ENTS: Shigo had a good reputation among scientists. Also, I checked ISI (Institute for Scientific Information, the basic keeper of statistics on scientitsts publication records). He had 54 papers published in the peer-reviewed literature and 573 citations in the database covering 1975 to today. That's comparable to most university faculty.
Lee Paul Jost wrote: > All, > > From the "outside" looking in, these are my observations: Shigo > brings up mixed feelings on this site due to the audaciously demeaning > manner in which he was presented to our members by the author of the > treedictionary site. With no apparent formal education in related > fields other than attending Shigo seminars and then reading his past > works (according to his own online resume), he went on to defiantly > challenge practically every basic statement that ENTS members made in > dialogues with him, and then insulted the professional credentials of > anyone that entered into open debate with him. He would act as if he > wanted to open a debate but was never really open to any true debate > or open-mindedness - seemingly more interested in preaching in hopes > of changing other people's minds with an unwillingness to even > slightly evolve his own positions in the face of scientific facts. > This went on to a much greater degree with him than the recent global > warming "debate". > > Please don't ask me to quote any specifics. The dialogues are all in > either the google or topica history of ents. > > Paul J. > > > > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 8:24 AM, Marcboston > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > Don, I agree with Steve. I had meet Shigo back in college and found > his information sound? What doctrine are you referring too? > > On Apr 13, 9:50 am, "Steven Springer" > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > wrote: > > 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]> > [mailto:[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>] On > > > > Behalf Of DON BERTOLETTE > > Sent: Friday, April 10, 2009 3:11 PM > > To: [email protected] <mailto:[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_04200 > > 9>- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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] -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
