Tree of life, a natural spirituality?

[Dean Lofthouse]

I have implied in prior posts to ancient mans knowledge of trees which fell on deaf ears

 

You have just ruined an otherwise interesting post with that comment.

 

Trees were here millions of years before man

 

Man came along and, in evolutionary timescale of around 5 minutes, with his "knowledge" devestated their numbers

[skyhuck]

This is all very interesting as a study of "history",But personally I think most of it is mumbo jumbo.

 

Religion was what people needed before science, in order to make sense of the world.

 

Some today still want/need religion as they are not happy the the answers that science gives them.

[sean]

You have just ruined an otherwise interesting post with that comment.

 

Trees were here millions of years before man

 

Man came along and, in evolutionary timescale of around 5 minutes, with his "knowledge" devestated their numbers

 

 

Easter island being a prime example!!

[Mesterh]

Gotta remember though if we hadnt exploited natural resources we wouldnt all be sitting here now on our pc's on the net.

 

We would be out hunting/gathering and dying.

 

Its only now that with a better understanding of how we are raping nature to its destruction we can start to turn that process around.

 

I dont think for one minute tbh that our ancestors had a better understanding of trees,they used them as and when needed just not on such a large scale as we do now.

 

In fact I remember watching a program where they reckon ancient man was responsible for the destruction of the largest species of trees. They have found ancient stumps in bogs that were a lot larger than todays trees of the same species.

 

BTW I didnt read all the posts because they are too long so if I am babbling on about nothing relating to the topic then please just ignore this post.

[Mozza]

This is all very interesting as a study of "history",But personally I think most of it is mumbo jumbo.

 

Religion was what people needed before science, in order to make sense of the world.

 

Some today still want/need religion as they are not happy the the answers that science gives them.

 

Spot on Dave imo!!

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

I have to come to a conclusion, that I am wasting my time tyrying to explain myself to some folk in here, so I wont be bothering to reply to one lined responses that detract and do not add or contribute.

 

I wanted this to be an interesting and enjoyable thread, a serious but enjoyable subject, and starting to understand why some choose the little and well placed approach to thier contributions:001_rolleyes:

 

Should I join their ranks and just keep to an observational resource method?

 

NAH!

 

im a gas bag and three guys aint enough to stop me when the overwhelming response in general is a positive one!

 

You can please all the poeple some of the time and some of the people all of the time:001_tt2:

 

And you know me, I just love talking Bowlocks!

[Ben Ballard]

realy great and interesing thread mate glad you put it up:thumbup1:

[Dean Lofthouse]

I have to come to a conclusion, that I am wasting my time tyrying to explain myself to some folk in here, so I wont be bothering to reply to one lined responses that detract and do not add or contribute.

 

I wanted this to be an interesting and enjoyable thread, a serious but enjoyable subject, and starting to understand why some choose the little and well placed approach to thier contributions:001_rolleyes:

 

Should I join their ranks and just keep to an observational resource method?

 

NAH!

 

im a gas bag and three guys aint enough to stop me when the overwhelming response in general is a positive one!

 

You can please all the poeple some of the time and some of the people all of the time:001_tt2:

 

And you know me, I just love talking Bowlocks!

 

Tony

 

If we are not "allowed" to contribute because I/we detract from how "you" see things and I'm not allowed to oppose your veiws then in my opinion that is extremism.

 

You have iMO very extremist veiws with regards to trees, I dont agree with many of them, doesn't mean I right and your wrong, I just have slightly differing veiws.

[Danavan]

Great thred:thumbup1: will read through when I have put the kids to bed. If I can bring them down from choc overload:lol:

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Tony

 

If we are not "allowed" to contribute because I/we detract from how "you" see things and I'm not allowed to oppose your veiws then in my opinion that is extremism.

 

You have iMO very extremist veiws with regards to trees, I dont agree with many of them, doesn't mean I right and your wrong, I just have slightly differing veiws.

 

Im an extremist! lol no that is cool, i do like to be "different" some say special but I aint so sure its meant to be complimentary! lol:lol:

 

dean all I am saying is that if you make a comment like ive just ruined this thread by saying what i said then i am going to justifiably treat it with the contempt it deserves, by reflection, by Karma, you reap what you sow.

 

Dean, you picked up on the ONE point that I made from a personal level, that stinks of pure antagonism as far as i am concerned because you stated you was interested in all UNTIL you read my ONE personal addition to my post!

 

say what you like, wether you mean to or not, your post/s are often antagonistic rather than debate, otherwise you would back up your argument with something other than just your opinion, am i wrong? I do at least give a detailed response often with pictorial evidence to reiterate my point.

 

and once again I am trying to justify myself to a guy who cleary has no intention of discussing mans connection to trees throughout the ages even pre dating organised religion, why? why should i bother rplying when this is going to go on and on as a "personal thing" I aint interested in that, come and talk, but please keep it to thread and not personal.