ISA and religion

[ QUOTE ]
as well as a billion+ believers.

[/ QUOTE ]
"The majority opinion is a proof worth nothing." René Descartes


MisterSir,

There may be a billion+ believers in Christianity, but there is also a billion+ believers in Islam. Many of the tenets of those belief systems are mutually exclusive. How should we decide who is right? Crusades? Jihads? Inquisitions?

There is no fool-proof way to determine who is right. But there is a fool-proof way to determine that painting wounds on trees is useless. This is precisely why we should invite arboricultural researchers to speak and not pastors, priests, rabbis, mullahs, gurus, or clergy of any sort.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Mario,

....

Your statement reveals that you have a poor or perhaps negligible understanding of how science works. Science is cumulative and self-correcting. This scientific ability to admit previous errors and mistakes is the very strength of the process. Can you provide a citation for the scientific paper(s) that expound on the efficacy of painting tree wounds? Have you read a scientific paper supporting wound painting? I’m not saying they don’t exist, I’ve just never read one.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let me give provide this ...

Dr. Shigo wrote that there were "HUNDREDS of papers" of claims about wound dressing. But "FEW" which included "experiments with controls and dissections". So obviously there were some papers with some form of controls and dissections.

Now ...

Dr. Shigo also wrote that he spent "5 years" himself, working on beneficial tree wound paint development.

Going on what Shigo has written, it seems apparent that there was research leading to wound sealer use. He just does not give them a pat on the back for it.

Shigo is part of the our self-correcting. There was nothing negligible about my understanding on this matter.

cool.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
Let me give provide this ...

Dr. Shigo wrote that there were "HUNDREDS of papers" of claims about wound dressing. But "FEW" which included "experiments with controls and dissections". So obviously there were some papers with some form of controls and dissections.

Now ...

Dr. Shigo also wrote that he spent "5 years" himself, working on beneficial tree wound paint development.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, that's great. I haven't read any of those papers and I would be very interested in what they say. Based on your response I assume you haven't read any of them either. Unfortunately, I still don't know where to find them.
 
There is no shortage of credible data supporting wound paints. Just ask any arborist working in Wilt territory or the practitioner open minded enough to work with any number of biocontrol coverings for a specific purpose.

Even Dr. Shigo -clearly- showed a lower instance of decay 7 years into this study. See table 8. WOUND DRESSINGS: RESULTS OF STUDIES OVER 13 YEARS

Just another tool for an informed arborist.

Now you cats can get back to your Christian bashing.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[I haven't read any of those papers and I would be very interested in what they say. Based on your response I assume you haven't read any of them either. Unfortunately, I still don't know where to find them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's an available reference:

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...mWuSGSYHEeBK11w



I can't help but notice the thread swing back and forth between prayer at ISA meetings--and wound paint.

Could both issues be about chanting?





Bob Wulkowicz
 
[ QUOTE ]
Now you cats can get back to your Christian bashing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Knowledgequest,

To call what I've been saying "Christian bashing" is to seriously—and possibly intentionally—misunderstand my point. I object to sermons from the dais over lunch at ISA meetings. I object to any overt religious rituals by any person acting in an official capacity at ISA meetings. That is all. This is not directed at Christians, it is directed at religious bullys only, and is independent of what particular religious viewpoint they hold. In the United States, this just often happens to be a small subset of Christians. There are many people, Christian and non-Christian alike, who agree with this precept.

Non-Christian does not mean atheist. It does not mean infidel. It's an inclusive term containing Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, atheists, agnostics, Jainists, Wiccans, and includes any other religious viewpoint one can list.

I'm bashing religious bullying only, regardless of religious viewpoint.


[ QUOTE ]
There is no shortage of credible data supporting wound paints. Just ask any arborist working in Wilt territory or the practitioner open minded enough to work with any number of biocontrol coverings for a specific purpose.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you actually read my comments? I'm not interested in anecdotal data, I'm interested in scientific papers that show the efficacy of wound painting. I stated clearly and unequivocally that I did not doubt the existence of such papers. I stated clearly that I would be interested in reading such papers if Mario would provide some citations.
 
[ QUOTE ]
There is no shortage of credible data supporting wound paints. Just ask any arborist working in Wilt territory or the practitioner open minded enough to work with any number of biocontrol coverings for a specific purpose.

Even Dr. Shigo -clearly- showed a lower instance of decay 7 years into this study. See table 8. WOUND DRESSINGS: RESULTS OF STUDIES OVER 13 YEARS

...

[/ QUOTE ]

Also, where I was quoting Dr. Shigo, was from his book

A NEW TREE BIOLOGY

The section on wound dressings.

I tend to find little interest in old studies, because more recent teaching and articles I've read from credible people have explained the main why's for the use of wound dressing in the past: including what they could see on the outside, but not on the inside. So in a way, I find the recent material to hold the value of reading old and new and the same time.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Now you cats can get back to your Christian bashing.

[/ QUOTE ]

(Butler)

Knowledgequest,

To call what I've been saying "Christian bashing" is to seriously—and possibly intentionally—misunderstand my point ....

I'm bashing religious bullying only, regardless of religious viewpoint.



[/ QUOTE ]

cool.gif
Shigo offers you another lesson.

When he wrote about wound dressings, he said

"Short-term experiments with wound treatments can be very deceptive because decay usually takes several years to develop."

That's why your attitude was more likely to be unveiled as the thread progressed from short-term to long-term. First you started the accusations about lying, etc., etc., etc., and eventually it led to further melt-down of telling people they don't understand what they completely understand.

And then your talk about bullying, is self-inflicted where you refer to yourself as "bashing". It almost gives the impression that you've been taken to the wood shed a few times and hold some kind of bitterness. But your own words specify bashing. It connotes arrows of conversation returning back to the one who spoke with a bow.

cool.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
There is no shortage of credible data supporting wound paints. Just ask any arborist working in Wilt territory or the practitioner open minded enough to work with any number of biocontrol coverings for a specific purpose.

Even Dr. Shigo -clearly- showed a lower instance of decay 7 years into this study. See table 8. WOUND DRESSINGS: RESULTS OF STUDIES OVER 13 YEARS

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you actually read my comments? I'm not interested in anecdotal data, I'm interested in scientific papers that show the efficacy of wound painting.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, I read your comments. You said...

[ QUOTE ]
But there is a fool-proof way to determine that painting wounds on trees is useless.

[/ QUOTE ]
Would you demonstrate for us?

Mr. Butler, please explain how the Shigo, Shortle work in the paper Bob and I provided for you is anecdotal. Or possibly you are unaware of the data surrounding biocontrols on wounds? Or possibly you are not familiar with the efficacy of pruning paint to protect trees from vector activity? Simple internet searches should provide you with several examples of quantitative work carried out in this arena.
 
[ QUOTE ]


Now you cats can get back to your Christian bashing.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is exactly what this thread is about. If Christians would view themselves as part of our society and offer mutual respect to those who disagree, we'd probably find few complaints about public prayer. But when a very reasonable request to keep our ISA events on-topic comes along, you see it as Christian bashing. I could show you christian bashing; send a PM and I'll forward some links to sites that will demonstrate how thoroughly this is not it (though your response tends to provoke the part of me that would love to itemize all the things I dislike about christianity).

I have been very careful to respect the beliefs of others throughout this thread, as has Glenn (thanks, btw, Glenn, for supporting me in this so effectively). All I am asking is that you show me the same respect.

Here's another example. Say you went to a conference and a speaker comes out for opening remarks. If he started by saying, "Let's look at these slides of my model airplanes," would you find that appropriate? It isn't that anyone is likely to be offended by this--nobody really cares if he wants to build models. But it is off-topic and a waste of everyone's time. When I go to a conference, I am paying a pretty hefty registration fee, losing income because I miss work, and often I have to buy a hotel room, all to learn more about being a good arborist. I don't want my time to be wasted on something that doesn't relate to trees. Show me some respect and take your prayers somewhere private or to a church, where they belong, and nobody will bash you. It's that simple.
 
[ QUOTE ]
(though your response tends to provoke the part of me that would love to itemize all the things I dislike about christianity).

[/ QUOTE ]

Babberney, my response was about pruning paint. If addressing Mr. Butler's ignorance on the subject provokes you in some way then you will likely find "offense" in just about anything.
crazy.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
Babberney, my response was about pruning paint. If addressing Mr. Butler's ignorance on the subject provokes you in some way then you will likely find "offense" in just about anything.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am offended that you hijacked this thread, which is not meant to have anything to do with pruning paint.

I am also offended that you apparently consider disagreement about prunng paint to be Christian bashing.

Or maybe I should just be offended that you tried to hide your remark about Christian bashing behind this misdirection.

So tell us, straight up: do you think it is okay for the ISA (or one of its chapters) to add prayer to the agenda of its events? What if it is a Muslim prayer? What if it is a prayer to Gaia?
 
Knowledgequest,

Look at my previous response to you again. I quoted your first paragraph only. I was not referring to Shigo and Shortle's paper as anecdotal, but to your statement about asking working arborists. Did you deceitfully quote me incorrectly in your last post by including the second paragraph in your quote or was it an honest mistake? Also you didn't cite Shigo's paper, Bob did. Your post referred to Shigo's paper only obliquely with no citation. I had no way of knowing what you were referring to. I was busy writing my response to you before I read Bob's post.

[ QUOTE ]
Sure, I read your comments. You said...


[ QUOTE ]
But there is a fool-proof way to determine that painting wounds on trees is useless.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]
I think there are a few problems here. One, I could have written what I meant more clearly, two, you're removing the sentence from context. Let's look at the sentence in the context of what I wrote.

[ QUOTE ]
There may be a billion+ believers in Christianity, but there is also a billion+ believers in Islam. Many of the tenets of those belief systems are mutually exclusive. How should we decide who is right? Crusades? Jihads? Inquisitions?

There is no fool-proof way to determine who is right. But there is a fool-proof way to determine that painting wounds on trees is useless. This is precisely why we should invite arboricultural researchers to speak and not pastors, priests, rabbis, mullahs, gurus, or clergy of any sort.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was simply contrasting scientific methods for obtaining answers with religious practices of relying on authority and ancient texts. I did not intend to mean that we have currently determined all there is to know about pruning paint and trees. Let me rephrase the sentence, "But there is a fool-proof way to determine if painting wounds on trees is useless." Is that clear now? We can't determine if many religious assertions are true or false, but we can determine if assertions about tree health and pruning paint are true or false, because we can do the experiment. Again, my overarching point is that we should discuss arboriculture at our meetings and leave religion out of the official program.

I only used the pruning paint example, because it's the one Mario introduced in his argument.

[ QUOTE ]
Would you demonstrate for us?

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't understand your request. I'm a practicing arborist, not a scientist. I read scientific papers, I don't write them.

[ QUOTE ]
Babberney, my response was about pruning paint. If correcting Mr. Butler's ignorance on the subject provokes you in some way then you will likely find "offense" in just about anything.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't need to correct my ignorance on the efficacy of using pruning paint because I have clearly stated I haven't read any papers about it. I've never dealt with oak wilt and I've never painted a pruning wound.

I haven't read the Shigo paper Bob linked to yet, but I see the abstract begins, "Many materials were used in and on experimentally-inflicted wounds in many studies over a 13-year period. No material prevented decay. The individual tree had a greater effect on the wound than the treatments."

So this might not be quite what I was looking for. I'll have to read the paper.
 
Fair enuf, Glenn.

Babberney, I've no interest in responding to your trolling. I'm simply going to wish you success in finding some sort of peace.

God Bless.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Fair enuf, Glenn.

Babberney, I've no interest in responding to your trolling. I'm simply going to wish you success in finding some sort of peace.

God Bless.

[/ QUOTE ]

Trolling? I am not sure that word means what you think it does.

But if you have nothing relevant to offer on this topic, I appreciate your decision to offer it. And so peace was found.

(R)amen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom