Which came first, the fang or the poison?

[Mallon]

The theory of evolution has evolved so far from Darwin's idea that he would not recognize it. Goodbye and God Bless.

I don't know of too many biologists who would agree with you. Darwin's theory has certainly changed in the last 150+ years (wouldn't be science if it hadn't!), but the fundamentals are still intact. Really, though, this is turning into a bit of an argumentum ad nauseum.

Did you ever manage to contact any specialists with your questions, Chesterton?

 

[Chesterton]

No, I haven’t tried yet but I will. The guy mentioned in this article might have ideas about the OP:

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2008/07/31/2317789.htm

“Dr Bryan Fry, of the University of Melbourne's Bio21 Institute, who contributed to the new research, says advanced snakes share a common ancestor that had venom glands before fangs developed.

“’Logically venom preceded fangs as there cannot be a selection pressure for the evolution of intricate delivery systems [for venom] in the absence of something worth delivering,’ he says.”​

It seems his statement could be equally logical vice-versa, but what do I know? Fry’s not mentioned on the Bio21 site, but I’ll try and find him through them, or find someone. I’ll post again.

 

[InTheCloud]

Many primitive snakes do not have fangs, they bite and the venon, just a modified form of saliva just soaks the wound.

So I say, the venom.