Day 12: Earthquakes
too amazing to be true, but it is! Our estimate of the date of the earthquake
based on the tree cores was off by only eight years 1725 v 1717. Before
anyone says "this is beginner's luck", let's talk about
the "repeatability" of science.
When scientists report
their findings in journals, they state their methodology so that others
can check their results. In other words, we've just further substantiated
that 1) the forest we were in appears to be, based on our limited six
core sample, even aged all the trees were between 246 and 277 years
old, and 2) the trees in this forest began colonizing the area in about
1725. Thus, we've just substantiated that the data and the results
that the first group got are actually reasonable.
Now, I cannot prove
or substantiate that an earthquake actually caused the forest on that
patch of land to be decimated so this next bunch of trees could colonize
the area and grow into the forest that is there today. We do, however,
know that the Maori people did not have a common practice of clear-cutting
forest. We also know that there are many forests in this area that are
basically the same age as this one. Few natural phenomena can cause such
catastrophic disruption besides earthquakes, volcanoes and hurricanes.
Windstorms and floods are more isolated and usually don't affect
entire regions. So, I feel like we've just won big on a TV game
show. Hooray for trees!
Plus, the production
team just won't stop talking about the beauty of the forest. Some
of them call it fairyland, some call it the green cathedral, and all of
them want to go back. Hoorah! People value things they love and find appealing.
That's what's going to keep the forests alive, healthy, and
functioning for us as well as the rest of the planet.
Back to top