The networked beauty of forests - Suzanne Simard
video description
Date: 2020-08-22
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 9
SystemFreaKk13
That some species of fungi are parasitic and not mutualistic does not undermine the abundance of species of fungi and plant-life which are engaged in a complex mutualism, much of which we depend upon for our global environment to be livable at all. Even the parasitic species inhabit their own ecological niche, and were they to disappear, despite their visible damage to certain species w/in that same local environment, could induce a trophic cascade that threatens the sustainability of the whole of the local ecosystem itself. She certainly left out much of the background science, which would have been helpful communicating her point (though there were time constraints, as well as oversimplifying some conceptual errors with equating the Earth's fungal network to our brain activity, but there really is excessive deforestation occurring, and it really is amazing that the beauty and complexity of these forest systems, which it took the Earth billions of years to form and upon which we very much depend, is being deincentivized and destroyed in an instant so readily by industry-first ideologies. Her emotional charge here, despite being a scientist, is not misplaced.
reply
That some species of fungi are parasitic and not mutualistic does not undermine the abundance of species of fungi and plant-life which are engaged in a complex mutualism, much of which we depend upon for our global environment to be livable at all. Even the parasitic species inhabit their own ecological niche, and were they to disappear, despite their visible damage to certain species w/in that same local environment, could induce a trophic cascade that threatens the sustainability of the whole of the local ecosystem itself. She certainly left out much of the background science, which would have been helpful communicating her point (though there were time constraints, as well as oversimplifying some conceptual errors with equating the Earth's fungal network to our brain activity, but there really is excessive deforestation occurring, and it really is amazing that the beauty and complexity of these forest systems, which it took the Earth billions of years to form and upon which we very much depend, is being deincentivized and destroyed in an instant so readily by industry-first ideologies. Her emotional charge here, despite being a scientist, is not misplaced.
reply
James
I don't think she is an expert on greenhouse gases (Neither am I, and I agree with her on the effects of human produced CO2 on the Earth's climate, but there are far more potent greenhouse gases than CO2, such as methane) She was very involved with the hand movements (too involved I think) and although she tried hard to reach the obvious younger audience with references to family and social networking, her topic simply isn't something that would reach to kids (If she had given the talk to an adult audience or even a teenage audience she could've made the very same topic 10 times more interesting, but no, she gave it to kids. What I did like was her passion for forestry and the environment, and I'm sure that she put a lot of effort into her research, but this talk was so uninteresting it literally would have caused the crickets to cease chirping and the room go silent.
reply
I don't think she is an expert on greenhouse gases (Neither am I, and I agree with her on the effects of human produced CO2 on the Earth's climate, but there are far more potent greenhouse gases than CO2, such as methane) She was very involved with the hand movements (too involved I think) and although she tried hard to reach the obvious younger audience with references to family and social networking, her topic simply isn't something that would reach to kids (If she had given the talk to an adult audience or even a teenage audience she could've made the very same topic 10 times more interesting, but no, she gave it to kids. What I did like was her passion for forestry and the environment, and I'm sure that she put a lot of effort into her research, but this talk was so uninteresting it literally would have caused the crickets to cease chirping and the room go silent.
reply
Bella
Unless we stop using paper, recycle all cardboard waste etc. There's not really a solution. We are the ones causing deforestation, eventhough we're not physically cutting down the trees.
The number of consumption must go down dramatically for them to reduce the rate of deforestation. Just think about the packaging you buy and furniture, flooring, decking etc. Rather plant trees then put dead ones all over your house.
This subject is tragic and the fact we think we need these wooden items is the problem. They are our life, the air we breathe and the beauty of the world. She was annoying really.
reply
Unless we stop using paper, recycle all cardboard waste etc. There's not really a solution. We are the ones causing deforestation, eventhough we're not physically cutting down the trees.
The number of consumption must go down dramatically for them to reduce the rate of deforestation. Just think about the packaging you buy and furniture, flooring, decking etc. Rather plant trees then put dead ones all over your house.
This subject is tragic and the fact we think we need these wooden items is the problem. They are our life, the air we breathe and the beauty of the world. She was annoying really.
reply
GEZZA1
thanks Dr Simard and i like this, except, the biggest greenhouse gas is not CO2.
H2O is the major greenhouse gas which contributes to the warming on Earth.
H2O is not mentioned as the major greenhouse gas because it is not poisonous to breathe, as is CO2.
Increased CO2 results in more H2O gas= warming.
My target is to plant 20000 trees. If many people aimed to plant 50 trees/ yr, for 20 years, we could capture a lot of CO2.
Ocean acidification is an EMERGENCY, caused by CO2 absorbed in the sea water= Carbonic acid.
reply
thanks Dr Simard and i like this, except, the biggest greenhouse gas is not CO2.
H2O is the major greenhouse gas which contributes to the warming on Earth.
H2O is not mentioned as the major greenhouse gas because it is not poisonous to breathe, as is CO2.
Increased CO2 results in more H2O gas= warming.
My target is to plant 20000 trees. If many people aimed to plant 50 trees/ yr, for 20 years, we could capture a lot of CO2.
Ocean acidification is an EMERGENCY, caused by CO2 absorbed in the sea water= Carbonic acid.
reply
Aphetorusbull
Too much huggy kissy and not enough science! This talk comes across more as a political statement than an educational piece. Explain how you determined that they were a tree family and how you determined what the fungi and tree's worked together in a symbiotic relationship. It wouldn't hurt to add credibility by explaining the non-symbiotic fungi relationships like root rot that actually kills trees. Lots of feel good fluff and very little substance.
reply
Too much huggy kissy and not enough science! This talk comes across more as a political statement than an educational piece. Explain how you determined that they were a tree family and how you determined what the fungi and tree's worked together in a symbiotic relationship. It wouldn't hurt to add credibility by explaining the non-symbiotic fungi relationships like root rot that actually kills trees. Lots of feel good fluff and very little substance.
reply
Sam
What amazing networks formed by overground trees and underground fungi and the symbiotic exchange between the two for the benefit of both.
In fact these networks are studied to find out the shortest and best ways, most economic ways, to serve the furthest away trees/fungi and how to do so if main nodes are down. Man does learn from nature.
reply
What amazing networks formed by overground trees and underground fungi and the symbiotic exchange between the two for the benefit of both.
In fact these networks are studied to find out the shortest and best ways, most economic ways, to serve the furthest away trees/fungi and how to do so if main nodes are down. Man does learn from nature.
reply
stanaugustin
I see nothing here. I appreciate and understand the main message - protect forests. I agree, but I don't see any science here and absolutely no research just hippie mumbo jumbo. I certainly don't appreciate a Ph. D. using the the phrase magical symbiosis.
reply
I see nothing here. I appreciate and understand the main message - protect forests. I agree, but I don't see any science here and absolutely no research just hippie mumbo jumbo. I certainly don't appreciate a Ph. D. using the the phrase magical symbiosis.
reply
Rita
I just heard this on NPR, and I googled her because the segment sounded extremely unscientific, and I cannot find any information on her formal education, undergrad degree major or graduate degree. Has anyone found otherwise?
reply
I just heard this on NPR, and I googled her because the segment sounded extremely unscientific, and I cannot find any information on her formal education, undergrad degree major or graduate degree. Has anyone found otherwise?
reply
thomas
37 seconds in: no ma'am, forests are survival of the fittest. that you happen to see beauty is just you. not that i dont appreciate it as well, but dont make it more than it is.
reply
37 seconds in: no ma'am, forests are survival of the fittest. that you happen to see beauty is just you. not that i dont appreciate it as well, but dont make it more than it is.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
