Ivy IS a real problem

[Joe Newton]

34 minutes ago, CambridgeJC said:

Your final sentence includes a highly provocative suggestion that directly goes against your own posting guidelines. Designed to belittle me and suggest that my own posts are designed to belittle others. Please explain why you decided to send that parting shot because this is not the measured reply of a fair and impartial administrator or moderator. Please read paragraph 4 especially of those guidelines. You seem happy enough to allow someone to call me unhinged in this public forum which I found abusive. 
Maybe this is because I am a new visitor here from outside your arborist community?  You may need to follow the posting trail to discover action and reaction. I came here in good faith but have not enjoyed the behaviour of some contributors. Sorry to say this. John

This should be interesting...

 

It's fair to say that you've been dismissed by a few including myself as an irritating poster with little merit to the conversation that makes this forum enjoyable to many.

 

This has possibly been because of your dismissive or provocative attitude to the time served tree workers who have wasted their time replying to you when it doesn't suit your narrative.

 

It's nothing to do with your lack of arb background. There's plenty of long standing contributors who aren't in the arb industry specifically. It's to do with your attitude. You ask for opinions and demand credentials from those who reply, and yet you offer nothing in return.

 

This whole post is pointless though. People like yourself are incapable of introspect.

[Haironyourchest]

3 hours ago, CambridgeJC said:

Does it make you feel good to post an image loke this?

 Wifey got a chuckle out of it. She's quite enjoyed bits of this thread I've read aloud to her.

[Stubby]

7 hours ago, CambridgeJC said:

Bioscience. Why do you ask? Is this the beginning of a mature discussion on ivy? Or a continuation of the anti-scientist dismissal of someone who is not an arborist. Someone who explicitly stated this in his original quest for help for facts and opinions from arborists?

Someone who has gained a great deal of information since making contact with this forum. I look forward to a friendly discussion with knowledgeable people who accept people with different views and perspectives. We are all never too old to learn. None of us know everything even after 30 years or more in any discipline. Friend or foe?

I posted an observation about an FC woodland a few posts back but you seem to have ignored it . Maybe because , in this instance it did counter your argument  ?

[Mick Dempsey]

It’s not really about Ivy anymore for this bloke is it?

[Stere]

Most scientists are normally more rational and objective?

 

You have a hypothesis about ivy but have jumped to a conclusion without citing much evidence apart from casual observations.

 

Any links to interesting scientific papers on ivy which I posted  you haven't  engaged with, maybe you didn't bother to read them?

 

I already posted this one:

 

 

Quote

Abstract

The increasing prevalence of woody liana species has been widely observed across the neotropics, but observations from temperate regions are comparatively rare. On the basis of a resurvey database of 1814 (quasi-)permanent plots from across 40 European study sites, with a median between-survey interval of 38 years, and ranging from 1933 (earliest initial survey) to 2015 (most recent resurvey), we found that liana occurrence has also increased in the understories of deciduous temperate forests in Europe. Ivy (Hedera helix) is largely responsible for driving this increase across space and time, as its proportional occurrence has grown by an average of 14% per site. Enhanced warming rates, increased shade, and historical management transitions explain only some of the variation in ivy frequency response across the dataset, despite surveys coming from across continental gradients of environmental conditions. Uncovering the mechanisms underlying ivy expansion, and the potential consequences for forest structure and functioning, requires further research. Given the magnitude of increases in understory ivy frequency and its possible impacts, scientists, policy makers, and resource managers must be mindful of the patterns, processes, and implications of potential “lianification” of temperate forests.

 

https://purews.inbo.be/ws/portalfiles/portal/34412808/Perring_et_al._2020_Increasing_liana_frequency_Preprint.pdf

 

Edited April 20, 2022 by Stere

[Sutton]

25 minutes ago, Stere said:

Most scientists are normally more rational and objective?

 

You have a hypothesis about ivy but have jumped to a conclusion without citing much evidence apart from casual observations.

 

Any links to interesting scientific papers on ivy which I posted  you haven't  engaged with, maybe you didn't bother to read them?

 

I already posted this one:

 

 

 

https://purews.inbo.be/ws/portalfiles/portal/34412808/Perring_et_al._2020_Increasing_liana_frequency_Preprint.pdf

 

What have we got?

What's changed and why?

Are we going to do anything about it and who's paying?

:)

[gary112]

9 hours ago, CambridgeJC said:

Your final sentence includes a highly provocative suggestion that directly goes against your own posting guidelines. Designed to belittle me and suggest that my own posts are designed to belittle others. Please explain why you decided to send that parting shot because this is not the measured reply of a fair and impartial administrator or moderator. Please read paragraph 4 especially of those guidelines. You seem happy enough to allow someone to call me unhinged in this public forum which I found abusive. 
Maybe this is because I am a new visitor here from outside your arborist community?  You may need to follow the posting trail to discover action and reaction. I came here in good faith but have not enjoyed the behaviour of some contributors. Sorry to say this. John

Aye up your back again,now who,s doing the trolling then?thought you had long gone

[CambridgeJC]

2 hours ago, Mick Dempsey said:

It’s not really about Ivy anymore for this bloke is it?

Sasly no. You managed to push it off course by your personal remarks and attempts to belittle your target who you consider an outsider who you assume has no knowledge and who you believe does not have the right to observe something you clearly have never considered seriously before and which you enjoy bating. Your behaviour breaches basic rules of good respectful behaviour and the administration seems unwilling to review the evolution of the threads in which you clearly enjoy provocative personal remarks designed to belittle and raise a laugh with your colleague arborists. I am no different from many other contributors who prefer to protect themselves from more sinister personal abuse from people like you by maintaining a posting name only. Soon I will provide a bit more to show I am not a total dumbo as you would have me seem. Have a good laugh now. John. 

[Guest Gimlet]

9 hours ago, Doug Tait said:

 

...Bioscientist? I don't know what that is I'm afraid.

A bod who studies stuff that lives, rather than test tubes and things you set fire to, or lecky-tricks, fizzicks and shit...

[Guest Gimlet]