Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Office debate: # of trees on the planet earth
My non EF co-workers claim there are more trees on the planet earth today than ever before.
I don't believe that claim. Or at least I don't think there are as many long term trees (oaks, redwoods) as before--I don't know that a crepe murtle, as pretty as it is, provides the same kind of "life and goodness" as my oaks, poplars, etc. I might be totally off base, but my initial google searches didn't provide me with any source of good info either (and I can't google too much myself because my computer tends to pick up any virus that's out there--I always chose the "wrong" links.)
Can any of you help me with this debate? Unfortunately one of the non believers is my boss so I'm not going to push it, but I would like to know (even if I'm wrong.)
Re: Office debate: # of trees on the planet earth
I found this article that seems to indicate your co-workers are correct: http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/wilderness-resources/stories/more-trees-than-there-were-100-years-ago-its-true. It has some good links to other sources, it appears.
Also, I'm kinda drunk Nesting, so I didn't read the whole article, and it could say the complete opposite of what I think it says.
Apparently I'm too much of a lightweight to start drinking a cocktail before I've started eating.
This article is just about the United States, and it's just a comparison of now vs. 100 years ago. It is true in the US that there are more trees than 100 years ago, because 100 years ago was a period when forests across much of the US were being cleared rapidly for development and timber production. Since then, many forests have been protected, restoration efforts have been fairly successful, lots of urban trees have been planted, and some grassland ecosystems (e.g. Midwestern savannas) have become overgrown with trees due to fire suppression. So yes, in the US there are more trees than a century ago.
I don't think this argument can be made globally, given that the rates of deforestation are still very high in many tropical countries, and the protection and restoration efforts are not as strong in many of those countries as they are in the US. I also wouldn't have any confidence in the statement that there are more trees today than any other period in time... I don't have time to dig around for resources, but the climate has changed very dramatically over the course of the earth's history, and I think think there have been periods of time that have been more favorable climatically for trees than our current conditions. Paleo-ecology is not my particular area of expertise though, so I can't provide specifics...