Even if you incorrectly call ginkgos’ unprotected seeds “flowers” (which are definitionally limited to the angiosperms), what I didn’t discuss earlier – because the “flower” thing was a more obvious indication the writer had no idea what they were talking about and because my research turned up nothing – is that I did try to find any scientific literature about ancient insects pollinating ginkgos. I found nothing, and given they assert this entirely without evidence (or even identifying the insect), it seems like they misremembered or straight-up fabricated it.
Even if you incorrectly call ginkgos’ unprotected seeds “flowers” (which are definitionally limited to the angiosperms), what I didn’t discuss earlier – because the “flower” thing was a more obvious indication the writer had no idea what they were talking about and because my research turned up nothing – is that I did try to find any scientific literature about ancient insects pollinating ginkgos. I found nothing, and given they assert this entirely without evidence (or even identifying the insect), it seems like they misremembered or straight-up fabricated it.
We have evidence of ancient insects pollinating ancient gymnosperms. We have no evidence that I know of or could find that 1) ancient insects pollinated ginkgos and 2) died off such that ginkgos had to rely solely on non-insect means.