Don and Paul, Always in good fun my ENTS brothers. :-)
Looking forward to a rendezvous where we can do some verbal wrestling (I wouldn't dare tackle Big Don physically!) Gary On Apr 15, 2009, at 1:19 AM, DON BERTOLETTE wrote: > Paul- > I think (well at least in my case) that Gary was bragging on > us...while I was able immediately to pronounce sesquipedalian, I was > way off on it's meaning which I found consulting Wikipedia...whose > first entry was: > Etymology > > Lit. “a foot and a half long” > -Don > PS: Reading further along I think what Gary was trying to say was > that we were using big words...having uttered 'sesquipedalian' > himself, I guess that would be self-indicting? All in good fun, > perhaps at John K.'s expense... > > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: [ENTS] Re: Even if you think it is a hoax > Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 22:06:36 -0400 > > PJ, > > You sesquipedalian! > > G > On Apr 14, 2009, at 6:00 PM, pauljost tds.net wrote: > > Don, > > We think way too much alike. If we ever meet face to face, I'd like > to discuss the Shigocracy of symplastlessness over a cool brew... or > two... better yet, after we have too many, late into the night, > let's drag some potentially alien contaminated/infested urban logs > into some old growth forests to help improve it's CWD... > > PJ > > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 2:05 PM, DON BERTOLETTE > <[email protected]> wrote: > Steve- > If you'll permit me to answer a question with a question, I'd ask > you to define "symplastless"? > > -Don > > Subject: [ENTS] Re: Even if you think it is a hoax > Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 08:11:11 -0500 > > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > > Don, > > Now you know that we are not afraid to be prodding around inside > worm cans (J)! Again, to what are some of the specifics to the > “Shigo Doctrine” do you refer? > CODIT? Lateral pruning? > > Steve > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of DON BERTOLETTE > Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 6:07 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [ENTS] Re: Even if you think it is a hoax > > Steve/Chris- > Hmmmm, 'can of worms' time...:>} > A while back, one of our forum members held wholly to the 'Shigo > Doctrine'...to the exclusion of any other views...if you fully > subscribe to all that Shigo professed, then I would have to indicate > that I am one of the many who remain somewhat skeptical of some of > his pronouncements. He was controversial in his time, and time > hasn't really changed much in the retrospective view of his > hypotheses, theories. > But you know what, on a more personal basis, in my pursuit of a wide > variety of scientific disciplines, I have encountered jargon/ > terminology specific to each discipline, but never with the verve > and audacity of Shigo...if either of you could 'translate' Shigo's > views into a language I might understand, I'd be sure to listen to > you...I scored very well on the MLATs (Modern Language Aptitude > Test, I think), but he's Greek to me! > -Don > Subject: [ENTS] Re: Even if you think it is a hoax > Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 13:40:18 -0400 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > I too am curious especially since I'm an ISA Certified Arborist and > also met Dr. Shigo at one of his last workshops before he passed away. > > I don't think you could find another person who has had more > influence on Arboriculture than Alex Shigo. > > Chris Girard - CTSP > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]]on Behalf Of Steven Springer > Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 9:50 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [ENTS] Re: Even if you think it is a hoax > Don, > > IM ALL FOR THATI HOPE YOU ARENT ONE OF THOSE ARBORISTS THAT > SUBSCRIBES WHOLLY TO THE SHIGO DOCTRINE;>} > > My curiosity is peaked, to what portion of the Shigo Doctrine do you > refer? I am convinced of the Compartmentalization of Decay in Trees > (CODIT) and the lateral pruning methods are sound. > > Steve > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of DON BERTOLETTE > Sent: Friday, April 10, 2009 3:11 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [ENTS] Re: Even if you think it is a hoax > > Steve....I'm responding in SMALL CAPS IN THE BODY OF YOUR TEXT > BELOW... > All, > My objective(s) in raising this issue of Global Warming before this > board was to (1) recognize that the perceived consensus promoted is > not as wide spread as perhaps thought; WIDESPREAD ENOUGH THAT I FEEL > THAT THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE SHOULD BE APPLIED TO YOUR ASSERTION > THAT IT ISNT, AND THAT STEPS SHOULD BE TAKEN TO DIMINISH OUR IMPACT > ON THE EARTHS ATMOSPHERE, WATERS, AND TERRAIN UNTIL WE CAN > CONCLUSIVELY DETERMINE OTHERWISE... (2) the reliable data (that > which has not to have been shown faulty) is not as conclusive to an > applicable world-wide crisis WHILE I HAVE PROVIDED A NUMBER OF > LOCAL AND REGIONAL LOCATIONS THAT SUPPORT THE DATA, FROM MY OWN > PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, THE LIST OF OTHER ANECDOTAL ACCOUNTS IN > ACADEMIC PERIODICALS (READ CURRENT REPUTABLE, REPLICABLE SCIENTIFIC > SOURCES) IS SO WIDE SPREAD (READ GLOBAL) AS TO BE ACCEPTED AS > CONCLUSIVE ENOUGH, NOT TO CONTINUE WITH A MAINTAIN STATUS QUOAND > DONT BOTHER CHANGING OUR ILL-ADVISED, ENVIRONMENT DESPOILING WAYS.. > > My experience regarding this consensus gathering has been limited to > those boots on the ground colleagues in the Forest Service, at the > Federal and State level (remain un-named to protect the innocent!). > STEVE, I STARTED WORKING FOR FEDERAL AGENCIES (BLM IN 1967; USFS IN > 1969, NPS IN 1998)AND ITS NOT BEEN SINCE 2002 THAT MY BOOTS (WHITES > LOGGERS, FOR THE RECORD) DIDNT HIT THE GROUND EVERY DAY. I HAVE > BEEN ALTERNATELY A LAND SURVEYOR, A ROAD DESIGNER, A TIMBER MARKER, > A GIS TECHNICIAN, AND FINALLY A RESTORATION FORESTER. If one > chooses to research this issue deeper, there are many in the > scientific field at a world-wide scale that are very skeptical and > will not mince words in calling those who are convinced as fools! > IVE HEARD THIS SAID, BUT I CANT IMAGINE THE STATE OF DENIAL THAT > THEY MUST BE INIT IS WISE FOR SCIENTIST TO BE SKEPTICAL, INDEED IT > IS THE BASIS OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD TO QUESTION ASSUMPTIONSBUT THE > STATE OF DENIAL THAT COMES TO MY MIND THAT REPUTABLE SCIENTISTS > WOULD REFER TO THOSE WILLING TO ACCEPT THE PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE > IN SUPPORT OF MANS AUGMENTATION TO THE CAUSES OF THE GLOBAL CLIMATE > CHANGE CURRENTLY UNDERWAY, BEFUDDLES ME. It is common to be of > the opinion that only the Rush Limbaughs and Sean Hannitys promote > this skepticism, this is erroneous. UNFORTUNATELY THEY ARE NOT A > SMALL SOURCE OF THIS SKEPTICISM I suppose that if a true consensus > was conducted among us world-wide, the split would lean more toward > the skeptic rather than the convinced WE REALLY DIFFER IN OUR > PERCEPTION OF THE WORLD HERE!!!; or at best only half NOT EVEN > CLOSE, PROVIDE YOUR FIGURES. Does this make morons of one side? > NO, I AGREE THAT YOU DONT HAVE TO BE A MORON TO BE IN DENIALNo, this > reveals an effective argument for conclusion has not been made. NOT > TRUE, AN REPUATABLE AND REPLICABLE ARGUMENT HAS BEEN MADEITS JUST > THAT APPARENTLY THE OVERWHELMING SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS HASNT BEEN > EFFECTIVE WITH YOU, AND OTHER INTRANSIGENT SKEPTICS So, why arent > more speaking freely regarding their opposition? It is recognized as > politically correct and job-safe to remain silent or non-committal. > THROUGHOUT MY UNHERALDED CAREERS, I FUNCTIONED AS AN AGENT OF > CHANGE, DIDNT REMAIN SILENT, AND NO ONE WHO KNOWS ME WOULD ACCUSE ME > OF BEING NON-COMMITALIM NOT TAKING THIS PERSONALLY, MERELY REBUTTING > YOUR ASSUMPTION. AS IM SURE, MANY ON THIS FORUM WOULD, WERE THEY > NOT AS OUTSPOKEN AS I;>} > Much of the data (not all) presented has been refuted or shown to > be flawed (the hockey-stick analogy for instance). We all recognize > that conflicting data or that which reveals itself to be inclusive, > causes us to fail to reject the null in statistical probability. > While many have done well, detailed work concerning climate change > and its cause and effect, there still is not enough evidence to > reach a sound conclusion regarding a world-wide crisis. This fact > is evident even in some of the responses given on this post. STEVE, > YOU STILL HAVE NOT RESPONDED TO THE LEE FRELICHS COMMENTTHIS ENTIRE > PARAGRAPH PROVES YOUR UNWILLINGNESS TO CONSIDER INFORMATION NEW TO > YOU, INFORMATION THAT ISNT FLAWED, INFORMATION THAT ISNT > CONFLICTING, AND NOT DOUBLE NEGATIVE GOBBLEDY GOOK ABOUT STATISTICAL > PROBABILITY. YOUVE OTHERWISE SHOWN SIGNS OF INTELLIGENCE, FLAWED > ONLY BY YOUR RELUCTANCE TO CONSIDER ALTERNATIVES. > So what is going on? Well, I do not have all the answers. I can > only critically examine that which is around me and the works of > others then make my surmising, like you. The reliable and conclusive > data that we have to this point reveals a sometimes volatile, > variable and inconsistent patterned planet. At a micro level we can > sometimes establish caused weather patterns, other times we cannot. > At a macro level, this is an ardent undertaking, which may be above > the ability of mortal man. There is much that we will probably > never understand about our natural world. Perhaps, we should > consider that the world changes naturally (coastlines, Greenland, > et. al.) and without recognizable patterns and we are unable to > understand or explain. Is the United States in the early stages of a > collective micro climate change? Perhaps, is it because of our > doing or could it be part of an unexplainable natural process? We > may never have the answer. > READ LEE FRELICHS POST, AND WE CAN CONTINUE THIS > DISCUSSIONOTHERWISE WELL HAVE TO AGREE THAT YOURE GOING TO CONTINUE > TO DISAGREETHAT SAID, I AGREE, LETS TALK TREES, AS IVE SAID ALL IM > GOING TO SAY, UNLESS ITS TO DISCUSS THE FRELICH POST > One of the main tenants of Global Warming is that man; particularly > those citizens of industrialized nations are to blame. It is true > that we can degrade our local environment, contribute a non-point > pollutant for our neighbors, or even manipulate weather patterns to > a small extent, at a micro level. But to make the assumption that > the way it is in my backyard is conducive to the whole world is a > bit unfounded and illogical. This one tenant in this issue perhaps > draws the deepest battle lines. > With all this said, I respectfully stand beside my arguments as > presented. As one who may appear to you as crying from the > wilderness regarding this issue, I am not beside myself among those > in our field. > I am new to this website and have come to enjoy it! Now, we can > move on to talk about the trees (large, champions) rather than the > forest! AS IVE STATED ABOVE, IM ALL FOR THATI HOPE YOU ARENT ONE OF > THOSE ARBORISTS THAT SUBSCRIBES WHOLLY TO THE SHIGO DOCTRINE;>} > I'D ALSO LIKE TO ADD THAT YOU'VE ACQUITTED YOURSELF WELL, SPOKEN > RESPECTFULLY ABOUT TOPICS THAT AREN'T ALWAYS UNIVERSALLY AGREED > UPON, AND WE APPRECIATE YOUR FORUM PRESENCE. > > SINCERELY, > DON > Respectfully > Steve > > ________________________________ > > Windows Live: Keep your life in sync. Check it out. > <http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_allup_1a_explore_042009 > > > > > <BR > > Rediscover Hotmail®: Get quick friend updates right in your inbox. > Check it out. > > > > > > Rediscover Hotmail®: Now available on your iPhone or BlackBerry > Check it out. > > > > > > > > > > > Hotmail® is up to 70% faster. Now good news travels really fast. > Find out more. > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org Send email to [email protected] Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
