Live data from Hacker News

List of individual trees

en.wikipedia.org

71–80 of 117 posts

Re: List of individual trees

#71
Growing up I would see authors listing particular species of trees when describing a scene, and I’d marvel at the idea of someone getting all the references. It seemed so old-timey. But during the pandemic, my wife and I got into plants because it was an outdoor activity. I used an app to identify all the trees in our neighborhood (then we found out our town has a map online of them all). I have my favorite ones I like to go by on walks. In a given area there are really only 10 or 15 species you have to know to cover most of the trees you see. Being aware of these things adds depth to the world as you experience it.

Re: List of individual trees

#74
The saddest part of this is that we really have no idea just how many or the oldest redwood trees that were felled in California and on the western cost of the USA that were possibly multiple thousands of years old, i.e., 4000 years, possibly even 6000 years based on old images and accounts of trees, and that's just what we do have signals about.

Side note; there are several places in Europe where Sequoias were planted at various times and are basically infants at 150-200 years old, having been brought back to Europe by explorers and aristocrats.

Re: List of individual trees

#75
post #68

Humans, man. The Tree of Ténéré was a solitary acacia that was once considered the most isolated tree on Earth. It was a landmark on caravan routes through the Ténéré region of the Sahara Desert in northeast Niger, so well known that it and the Lost Tree to the north are the only trees to be shown on a map at a scale of 1:4,000,000. The tree is estimated to have existed for approximately 300 years until it was knocke…

And then there's the Senator Tree [0], estimated to be more than ten times older (~3500 years), which was "killed when a meth addict started a garbage fire inside the hollow trunk so she could see the crystal meth she was trying to smoke."

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Senator_(tree)

Re: List of individual trees

#76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It’s Wikipedia. Make the change you want to see in the page." If it allows you to edit it in the first place or isn't reverted within five minutes.

They have strict rules, but I’ve had no issues editing articles after my first error. It’s certainly not like posting an answer on Stack Overflow, where you will be downvoted and flamed for a correct-but-suboptimal answer.

I suppose it's a matter of perspective which one you find worse: getting flamed for trying to contribute, or just having your contributions erased.

Re: List of individual trees

#77
post #68

Humans, man. The Tree of Ténéré was a solitary acacia that was once considered the most isolated tree on Earth. It was a landmark on caravan routes through the Ténéré region of the Sahara Desert in northeast Niger, so well known that it and the Lost Tree to the north are the only trees to be shown on a map at a scale of 1:4,000,000. The tree is estimated to have existed for approximately 300 years until it was knocke…

What I find funny is how the drunk driver was able to hit the only obstacle in sight in the middle of an empty desert.

Re: List of individual trees

#78
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With respect, that is naive. To demonstrate, create a new account and go ahead and make that change. It will be reverted. Wikipedia is not the democratic free-for-all it once was. If you do perform that experiment and I am wrong, please come back and let us know.

Wikipedia is and has always been a wiki; reverting bad or controversial edits has always been expected from day one. Also Wikipedia has developed an editorial line of its own, so it's normal that edits that go against the line will be put in question; if that happens to you, you're expected to collaborate in the talk pages to express your intent for the changes, and possibly get recommendations on how to tweak it so…

> reverting bad or controversial edits has always been expected from day one.

How charming of you to think that the well-meaning contributor is going to happily smile and agree with you when you tell them that their well-meaning contributions are bad.

Re: List of individual trees

#79
post #8

Is this list comprehensive?

How could it be? Growing up, there was a large horse chestnut tree that was a meeting point for all the kids in the neighborhood. It was such a huge part of our lives that it became an icon for our childhood, as several others have agreed with me as adults. It's gone now, as it grew old and diseased and someone cut it down. But it was a very significant tree for many people in the town for many years. I doubt, however, that it, or so many other trees that had similar impact on people, would ever make a Wikipedia list. There are just too many trees.

Re: List of individual trees

#80
post #68

Humans, man. The Tree of Ténéré was a solitary acacia that was once considered the most isolated tree on Earth. It was a landmark on caravan routes through the Ténéré region of the Sahara Desert in northeast Niger, so well known that it and the Lost Tree to the north are the only trees to be shown on a map at a scale of 1:4,000,000. The tree is estimated to have existed for approximately 300 years until it was knocke…

forget 300 year old trees... the Californians cut down sequoia trees that were probably up to 6000 years old. The oldest current one alive is estimated to be only 3200 years old.

On a scale of atrocities humans have committed, I can't really think of anything that is more atrocious than the felling of those sequoias that were at the very least as old as the oldest known human civilization. 6000+ years ... poof gone, turned into beams and furniture for houses. They've been around at least 100 Million years, but almost and possibly will not survive what is the equivalent of 0.173 seconds if you scale the 100M years to one day.

Among all the many atrocities humans have and currently are committing, things like destroying something that took 6000 years to grow seems particularly bad because there is no way to even really restore or save that, like you might be able to restore an at-risk population of animals or even revive an extinct species.

It takes about 150-200 years (we don't really know) for a sequoia to become mature, i.e., fruitful, and then it requires fire to reproduce. Let me repeat that, it absolutely requires fire to reproduce once it as matured following surviving around 175 years of human proximity, not sooner.

For our European community, it seems that the various redwoods and sequoia that were planted in Europe in the 19th century, could be coming into maturity now/soon. They are technically invasive, but at a 175 year maturity cycle, I suspect there's not much you have to worry about.

Post reply on HN