Wheatmaster
Diamond Member
i think we should do this
Originally posted by: IamDavid
Didn't they figure out a while ago most of the earths oxygen is produced from other sources? I thought I heard something about sea plant-life doing most of it..
Originally posted by: IamDavid
Didn't they figure out a while ago most of the earths oxygen is produced from other sources? I thought I heard something about sea plant-life doing most of it..
Originally posted by: MacBaine
Originally posted by: IamDavid
Didn't they figure out a while ago most of the earths oxygen is produced from other sources? I thought I heard something about sea plant-life doing most of it..
Even if that were true... think about this. say out of 100% O2, 60% (a majority) comes from sea life... well, there's still 40% that we need to take care of. I know this isn't the most accurate of comparisons, but we can't say land based oxygen producers don't matter.
Certainly there are more trees now than in 1900, at the end of the great timber baron era of deforestation, and especially since the 1930's depression years much marginal farmland has been turned back to forest
Originally posted by: ffmcobalt
Originally posted by: IamDavid
Didn't they figure out a while ago most of the earths oxygen is produced from other sources? I thought I heard something about sea plant-life doing most of it..
There's more plant life on the bottom of the ocean than there is above it. Most of the earth's surface area is under water, so it only makes sense that a higher percentage of oxygen conversion takes place below sea level than above sea level.
nik
Originally posted by: Eli
Originally posted by: ffmcobalt
Originally posted by: IamDavid
Didn't they figure out a while ago most of the earths oxygen is produced from other sources? I thought I heard something about sea plant-life doing most of it..
There's more plant life on the bottom of the ocean than there is above it. Most of the earth's surface area is under water, so it only makes sense that a higher percentage of oxygen conversion takes place below sea level than above sea level.
nik
So does that mean that we should just cut all the trees down, because they don't matter?![]()
Yes, of course. We should plant as many trees as we can. Especially in urban environments.
Did you know that the air inside your house can be worse than the air outside? Having plants in your house helps combat the problem.. plus it makes it homey. 🙂 You can never have too many plants in the house, or in your yard.
Originally posted by: klah
There are more trees in the US now than in 1900, and I don't remember reading about people suffocating back then.
Ask A Scientist©: More Trees Today?
Certainly there are more trees now than in 1900, at the end of the great timber baron era of deforestation, and especially since the 1930's depression years much marginal farmland has been turned back to forest
Originally posted by: Eli
Originally posted by: klah
There are more trees in the US now than in 1900, and I don't remember reading about people suffocating back then.
Ask A Scientist©: More Trees Today?
Certainly there are more trees now than in 1900, at the end of the great timber baron era of deforestation, and especially since the 1930's depression years much marginal farmland has been turned back to forest
Uh..... I find that very, very, very hard to believe. I mean, think about it. How many acres of rainforest gets cut down a day? It's rediculous. That alone should tell you that there aren't more trees today than there were in 1900. What about all the cities? What do you think used to be there? Do you think the contcrete and asphalt was there from the beginning?
The idea that there are more trees today than there were in 1900 is absolutely obsurd.
Originally posted by: klah
Originally posted by: Eli
Originally posted by: klah
There are more trees in the US now than in 1900, and I don't remember reading about people suffocating back then.
Ask A Scientist©: More Trees Today?
Certainly there are more trees now than in 1900, at the end of the great timber baron era of deforestation, and especially since the 1930's depression years much marginal farmland has been turned back to forest
Uh..... I find that very, very, very hard to believe. I mean, think about it. How many acres of rainforest gets cut down a day? It's rediculous. That alone should tell you that there aren't more trees today than there were in 1900. What about all the cities? What do you think used to be there? Do you think the contcrete and asphalt was there from the beginning?
The idea that there are more trees today than there were in 1900 is absolutely obsurd.
In the US, not the world.
Originally posted by: Gr1mL0cK
Originally posted by: klah
Originally posted by: Eli
Originally posted by: klah
There are more trees in the US now than in 1900, and I don't remember reading about people suffocating back then.
Ask A Scientist©: More Trees Today?
Certainly there are more trees now than in 1900, at the end of the great timber baron era of deforestation, and especially since the 1930's depression years much marginal farmland has been turned back to forest
Uh..... I find that very, very, very hard to believe. I mean, think about it. How many acres of rainforest gets cut down a day? It's rediculous. That alone should tell you that there aren't more trees today than there were in 1900. What about all the cities? What do you think used to be there? Do you think the contcrete and asphalt was there from the beginning?
The idea that there are more trees today than there were in 1900 is absolutely obsurd.
In the US, not the world.
Hehe, thats because now instead of cutting down our own trees we just have the other countries cut down thiers for us. 😀
Originally posted by: Gr1mL0cK
Originally posted by: klah
Originally posted by: Eli
Originally posted by: klah
There are more trees in the US now than in 1900, and I don't remember reading about people suffocating back then.
Ask A Scientist©: More Trees Today?
Certainly there are more trees now than in 1900, at the end of the great timber baron era of deforestation, and especially since the 1930's depression years much marginal farmland has been turned back to forest
Uh..... I find that very, very, very hard to believe. I mean, think about it. How many acres of rainforest gets cut down a day? It's rediculous. That alone should tell you that there aren't more trees today than there were in 1900. What about all the cities? What do you think used to be there? Do you think the contcrete and asphalt was there from the beginning?
The idea that there are more trees today than there were in 1900 is absolutely obsurd.
In the US, not the world.
Hehe, thats because now instead of cutting down our own trees we just have the other countries cut down thiers for us. 😀 Like good ol' Canda, and South America so that they can make more cattle for our fast food hamurger patties.
Originally posted by: Zap0602
i think we should do this
Originally posted by: lowtech
You should plant trees because it is pretty & it also provide shelter/protection from the environment to the animals & human.
I have planted over 300,000 trees as an ex tree-planter (average about 1200 per/day every summer for 5 years during college).
Originally posted by: N8Magic
Yes, we should.
1,000 trees is pretty much a drop in the bucket on a global scale, but every little bit helps.
It is piecework & we work 10-14 hours per day 6 days a week.Originally posted by: MacBaine
Originally posted by: lowtech
You should plant trees because it is pretty & it also provide shelter/protection from the environment to the animals & human.
I have planted over 300,000 trees as an ex tree-planter (average about 1200 per/day every summer for 5 years during college).
1,200 per day? I find it hard to believe that you yourself could have done that... 8 hours a day, that's 2.5 trees per minute...