interesting shot showing the fires during the life of the tree

http://media.eurekalert.org/multimed.../20963_web.jpg

On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 09:00:09 -0800, Electric Comet
wrote:


interesting shot showing the fires during the life of the tree

http://media.eurekalert.org/multimed.../20963_web.jpg

Did you know that tree rings do not show years, but show rainy
seasons?

On 1/5/2016 6:15 PM, OFWW wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 09:00:09 -0800, Electric Comet
wrote:


interesting shot showing the fires during the life of the tree

http://media.eurekalert.org/multimed.../20963_web.jpg

Did you know that tree rings do not show years, but show rainy
seasons?



I always understood rings represent years, size of rings represent the
climate for that year. Do you have a reference by any chance?

On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 18:17:20 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 1/5/2016 6:15 PM, OFWW wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 09:00:09 -0800, Electric Comet
wrote:


interesting shot showing the fires during the life of the tree

http://media.eurekalert.org/multimed.../20963_web.jpg

Did you know that tree rings do not show years, but show rainy
seasons?



I always understood rings represent years, size of rings represent the
climate for that year. Do you have a reference by any chance?

I'll have to look for it, The reason it stuck in my mind was that
those people looking for the ark could tell by lumber with the lack of
rings in it. Which some people would discount, but also a friend of
mine who was studying ice "rings" or layers that geologists used for
the age of ice discovered that it actually bore record of rain or
snowfall, which is why some rings were close and some wider in
patterns. I'll look it up tonight.

OFWW wrote:

On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 09:00:09 -0800, Electric Comet
wrote:


interesting shot showing the fires during the life of the tree

http://media.eurekalert.org/multimed.../20963_web.jpg

Did you know that tree rings do not show years, but show rainy
seasons?

You might want to rethink that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dendrochronology

https://www.classzone.com/books/eart...2905page01.cfm

On 1/5/2016 8:15 PM, OFWW wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 18:17:20 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 1/5/2016 6:15 PM, OFWW wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 09:00:09 -0800, Electric Comet
wrote:


interesting shot showing the fires during the life of the tree

http://media.eurekalert.org/multimed.../20963_web.jpg

Did you know that tree rings do not show years, but show rainy
seasons?



I always understood rings represent years, size of rings represent the
climate for that year. Do you have a reference by any chance?

I'll have to look for it, The reason it stuck in my mind was that
those people looking for the ark could tell by lumber with the lack of
rings in it. Which some people would discount, but also a friend of
mine who was studying ice "rings" or layers that geologists used for
the age of ice discovered that it actually bore record of rain or
snowfall, which is why some rings were close and some wider in
patterns. I'll look it up tonight.



;~) Well the Arc, is a super natural object and all that goes with
that... ;~) But I would be interested in what you find.

On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 22:24:41 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 1/5/2016 8:15 PM, OFWW wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 18:17:20 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 1/5/2016 6:15 PM, OFWW wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 09:00:09 -0800, Electric Comet
wrote:


interesting shot showing the fires during the life of the tree

http://media.eurekalert.org/multimed.../20963_web.jpg

Did you know that tree rings do not show years, but show rainy
seasons?



I always understood rings represent years, size of rings represent the
climate for that year. Do you have a reference by any chance?

I'll have to look for it, The reason it stuck in my mind was that
those people looking for the ark could tell by lumber with the lack of
rings in it. Which some people would discount, but also a friend of
mine who was studying ice "rings" or layers that geologists used for
the age of ice discovered that it actually bore record of rain or
snowfall, which is why some rings were close and some wider in
patterns. I'll look it up tonight.



;~) Well the Arc, is a super natural object and all that goes with
that... ;~) But I would be interested in what you find.

As the story goes, before the flood there was no rain. No rainy
season, no rings, or very few?


Anyhow, here are a few page links, and basically the growth, or rainy
season and the end of it determines the rings. So in area's that have
a regular rainy season you will get a growth ring. In a severe drought
it can be difficult to tell if there is a growth ring or not. I have
included the areas of tropical forests to show that there can be
multiple growth rings per year, and that basically a tree is a tree is
a tree.

Here in the west I can remember seeing large trees with growth ring
anomalies shown in the local museums of national parks where
uncertainty prevailed in the reading of rings due to weather patterns.

Bottom line? Tree's don't have birthday's.


https://www.theforestacademy.com/tre.../#.VoyxRI9FyUk

Annual rings generally exist in trees where the climate halts growth
at some point during the year. In our country, winter causes this
shutdown. In other countries, it is the dry season. Growth begins
again in the spring or rainy season.

But what happens to trees growing in countries where there is no
alternation between growth and rest periods?

For example, a country where it rains all year long! Remember that all
trees grow by adding successive rings. So in such an area, the
beginning and end of the growth period may occur any time during the
year, depending on the local conditions.

Some trees in tropical forests, like the okoumé (Gaboon), manage to
create several dozen very thin rings in a year, and never the same
number from one year to the next. It is often difficult, even
impossible, to distinguish them with the naked eye. In such cases, it
is extremely hard to determine the age of the tree.



http://www.priweb.org/globalchange/c...cc/scc_01.html

Dendrochronology is the study of climate change as recorded by tree
growth rings. Each year, trees add a layer of growth between the
older wood and the bark. This layer, or ring as seen in cross
section, can be wide, recording a wet season, or narrow, recording a
dry growing season. Because the rings are basically recording a good
growing season or a bad growing season, they are indirectly recording
more than just moisture. They also document temperature and cloud
cover as they impact tree growth as well. This record of annual
summer information is very important when you consider that certain
types of trees grow slowly over hundreds and hundreds of years, and
therefore contain a record of as many years of climate and climate
change.

There are limitations to this research though. Trees in the
temperate zone only record the growing season, so the winter season,
no matter how dramatic, will not be seen in the ring record.
Interestingly, trees in tropical regions grow year round and therefore
show no real obvious annual growth rings. Therefore climate data from
equatorial areas is difficult to piece out and use. The record is
limited geographically in another way too. Trees do not grow in all
places on Earth, therefore we don’t have a tree ring record of climate
change for each region and ecologic niche globally. (No trees in
polar regions, high in the mountains, in the ocean!!!)

On Wed, 06 Jan 2016 03:16:54 +0000, Spalted Walt
wrote:

OFWW wrote:

On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 09:00:09 -0800, Electric Comet
wrote:


interesting shot showing the fires during the life of the tree

http://media.eurekalert.org/multimed.../20963_web.jpg

Did you know that tree rings do not show years, but show rainy
seasons?

You might want to rethink that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dendrochronology

These pages are full of errors, and a good deal of it is written by
those with narrow visions who think that what they see here in the US
applies globally. They have pulled in some historic notes in order to
add weight to their arguments, but they failed and the pages reflect
it by asking for confirmations, etc.

See my reply to Leon, where it is easy to see that it is the growth
season or lack of it that gives the rings. Sometimes multiple rings
from one year to the next.

I have seen mentions of this in some of our national parks.

https://www.classzone.com/books/eart...2905page01.cfm

Disclaimer on this page, "In general tree's have one growth ring per
year"

OFWW wrote in news

On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 18:17:20 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 1/5/2016 6:15 PM, OFWW wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 09:00:09 -0800, Electric Comet
wrote:


interesting shot showing the fires during the life of the tree

http://media.eurekalert.org/multimed.../20963_web.jpg

Did you know that tree rings do not show years, but show rainy
seasons?



I always understood rings represent years, size of rings represent the
climate for that year. Do you have a reference by any chance?

I'll have to look for it, The reason it stuck in my mind was that
those people looking for the ark could tell by lumber with the lack of
rings in it.

Are ~those people~ the same ones who believe our square
planet is only 6000 years old and the baby Jesus put all
those dinosaur fossils here ~just to test our faith~ ?


--
Religion was invented when the first
con-man met the first fool. ~ Mark Twain

On Wed, 06 Jan 2016 06:39:11 -0800, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

OFWW wrote in news

On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 18:17:20 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 1/5/2016 6:15 PM, OFWW wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 09:00:09 -0800, Electric Comet
wrote:


interesting shot showing the fires during the life of the tree

http://media.eurekalert.org/multimed.../20963_web.jpg

Did you know that tree rings do not show years, but show rainy
seasons?



I always understood rings represent years, size of rings represent the
climate for that year. Do you have a reference by any chance?

I'll have to look for it, The reason it stuck in my mind was that
those people looking for the ark could tell by lumber with the lack of
rings in it.

Are ~those people~ the same ones who believe our square
planet is only 6000 years old and the baby Jesus put all
those dinosaur fossils here ~just to test our faith~ ?

No, and this is not the place for that type of discussion.

On 01/05/2016 6:17 PM, Leon wrote:
On 1/5/2016 6:15 PM, OFWW wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 09:00:09 -0800, Electric Comet
wrote:


interesting shot showing the fires during the life of the tree

http://media.eurekalert.org/multimed.../20963_web.jpg

Did you know that tree rings do not show years, but show rainy
seasons?



I always understood rings represent years, size of rings represent the
climate for that year. Do you have a reference by any chance?

The US FPL Wood Handbook --
http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/products/publications/several_pubs.php?grouping_id=100

See chap 3 for botany lessons. Short version is, in temperate climates
such as most of the US, there is an annual growth and dormant season and
so the growth rings can be associated with that yearly cycle. How
prevalent they are is basically determined by the variety of the tree
itself, spacing is related to environmental and local conditions. But
it makes note that this is a temperate-zone characteristic and so to
refer them as "annual rings" isn't necessarily accurate; use the term
"growth rings" or "growth increment" instead.

OTOH, in many tropical woods it's essentially impossible to visually
detect growth rings altho I note in the 2010 edition it includes the
following: "... continuing research in this area has uncovered several
characteristics whereby growth rings can be correlated with seasonality
changes in some tropical species (Worbes 1995, 1999; Callado and others
2001)."

Shorter version is R. B. Hoadley's Understanding Wood, Taunton
Press...although I don't believe it's been revised; there's certainly
little to fault for a US audience and domestic woods on the subject
albeit it's not a botany textbook, either (nor, of course, is the
Handbook, but it is in more depth than Hoadley).

--

On Tue, 05 Jan 2016 16:15:26 -0800
OFWW wrote:

Did you know that tree rings do not show years, but show rainy
seasons?

it is not that simple
some can be decades and longer
as always it depends on many factors

dendrochronology is the study of the rings

there are photos of giant sequoia cross sections marked with historic
events that are fun to see

On 01/06/2016 9:34 AM, dpb wrote:
....

The US FPL Wood Handbook --
http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/products/publications/several_pubs.php?grouping_id=100


See chap 3 for botany lessons. Short version is, in temperate climates
such as most of the US, there is an annual growth and dormant season and
so the growth rings can be associated with that yearly cycle. How
prevalent they are is basically determined by the variety of the tree
itself, spacing is related to environmental and local conditions. But it
makes note that this is a temperate-zone characteristic and so to refer
them as "annual rings" isn't necessarily accurate; use the term "growth
rings" or "growth increment" instead.

OTOH, in many tropical woods it's essentially impossible to visually
detect growth rings altho I note in the 2010 edition it includes the
following: "... continuing research in this area has uncovered several
characteristics whereby growth rings can be correlated with seasonality
changes in some tropical species (Worbes 1995, 1999; Callado and others
2001)."
....

First sentence 2nd paragraph is garbled -- I changed horses in
midsentence on what was planning on writing and didn't get all the first
outta' there that shoulda' been --

What was intended to say was impossible had to to with associating
growth rings with a necessarily annual cycle in tropical regions, not
that the growth increments are not visible.

--

On 01/06/2016 9:55 AM, Electric Comet wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jan 2016 16:15:26 -0800
wrote:

Did you know that tree rings do not show years, but show rainy
seasons?

it is not that simple
some can be decades and longer

An individual growth increment? I'm certainly not aware of anything
that shows such a pattern. Reference????

as always it depends on many factors
....

Spacing, yes. Actual ring structure itself is simply a characteristic
of the individual species. Now, yes, while there are lots of species,
there are a (relatively few) characteristics into which individual trees
fall.

--

On 1/6/2016 12:57 AM, OFWW wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 22:24:41 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 1/5/2016 8:15 PM, OFWW wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 18:17:20 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 1/5/2016 6:15 PM, OFWW wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 09:00:09 -0800, Electric Comet
wrote:


interesting shot showing the fires during the life of the tree

http://media.eurekalert.org/multimed.../20963_web.jpg

Did you know that tree rings do not show years, but show rainy
seasons?



I always understood rings represent years, size of rings represent the
climate for that year. Do you have a reference by any chance?

I'll have to look for it, The reason it stuck in my mind was that
those people looking for the ark could tell by lumber with the lack of
rings in it. Which some people would discount, but also a friend of
mine who was studying ice "rings" or layers that geologists used for
the age of ice discovered that it actually bore record of rain or
snowfall, which is why some rings were close and some wider in
patterns. I'll look it up tonight.



;~) Well the Arc, is a super natural object and all that goes with
that... ;~) But I would be interested in what you find.

As the story goes, before the flood there was no rain. No rainy
season, no rings, or very few?


Anyhow, here are a few page links, and basically the growth, or rainy
season and the end of it determines the rings. So in area's that have
a regular rainy season you will get a growth ring. In a severe drought
it can be difficult to tell if there is a growth ring or not. I have
included the areas of tropical forests to show that there can be
multiple growth rings per year, and that basically a tree is a tree is
a tree.

Here in the west I can remember seeing large trees with growth ring
anomalies shown in the local museums of national parks where
uncertainty prevailed in the reading of rings due to weather patterns.

Bottom line? Tree's don't have birthday's.

And yet they are called "Annual" Growth rings. That still sounds like a
new ring each year.

And from your link,

Each year, the tree forms new cells, arranged in concentric circles
called annual rings or annual growth rings. These annual rings show the
amount of wood produced during one growing season.




https://www.theforestacademy.com/tre.../#.VoyxRI9FyUk

On 01/06/2016 10:22 AM, dpb wrote:
On 01/06/2016 9:55 AM, Electric Comet wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jan 2016 16:15:26 -0800
wrote:

Did you know that tree rings do not show years, but show rainy
seasons?

it is not that simple
some can be decades and longer

An individual growth increment? I'm certainly not aware of anything that
shows such a pattern. Reference????
....

Or perhaps are you simply referring to a period of time such as a
prolonged drought or the like that can bring a period of growth to near
standstill for as long as the particular event lasts and sometimes for
sometime thereafter before the specimen really fully recovers (presuming
it survives and does do so eventually, of course)?

That sort of thing certainly happens for any number of reasons, weather
patterns being the most notable for a given specimen. Over a longer
period of time over a number of generations one may see other more
longer-term trends although one may have to have some additional help in
that the forest was uprooted in a devastating event such a a flood,
buried in an anerobic environment and became fossilized or otherwise
preserved in order for us to find rings to count and ponder over their
meaning...a few thousand years for individual trees is their lifetime, a
mere blink of the eye in geologic time.

The bristlecone pine is, afaik, the longest-lived single tree, reaching
into the 5-6,000 yr neighborhood. The giant sequoias are mere
youngsters in comparison in the 3-4,000 range.

What's really unusual is that the Pando quaking aspen grove is the
oldest overall by a wide margin (80,000 to to perhaps as much as
1,000,000 by some estimates) but it's not the part you see; it (they?
) is a clonal colony of a single male quaking aspen. Individual stems
are more like only 100-130 years in age but they come up from the
underground root system, not by flowering/seed production. The whole
grove of some 100 acres and 40-50,000 "stems" are identical clones
genetically.

--

On 01/06/2016 2:06 PM, Leon wrote:
On 1/6/2016 12:57 AM, OFWW wrote:
....

Anyhow, here are a few page links, and basically the growth, or rainy
season and the end of it determines the rings. So in areas that have
a regular rainy season you will get a growth ring. In a severe drought
it can be difficult to tell if there is a growth ring or not. I have
included the areas of tropical forests to show that there can be
multiple growth rings per year, and that basically a tree is a tree is
a tree.
....
Bottom line? Tree's don't have birthday's.

And yet they are called "Annual" Growth rings. That still sounds like a
new ring each year.

As noted earlier, that's fine for temperate-zone regions but "not so
much" in tropical areas. US FPL points out that that is poor terminology...

And from your link,

Each year, the tree forms new cells, arranged in concentric circles
called annual rings or annual growth rings. These annual rings show the
amount of wood produced during one growing season.

And, from just a little farther down in the same link--

"Trees in Tropical Countries

Annual rings generally exist in trees where the climate halts growth at
some point during the year. In our country, winter causes this shutdown.
In other countries, it is the dry season. Growth begins again in the
spring or rainy season.

But what happens to trees growing in countries where there is no
alternation between growth and rest periods?

For example, a country where it rains all year long! Remember that all
trees grow by adding successive rings. So in such an area, the beginning
and end of the growth period may occur any time during the year,
depending on the local conditions.

Some trees in tropical forests, like the okoumé (Gaboon), manage to
create several dozen very thin rings in a year, and never the same
number from one year to the next. It is often difficult, even
impossible, to distinguish them with the naked eye. In such cases, it is
extremely hard to determine the age of the tree."

--

On Wed, 06 Jan 2016 10:22:43 -0600
dpb wrote:

An individual growth increment? I'm certainly not aware of anything
that shows such a pattern. Reference????

look at the sequoias

there are some great pics around with markings of historic events
over the life of the tree

the sequoias are special for sure and the annual ring does not apply
as yo noted it is the growth ring and it can span decades

trees are incredible
the blue gum and sequoias are more so due to their size

On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 14:06:24 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 1/6/2016 12:57 AM, OFWW wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 22:24:41 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 1/5/2016 8:15 PM, OFWW wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 18:17:20 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 1/5/2016 6:15 PM, OFWW wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 09:00:09 -0800, Electric Comet
wrote:


interesting shot showing the fires during the life of the tree

http://media.eurekalert.org/multimed.../20963_web.jpg

Did you know that tree rings do not show years, but show rainy
seasons?



I always understood rings represent years, size of rings represent the
climate for that year. Do you have a reference by any chance?

I'll have to look for it, The reason it stuck in my mind was that
those people looking for the ark could tell by lumber with the lack of
rings in it. Which some people would discount, but also a friend of
mine who was studying ice "rings" or layers that geologists used for
the age of ice discovered that it actually bore record of rain or
snowfall, which is why some rings were close and some wider in
patterns. I'll look it up tonight.



;~) Well the Arc, is a super natural object and all that goes with
that... ;~) But I would be interested in what you find.

As the story goes, before the flood there was no rain. No rainy
season, no rings, or very few?


Anyhow, here are a few page links, and basically the growth, or rainy
season and the end of it determines the rings. So in area's that have
a regular rainy season you will get a growth ring. In a severe drought
it can be difficult to tell if there is a growth ring or not. I have
included the areas of tropical forests to show that there can be
multiple growth rings per year, and that basically a tree is a tree is
a tree.

Here in the west I can remember seeing large trees with growth ring
anomalies shown in the local museums of national parks where
uncertainty prevailed in the reading of rings due to weather patterns.

Bottom line? Tree's don't have birthday's.

And yet they are called "Annual" Growth rings. That still sounds like a
new ring each year.

And from your link,

Each year, the tree forms new cells, arranged in concentric circles
called annual rings or annual growth rings. These annual rings show the
amount of wood produced during one growing season.

ROTFL, Annual growth rings the term fits to everyone's satisfaction.
But that only works in areas with one growth cycle per year.

The last couple years here we have had two growth seasons each year,
literally, played havoc with the veggies, but the tree's seemed to
handle it fine. It would be nice to core the tree and then core it
again just to see or verify what the tree did for those years. It
isn't common, but it is not unusual.

Bottom line I guess we all see what we want.

And then a North American heads to Australia and gets confused because
the toilet flushes opposite than it does here.



https://www.theforestacademy.com/tre.../#.VoyxRI9FyUk

On 01/06/2016 4:22 PM, Electric Comet wrote:
....

the sequoias are special for sure and the annual ring does not apply
as yo noted it is the growth ring and it can span decades
....

A _given_ growth ring for a sequoia (or any other tree in the temperate
climatic zone) will absolutely _NOT_ span "decades". It'll be in accord
with the growing seasons which are, and have been for the life of these
trees, annual cycles.

It takes a place without these cycles for there to not be any
correlation; that ain't where the redwoods are.

--

On Wed, 06 Jan 2016 14:19:08 -0600, dpb wrote:

On 01/06/2016 10:22 AM, dpb wrote:
On 01/06/2016 9:55 AM, Electric Comet wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jan 2016 16:15:26 -0800
wrote:

Did you know that tree rings do not show years, but show rainy
seasons?

it is not that simple
some can be decades and longer

An individual growth increment? I'm certainly not aware of anything that
shows such a pattern. Reference????
...

Or perhaps are you simply referring to a period of time such as a
prolonged drought or the like that can bring a period of growth to near
standstill for as long as the particular event lasts and sometimes for
sometime thereafter before the specimen really fully recovers (presuming
it survives and does do so eventually, of course)?

That sort of thing certainly happens for any number of reasons, weather
patterns being the most notable for a given specimen. Over a longer
period of time over a number of generations one may see other more
longer-term trends although one may have to have some additional help in
that the forest was uprooted in a devastating event such a a flood,
buried in an anerobic environment and became fossilized or otherwise
preserved in order for us to find rings to count and ponder over their
meaning...a few thousand years for individual trees is their lifetime, a
mere blink of the eye in geologic time.

The bristlecone pine is, afaik, the longest-lived single tree, reaching
into the 5-6,000 yr neighborhood. The giant sequoias are mere
youngsters in comparison in the 3-4,000 range.

What's really unusual is that the Pando quaking aspen grove is the
oldest overall by a wide margin (80,000 to to perhaps as much as
1,000,000 by some estimates) but it's not the part you see; it (they?
) is a clonal colony of a single male quaking aspen. Individual stems
are more like only 100-130 years in age but they come up from the
underground root system, not by flowering/seed production. The whole
grove of some 100 acres and 40-50,000 "stems" are identical clones
genetically.

There are tree's like that in La Jolla, Calif. To the naked eye people
mistake them for scrub pine due to their small stature, but some wise
person recognized them for what they are not too awful long ago, and
now they are protected. The only spot, I think, in NA

On 01/06/2016 4:43 PM, OFWW wrote:
....

The last couple years here we have had two growth seasons each year,
literally, played havoc with the veggies, but the tree's seemed to
handle it fine. It would be nice to core the tree and then core it
again just to see or verify what the tree did for those years. It
isn't common, but it is not unusual.
....

I'd venture _most_ didn't actually go through two fully dormant cycles
and wouldn't show up a second ring therefore but it would be interesting
to do a core sample, indeed...

--

On 01/06/2016 4:47 PM, OFWW wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jan 2016 14:19:08 -0600, wrote:
....

What's really unusual is that the Pando quaking aspen grove is the
oldest overall by a wide margin (80,000 to to perhaps as much as
1,000,000 by some estimates) but it's not the part you see; it (they?
) is a clonal colony of a single male quaking aspen. Individual stems
are more like only 100-130 years in age but they come up from the
underground root system, not by flowering/seed production. The whole
grove of some 100 acres and 40-50,000 "stems" are identical clones
genetically.

There are tree's like that in La Jolla, Calif. To the naked eye people
mistake them for scrub pine due to their small stature, but some wise
person recognized them for what they are not too awful long ago, and
now they are protected. The only spot, I think, in NA

I'd like to know what those are; the quaking aspen are certainly NA,
Pando is in south-central UT, not far from Fishlake NF...

--

On Wed, 06 Jan 2016 16:45:44 -0600
dpb wrote:

A _given_ growth ring for a sequoia (or any other tree in the
temperate climatic zone) will absolutely _NOT_ span "decades". It'll
be in accord with the growing seasons which are, and have been for
the life of these trees, annual cycles.

fyi you are disagreeing with what dendrochronologists have determined by
careful analysis

On 1/6/2016 5:43 PM, OFWW wrote:


And then a North American heads to Australia and gets confused because
the toilet flushes opposite than it does here.

That's an old wives tale. Everyone knows they don't flush their toilets
in Australia...


--
-Mike-

On Wed, 06 Jan 2016 16:54:17 -0600, dpb wrote:

On 01/06/2016 4:43 PM, OFWW wrote:
...

The last couple years here we have had two growth seasons each year,
literally, played havoc with the veggies, but the tree's seemed to
handle it fine. It would be nice to core the tree and then core it
again just to see or verify what the tree did for those years. It
isn't common, but it is not unusual.
...

I'd venture _most_ didn't actually go through two fully dormant cycles
and wouldn't show up a second ring therefore but it would be interesting
to do a core sample, indeed...

Normally I wouldn't have thought so either, but we had a short hot
winter followed by some quick freezes, all the trees that were budding
and growing fruit, lost all their fruit an some leaves, then a mild
winter for a couple weeks, and then a repeat of the cycle. I was
thinking that the poor trees and plants must be getting confused
because or the strange weather sequences.

I had a great laugh through it all as the weather men and new people
were really hamming up the heat wave, and talking about the
seriousness of GW, and after a couple weeks of that going on the temp
dropped to below freezing then hovered down low and made them all look
a bit skittish for a while.

On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 20:14:57 -0500, Mike Marlow
wrote:

On 1/6/2016 5:43 PM, OFWW wrote:


And then a North American heads to Australia and gets confused because
the toilet flushes opposite than it does here.

That's an old wives tale. Everyone knows they don't flush their toilets
in Australia...

ROTFLOL!! You owe me a new keyboard, just spit out my coffee.

On Wed, 06 Jan 2016 17:00:03 -0600, dpb wrote:

On 01/06/2016 4:47 PM, OFWW wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jan 2016 14:19:08 -0600, wrote:
...

What's really unusual is that the Pando quaking aspen grove is the
oldest overall by a wide margin (80,000 to to perhaps as much as
1,000,000 by some estimates) but it's not the part you see; it (they?
) is a clonal colony of a single male quaking aspen. Individual stems
are more like only 100-130 years in age but they come up from the
underground root system, not by flowering/seed production. The whole
grove of some 100 acres and 40-50,000 "stems" are identical clones
genetically.

There are tree's like that in La Jolla, Calif. To the naked eye people
mistake them for scrub pine due to their small stature, but some wise
person recognized them for what they are not too awful long ago, and
now they are protected. The only spot, I think, in NA

I'd like to know what those are; the quaking aspen are certainly NA,
Pando is in south-central UT, not far from Fishlake NF...


http://www.livescience.com/29152-old...-in-world.html

Not the ones I was thinking of in Torrey Pines, Calif.
http://davesgarden.com/guides/articles/view/3450/

Now I know I read some articles about the find and as I recall the
small tree, which was like a natural Japanese trained stunted tree,
that grew from ancient root systems not seeds.

Can't seem to find any info on it at the moment. grrrrr.

On 01/06/2016 6:40 PM, Electric Comet wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jan 2016 16:45:44 -0600
wrote:

A _given_ growth ring for a sequoia (or any other tree in the
temperate climatic zone) will absolutely _NOT_ span "decades". It'll
be in accord with the growing seasons which are, and have been for
the life of these trees, annual cycles.

fyi you are disagreeing with what dendrochronologists have determined by
careful analysis

Show me the research that says that.

--

On 01/06/2016 8:52 PM, OFWW wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jan 2016 16:54:17 -0600, wrote:

On 01/06/2016 4:43 PM, OFWW wrote:
...

The last couple years here we have had two growth seasons each year,
literally, played havoc with the veggies, but the tree's seemed to
handle it fine. It would be nice to core the tree and then core it
again just to see or verify what the tree did for those years. It
isn't common, but it is not unusual.
...

I'd venture _most_ didn't actually go through two fully dormant cycles
and wouldn't show up a second ring therefore but it would be interesting
to do a core sample, indeed...

Normally I wouldn't have thought so either, but we had a short hot
winter followed by some quick freezes, all the trees that were budding
and growing fruit, lost all their fruit an some leaves, then a mild
winter for a couple weeks, and then a repeat of the cycle. I was
thinking that the poor trees and plants must be getting confused
because or the strange weather sequences.

I had a great laugh through it all as the weather men and new people
were really hamming up the heat wave, and talking about the
seriousness of GW, and after a couple weeks of that going on the temp
dropped to below freezing then hovered down low and made them all look
a bit skittish for a while.

That's an el Nino cycle for ya'...

We've been thru the 5-6 years of severe (Cat IV on national drought
monitor like CA that you hear about; nobody much cares about "flyover
country") until the worm turned suddenly about first of June and have
been (by our standards, anyways, wet since). Included w/ the pattern is
the jet stream pattern that includes blocking the extreme Canadian cold
from the northern midwest/northeast...

They've been touting how this year is the "strongest since the '80s!!!!"
not bothering to mention they've only had tracking data from roughly
that time which is only 30 years; absolutely nothing in terms of overall
climate. Meanwhile, there are records that the Peruvian fishermen knew
of it in early 17th century and undoubtedly actually much earlier than
that so it's certainly nothing new; we just now are beginning to
understand how it affects global weather patterns.

There's a NOAA fella' in the Dodge City office finishing up his doctoral
dissertation who works the night shift and on occasion will write in
some depth on his work in the area in the "behind the scene" internal
discussion distributed as part of the workings behind the daily
forecast. Quite interesting how it's all so intertwined.

My hypothesis is that if one had the data one could show that in fact
the "Dirty 30's" dustbowl was tied in with a strong La Nina (the
opposite of the El Nino) which is associated with the strong jet stream
buckle to the north which shunts all the rain-producing t-storm
producing systems to the east of the western High Plains leaving us with
the similar situation we've just been through. IOW, imo there's
"nothing new under the sun"; we're just not a long-lived enough species
to be able to see the big picture in short term patterns and have fallen
into the trap of thinking we're more important than we are.

--

On 1/7/2016 9:34 AM, dpb wrote:
On 01/06/2016 8:52 PM, OFWW wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jan 2016 16:54:17 -0600, wrote:

On 01/06/2016 4:43 PM, OFWW wrote:
...

The last couple years here we have had two growth seasons each year,
literally, played havoc with the veggies, but the tree's seemed to
handle it fine. It would be nice to core the tree and then core it
again just to see or verify what the tree did for those years. It
isn't common, but it is not unusual.
...

I'd venture _most_ didn't actually go through two fully dormant cycles
and wouldn't show up a second ring therefore but it would be interesting
to do a core sample, indeed...

Normally I wouldn't have thought so either, but we had a short hot
winter followed by some quick freezes, all the trees that were budding
and growing fruit, lost all their fruit an some leaves, then a mild
winter for a couple weeks, and then a repeat of the cycle. I was
thinking that the poor trees and plants must be getting confused
because or the strange weather sequences.

I had a great laugh through it all as the weather men and new people
were really hamming up the heat wave, and talking about the
seriousness of GW, and after a couple weeks of that going on the temp
dropped to below freezing then hovered down low and made them all look
a bit skittish for a while.

That's an el Nino cycle for ya'...

We've been thru the 5-6 years of severe (Cat IV on national drought
monitor like CA that you hear about; nobody much cares about "flyover
country") until the worm turned suddenly about first of June and have
been (by our standards, anyways, wet since). Included w/ the pattern is
the jet stream pattern that includes blocking the extreme Canadian cold
from the northern midwest/northeast...

They've been touting how this year is the "strongest since the '80s!!!!"
not bothering to mention they've only had tracking data from roughly
that time which is only 30 years; absolutely nothing in terms of overall
climate. Meanwhile, there are records that the Peruvian fishermen knew
of it in early 17th century and undoubtedly actually much earlier than
that so it's certainly nothing new; we just now are beginning to
understand how it affects global weather patterns.

There's a NOAA fella' in the Dodge City office finishing up his doctoral
dissertation who works the night shift and on occasion will write in
some depth on his work in the area in the "behind the scene" internal
discussion distributed as part of the workings behind the daily
forecast. Quite interesting how it's all so intertwined.

My hypothesis is that if one had the data one could show that in fact
the "Dirty 30's" dustbowl was tied in with a strong La Nina (the
opposite of the El Nino) which is associated with the strong jet stream
buckle to the north which shunts all the rain-producing t-storm
producing systems to the east of the western High Plains leaving us with
the similar situation we've just been through. IOW, imo there's
"nothing new under the sun"; we're just not a long-lived enough species
to be able to see the big picture in short term patterns and have fallen
into the trap of thinking we're more important than we are.

--
Exactly! Concerning not enough data to make a reasonable assumption
about the long term weather patterns.

This we do know, the weather is unpredictable and has been changing for
centuries.

Now that computers are every where every one is an expert on the weather
using the vast amount of data that has only recently become available to
everyone. I highly suspect that in 200 years future generations will
look at the global warming crisis somewhat like the Salem Witch trials.

Had we had access to computers and weather data 60 years ago like we
have in the last 30 or so years I'm certain that we would be looking at
the weather much differently. Thank goodness we did what we did to curb
global cooling in the 70's and 80's so that we would not all freeze.
There simply is not enough data to make anything close to accurate
assumptions about recent history weather patterns.

I find it ironic that in general we did not have these global weather
problems until we felt compelled to do something about them. Here is
where you should follow the money to see how conclusions have been
propped up.

There is just way too much to take into consideration to make any
assumption that anything we change can change the weather.

Is the weather getting warmer, probably. Is that a bad thing? Perhaps
the earth's weather is adjusting naturally to provide more or longer
growing seasons to supply food for the growing population. If we were
actually able to cool things down and shorten the growing seasons, would
we be able to grow enough food to feed the planet?

On 01/06/2016 6:40 PM, Electric Comet wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jan 2016 16:45:44 -0600
wrote:

A _given_ growth ring for a sequoia (or any other tree in the
temperate climatic zone) will absolutely _NOT_ span "decades". It'll
be in accord with the growing seasons which are, and have been for
the life of these trees, annual cycles.

fyi you are disagreeing with what dendrochronologists have determined by
careful analysis

In reality, _IN TEMPERATE ZONES_, the likelihood is that there may be an
additional ring or two now and then as OFWW notes may have occurred in
his region owing to an indication or dormancy and renewed growth again
more than once during the calendar year from an aberration from normal
weather patterns of sufficient magnitude and duration as to actually
cause the growth pattern to mimic another year. Similarly, particularly
in drier climates it's possible that a period of dormancy is caused by
drought that if relieved during the normal growing season may cause
another growth ring to be present that might otherwise not be.

It's also possible for there to have been an extended dormancy giving
rise to a missing ring for a given year; I'd posit that for such to have
been true for a period of decades is just not likely to be so albeit
there's a possibility that like in tropical regions the size of the ring
may be so small as to be essentially indetectable. I'd expect that few
specimens will survive such an instance if it were to have occurred at
which point it's pretty clear the next ring will span infinity.

Actual dating is done via statistical averaging of many samples and
normalized against alternative references to become absolute. There are
several established series internationally recognized that a given
specimen from an area can be compared against for such dating.

But, the possibility of a time span of "decades" between growth rings of
any of the common trees we in rec.woodworking would even know existed
and growing in NA or any similar temperate climate is essentially zero.

--

On Thu, 7 Jan 2016 09:52:03 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 1/7/2016 9:34 AM, dpb wrote:
On 01/06/2016 8:52 PM, OFWW wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jan 2016 16:54:17 -0600, wrote:

On 01/06/2016 4:43 PM, OFWW wrote:
...

The last couple years here we have had two growth seasons each year,
literally, played havoc with the veggies, but the tree's seemed to
handle it fine. It would be nice to core the tree and then core it
again just to see or verify what the tree did for those years. It
isn't common, but it is not unusual.
...

I'd venture _most_ didn't actually go through two fully dormant cycles
and wouldn't show up a second ring therefore but it would be interesting
to do a core sample, indeed...

Normally I wouldn't have thought so either, but we had a short hot
winter followed by some quick freezes, all the trees that were budding
and growing fruit, lost all their fruit an some leaves, then a mild
winter for a couple weeks, and then a repeat of the cycle. I was
thinking that the poor trees and plants must be getting confused
because or the strange weather sequences.

I had a great laugh through it all as the weather men and new people
were really hamming up the heat wave, and talking about the
seriousness of GW, and after a couple weeks of that going on the temp
dropped to below freezing then hovered down low and made them all look
a bit skittish for a while.

That's an el Nino cycle for ya'...

We've been thru the 5-6 years of severe (Cat IV on national drought
monitor like CA that you hear about; nobody much cares about "flyover
country") until the worm turned suddenly about first of June and have
been (by our standards, anyways, wet since). Included w/ the pattern is
the jet stream pattern that includes blocking the extreme Canadian cold
from the northern midwest/northeast...

They've been touting how this year is the "strongest since the '80s!!!!"
not bothering to mention they've only had tracking data from roughly
that time which is only 30 years; absolutely nothing in terms of overall
climate. Meanwhile, there are records that the Peruvian fishermen knew
of it in early 17th century and undoubtedly actually much earlier than
that so it's certainly nothing new; we just now are beginning to
understand how it affects global weather patterns.

There's a NOAA fella' in the Dodge City office finishing up his doctoral
dissertation who works the night shift and on occasion will write in
some depth on his work in the area in the "behind the scene" internal
discussion distributed as part of the workings behind the daily
forecast. Quite interesting how it's all so intertwined.

My hypothesis is that if one had the data one could show that in fact
the "Dirty 30's" dustbowl was tied in with a strong La Nina (the
opposite of the El Nino) which is associated with the strong jet stream
buckle to the north which shunts all the rain-producing t-storm
producing systems to the east of the western High Plains leaving us with
the similar situation we've just been through. IOW, imo there's
"nothing new under the sun"; we're just not a long-lived enough species
to be able to see the big picture in short term patterns and have fallen
into the trap of thinking we're more important than we are.

--
Exactly! Concerning not enough data to make a reasonable assumption
about the long term weather patterns.

This we do know, the weather is unpredictable and has been changing for
centuries.

Now that computers are every where every one is an expert on the weather
using the vast amount of data that has only recently become available to
everyone. I highly suspect that in 200 years future generations will
look at the global warming crisis somewhat like the Salem Witch trials.

Had we had access to computers and weather data 60 years ago like we
have in the last 30 or so years I'm certain that we would be looking at
the weather much differently. Thank goodness we did what we did to curb
global cooling in the 70's and 80's so that we would not all freeze.
There simply is not enough data to make anything close to accurate
assumptions about recent history weather patterns.

I find it ironic that in general we did not have these global weather
problems until we felt compelled to do something about them. Here is
where you should follow the money to see how conclusions have been
propped up.

There is just way too much to take into consideration to make any
assumption that anything we change can change the weather.

Is the weather getting warmer, probably. Is that a bad thing? Perhaps
the earth's weather is adjusting naturally to provide more or longer
growing seasons to supply food for the growing population. If we were
actually able to cool things down and shorten the growing seasons, would
we be able to grow enough food to feed the planet?

I think you both are dead on in this. When I was a kid I read a lot of
those old English classic novels, Like Heidi and her Grandpa, Daniel
Defoe's stuff, the books of the various countries and Ice skating on
the Danube and the like, all icy cold, etc. And then with all the talk
on GW, people mentioned the various ice ages, and in the 14-1600'a
there was a mini ice age, or was it 1200-?? Can't remember at the
moment, but those icy stories were tied in with the tale end of the
last mini ice age. Millions died not just from the freezing cold, but
the lack of food. Seems that right before that there was a GW period
which was so warm that food was growing where it wouldn't before, and
the oceans were calm because of it, and allowed the Phoenicians to
travel to the US in their reed boats, as well as the Vikings in their
ships. Populations spread and grew because of it all, but when the
mini ice age hit it was major misery for most everyone and brought
things to a screaming halt. Lack of food, lack of livable land and so
on.

So in a way those books were recordings of the weather pattern and
cycle and if we all paid attention to history we wouldn't be crying
like Chicken Little.

or like our illustrious leader...


So in a way those books were recordings of the weather pattern and
cycle and if we all paid attention to history we wouldn't be crying
like Chicken Little.

On Thu, 07 Jan 2016 14:43:01 -0600
dpb wrote:

But, the possibility of a time span of "decades" between growth rings
of any of the common trees we in rec.woodworking would even know
existed and growing in NA or any similar temperate climate is
essentially zero.

would not consider sequoia to be common
it is the only hexaploid tree
it is the tallest tree

much prefer the dendrochronologist analysis over yours or
rec.woodworking

On 1/6/2016 5:43 PM, OFWW wrote:
And then a North American heads to Australia and gets confused because
the toilet flushes opposite than it does here.

The water goes ... UP???

On 01/08/2016 10:56 AM, Electric Comet wrote:
On Thu, 07 Jan 2016 14:43:01 -0600
wrote:

But, the possibility of a time span of "decades" between growth rings
of any of the common trees we in rec.woodworking would even know
existed and growing in NA or any similar temperate climate is
essentially zero.

would not consider sequoia to be common
it is the only hexaploid tree
it is the tallest tree

much prefer the dendrochronologist analysis over yours or
rec.woodworking
....

Again, show me any reference that refutes the above.

As for common, I'd say sequoia are essentially "a dime a dozen" in their
range.

--

On 01/08/2016 1:49 PM, dpb wrote:
....

Again, show me any reference that refutes the above.

As for common, I'd say sequoia are essentially "a dime a dozen" in their
range.

And, they're (coastal redwood) the only hexaploid _conifer_, _NOT_ the
only hexaploid tree. While most hexaploid plants are grasses, etc.,
rather than woody plants, there are some deciduous trees which are
hexaploid as well.

--

On 01/08/2016 1:49 PM, dpb wrote:
On 01/08/2016 10:56 AM, Electric Comet wrote:
On Thu, 07 Jan 2016 14:43:01 -0600
wrote:

But, the possibility of a time span of "decades" between growth rings
of any of the common trees we in rec.woodworking would even know
existed and growing in NA or any similar temperate climate is
essentially zero.

would not consider sequoia to be common
it is the only hexaploid tree
it is the tallest tree

much prefer the dendrochronologist analysis over yours or
rec.woodworking
...

Again, show me any reference that refutes the above.

Or, more specifically, even a single paper that supports the claim of
"decades" (I'd even take several years) between growth rings of any tree
in any temperate climate.

--

Greg Guarino wrote in news:n6p14q$bsd$1@dont-
email.me:

On 1/6/2016 5:43 PM, OFWW wrote:
And then a North American heads to Australia and gets confused because
the toilet flushes opposite than it does here.

The water goes ... UP???


That's why outhouses are so common in Australia even though the rest of the
world has had indoor plumbing for decades.

Most places on the earth suck, Australia blows.

Puckdropper