon Viper. His fangs can reach 2". He's well camouflaged, averages 6 feet long and is a heavy-bodied ground-dweller. Natural diet of large rodents, ground birds and even small antelopes.

Vipers simply don't naturally prey upon primates as food, though they will bite them defensively. They don't necessarily inject venom when biting critters they aren't planning to eat. According to herpetologist Harry Greene,

"Most major groups of primates kill and eat snakes," explains Greene. "They're just a great little grocery item. They're easy to kill, come in a nice neat package, and contain a lot of nutrition for their size."

Primate-eaters aren't venomous, though. Snake venom has components that are neurotoxins to immobilize and kill, and others that begin the digestion process. Like spider venom. Thus the venom is geared directly toward the acquisition of food - a predator weapon for the purpose of getting and ingesting the prey, not for defense. Venomous snakes do not eat primates, but primates do eat snakes. Using venom for defense is a secondary application. Isbell's just-so tale looks pretty iffy to me.

This city slicker is just no good around reptiles. I live in a new development that is still going through a lot of construction. They are awfully mad when you invade and occupy their land. Both copperheads and cottonmouths have been seen on the golf course and in front of people's houses.

Machetes are out for me, too close for comfort. I would imagine pinning it down would be the hard part for me. I assume that a swing with the shovel w/o pinning it down would not be effective? You are right, if I am not concerned with it nesting around my yard or getting bit by it at a later date, I would prefer to run away.

Shovels are good beheading devices. We also have an old bank-cutter that looks impressive but is too heavy for me to wield. Then there's machetes, flat-hoes and my grandson's sword collection. It's generally a 2-person job, with one pinning the snake with a staff or tri-fork so the beheading can be quick and clean. Our policy is that if you see one you stay right where you are (at least 3 feet away) and don't take your eyes off it - just yell "SNAKE!" and someone else will bring the tools. He'll stay coiled in defensive mode so long as you're there, but if you don't stay there he'll disappear right quick, only to strike again another day.

Snakes can move surprisingly fast when they want to, even the fat rattlers. The sheer decibel level of a cornered rattler will fairly deafen you, though. They don't like people or kept yards/gardens and are respectable participants in the ecosystem. We leave each other alone.

Copperheads are a version of moccasin, but smaller and more aggressive. I've not heard that moccasins or cottonmouths like living in tended yards or stalking humans and pets. Obviously, the biggest problem around here is with visiting city folk. You can warn them ten times a day to be alert for snakes, but they seem to have lost the capacity that snake-human co-evolution was supposed to have gifted them with. According to this just-so story, anyway. We've lived here 14 years, have to dispatch an average of 3 copperheads a year, and not one of us has been bitten. Go figure… §;o)

Isbell's paper has a section on "testing the hypothesis," including 9 core predictions which are essential to her hypothesis and if shown to be incorrect would lead one to reject it. She also lists 25 corollary predictions which "are not essential to the core hypothesis if refuted, but would support the core hypothesis if they are confirmed."

Of the core predictions, she argues that 5 are supported by existing evidence and 4 are novel predictions that require new research.