real tree work

Status
Not open for further replies.
"In changing times, the learners shall inherit the earth, while the learned shall find themselves very well equipped for a world that no longer exists."
-Eric Hoffer

@Daniel I double checked, and I don't see any citations on your posts? Where are your references to current science backing up your claims? It is amazing how much people project their own failings onto those who challenge them. You are using the same basic type of argument that you're complaining about. I haven't been doing this work for more than a couple of years, but I have studied a lot of varied subjects, and learning about things requires one to learn to discern bullshit from the legit information quickly. You sound like I feel I would sound if I was stubborn about taking informed advice, and I am a bit of an asshole too. Good luck with that.
 
Last edited:
Matias said:
"In changing times, the learners shall inherit the earth, while the learned shall find themselves very well equipped for a world that no longer exists."

@Daniel I double checked, and I don't see any citations on your posts? Where are your references to current science backing up your claims?
Click to expand...
My claim is that there is no science on reduction pruning...and you ask me to support that claim with scientific citations... that's how bright you are... But you're still green so you've got time. I wish you well on the journey...

Here's a good video explaining my pruning philosophy and showing the results of that ice storm:
 
Last edited:
Daniel said:
My claim is that there is no science on reduction pruning...and you ask me to support that claim with scientific citations... that's how bright you are... But you're still green so you've got time. I wish you well on the journey...

Here's a good video explaining my pruning philosophy and showing the results of that ice storm:
Click to expand...
First off, that video is tagged private, and I cant see it.

Secondly, I will concede that the request for citations was less than totally clear. I meant that you've provided no counterpoint that isn't wholly anecdotal, whilst denying any science that you're provided with. You do make claims in many of your comments, but do CYA by admitting that yours are merely your own, definitionally anecdotal, observations.

Observation is a fundamental part of the scientific method. I am gonna assume that you understand the method and acknowledge that said method has brought us myriad tools and systems that we've been building on since before the written word, correct? Because if you're denying the collected knowledge of so many that came before you, then we can't have a real discussion with you.
 
Matias said:
First off, that video is tagged private, and I cant see it.

Because if you're denying the collected knowledge of so many that came before you, then we can't have a real discussion with you.
Click to expand...
Have you read Kuhn's work on Scientific revolutions? The Structure of Scientific Revolutions

While you're trying to make yourself sound intelligent with that lingo, the substance of all that fluffy language is absurd and ridiculous...but hey, that fits perfectly here at TB as evidenced by the likes on your last post.

"Denying the collective knowledge of so many that came before you" is how science moves forward and always has...

Ever hear of a guy named Copernicus?

How about Barry Marshall? does that name ring a bell?
en.wikipedia.org

Barry Marshall - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

or Mendel?
or Semmelweis?
they killed him and all he was trying to do was to get doctors to wash their hands..

I love this line: "And Semmelweis was not very tactful. He publicly berated people who disagreed with him and made some influential enemies." Thank God you guys are just tree rats, nothing influential here.

Tesla died alone and penniless.

Do you know Shigo's history? He was ridiculed.. got thrown out of Germany.

And then there are all the other visionaries that were right and never got vindicated... countless and nameless at this point.

So you're a green tree man that barely knows which side of the rake to use and knows even less about the other crap you post up... ANd you want to cross swords with me here.. Let's do it.. this is fun.. almost too easy...

I do agree with that last line.. "we can't have a real discussion with you" NO... you can't

you can see it now..
 
Matias said:
First off, that video is tagged private, and I cant see it.

Secondly, I will concede that the request for citations was less than totally clear. I meant that you've provided no counterpoint that isn't wholly anecdotal, whilst denying any science that you're provided with. You do make claims in many of your comments, but do CYA by admitting that yours are merely your own, definitionally anecdotal, observations.

Observation is a fundamental part of the scientific method. I am gonna assume that you understand the method and acknowledge that said method has brought us myriad tools and systems that we've been building on since before the written word, correct? Because if you're denying the collected knowledge of so many that came before you, then we can't have a real discussion with you.
Click to expand...
Sums it up pretty well. I’d love to be a fly on the wall if Dan ever said that to Gilman.
 
treegongfu said:
I thought that video conversation with Guy was informative. Thanks for posting that Daniel.
Click to expand...
Should be required reading!!!

I just rewatched the whole thing... Guy says it all and says it well...

Is there anyone here that wants to cross swords with Guy?

Everything he says in this video is what I've been saying on this thread...

It's pretty simple... leave the middle alone, bring the sides in, and only take something off the top when required by structural problems in the main stem or roots...

Anyone that says different needs to pull their head out of the but.
 
Dogma about reducing trees is just that.
Some people are just stuck in that box.

There are many factors In choosing how and by how much you can reduce a tree.

Most notably species, but age of tree, desire of the client to retain and not remove, ongoing maintenance etc.
 
Mick Dempsey said:
Dogma about reducing trees is just that.
Some people are just stuck in that box.

There are many factors In choosing how and by how much you can reduce a tree.

Most notably species, but age of tree, desire of the client to retain and not remove, ongoing maintenance etc.
Click to expand...
And the most important factor of all...

Do you have the skill/equipment and ability to get out to all those branch tips where the cuts need to be made?
 
I have been waiting to see how long this thread would go before totally ending up in the self-aggrandizing Ranting-Asshole thread. It doesn't take long.

Take your medicine, Daniel, you nutjob.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

New threads New posts

Kask Stihl NORTHEASTERN Arborists Wesspur TreeStuff.com Teufelberger Westminster X-Rigging Teufelberger
Back
Top Bottom