next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
> Subject: RE: [NatureNS] Red Herr
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_2FC3_01D14A3E.5F441460
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi David P. & Nick, Jan 8, 2006
After much delay dealing with numerous side matters I read both of =
your e-mails of Dec 27, 2015. Given access to relevant research results =
from two or more independent sources, the full papers, not just a =
summary of a summary of an executive summary, I am prepared to believe =
anything; provided I have good reason to believe that the researchers in =
question have done their homework. And in all such matters Murphy's Law =
never sleeps.=20
Alex McKeague of Ottawa (in the 80s ?) distributed subsamples of =
thoroughly validated soil samples to interested labs, assigned code =
letters to each lab involved, so the outliers could avoid embarassment, =
and then reported all results back to those involved. He did this at =
least twice using different samples. The range in results was astounding =
and Ca, drawing on memory, had great scatter.
It would be helpful if you each could send me a pdf file of the two =
most complete papers.
YT, DW
=20
----- Original Message -----=20
From: David Patriquin=20
To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca=20
Sent: Sunday, December 27, 2015 7:51 AM
Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry - calcium exchangeable =
etc
The studies/modelling by Ouimet, Clair & others related to acid rain' =
& Noseworthy's thesis examining forest biomass harvesting include =
calculation of "Exceedances"which occur when the removal of basic =
cations by acid rain exceed the additions though atmospheric deposition =
and weathering of rocks....
The Noseworthy research, incorporated more detailed local information =
than the Ouillet et al.study and made an upward revision of the estimate =
of the area of Nova Scotia mapped in exceedance from 39.9% to 73%. This =
is simply not good news for Nova Scotia: even with no harvesting, soil =
fertility under 73% of our forests will continue to decline because of =
acid rain.
Noseworthy presents results for calculations of sustainable harvest =
rates across Kejimkujik National Park for harvesting with and without =
base-cation depletions....* Although not specifically discussed in this =
context, the results can be interpreted as indicating that limited =
selective harvest schemes, but not clearcuts, would be sustainable for =
most of that area. Such a conclusion would likely apply also to the =
Bowater St. Margaret=E2=80=99s Bay Lands which have similar geology, and =
indeed probably to most of Nova Scotia forests.
(*There is no assumption that there would be commercial harvesting in =
Keji - details for Keji but not other areas are apparently given because =
there are no commercial interests in it as it is a protected area; also =
exisiting data on outflow of nutrients in streams allowed some =
validation of the methodology.)
More at http://wrweo.ca/wrweo2014/posts/2014/LetterWRWEOFeb12.pdf
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
From: David & Alison Webster <dwebster@glinx.com>
To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca=20
Sent: Sunday, December 27, 2015 7:11 AM
Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry
Hi Nick & All Dec 27, 2015
A key question in this discussion is what fraction of soil calcium =
is under consideration ? Is this exchangeable Ca and soil was sampled to =
what depth ?=20
=20
Yt, DW, Kentville
=20
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Nicholas Hill=20
To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca=20
Sent: Saturday, December 26, 2015 7:30 PM
Subject: RE: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry
Steve,
Bill Freedman had these data and Garbary and I referred to his paper =
w Morash as well as to a paper on a fractional analysis from New =
England. .conn..The take home message was that while biomass removal =
removed 13% of the soil calcium in new England, a similar harvest =
removed 27% of soil calcium in Nova Scotia.
This story has another Dal connection: Barry Goldsmith, forest =
ecologist who worked at Dal before Bill Freedman. Barry (FB Goldsmith, =
we have lost touch) figured that on average NS forests had been cut over =
3 times. This figure is about right if we take a harvest once every 80 =
years rate and we might increase this estimate (made in 1980) to 3.5 =
times cut taking into account we are 36 years past his time and that =
times between harvests have diminished.
So with 27% loss of calcium per harvest and forests being cut over =
more that 3 times, we could make a calculation of:
A. Loss of Ca in NS forests (our cuts do not remove all biomass)
And=20
B. How much worse shape we are in in comparison w Connecticut=20
So what?
David Garbary and my finding (Botany in 2011) showed that NS has a =
group of rare Appalachian herbs that are restricted to our highest =
calcium forests; floodplains, even though in Appalachia they grow on =
upland slopes. With climate change plant distributions will move north =
but only if we have not exhausted our soils.=20
We should be able to do something with these data.
Nick
On Dec 24, 2015 4:52 PM, "Stephen Shaw" <srshaw@dal.ca> wrote:
A question regarding Fred & Peter's point about loss of nutrients.
In a natural deciduous forest of any type that has not been =
harvested at all, for a 100-year old tree (say), what proportion of the =
total recyclable nutrients per tree-area will have come from the =
accumulated annual leaf fall (+ fallen dead branches + feasting =
caterpillar, squirrel and woodpecker turds, etc), and what proportion =
will be returned only after the woody trunk and main branches have =
finally died, fallen down and decayed at age 100?
If the first is dominant then the argument about loss of nutrients =
by logging and tree removal is not strictly valid, whereas if the second =
dominates, it is.
I'm sure somebody must have looked at this carefully, and for =
different types of forest and different soil types. Are the proportions =
known?
Steve
________________________________________
From: naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca =
[naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca] on behalf of Fred Schueler =
[bckcdb@istar.ca]
Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 12:28 PM
To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
Subject: RE: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry
Quoting John and Nhung <nhungjohn@eastlink.ca>:
> Yeah, I get the impression that the main problem with the Point =
Tupper
> monster is its size. A smaller operation might have fit in =
quite nicely.
> Of course, the NewPage surprise added to the mess, but mess it =
is, and I
> hope the government ad the operators can ramp back its biomass =
consumption
> to a more sensible, sustainable scale.
* I was crafting a more complex reply to this thread, but I'll =
just
say that the problem with biomass harvesting from forests is to =
get
the nutrients removed in the wood back into the forest so =
successive
generation of trees can grow at a decent rate. We tried to deal =
with
this in our county forest here but certain foresters reacted so
negatively to the question of fertilization that the advisory
committee was illegally terminated as a consequence - but here's =
our
discussion of the nutrient question in forests that are having =
wood
removed - http://pinicola.ca/limnutr.htm - on sand and limestone =
we've
got very low intrinsic levels of nutrients, but the problem exists =
in
all woods if they're intensively exploited.
fred.
=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
> Fingers crossed for a mild winter, with minimum demand for =
firewood! All
> this tells me we still need to take solar heat and other =
renewable sources
> more seriously.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca =
[mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca]
> On Behalf Of Stephen Shaw
> Sent: December 24, 2015 11:59 AM
> To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
> Subject: RE: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry
>
> Ed Darby? Abraham Darby I around 1709 modified the blast =
furnace that had
> already been evolving for over a millenium, to consume coke =
instead of
> charcoal as the source of carbon that formed the carbon monoxide =
used to
> reduce raw iron oxide to pig iron, the starting point for other =
iron
> products. Charcoal gave a purer iron product, but making coke =
from coal
> proved much cheaper than making charcoal from harvested trees, =
by then a
> scarce commodity. For both charcoal and coke, a main byproduct =
was/is CO2
> gas from the finally oxidised carbon, released into the =
atmosphere. The
> cheaper Darby coke method, later improved, caught on rapidly: a =
gnomic irony
> of this is that while saving some of the CO2-consuming much =
diminished
> forests from approaching extinction, it led rapidly to much =
greater iron
> production via burning fossil carbon that underpinned the =
Industrial
> Revolution in Britain, which in turn led to ever increasing CO2 =
emissions,
> eventually worldwide.
>
> On a lesser point not covered by reporter Aaron Beswick's =
article in the C-H
> that Dave referred to, if you had tried to get a few cords of =
16" cut
> firewood for your wood stove in early 2015, as we did, you would =
have found
> that initially, none of the local suppliers around Halifax could =
get any
> logs, because they believed that such wood that had been =
harvested was
> nearly all going directly to Point Tupper biomass monster, =
because that had
> been built too large for the available supply of so-called =
'waste' wood and
> bark. Central planning at its very best. Our supplier =
eventually got some
> logs from New Brunswick, but the price went up considerably.
> Steve
> ________________________________________
> From: naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca =
[naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca] on
> behalf of David & Alison Webster [dwebster@glinx.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 7:12 PM
> To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
> Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry
>
> Hi Nick & All, Dec 23, 2015
> I have only few minutes so will deal with the "gnomic" =
question first
> and return later to the rest.
> It was a new word to me so I had to consult a dictionary =
which referred
> me to sententious=3D Aphoristic, pithy, given to the use of =
maxims; (of
> persons) =3D fond of pompous moralizing; maxim=3D A general =
truth drawn from
> science or experience.
> I think we should both plead guilty to the "gnomic" charge =
and be
> flattered. As for the "pompous moralizing"; I am frequently =
inclined to
> quote the King James Bible but then remember: "Be not righteous =
over much,
> neither make thyself over wise: why shouldest thou destroy =
thyself ?";
> Ecclesiastes 7:16; and decide not to.
>
> Merry Christmas All & A Happy New Year
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Nicholas Hill<mailto:fernhillns@gmail.com>
> To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca<mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 4:32 PM
> Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry
>
> A friend recently accused me of being "gnomic", and ill-educated =
lout as i
> am, i took issue at being called a gnome, but moving into this =
here case at
> hand, I think the gnomes have it: "And warning that use of =
biomass is not
> green is perhaps already an effective way to indirectly kill =
trees." Not
> exactly gnomic but not entirely designed for clarity and =
explicitness. Then
> we have: "And if not now, then without doubt in the future." =
This non
> sentence leaves us without a doubt in the future waiting with =
and like Godot
> for some Christmas clarety.
>
> Seriously, I see Dave's point and Jamie's. England found a way =
through
> Edward Darby to stop using beech trees for coking to make steel; =
Darby
> figured out how to substitute coal for wood and thank god =
because England
> had run out of most decent sized trees and was charcoaling most =
of its
> forests. David is right that the first quotation is an =
overstatement but
> Jamie's point was most welcome in today's Herald. We not only =
are running
> the risk of losing good forest but we are running down our =
forest soils so
> that tree regrowth is poor, forest composition is weedy, =
wildlife suffers,
> and the carbon balance (ie. that less carbon dioxide is being =
emitted than
> would be if we allowed forests to grow and used conventional =
fossil fuels in
> the most efficient manner) is questionable. We want to move away =
from
> "Green" that is not sustainable for wildlife and I would put =
biomass and
> large scale hydroelectric both in that unsustainable class.
>
> Good on David and Jamie, the environmental critic and the =
advocate.
>
> Merry Christmas guys
>
> Nick
>
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 2:56 PM, David & Alison Webster
> <dwebster@glinx.com<mailto:dwebster@glinx.com>> wrote:
> Dear All, Dec 23, 2015
> There is an article on biomass in today's Chron. Hrld. page =
A3 "Biomass
> may be less than green: report". I could not see how to extract =
a link to
> this article.
> The warning was issued some years ago to "Beware of false =
prophets" and
> if this article is at all accurate then Jamie Simpson and Aaron =
Ward may
> qualify to some extent.
> These biomass plants leave much to be desired and =
constructive criticism
> will hopefully lead to better context integration in future but =
saying that
> "...the province is not capable of proving that harvesting for =
biomass is
> better for the environment than burning coal." is misleading in =
the extreme.
> First of all it is an example of deplorable prose because =
superficially
> it would appear to say that burning biomass for power is no =
better for the
> environment than burning coal. Unless huge amounts of CO2 are =
released in
> the course of cutting, hauling and preparation for burning then =
the above
> would be false.
> But burning of biomass is not mentioned; only harvesting =
for biomass is
> mentioned in that quote. And true enough "harvesting for =
biomass" uses
> energy for no purpose if the biomass is not subsequently burned =
and would
> not help the environment in any way. And the province, being =
just an area of
> land would be unable to prove anything.
>
> Getting back to the heart of this question; when a tree =
which has fixed
> carbon for say 100 years is cut down, it is entirely correct =
that another
> tree of equal size and carbon content does not spring up to =
replace it in
> less than 100 years (unless a faster growing tree is planted). =
So yes there
> often is an apparent lag. But if done astutely, say by thinning =
overstocked
> trees sufficiently early, then this apparent lag will shrink =
nearly to zero.
> And this may be repeated on the same ground two or more times =
depending upon
> details.
>
> But what are the alternatives ? If a tree dies and rots in =
the forest
> then all of the carbon is eventually released as CO2 after being =
recycled
> through a host of fungi, insects , etc. In event of forest fire =
then huge
> amounts of CO2 are released in one slug. And some may have =
noticed that
> large areas of western forest were burned this year; (some =
carbon bank).
>
> Going back to that 100 year old tree which was cut, and =
standing back a
> bit, it can be seen that the perceived lag in carbon capture is =
an illusion.
> The carbon has already been captured. The tree, over the period =
of its life
> fixed carbon and atmospheric carbon was decreased accordingly. =
Even if that
> entire tree is burned; trunk, branches and all roots, the amount =
of CO2
> released can not exceed the amount which that tree has fixed. So =
the true
> lag is zero.
>
> There is more than one way to kill a tree. I became alarmed =
about 1990
> because Spruce trees, normally long lived, were starting to die =
prematurely.
> At first I suspected air pollution and this may be in play to =
some extent.
> But over time I have became convinced that moisture stress was =
the dominant
> cause. Trees evolved for loss of feeder roots. As moisture =
is extracted
> to the wilting point, at a given level, death of feeder roots =
will soon
> follow and when moisture is replenished a new set of feeder =
roots will
> eventually develop. And long periods without rainfall in NS go =
way back, as
> growth rings here record, but if repeated too frequently then =
trees become
> overwhelmed by fungi invading dead extension roots leading to =
invasion of
> major roots.
> I don't have the figures extracted to prove it, but I think =
climate
> change has already led to more erratic precipitation during the =
growing
> season here.
> And warning that use of biomass is not green is perhaps =
already an
> effective way to indirectly kill trees. And if not now, then =
without doubt
> in the future.
>
> Yt, Dave Webster, Kentville
>
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com>
> Version: 2016.0.7294 / Virus Database: 4489/11241 - Release =
Date: 12/23/15
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus =
software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------
Frederick W. Schueler & Aleta Karstad
Mudpuppy Night - http://pinicola.ca/mudpup1.htm
Vulnerable Watersheds - http://vulnerablewaters.blogspot.ca/
study our books - http://pinicola.ca/books/index.htm
RR#2 Bishops Mills, Ontario, Canada K0G 1T0
on the Smiths Falls Limestone Plain 44* 52'N 75* 42'W
(613)258-3107 <bckcdb at istar.ca> http://pinicola.ca/
"[The] two fundamental steps of scientific thought - the =
conjecture
and refutation of Popper - have little place in the usual =
conception
of intelligence. If something is to be dismissed as inadequate, it =
is
surely not Darwin [, whose] works manifest the activity of a mind
seeking for wisdom, a value which conventional philosophy has =
largely
abandoned." Ghiselen, 1969. Triumph of the Darwinian Method, p =
237.
------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7294 / Virus Database: 4489/11261 - Release Date: =
12/26/15
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7294 / Virus Database: 4489/11320 - Release Date: =
01/04/16
------=_NextPart_000_2FC3_01D14A3E.5F441460
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=EF=BB=BF<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dutf-8" http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META name=3DGENERATOR content=3D"MSHTML 8.00.6001.23588"></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>Hi David P. & Nick, =20
Jan 8, =
2006</DIV>
<DIV> After much delay dealing with numerous side =
matters I=20
read both of your e-mails of Dec 27, 2015. Given access to relevant =
research results from two or more independent sources, the full papers, =
not just=20
a summary of a summary of an executive summary, I am prepared to believe =
anything; provided I have good reason to believe that the researchers in =
question have done their homework. And in all such matters Murphy's Law =
never=20
sleeps. </DIV>
<DIV> Alex McKeague of Ottawa (in the 80s ?) =
distributed=20
subsamples of thoroughly validated soil samples to interested =
labs,=20
assigned code letters to each lab involved, so the outliers =
could=20
avoid embarassment, and then reported all results back to those =
involved.=20
He did this at least twice using different samples. The range in results =
was=20
astounding and Ca, drawing on memory, had great scatter.</DIV>
<DIV> It would be helpful if you each could send me a =
pdf file=20
of the two most complete papers.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>YT, DW</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; =
PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"=20
dir=3Dltr>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
<A title=3Ddavidgpatriquin@yahoo.ca =
href=3D"mailto:davidgpatriquin@yahoo.ca">David=20
Patriquin</A> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3Dnaturens@chebucto.ns.ca=20
href=3D"mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca">naturens@chebucto.ns.ca</A> =
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, December 27, 2015 =
7:51=20
AM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NatureNS] Red =
Herring &=20
Forestry - calcium exchangeable etc</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fff; FONT-FAMILY: HelveticaNeue, Helvetica =
Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif; COLOR: #000; =
FONT-SIZE: 13px">
<DIV dir=3Dltr id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_4951><SPAN=20
id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_5025>The studies/modelling=20
by </SPAN> Ouimet, Clair & others related to acid =
rain'=20
& Noseworthy's thesis examining forest biomass harvesting =
include=20
calculation of "Exceedances"which occur when the removal of basic =
cations=20
by acid rain exceed the additions though atmospheric deposition and =
weathering=20
of rocks....</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_4951><BR></DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_4951>The Noseworthy =
research,=20
incorporated more detailed local information than the Ouillet et =
al.study and made an upward revision of the estimate of the area of =
Nova=20
Scotia mapped in exceedance from 39.9% to 73%. This is simply not good =
news=20
for Nova Scotia: even with no harvesting, soil fertility under 73% of =
our=20
forests will continue to decline because of acid rain.</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_4951><BR></DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_4951>Noseworthy =
presents results=20
for calculations of sustainable harvest rates across Kejimkujik =
National Park=20
for harvesting with and without base-cation depletions....* Although =
not=20
specifically discussed in this context, the results can be interpreted =
as=20
indicating that limited selective harvest schemes, but not clearcuts, =
would be=20
sustainable for most of that area. Such a conclusion would likely =
apply also=20
to the Bowater St. Margaret=E2=80=99s Bay Lands which have similar =
geology, and indeed=20
probably to most of Nova Scotia forests.</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_4951><BR></DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_4951>(*There is no =
assumption that=20
there would be commercial harvesting in Keji - details for Keji but =
not other=20
areas are apparently given because there are no commercial interests =
in it as=20
it is a protected area; also exisiting data on outflow of nutrients in =
streams=20
allowed some validation of the methodology.)</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_4951><BR></DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_4951>More at <A=20
id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_6573=20
=
href=3D"http://wrweo.ca/wrweo2014/posts/2014/LetterWRWEOFeb12.pdf">http:/=
/wrweo.ca/wrweo2014/posts/2014/LetterWRWEOFeb12.pdf</A><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_4976> </DIV>
<DIV id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_4933 =
class=3Dsignature><BR></DIV><BR>
<DIV id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_4947 =
class=3DqtdSeparateBR><BR><BR></DIV>
<DIV style=3D"DISPLAY: block" id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_4944=20
class=3Dyahoo_quoted>
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-FAMILY: HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, =
Lucida Grande, sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 13px"=20
id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_4943>
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-FAMILY: HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, =
Lucida Grande, sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 16px"=20
id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_4942>
<DIV dir=3Dltr id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_4941><FONT=20
id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_4940 size=3D2 face=3DArial>
<HR id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_5866 SIZE=3D1>
<B><SPAN style=3D"FONT-WEIGHT: bold">From:</SPAN></B> David & =
Alison Webster=20
<dwebster@glinx.com><BR><B><SPAN=20
style=3D"FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> naturens@chebucto.ns.ca =
<BR><B><SPAN=20
style=3D"FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Sunday, December 27, 2015 =
7:11=20
AM<BR><B><SPAN style=3D"FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> Re: =
[NatureNS]=20
Red Herring & Forestry<BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_5864 class=3Dy_msg_container><BR>
<DIV id=3Dyiv7108882142>
<STYLE></STYLE>
<DIV id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_6534>
<DIV id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_6555>Hi Nick & =
All =20
=
=20
Dec 27, =
2015</DIV>
<DIV id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_6553> A key =
question in=20
this discussion is what fraction of soil calcium is under =
consideration ? Is=20
this exchangeable Ca and soil was sampled to what depth ? </DIV>
<DIV id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_6551> </DIV>
<DIV id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_6549>Yt, DW, Kentville</DIV>
<DIV id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_6547> </DIV>
<DIV id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_6545> </DIV>
<DIV id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_6543> </DIV>
<DIV id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_6541>----- Original Message ----- =
</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; =
PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"=20
dir=3Dltr id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_6533>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4"=20
id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_6538><B>From:</B> <A=20
title=3Dfernhillns@gmail.com href=3D"mailto:fernhillns@gmail.com" =
rel=3Dnofollow=20
target=3D_blank title-off=3D"" =
ymailto=3D"mailto:fernhillns@gmail.com">Nicholas=20
Hill</A> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial" =
id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_6536><B>To:</B>=20
<A title=3Dnaturens@chebucto.ns.ca =
href=3D"mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca"=20
rel=3Dnofollow target=3D_blank title-off=3D""=20
=
ymailto=3D"mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca">naturens@chebucto.ns.ca</A> =
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"=20
id=3Dyui_3_16_0_1_1451215827128_6532><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, December =
26, 2015=20
7:30 PM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: [NatureNS] Red =
Herring=20
& Forestry</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr>Steve,<BR>Bill Freedman had these data and Garbary =
and I=20
referred to his paper w Morash as well as to a paper on a fractional =
analysis from New England. .conn..The take home message was that =
while=20
biomass removal removed 13% of the soil calcium in new =
England, a=20
similar harvest removed 27% of soil calcium in Nova Scotia.</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr>This story has another Dal connection: Barry =
Goldsmith, forest=20
ecologist who worked at Dal before Bill Freedman. Barry (FB =
Goldsmith, we=20
have lost touch) figured that on average NS forests had been cut =
over 3=20
times. This figure is about right if we take a harvest once every 80 =
years=20
rate and we might increase this estimate (made in 1980) to 3.5 times =
cut=20
taking into account we are 36 years past his time and that times =
between=20
harvests have diminished.</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr>So with 27% loss of calcium per harvest and =
forests being=20
cut over more that 3 times, we could make a calculation of:</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr>A. Loss of Ca in NS forests (our cuts do not remove =
all=20
biomass)<BR>And <BR>B. How much worse shape we are in in comparison =
w=20
Connecticut </DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr>So what?</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr>David Garbary and my finding (Botany in 2011) showed =
that NS=20
has a group of rare Appalachian herbs that are restricted to our =
highest=20
calcium forests; floodplains, even though in Appalachia they grow on =
upland=20
slopes. With climate change plant distributions will move north but =
only if=20
we have not exhausted our soils. </DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr>We should be able to do something with these =
data.</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr>Nick</DIV>
<DIV class=3Dyiv7108882142gmail_quote>On Dec 24, 2015 4:52 PM, =
"Stephen Shaw"=20
<<A href=3D"mailto:srshaw@dal.ca" rel=3Dnofollow target=3D_blank=20
ymailto=3D"mailto:srshaw@dal.ca">srshaw@dal.ca</A>> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; =
PADDING-LEFT: 1ex"=20
class=3Dyiv7108882142gmail_quote>A question regarding Fred & =
Peter's=20
point about loss of nutrients.<BR>In a natural deciduous forest of =
any=20
type that has not been harvested at all, for a 100-year old tree =
(say),=20
what proportion of the total recyclable nutrients per tree-area =
will have=20
come from the accumulated annual leaf fall (+ fallen dead branches =
+=20
feasting caterpillar, squirrel and woodpecker turds, etc), and =
what=20
proportion will be returned only after the woody trunk and main =
branches=20
have finally died, fallen down and decayed at age 100?<BR>If the =
first is=20
dominant then the argument about loss of nutrients by logging and =
tree=20
removal is not strictly valid, whereas if the second dominates, it =
is.<BR><BR>I'm sure somebody must have looked at this carefully, =
and for=20
different types of forest and different soil types. Are the=20
proportions=20
=
known?<BR>Steve<BR>________________________________________<BR>From: <A=20
href=3D"mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca" rel=3Dnofollow =
target=3D_blank=20
=
ymailto=3D"mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca">naturens-owner@chebucto.=
ns.ca</A>=20
[<A href=3D"mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca" rel=3Dnofollow =
target=3D_blank=20
=
ymailto=3D"mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca">naturens-owner@chebucto.=
ns.ca</A>]=20
on behalf of Fred Schueler [<A href=3D"mailto:bckcdb@istar.ca" =
rel=3Dnofollow=20
target=3D_blank=20
ymailto=3D"mailto:bckcdb@istar.ca">bckcdb@istar.ca</A>]<BR>Sent: =
Thursday,=20
December 24, 2015 12:28 PM<BR>To: <A =
href=3D"mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca"=20
rel=3Dnofollow target=3D_blank=20
=
ymailto=3D"mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca">naturens@chebucto.ns.ca</A><BR=
>Subject:=20
RE: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry<BR><BR>Quoting John and =
Nhung=20
<<A href=3D"mailto:nhungjohn@eastlink.ca" rel=3Dnofollow =
target=3D_blank=20
=
ymailto=3D"mailto:nhungjohn@eastlink.ca">nhungjohn@eastlink.ca</A>>:<B=
R><BR>>=20
Yeah, I get the impression that the main problem with the Point=20
Tupper<BR>> monster is its size. A smaller operation =
might have=20
fit in quite nicely.<BR>> Of course, the NewPage surprise added =
to the=20
mess, but mess it is, and I<BR>> hope the government ad the =
operators=20
can ramp back its biomass consumption<BR>> to a more sensible,=20
sustainable scale.<BR><BR>* I was crafting a more complex reply to =
this=20
thread, but I'll just<BR>say that the problem with biomass =
harvesting from=20
forests is to get<BR>the nutrients removed in the wood back into =
the=20
forest so successive<BR>generation of trees can grow at a decent =
rate. We=20
tried to deal with<BR>this in our county forest here but certain =
foresters=20
reacted so<BR>negatively to the question of fertilization that the =
advisory<BR>committee was illegally terminated as a consequence - =
but=20
here's our<BR>discussion of the nutrient question in forests that =
are=20
having wood<BR>removed - <A =
href=3D"http://pinicola.ca/limnutr.htm"=20
rel=3Dnofollow target=3D_blank>http://pinicola.ca/limnutr.htm</A> =
- on sand=20
and limestone we've<BR>got very low intrinsic levels of nutrients, =
but the=20
problem exists in<BR>all woods if they're intensively=20
=
exploited.<BR><BR>fred.<BR>=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D<BR>><BR>>=20
Fingers crossed for a mild winter, with minimum demand for =
firewood! =20
All<BR>> this tells me we still need to take solar heat and =
other=20
renewable sources<BR>> more seriously.<BR>><BR>> =
-----Original=20
Message-----<BR>> From: <A =
href=3D"mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca"=20
rel=3Dnofollow target=3D_blank=20
=
ymailto=3D"mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca">naturens-owner@chebucto.=
ns.ca</A>=20
[mailto:<A href=3D"mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca" =
rel=3Dnofollow=20
target=3D_blank=20
=
ymailto=3D"mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca">naturens-owner@chebucto.=
ns.ca</A>]<BR>>=20
On Behalf Of Stephen Shaw<BR>> Sent: December 24, 2015 11:59 =
AM<BR>>=20
To: <A href=3D"mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca" rel=3Dnofollow =
target=3D_blank=20
=
ymailto=3D"mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca">naturens@chebucto.ns.ca</A><BR=
>>=20
Subject: RE: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry<BR>><BR>> =
Ed=20
Darby? Abraham Darby I around 1709 modified the blast =
furnace=20
that had<BR>> already been evolving for over a millenium, to =
consume=20
coke instead of<BR>> charcoal as the source of carbon that =
formed the=20
carbon monoxide used to<BR>> reduce raw iron oxide to pig iron, =
the=20
starting point for other iron<BR>> products. =
Charcoal gave=20
a purer iron product, but making coke from coal<BR>> proved =
much=20
cheaper than making charcoal from harvested trees, by then =
a<BR>>=20
scarce commodity. For both charcoal and coke, a main =
byproduct=20
was/is CO2<BR>> gas from the finally oxidised carbon, released =
into the=20
atmosphere. The<BR>> cheaper Darby coke method, =
later=20
improved, caught on rapidly: a gnomic irony<BR>> of this is =
that while=20
saving some of the CO2-consuming much diminished<BR>> forests =
from=20
approaching extinction, it led rapidly to much greater =
iron<BR>>=20
production via burning fossil carbon that underpinned the=20
Industrial<BR>> Revolution in Britain, which in turn led to =
ever=20
increasing CO2 emissions,<BR>> eventually =
worldwide.<BR>><BR>> On=20
a lesser point not covered by reporter Aaron Beswick's article in =
the=20
C-H<BR>> that Dave referred to, if you had tried to get a few =
cords of=20
16" cut<BR>> firewood for your wood stove in early 2015, as we =
did, you=20
would have found<BR>> that initially, none of the local =
suppliers=20
around Halifax could get any<BR>> logs, because they believed =
that such=20
wood that had been harvested was<BR>> nearly all going directly =
to=20
Point Tupper biomass monster, because that had<BR>> been built =
too=20
large for the available supply of so-called 'waste' wood =
and<BR>>=20
bark. Central planning at its very best. Our supplier=20
eventually got some<BR>> logs from New Brunswick, but the price =
went up=20
considerably.<BR>> Steve<BR>>=20
________________________________________<BR>> From: <A=20
href=3D"mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca" rel=3Dnofollow =
target=3D_blank=20
=
ymailto=3D"mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca">naturens-owner@chebucto.=
ns.ca</A>=20
[<A href=3D"mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca" rel=3Dnofollow =
target=3D_blank=20
=
ymailto=3D"mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca">naturens-owner@chebucto.=
ns.ca</A>]=20
on<BR>> behalf of David & Alison Webster [<A=20
href=3D"mailto:dwebster@glinx.com" rel=3Dnofollow target=3D_blank=20
=
ymailto=3D"mailto:dwebster@glinx.com">dwebster@glinx.com</A>]<BR>> =
Sent:=20
Wednesday, December 23, 2015 7:12 PM<BR>> To: <A=20
href=3D"mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca" rel=3Dnofollow =
target=3D_blank=20
=
ymailto=3D"mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca">naturens@chebucto.ns.ca</A><BR=
>>=20
Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry<BR>><BR>> =
Hi Nick=20
& All, Dec 23, =
2015<BR>> I have only few minutes so will =
deal with=20
the "gnomic" question first<BR>> and return later to the=20
rest.<BR>> It was a new word to me so I had =
to=20
consult a dictionary which referred<BR>> me to sententious=3D =
Aphoristic,=20
pithy, given to the use of maxims; (of<BR>> persons) =3D fond =
of pompous=20
moralizing; maxim=3D A general truth drawn from<BR>> science or =
experience.<BR>> I think we should both =
plead guilty=20
to the "gnomic" charge and be<BR>> flattered. As for the =
"pompous=20
moralizing"; I am frequently inclined to<BR>> quote the King =
James=20
Bible but then remember: "Be not righteous over much,<BR>> =
neither make=20
thyself over wise: why shouldest thou destroy thyself ?";<BR>>=20
Ecclesiastes 7:16; and decide not to.<BR>><BR>> Merry =
Christmas All=20
& A Happy New Year<BR>><BR>> ----- Original Message=20
-----<BR>> From: Nicholas Hill<mailto:<A=20
href=3D"mailto:fernhillns@gmail.com" rel=3Dnofollow =
target=3D_blank=20
=
ymailto=3D"mailto:fernhillns@gmail.com">fernhillns@gmail.com</A>><BR>&=
gt;=20
To: <A href=3D"mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca" rel=3Dnofollow =
target=3D_blank=20
=
ymailto=3D"mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca">naturens@chebucto.ns.ca</A><=
;mailto:<A=20
href=3D"mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca" rel=3Dnofollow =
target=3D_blank=20
=
ymailto=3D"mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca">naturens@chebucto.ns.ca</A>>=
;<BR>>=20
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 4:32 PM<BR>> Subject: Re: =
[NatureNS]=20
Red Herring & Forestry<BR>><BR>> A friend recently =
accused me of=20
being "gnomic", and ill-educated lout as i<BR>> am, i took =
issue at=20
being called a gnome, but moving into this here case at<BR>> =
hand, I=20
think the gnomes have it: "And warning that use of biomass is =
not<BR>>=20
green is perhaps already an effective way to indirectly kill =
trees."=20
Not<BR>> exactly gnomic but not entirely designed for clarity =
and=20
explicitness. Then<BR>> we have: "And if not now, then without =
doubt in=20
the future." This non<BR>> sentence leaves us without a doubt =
in the=20
future waiting with and like Godot<BR>> for some Christmas=20
clarety.<BR>><BR>> Seriously, I see Dave's point and =
Jamie's.=20
England found a way through<BR>> Edward Darby to stop using =
beech trees=20
for coking to make steel; Darby<BR>> figured out how to =
substitute coal=20
for wood and thank god because England<BR>> had run out of most =
decent=20
sized trees and was charcoaling most of its<BR>> forests. David =
is=20
right that the first quotation is an overstatement but<BR>> =
Jamie's=20
point was most welcome in today's Herald. We not only are =
running<BR>>=20
the risk of losing good forest but we are running down our forest =
soils=20
so<BR>> that tree regrowth is poor, forest composition is =
weedy,=20
wildlife suffers,<BR>> and the carbon balance (ie. that less =
carbon=20
dioxide is being emitted than<BR>> would be if we allowed =
forests to=20
grow and used conventional fossil fuels in<BR>> the most =
efficient=20
manner) is questionable. We want to move away from<BR>> "Green" =
that is=20
not sustainable for wildlife and I would put biomass and<BR>> =
large=20
scale hydroelectric both in that unsustainable =
class.<BR>><BR>> Good=20
on David and Jamie, the environmental critic and the=20
advocate.<BR>><BR>> Merry Christmas guys<BR>><BR>>=20
Nick<BR>><BR>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 2:56 PM, David & =
Alison=20
Webster<BR>> <<A href=3D"mailto:dwebster@glinx.com" =
rel=3Dnofollow=20
target=3D_blank=20
=
ymailto=3D"mailto:dwebster@glinx.com">dwebster@glinx.com</A><mailto:<A=
=20
href=3D"mailto:dwebster@glinx.com" rel=3Dnofollow target=3D_blank=20
=
ymailto=3D"mailto:dwebster@glinx.com">dwebster@glinx.com</A>>>=20
wrote:<BR>> Dear All, =
=20
Dec =
23,=20
2015<BR>> There is an article on biomass in =
today's=20
Chron. Hrld. page A3 "Biomass<BR>> may be less than green: =
report". I=20
could not see how to extract a link to<BR>> this =
article.<BR>> =20
The warning was issued some years ago to "Beware of =
false=20
prophets" and<BR>> if this article is at all accurate then =
Jamie=20
Simpson and Aaron Ward may<BR>> qualify to some =
extent.<BR>> =20
These biomass plants leave much to be desired and=20
constructive criticism<BR>> will hopefully lead to better =
context=20
integration in future but saying that<BR>> "...the province is =
not=20
capable of proving that harvesting for biomass is<BR>> better =
for the=20
environment than burning coal." is misleading in the=20
extreme.<BR>> First of all it is an example =
of=20
deplorable prose because superficially<BR>> it would appear to =
say that=20
burning biomass for power is no better for the<BR>> environment =
than=20
burning coal. Unless huge amounts of CO2 are released in<BR>> =
the=20
course of cutting, hauling and preparation for burning then the=20
above<BR>> would be false.<BR>> But =
burning of=20
biomass is not mentioned; only harvesting for biomass is<BR>> =
mentioned=20
in that quote. And true enough "harvesting for biomass" =
uses<BR>>=20
energy for no purpose if the biomass is not subsequently burned =
and=20
would<BR>> not help the environment in any way. And the =
province, being=20
just an area of<BR>> land would be unable to prove=20
anything.<BR>><BR>> Getting back to the =
heart of=20
this question; when a tree which has fixed<BR>> carbon for say =
100=20
years is cut down, it is entirely correct that another<BR>> =
tree of=20
equal size and carbon content does not spring up to replace it =
in<BR>>=20
less than 100 years (unless a faster growing tree is planted). So =
yes=20
there<BR>> often is an apparent lag. But if done astutely, say =
by=20
thinning overstocked<BR>> trees sufficiently early, then this =
apparent=20
lag will shrink nearly to zero.<BR>> And this may be repeated =
on the=20
same ground two or more times depending upon<BR>>=20
details.<BR>><BR>> But what are the =
alternatives=20
? If a tree dies and rots in the forest<BR>> then all of the =
carbon is=20
eventually released as CO2 after being recycled<BR>> through a =
host of=20
fungi, insects , etc. In event of forest fire then huge<BR>> =
amounts of=20
CO2 are released in one slug. And some may have noticed =
that<BR>> large=20
areas of western forest were burned this year; (some carbon=20
bank).<BR>><BR>> Going back to that 100 =
year old=20
tree which was cut, and standing back a<BR>> bit, it can be =
seen that=20
the perceived lag in carbon capture is an illusion.<BR>> The =
carbon has=20
already been captured. The tree, over the period of its =
life<BR>> fixed=20
carbon and atmospheric carbon was decreased accordingly. Even if=20
that<BR>> entire tree is burned; trunk, branches and all roots, =
the=20
amount of CO2<BR>> released can not exceed the amount which =
that tree=20
has fixed. So the true<BR>> lag is zero.<BR>><BR>> =
=20
There is more than one way to kill a tree. I became alarmed =
about=20
1990<BR>> because Spruce trees, normally long lived, were =
starting to=20
die prematurely.<BR>> At first I suspected air pollution and =
this may=20
be in play to some extent.<BR>> But over time I have became =
convinced=20
that moisture stress was the dominant<BR>> cause. =20
Trees evolved for loss of feeder roots. As moisture is=20
extracted<BR>> to the wilting point, at a given level, death of =
feeder=20
roots will soon<BR>> follow and when moisture is replenished a =
new set=20
of feeder roots will<BR>> eventually develop. And long periods =
without=20
rainfall in NS go way back, as<BR>> growth rings here record, =
but if=20
repeated too frequently then trees become<BR>> overwhelmed by =
fungi=20
invading dead extension roots leading to invasion of<BR>> major =
roots.<BR>> I don't have the figures =
extracted to=20
prove it, but I think climate<BR>> change has already led to =
more=20
erratic precipitation during the growing<BR>> season=20
here.<BR>> And warning that use of biomass =
is not=20
green is perhaps already an<BR>> effective way to indirectly =
kill=20
trees. And if not now, then without doubt<BR>> in the=20
future.<BR>><BR>> Yt, Dave Webster,=20
Kentville<BR>><BR>><BR>> No virus found in this =
message.<BR>>=20
Checked by AVG - <A href=3D"http://www.avg.com/" rel=3Dnofollow=20
target=3D_blank>www.avg.com</A><<A href=3D"http://www.avg.com/" =
rel=3Dnofollow target=3D_blank>http://www.avg.com</A>><BR>> =
Version:=20
2016.0.7294 / Virus Database: 4489/11241 - Release Date:=20
12/23/15<BR>><BR>><BR>> ---<BR>> This email has been =
checked=20
for viruses by Avast antivirus software.<BR>> <A=20
href=3D"https://www.avast.com/antivirus" rel=3Dnofollow=20
=
target=3D_blank>https://www.avast.com/antivirus</A><BR>><BR>><BR><B=
R><BR><BR><BR>-----------------------------------------------------------=
-<BR> =20
Frederick W. Schueler & =
Aleta=20
Karstad<BR> Mudpuppy Night - <A=20
href=3D"http://pinicola.ca/mudpup1.htm" rel=3Dnofollow=20
target=3D_blank>http://pinicola.ca/mudpup1.htm</A><BR>Vulnerable =
Watersheds=20
- <A href=3D"http://vulnerablewaters.blogspot.ca/" rel=3Dnofollow=20
target=3D_blank>http://vulnerablewaters.blogspot.ca/</A><BR> =
=20
study our books - <A =
href=3D"http://pinicola.ca/books/index.htm"=20
rel=3Dnofollow=20
target=3D_blank>http://pinicola.ca/books/index.htm</A><BR> =
=20
RR#2 Bishops Mills, Ontario, Canada K0G =
1T0<BR> on the Smiths Falls Limestone Plain 44* 52'N =
75*=20
42'W<BR> <A href=3D"" =
rel=3Dnofollow>(613)258-3107</A>=20
<bckcdb at <A href=3D"http://istar.ca/" rel=3Dnofollow=20
target=3D_blank>istar.ca</A>> <A href=3D"http://pinicola.ca/" =
rel=3Dnofollow=20
target=3D_blank>http://pinicola.ca/</A><BR>"[The] two fundamental =
steps of=20
scientific thought - the conjecture<BR>and refutation of Popper - =
have=20
little place in the usual conception<BR>of intelligence. If =
something is=20
to be dismissed as inadequate, it is<BR>surely not Darwin [, =
whose] works=20
manifest the activity of a mind<BR>seeking for wisdom, a value =
which=20
conventional philosophy has largely<BR>abandoned." Ghiselen, 1969. =
Triumph=20
of the Darwinian Method, p=20
=
237.<BR>------------------------------------------------------------<BR><=
BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><A=20
href=3D"" rel=3Dnofollow></A>
<DIV align=3Dleft>No virus found in this message.<BR>Checked by AVG =
- <A=20
href=3D"http://www.avg.com/" rel=3Dnofollow=20
target=3D_blank>www.avg.com</A><BR>Version: 2016.0.7294 / Virus =
Database:=20
4489/11261 - Release Date:=20
=
12/26/15</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></DIV><BR><BR></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</DIV><A></A>
<P align=3Dleft color=3D"#000000" avgcert??>No virus found in this=20
message.<BR>Checked by AVG - <A=20
href=3D"http://www.avg.com">www.avg.com</A><BR>Version: 2016.0.7294 / =
Virus=20
Database: 4489/11320 - Release Date: =
01/04/16</P></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_2FC3_01D14A3E.5F441460--
next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects