Why I'm Leave-ing Buckeye Planet (Hiking, Gardening, Nature Stuff Discussion)

[5 STAR U-G-A]

 

[5 STAR U-G-A]

Happy Earth Day!

 

[5 STAR U-G-A]

Earth Day 2022: Facts, holiday history
Published: Apr. 22, 2022, 5:39 a.m.
https://www.al.com/news/2022/04/earth-day-2022-facts-holiday-history.html

The Earth viewed from the Apollo 8 lunar mission on Dec. 24, 1968. NASA

Today, April 22, 2022, is Earth Day, a time set aside to celebrate the Earth, learn about the environment, and promote conservation.

The theme for this year’s event is “Invest in Our Planet.”

You can go here to learn more about Earth Day events near you.

History of Earth Day

In 1970, Sen. Gaylord Nelson of Wisconsin, inspired by what he had seen following a California oil spill, planned a grassroots demonstration aimed at protecting the environment. In the mode of student demonstrations, Nelson decided to hold a “teach-in” on the environment. Pete McCloskey, a Republican Congressman, was drafted as co-chair and Harvard professor Denis Hayes was tapped as national coordinator. Hayes picked April 22 for the first Earth Day since it fell between Spring Break and final exams and students were available to participate.


The idea spread quickly. By the time April 22, 1970 came, more than 20 million Americans took part in Earth Day events, eventually leading to the creation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

The event’s next big day came in 1990 when Hayes organized another Earth Day campaign. That year, more than 200 million people in 141 countries participated in Earth Day events. By 2000, the number of countries with Earth Day activities topped 184 countries with 500 million people taking part. Today, as many as a billion people in 190 countries are believed to mark the day through rallies, tree plantings, clean-up projects or other events.

Here’s some more info on Earth Day:

-Earth Day was first recognized worldwide in 1990.

-In 2009, Earth Day was officially renamed by the UN to International Mother Earth Day.

-On Earth Day 2012, more than 100,000 people rode bikes in China to reduce CO2 emissions and save fuel.

-Organizers hope to plant 7.8 billion trees during this year’s Earth Day activities.

-Earth Day has its own flag. It features a picture of the Earth taken from the Apollo 17 spacecraft on its way to the Moon.

 

[5 STAR U-G-A]

 

[5 STAR U-G-A]

Scientists Discover Fossil Of A 4-Legged Whale With A Raptor-Like Eating Style
https://www.npr.org/2021/08/27/1031659020/four-legged-whale-legs-discovered-43-million-years

We regret to inform you that your nightmares are about to get worse.

A team led by Egyptian scientists have dug up a 43 million-year-old fossil in the Sahara Desert in Egypt of a now-extinct amphibious four-legged whale.

That's right, folks — a whale with legs.

The authors of the study say that this creature had "unique features of the skull" and that its "mandible suggest a capacity for more efficient oral mechanical processing."


ANIMALS
Scientists Are 'Spying On Whales' To Learn How They Eat, Talk And ... Walked?
In other words, these walking whales had a "strong raptorial feeding style."

"We discovered how fierce and deadly its powerful jaws are capable of tearing a wide range of prey ... this whale was a god of death to most of the animals that lived in its area," Abdullah Gohar, one of the scientists, told Insider.

The new whale is called Phiomicetus anubis, which the scientists named in part after Anubis, the canine-headed Egyptian god associated with mummification and the afterlife. It was likely a top predator at the time, similar to what a killer whale is today.

Study authors Mohamed Sameh (from left), Abdullah Gohar and Hesham Sallam surround the holotype fossils of the new whale, Phiomicetus anubis, at Mansoura University Vertebrate Paleontology center.

Abdullah Gohar
Whales, it turns out, used to be "herbivorous, deer-like terrestrial mammals," the scientists write. Over the span of about 10 million years, whales turned into carnivorous creatures in the ocean. The discovery of the four-legged creature is part of that evolution.

So, a whale with legs and massive head with a vicious eating style.

Good luck sleeping tonight.

 

[5 STAR U-G-A]

 

[5 STAR U-G-A]

 

[5 STAR U-G-A]

 

[5 STAR U-G-A]

Is this the year Atlanta’s tree-protection ordinance gets an update?
Atlanta’s tree-protection ordinance—a critical tool for preserving the forest in the city—is more than two decades old. The old rules are no match for the city’s current growth.

https://www.atlantamagazine.com/new...Rwn0TdXrKErqpi6wxur1r_t-xQ5W8JWWf10Zah6k7D1FY

When the previous Atlanta City Council adjourned at the end of 2021, it left an important piece of business unfinished: a long-sought revision of the city’s Tree Protection Ordinance. A part of the city code since 2001, the ordinance aims to protect Atlanta’s status as a “city in the forest” by preserving that forest, putting into place guidelines for landholders, developers, and homebuilders. But much has changed in Atlanta in the last two decades, and there’s widespread agreement that the old rules are no match for the city’s current growth. In recent years the City Council has tried rewriting the law, though such efforts have yet to bear fruit.

What does the tree ordinance do—and what is it not doing?
If you want to remove a tree greater than six inches in diameter in the City of Atlanta, you need to apply for a permit and pay a fee into a fund that goes toward, among other things, replanting trees elsewhere—with the ultimate goal that Atlanta doesn’t experience a net loss. One problem is that the fee schedule is two decades old; currently, it costs $100 plus $30 per diameter inch, with fines for the illegal removal of individual trees capped at $1,000. For developers, those fees aren’t really an obstacle—just a part of doing business.

“One of the biggest critiques of the current ordinance is that it’s very transactional,” says Judy Yi, a spokesperson for Trees Atlanta, one of the groups pushing for an ordinance with more teeth, including fees that better reflect the value of Atlanta’s greenery. The current ordinance also treats most trees the same, regardless of size or species; advocates would like to see greater emphasis placed on protecting certain “priority” trees that provide the most benefits. A replanted sapling, for instance, doesn’t have nearly the value as a centuries-old oak with an enormous canopy.

But let’s not miss the forest for the peach trees here: What’s the bigger picture?
Between 2015 and 2020, the Atlanta metro was the third-fastest-growing urban area in the country—the kind of growth that, unchecked, threatens local vegetation. As the tree-protection organization City in the Forest points out, development norms are also different than they were when many Atlanta homes were being built prior to the 1960s. Back then, builders favored small lots on flat grades and retained trees for shade; now, with bigger houses and lots, clear-cutting and mass grading are more common. Most trees in Atlanta are in areas zoned for single-family homes.

The 2020 city planning document Atlanta City Design: Nature reaffirmed a preexisting goal for Atlanta’s canopy cover to be 50 percent—meaning that, when trees are in full leaf, they shade half of the city’s surface area. It’s currently a few percentage points less than that and shrinking: A 2018 study found that the city’s canopy cover was 46.5 percent—almost 1.5 percent smaller than a decade previous. This issue is far from exclusive to the Atlanta metro. Cities around the country have recently updated or are in the process of updating their tree protections. In our immediate neighborhood, Decatur has a canopy cover of over 57 percent, with a goal of 65 percent; the city updated its own tree-protection ordinance this year. Brookhaven, which has experienced a canopy decline in recent years, also recently revised its ordinance—in the face of pushback from developers, who say it’ll slow growth in the thriving town.

Why is the canopy important?
Beyond the aesthetic pleasures they provide, trees are immensely valuable, in cities as elsewhere: They cool surface temperatures, their roots stabilize soil and prevent erosion and flooding, and, of course, they absorb atmospheric carbon that would otherwise contribute to global warming. As the climate crisis worsens, much has been made of theoretical technical fixes, including massive carbon-capture projects. But, as environmentalists are fond of pointing out, there’s really only one carbon-capture technology that’s been proven to work at massive scale. It’s trees.

What’s the latest on updating the ordinance?
The city first tried to revise the tree ordinance in 2014; the most recent push followed the publication of Atlanta City Design: Nature, and it’s become a perennial issue. Last year, Atlanta’s Planning Department proposed a revision that addressed some of the shortcomings of the original, including designating a category of priority trees. But advocates thought the provisions weren’t strict or specific enough, and some drafted their own, alternative ordinance. Despite promises to take it up last summer, the council didn’t return to the issue by the end of its session and, in December, voted to defer action. This year, it’s on a list of goals for the council’s Community Development/Human Services committee, which says it’s aiming for a revised ordinance that “strikes a balance between strong protection of our tree canopy and increased density in our city.”

 

[5 STAR U-G-A]

 

[5 STAR U-G-A]

Eggplants are considered berries?

 

[Fungo Squiggly]

Vegetable? Berry? Neither. Eggplant is pure bullshit. It's a terrible food and anybody who says they enjoy eating it is a liar.

 

[5 STAR U-G-A]

Vegetable? Berry? Neither. Eggplant is pure bullshit. It's a terrible food and anybody who says they enjoy eating it is a liar.

I can enjoy a well-made Eggplant parm, but it's probably the cheese/red sauce that I like and the eggplant could be replaced with a piece of cardboard and I'd still enjoy it.

 

[jwinslow]

Vegetable? Berry? Neither. Eggplant is pure bullshit. It's a terrible food and anybody who says they enjoy eating it is a liar.

When eating eat piles of cheese and meat for a "healthy" lasagna? Or an absurd amount of cheese and breading and sauce in a good parm? It's a superb lie.

 

[Fungo Squiggly]

I can enjoy a well-made Eggplant parm, but it's probably the cheese/red sauce that I like and the eggplant could be replaced with a piece of cardboard and I'd still enjoy it.

When eating eat piles of cheese and meat for a "healthy" lasagna? Or an absurd amount of cheese and breading and sauce in a good parm? It's a superb lie.

Agree to disagree. There is no escaping that texture.

We make our veg lasagna with a variety of vegetables, including zucchini, carrots, celery, peppers, onions, and broccoli. Basically any veg we have in the house goes in. There are SO many other options other than eggplant. Is it as good as meat lasagna? Heck no! But it at least tastes good and has a shit ton of nutrition in it. And we use the Aldi vegetarian lasagna noodles and go light on the cheese. It's not the same as real lasagna, but it sure doesn't feel like a sacrifice to eat. What would eggplant do to make that better? Nothing!

And when I do occasionally make chicken parmesan, I'll just go ahead and use chicken. I'm already breading and frying it then covering it with cheese, sauce, and more cheese. Using eggplant does nothing other than make it worse! The boneless/skinless chicken is probably the only part of the parm that isn't bad for you. If anything, you have to use MORE of the bad stuff to cover up the eggplant so replacing the base protein with something healthier make the total dish unhealthier.

This is 100% a hill I will die on. Eggplant sucks.