Man vs. Earth

BRT

Well-Known Member
You do know that a tree's root system is part of its resource storage system as well as an access system.
That's the point--storage. They keep growing with the desire to far outpace usage needs. If they didn't, and a stress event occurred, they would not be able to sustain the life of the tree.

Wait just a minute--you're arguing that there is no waste? In nature? So....man's not a part of nature? I thought he climbed out of the primordial-slime, which occurred from the millions degrees Fahrenheit, which was generated by the big bang, like all the other creatures? This world's getting better & better right? Why would you stop the human race from obliterating the globe and exterminating ourselves and the planet as we know it? Surely something better & higher will come along. Do you want to stand in the way of progress? I mean, who are you to say this is as good as evolution can do?
 

Tom Dunlap

Here from the beginning
A Shigoism:

70%...plus or minus 10

I heard him explain what it means.

There is always friction or waste in any system...natural or created. No such thing as perpetual motion. Because of this natural waste the best that can be expected is about 80% efficiency. After that the system takes inordinate amounts of energy to grow or exist. In time, this extra effort, focused on growth or existence takes energy away from other critical functions. Waste is part of nature. How much and what kind of waste is the issue to me...and this thread it seems.
 

The_Archdruid

Well-Known Member
If we're going to do a big piece here on Nature and God and the mutability of metabolic functions lets just get right to it.

Does a ghost have an anus?

From a morphological analysis of Jacob Marley, it would seem so, right? Underneath those chains and all, I think there's still enough abdominal cavity for a typically configured colon. And who knows better than Dickens?

So there's that . . .
 

guymayor

Well-Known Member
"So....man's not a part of nature?" Strictly speaking, of course we are. Literally speaking man vs. nature is a false dichotomy. It can be reduced to absurdity so it's a fallacy, hence the unresolvable and eternal arguments. Like 'heading cut', the contradiction at the heart of the terminology dooms us to confusion, if we blindly adhere to it.

But in general (and Shigo's) unfortunate usage, and in the context of the thread, no.

Interesting thread; some delight in pulling out and spinning certain micro-points, in a vain effort to make predetermined political macro-points, reducing the thoughts without regard to the logical health of the discussion. As in the previous post, switching from common usage to the literal definitions, the discussion is effectively "topped". What a waste of time and energy!

Some engage their hearts and minds, and put their actions where their beliefs are. And in Redtree's case, they put their saws and their time and their businesses where their beliefs are, every day. Seeing this tree work, and the philosophy behind it, made reading the thread worthwhile. Thanks Ryan!
 

BRT

Well-Known Member
What a waste of time and energy!
Some engage their hearts and minds, and put their actions where their beliefs are.
Sure Guy. Here's what JeffGu said in one of his previous posts (And RedTree liked the post):

"No, I think going extinct isn't such a bad thing. Maybe a truly intelligent lifeform will arise from the ashes, you never know."

=They are intelligent and those who do not agree with them are not.

So don't accuse me of "pulling out and spinning" anything. You're the one off topic--pruning had nothing to do with this thread in its inception.

I am finding a true lack of balance on this forum. How many have left? I see a whole lot of good arbs here, but many with opposing political or environmental views have gone to another site (or at least do not dare voice their viewpoints any longer). Want carbon copies of yourself and your views Guy? I will say, it is audacious, if not dishonest, to suggest that you don't have any "predetermined political" views.
 

JeffGu

Well-Known Member
Deriving this: "=They are intelligent and those who do not agree with them are not."
From this: "No, I think going extinct isn't such a bad thing. Maybe a truly intelligent lifeform will arise from the ashes, you never know."

...demonstrates a huge deficit of reading comprehension skills. Since the object of the sentence is the extinction of the human race on the planet, and we can safely assume that a human being wrote it, the author is clearly including himself in the group of lifeforms that are not truly intelligent. To infer anything else from the comment would seem to indicate a paranoid assumption that someone in particular was the target of an underlying message, and that a presumption of superiority was indicated. As the author of the comment, I can assure you that neither is true.

It's always nice, though, to know that someone is there to explain to people what I really meant. Clearly, my writing skills are too deficient to do that myself.
 

BRT

Well-Known Member
Deriving this: "=They are intelligent and those who do not agree with them are not."
From this: "No, I think going extinct isn't such a bad thing. Maybe a truly intelligent lifeform will arise from the ashes, you never know."

...demonstrates a huge deficit of reading comprehension skills. Since the object of the sentence is the extinction of the human race on the planet, and we can safely assume that a human being wrote it, the author is clearly including himself in the group of lifeforms that are not truly intelligent. To infer anything else from the comment would seem to indicate a paranoid assumption that someone in particular was the target of an underlying message, and that a presumption of superiority was indicated. As the author of the comment, I can assure you that neither is true.

It's always nice, though, to know that someone is there to explain to people what I really meant. Clearly, my writing skills are too deficient to do that myself.
Yea, sure, you're admitting you're not intelligent. That's dishonest. If not on the surface, deep down, you know you don't believe that about yourself.
 

JeffGu

Well-Known Member
I believe that if I (and everyone else) was truly intelligent... I wouldn't need to worry about what human beings are doing to the planet, and ourselves. We'd use the same ingenuity that allows us to split the atom to make sure that nobody actually does it on the planet.
 

Redtree

Active Member
Well, what an exciting thread. Seriously, this is good stuff. I know I brought pruning into it on an extreme level. But the point was that we can sell pruning over removal and that would be man giving to nature. And hey, I thought I was on an arborist site to further the relativity of pruning. Pruning instead of removing, especially large trees, is probably one of the biggest things people here on this thread can do for Mother Earth, without having to ride your bike to work with your saddle and handsaw in a backpack. Actually, that's how I started.
Or have just one kid. My buddy called me a commy after that one last night. The idea is that it is promoted, educated, or even popular. Not that it is law. Imagine it was cool to have one kid. Enough about it being mean or lonely. Think of the pros not the cons. Think of what it does for nature. One of my best friends is a single child, and I admire him as a father, a business man. Big families are wonderful to be a part of I admit. So maybe we need to shift our culture to more to include friends in otherwise family occasions.
On the intelligence note. I would suspect that most here are relatively intelligent. And so is the human race. But it doesn't mean we make the right decisions. Einstein once said something like 'the ability of man to put the power into the hands of well meaning people has so far resisted all efforts'. This reminds me of BRTs' point that we have a control issue. The general population may be under the control of the government and corporate world. And it's a system that most of us gladly support. But we don't have to go through the door just because it's open. And many people are opening new doors. Eventually, hopefully, the sustainability trail blazers will overpower the mainstream and a new following will build up. I think it's already building. It just needs to be practiced more, not just talked about. Although talking is a part of the solution too. The public will hopefully and likely do more and more to demand greener ways. I just hope it's real green. Not just green on paper to look good. Does anyone know if corporate carbon credits are real? Or just a political image thing? I suspect a bit of both exists. Perhaps there is a European country that has really effective carbon credit applications.
If we all could take control over our own choices, and choose what is right more, and what is normal less, then we can get somewhere. And soon what is normal could be right. Wow normal is pretty horrible as of now, come to think of it. And crap, I wanted to look more normal? I'd rather look like mad max. Many people are getting somewhere already.
Einstein was actually quite aware of the fallout that came from his intelligence. Sadly, indirectly, he had one of the worst environmental footprints of all time, I would suspect. If I remember correctly, he actually was quite depressed about the whole bomb thing. Naturally. Maybe I'm thinking of someone else. The point is that we have great intelligence, but maybe lack foresight. Or we're smart stupid men who think 'lets just do it and see what happens'.
Plus the momentum we have with our demands and our greed is hard to just stop and turn around. Not that we need to turn around but we need to make some turns and I think we are. And I think we are intelligent enough to know the way through the turns. I just doubt that we have the willpower to change our greedy ways and bad habits. After all, through my upbringing, and probably yours, our habits didn't seem so greedy or bad. They just seemed normal. Normal can change. Just study up on more than just the HGTV network.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

guymayor

Well-Known Member
Deriving this: "=They are intelligent and those who do not agree with them are not."
From this: "No, I think going extinct isn't such a bad thing. Maybe a truly intelligent lifeform will arise from the ashes, you never know."
...demonstrates a huge deficit of reading comprehension skills. ...It's always nice, though, to know that someone is there to explain to people what I really meant. Clearly, my writing skills are too deficient to do that myself.
I had the same reaction after seeing the spin put on my post. wild inferences, out of left field. So many unintelligible words put in my mouth; like eating a Swahili dictionary.
 

mdvaden

Well-Known Member
Just watched the video for the first time today.

The "wisdom" aspect and general intent sounds fine to me, provided he doesn't try and sell me on the "global warming" panic.

He referenced storms that are worse than ever, and more trees cut down now than ever before, but I think historically over hundreds or millions of years, that's not quite accurate, although it makes for a cool song.

This planet is part of a much bigger picture, and its been laid waste in places and at times far greater than man could have done, when mankind as we know him was not even know to exist yet.

Also, Mt. Saint Helens eruption in 1983 or the Columbus Day Storm around 1962 along the west coast, are recent examples of how many trees can be leveled or broken by the planet Earth itself.

So as long as we don't lose sight that Earth and the universe cause far greater havoc than mankind, then encouragement to use wisdom and care for our resources are a good idea.
 

Treetopflyer

Well-Known Member
Just watched the video for the first time today.

The "wisdom" aspect and general intent sounds fine to me, provided he doesn't try and sell me on the "global warming" panic.

He referenced storms that are worse than ever, and more trees cut down now than ever before, but I think historically over hundreds or millions of years, that's not quite accurate, although it makes for a cool song.

This planet is part of a much bigger picture, and its been laid waste in places and at times far greater than man could have done, when mankind as we know him was not even know to exist yet.

Also, Mt. Saint Helens eruption in 1983 or the Columbus Day Storm around 1962 along the west coast, are recent examples of how many trees can be leveled or broken by the planet Earth itself.

So as long as we don't lose sight that Earth and the universe cause far greater havoc than mankind, then encouragement to use wisdom and care for our resources are a good idea.
Thanks for that post!
I just watched a program on the caldera of Yellowstone national park.. program on Smithssonian..really amazing place .They were saying when that one blows ,it could ,with focus on the word could , create a cloud that blocks the sun for years possibly and what I took away from that was basically game over man , maybe a few could survive .. I'm not sure how without the sun for five years..??
 

BRT

Well-Known Member
Since nobody seems to pick up on my sarcasm--and forums don't add a thing to expression or communication--let me say first of all that I am a huge fan of many forms of art.

Been thinking about this thread yesterday & this morning. Noticed you guys who talk about waste never mention art. But there is possibly no greater "waste" on this globe. Unless you narrowly define waste to fit things you disagree with. But art contributes nothing to food, shelter, or reproduction, so why not attack it? You want to look to nature as a model, correct? So humans are the only "animal" that expresses itself through art. The "waste" of art would make "over-packaging" look like an unobservable blip on the environmental radar. Think of the extent and grandeur of the budgets expended on art: just music-->

Musical instrument production inputs, millions of hours wasted practicing, university professors dedicated to its instruction, opera houses, radios & radio stations, home theater systems, sound studios, mp3 players, cds, Nashville, Seatle, Halls of Fame (Country, Rock, etc), dancing (gotta have music), wind chimes, etc.

What about the other forms of art? Painting, drawing, sculpture, architecture, theatre, fiction, and the biggest "waste" of all (which I actually happen to agree is waste)--Hollywood.

Can we even comprehend the billions if not trillions of dollars & resources poured into these each year? But, the left will never attack art as waste.

Not until they have a foothold, that is. Socialists wait until they have a choke-hold on their people before they start to rid the land of art. We witnessed this in Germany in the 1930's.

Want an example--the collective--called public schools--used to teach all sorts of things (shop, choir, drama, Latin, etc.)--now art programs, of all sorts, are nearing extinction. They teach what they're being tested on, and they teach it and test it to death. But art is waste--at least to public school boards/budgets across America.
 

JeffGu

Well-Known Member
There are oodles of catastrophic natural events that could occur that are capable of causing mass extinction. So could a handful of hydrogen weapons. But you don't need to murder someone by dumping a pound of poison in their Cheerios. Half a teaspoon a day in their orange juice will do the job too, it just takes longer.
 

MikePowers321

Well-Known Member
Since nobody seems to pick up on my sarcasm--and forums don't add a thing to expression or communication--let me say first of all that I am a huge fan of many forms of art.

Been thinking about this thread yesterday & this morning. Noticed you guys who talk about waste never mention art. But there is possibly no greater "waste" on this globe. Unless you narrowly define waste to fit things you disagree with. But art contributes nothing to food, shelter, or reproduction, so why not attack it? You want to look to nature as a model, correct? So humans are the only "animal" that expresses itself through art. The "waste" of art would make "over-packaging" look like an unobservable blip on the environmental radar. Think of the extent and grandeur of the budgets expended on art: just music-->

Musical instrument production inputs, millions of hours wasted practicing, university professors dedicated to its instruction, opera houses, radios & radio stations, home theater systems, sound studios, mp3 players, cds, Nashville, Seatle, Halls of Fame (Country, Rock, etc), dancing (gotta have music), wind chimes, etc.

What about the other forms of art? Painting, drawing, sculpture, architecture, theatre, fiction, and the biggest "waste" of all (which I actually happen to agree is waste)--Hollywood.

Can we even comprehend the billions if not trillions of dollars & resources poured into these each year? But, the left will never attack art as waste.

Not until they have a foothold, that is. Socialists wait until they have a choke-hold on their people before they start to rid the land of art. We witnessed this in Germany in the 1930's.

Want an example--the collective--called public schools--used to teach all sorts of things (shop, choir, drama, Latin, etc.)--now art programs, of all sorts, are nearing extinction. They teach what they're being tested on, and they teach it and test it to death. But art is waste--at least to public school boards/budgets across America.
Art, Music, Paintings, Drawings...etc, all have the potential to stimulate the human mind into deeper thought, and increased awareness (even if only temporarily). That is not "waste" unless you believe that it's material form must, in one way or another, benefit "the body" (or survival of the body for the matter)
 

JeffGu

Well-Known Member
Art is like herpes... some people get it, some don't. Art is so integral to function that much of our language centers around the relationship. I'm reminded of a billionaire who would rant about an art museum being a waste of money, but he owned a major sports team. Somehow, grown men being paid millions of dollars to play a kiddie game, and building a stadium at a cost of more than twenty times the cost of the art museum was not a waste of money. We're all entitled to our own perspective, but I can look at Frank Lloyd Wright's Falling Water and understand completely why he'll remain a part of our history, while the architects of our football stadium, who have hacked and slashed at it for decades adding more skybooths to increase capacity while it teeters on collapse, will be quickly forgotten when the taxpayers eventually realize that the economic gains are overshadowed by the economic and social losses.
 

BRT

Well-Known Member
Art is like herpes... some people get it, some don't.
But if pornography, strip clubs, and the like are your "art" preference--you may well get herpes.

Oh by the way; porn is $14,000,000,000 per year industry, and growing. Talk about waste!

Would you defend porn as legitimate entertainment, but not sports? How does art "have the potential to stimulate the human mind into deeper thought, and increased awareness (even if only temporarily)" (Mike Powers), and sports not stimulate the human body in the same way?

the architects of our football stadium, who have hacked and slashed at it for decades adding more skybooths to increase capacity while it teeters on collapse, will be quickly forgotten when the taxpayers eventually realize that the economic gains are overshadowed by the economic and social losses.
Did you have a bad experience with sports?

Do you think sports have created more "social losses" than the "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" (noticed that on your avatar) or other violent/horror/disturbed movies?
 

JeffGu

Well-Known Member
1) I doubt if even a porn producer, despite whining about freedom of expression, actually believes they are producing art.

2) I doubt if any substantial percentage of sports fans are improving their health by sitting in front of the TV, drinking beer and chanting "Go Big Red!" and I don't think anyone playing football at the collegiate or professional level is doing it just to stay in shape, considering the nature of the injuries.

3) Only with the fans. They used to park in my front yard... literally hop the curb and park in my yard... and then go ape shit when I had their cars towed away. Even to the point of death threats and waving a gun around. They apparently thought the NO PARKING ON MY LAWN signs didn't apply to them... because... BIG RED! Oh, and players. A basketball player that coach Danny Nee booted off the team for his criminal behavior. His girlfriend rented an apartment in a building my wife and I were managing for a friend for awhile. Evicted the girlfriend because their parties did over $2000 damage to the unit. The boyfriend was sitting out on the balcony trying to sell crack and pot to the other tenants, so had to ask him to leave the property. He had warrants out for his arrest, so standing around arguing with me about it didn't pan out too well for him. He bailed off the balcony and ran when the cops showed up, but he didn't get very far. I guess these would count as sports related bad experiences.

4) I doubt if the blatantly far-fetched movie has inspired nearly as many people to anti-social behavior as a home game in Lincoln, Nebraska... when nearly all of the police force is out dealing with the vandalism, assaults, DUI and drunk and disorderly that immediately follows.

Does that answer your questions?
 

BRT

Well-Known Member
1) I doubt if even a porn producer, despite whining about freedom of expression, actually believes they are producing art.

2) I doubt if any substantial percentage of sports fans are improving their health by sitting in front of the TV, drinking beer and chanting "Go Big Red!" and I don't think anyone playing football at the collegiate or professional level is doing it just to stay in shape, considering the nature of the injuries.

3) Only with the fans. They used to park in my front yard... literally hop the curb and park in my yard... and then go ape shit when I had their cars towed away. Even to the point of death threats and waving a gun around. They apparently thought the NO PARKING ON MY LAWN signs didn't apply to them... because... BIG RED! Oh, and players. A basketball player that coach Danny Nee booted off the team for his criminal behavior. His girlfriend rented an apartment in a building my wife and I were managing for a friend for awhile. Evicted the girlfriend because their parties did over $2000 damage to the unit. The boyfriend was sitting out on the balcony trying to sell crack and pot to the other tenants, so had to ask him to leave the property. He had warrants out for his arrest, so standing around arguing with me about it didn't pan out too well for him. He bailed off the balcony and ran when the cops showed up, but he didn't get very far. I guess these would count as sports related bad experiences.

4) I doubt if the blatantly far-fetched movie has inspired nearly as many people to anti-social behavior as a home game in Lincoln, Nebraska... when nearly all of the police force is out dealing with the vandalism, assaults, DUI and drunk and disorderly that immediately follows.

Does that answer your questions?
Yep--you're actually starting to seem pretty normal to me. (Bet that's a big relief to you :D)
 
Top