Anyone done this?

D

Drunkenstein

Member
http://courses.ag.uidaho.edu/pses/plscrec106/redwood%20pic%20better.JPG[IMG]

I have an absolutley massive Douglas Fir near my house (210 ft +), and I have tons of climbing equiptment, and I am begining to get ideas in my head.
 
redwood%20pic%20better.JPG
 
BTW: That tree is a coastal redwood, that is 285 feet tall, the Largest Reedwood was just discovered this summer in california, it is 379!!!
 
well if you do climb it, your gonna have a hell of a time washing your ropes afterwards, pitch from conifers sucks terribly.
 
and no, its not photoshopped, its from a article in the Smithsonian.

Kinda sad how any picture nowadays that depicts something like this is always shot down as "photoshoped" you guys really are glass half empty
 
If they thought that the tallest was 285 and than the found one at

379...thats not really equally close thats like a 100 foot margin.

And that shit is totally photoshoped its not even near the same species of tree. You dont just find a redwood scattered here and there
 
what you mean almost anytine someone posts something interesting on NS? and then some idiot calls fake? Like you? Is that it? cool.
 
Its in a forest of trees that is a completely different species. And there appears to be no redwoods any where near.

So tell me mother nature how a redwood magically germinated out of nowhere
 
i hate it when ever there is a pic posted or i go on some site like you tube, if there is something halfway interesting some one screams fake then every one afterwards jumps on the band wagon so gay
 
actually I use my ice climbing tools to get my christmas lights up into the tree in front of my house every year. the tree isn't that big though
 
I see no pictures in that article.

And I didnt say that the tree didnt exist. Because im sure it does redwoods are pretty big. All I said was that that picture was photoshopped which it clearly is. I dont see why you didnt get all pms-ie on everyone else that said it was photoshopped
 
all right i just looked at it up close and it is most def photoshoped, right around the middle you can see where it gets all blurry and shit, i admit defeat
 
holy fucking shit i cant believe how retarded this site is sometime... ever think it might be blurry cuz its scanned. nobody is gonna photoshop something like that and then leave the middle looking that bad
 
first off the Smithsonian would never photoshop a tree to make it bigger or put it in the middle of anther forrest. they might use it to touch up pictures.

just becasuse you can't see other red woods in that frame doesn't mean they arn't arround. and it is possible for a seed to be carried by wind,animals and loads of other things before they start to grow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top