Page 3 of 4
Re: Forest fires
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:25 am
by Rokcet Scientist
Digit wrote:Interesting debate this for two reasons, one it demonstrates to a degree how far people ae removed from a 'natural' way of life, and second it reminds me of an event some yers ago here in the UK.
The debate gets a lot less interesting when people project their very
local situation on the world at large, like Barry does:
wxsby wrote: [...] what does that have to do with where I live and am talking about?
Nothing, Barry: the situation where
you live does
not apply to the rest of the world.
wxsby wrote:Pines? What pines?
The pines that cover half of continental north America from Wasilla and Churchill to Flagstaff and the Sierra Nevada...
Natural fire starters
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 7:21 am
by Rokcet Scientist
Eyjafjallajokull, the (second) erupting volcano on Iceland (this year...), creates it's own electrical system with thousands of lightning strikes. Per hour! If there was enough flora on/in Eyjafjallajokull's slopes/surroundings there would be great forest/veld/bush fires. Guaranteed.
But there are many more natural dynamic processes that create 'wild' electricity storms and random lightning strikes: e.g. every wind storm, tornado, hurricane, or dust devil does it.
Re: Forest fires
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 7:44 am
by Digit
I think it's a filthy conspiracy on behalf of the Icelanders, couldn't they have arranged an eruption from a volcano with a pronouncable name?
Shocking lack of organisation I say!
Roy.
Re: Forest fires
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 7:53 am
by Rokcet Scientist
Digit wrote:I think it's a filthy conspiracy on behalf of the Icelanders, couldn't they have arranged an eruption from a volcano with a pronouncable name?
Shocking lack of organisation I say!
They heard you, Roy!
The next volcano to erupt on Iceland is expected to be Katla...
Re: Forest fires
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 9:10 am
by Digit
Place your orders here RS?
Roy.
Re: Forest fires
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 9:31 am
by Minimalist
I just learned today from some of my poor ( i.e. still working) buddies that one of the worst managers we have is stuck in Europe because of this ash problem.
I'd like to thank all you Europeans for taking one for the team!
And Dig, you might read some accounts of the Battle of the Wilderness for an idea of forest conditions in 1864 Virginia. The brush was so thick that artillery and cavalry was virtually useless and even infantry could barely move off the roads.
Re: Forest fires
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 10:10 am
by Digit
The brush was so thick that artillery and cavalry was virtually useless and even infantry could barely move off the roads.
And if so there, probably likewise else where Min, so what chance HSN running through the woodland to ram a spear where it would do most harm to his prey?
Doen't sound very promising does it?
Roy.
Re: Forest fires
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 10:19 am
by Minimalist
And, even more to the point, why would they try? The animals would have stuck to the game trails/clearings/water sources and I imagine so would a hunter who was looking for them.
As some wag once noted: Vegetarian is an old Indian word meaning "lousy hunter."
Re: Forest fires
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:10 am
by Digit
Re: Forest fires
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:23 pm
by Rokcet Scientist
Minimalist wrote:The brush was so thick that artillery and cavalry was virtually useless and even infantry could barely move off the roads.
Yep, in the 16th century the north American indians didn't have horses yet (and relatively few in the 17th and 18th centuries) and by and large they moved on foot along game trails through the forests, setting traps and ambushes for their prey (and for the white man) along the way. Hunting therefore was a close quarters business, and battle was mano-a-mano as well. So they simply didn't
need weapons with a greater range than 50/70 feet max.: spear, javelin, slingshot, atlatl, bow and arrow, knife, tomahawk.
The north American landscape only opened up in the 18th and 19th centuries, by way of bush/veld/brush/prairie/forest fires. A
lot of them! And
then the indians needed weapons with greater range.
So they got themselves fire arms!
BTW: when the white man met the indian first, in the 16th century, did the indian have
iron tools, weapons and implements? C.q. did they have iron ore mining and smelting operations, and blacksmiths? And a trans-continental trade system for distribution of those iron tools, weapons and implements? Or were they still in the stone age (like the Aztecs, Maya, and Incas were)?
Re: Forest fires
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:26 pm
by Minimalist
Except, if Mann is right, this is not primeval forest but rather what grew in the aftermath of the collapse of Indian society in the aftermath of the plagues brought about by contact with Europeans.
Re: Forest fires
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:53 pm
by wxsby
The debate gets a lot less interesting when people project their very local situation on the world at large, like Barry does:
Except that my original query was regarding my local area... climate, flora, fauna, terrain are obviously different all over the world. I was curious about whether the stories that local natives chose to modify their environment through the intentional use of fire might be true. Because the natural causes of fire, as they exist in most of the world, aren't abundantly present locally. Maybe they migrated from areas where fires occurred naturally and the liked the results. Sorry I asked the question.
Re: Forest fires
Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2010 9:00 am
by Rokcet Scientist
when the white man met the indian first, in the 16th century, did the indian have iron tools, weapons and implements? C.q. did they have iron ore mining and smelting operations, and blacksmiths? And a trans-continental trade system for distribution of those iron tools, weapons and implements? Or were they still in the stone age (like the Aztecs, Maya, and Incas were)?
Re: Forest fires
Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2010 1:46 pm
by kbs2244
“when the white man met the Indian first, in the 16th century, did the Indian have iron tools, weapons and implements? C.q. did they have iron ore mining and smelting operations, and blacksmiths? And a trans-continental trade system for distribution of those iron tools, weapons and implements? Or were they still in the stone age (like the Aztecs, Maya, and Incas were)?”
R S
That deserves a whole thread of it’s own.
There have been findings of furnaces that suggest bog iron smelting in the Ohio and Pennsylvania area that pre-date European contact.
But it seems to have been a lost technology.
At the time of European contact the “natives” were very much in the stone age.
Re: Forest fires
Posted: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:38 pm
by Rokcet Scientist
kbs2244 wrote:There have been findings of furnaces that suggest bog iron smelting in the Ohio and Pennsylvania area
That sounds awfully vague, kb. Are you sure that isn't wishful thinking? Projecting?
But it seems to have been a lost technology.
Yep, it happens.
Europeans literally forgot concrete technology for more than a thousand years. The Romans used it, but after Rome collapsed in the 5th century the technology wasn't used again until the building of the great cathedrals in the late 15th century.
Here's the Pantheon in Rome, without concrete technology that dome couldn't have been built.
