4 ms·

I don't understand the downvotes. Can someone explain? Is a valid question, looking for an answer from a person with more knowledge.

by ccozan 9y ago

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
brohee 9y ago
Your "solution" doesn't solve the "sappling being eaten by free roaming sheep" issue. Not the more complex issue of soil creation.
- mar77i 9y ago
  Trying is nature's way to be abundant. Just like you shouldn't spay the sheep just because the lamb might be eaten by a wolf.
arnarbi 9y ago
Because it isn't a problem with planting. That's very easy, and people volunteer to do it. When I was a kid (I'm Icelandic) we'd go on field trips and plant hundreds. The problem is keeping the growth alive.
- mar77i 9y ago
  You sound like you doubt the viability of automated and distributed tree planting which may be more statistically significant? I get your point that hundreds may not do, what about hundreds of thousands, then? Let's agree that we can't know as long as nobody tried. And you're right, we don't have the numbers on how the survivorship ratio in larger magnitudes would behave, it might just shrink to ridiculously small. But then again the soil would be slightly "improved" by a dead sapling, maybe even increasing the chances for another try?
  - arnarbi 9y ago
    > You sound like you doubt the viability of automated and distributed tree planting which may be more statistically significant? I get your point that hundreds may not do, what about hundreds of thousands, then? No, my point was that if the solution is increased numbers, it's already cheap and viable to get humans to do it rather than deploying expensive tech. (By hundreds, I meant hundreds for each group of 3 school kids in one afternoon.) > Let's agree that we can't know as long as nobody tried. I don't even know that nobody tried. I'm sure the actual experts (as opposed to us armchair ones) thought of it.

I don't understand the downvotes. Can someone explain? Is a valid question, looking for an answer from a person with more knowledge.

by ccozan 9y ago

I don't understand the downvotes. Can someone explain? Is a valid question, looking for an answer from a person with more knowledge.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

brohee 9y ago

Your "solution" doesn't solve the "sappling being eaten by free roaming sheep" issue. Not the more complex issue of soil creation.

mar77i 9y ago
Trying is nature's way to be abundant. Just like you shouldn't spay the sheep just because the lamb might be eaten by a wolf.

arnarbi 9y ago

Because it isn't a problem with planting. That's very easy, and people volunteer to do it. When I was a kid (I'm Icelandic) we'd go on field trips and plant hundreds. The problem is keeping the growth alive.

mar77i 9y ago
You sound like you doubt the viability of automated and distributed tree planting which may be more statistically significant? I get your point that hundreds may not do, what about hundreds of thousands, then? Let's agree that we can't know as long as nobody tried. And you're right, we don't have the numbers on how the survivorship ratio in larger magnitudes would behave, it might just shrink to ridiculously small. But then again the soil would be slightly "improved" by a dead sapling, maybe even increasing the chances for another try?
- arnarbi 9y ago
  > You sound like you doubt the viability of automated and distributed tree planting which may be more statistically significant? I get your point that hundreds may not do, what about hundreds of thousands, then? No, my point was that if the solution is increased numbers, it's already cheap and viable to get humans to do it rather than deploying expensive tech. (By hundreds, I meant hundreds for each group of 3 school kids in one afternoon.) > Let's agree that we can't know as long as nobody tried. I don't even know that nobody tried. I'm sure the actual experts (as opposed to us armchair ones) thought of it.