Posted by brandon7 7 TN (My Page) on Thu, Jan 30, 14 at 21:33

Even among Europeans, it is hard to imagine any nation could have such a mass population, including college professors, that vehemently dismiss evolution in favor of a supernatural being. Brandon, you know, Charles Darwin loves you.

This post was edited by jujujojo on Thu, Jan 30, 14 at 22:03

No he doesn't! His subroutine has been terminated and deleted, so he could have no such emotions.
_____________________________________

But back to pictures....You know what would be really neat? If you could get a whole series of photos from one of the large botanical gardens in China. I've tried looking a few of them up to see if that had photo galleries online, and I've even looked through Google Map photos to see if there was much posted that way. There seems to be few photos available for at least the ones I looked at.

Maybe if my subroutine is re-written, I'll be rich and can go to places like that. I'd love to be like some of the well-known global plant expeditionists and search for rare stuff in remote places while visiting with horticulturists from world-class botanical gardens.

Posted by brandon7 7 TN (My Page) on Fri, Jan 31, 14 at 0:51

Is that the little voice whispering into your ear from that supernatural being?! Perhaps, if you are more cultured, ...

Ahh, yes. This is more like it.

This post was edited by j0nd03 on Fri, Jan 31, 14 at 11:38

Posted by j0nd03 7b AR (My Page) on Fri, Jan 31, 14 at 11:23

J0nd03, are you a friend of Brandon?

We don't know each other except as fellow GardenWebbers.

"I can tell. As long as you do not persecute those who do not believe the existence of any god ... "

Wow.

No one appreciated the excruciatingly extreme irony of that statement?

Posted by viburnumvalley z5/6 KY (My Page) on Fri, Jan 31, 14 at 23:37

It is a plain statement with no irony. You would be happier if you are willing and open to diversity of ideas.

This post was edited by jujujojo on Sat, Feb 1, 14 at 9:34

The irony is even more emphatic in your newest statement:

"You would be happier if you are willing and open to diversity of ideas."

Is that simply personal sentiments, or the state/party line?

Is anyone allowed to think otherwise?

Posted by viburnumvalley z5/6 KY (My Page) on Sat, Feb 1, 14 at 19:35

I have no party line. Diversity is a scientific fact that we can observe everywhere. Look around yourself!

I hope your culture or religion can make you feel secure. May peace be with you.

This post was edited by jujujojo on Sat, Feb 1, 14 at 20:54

I think the tree looks like this cherry:

{{gwi:325917}}

Ok, three things....
1. Your original post was of a plastic tree that you wanted identified....on a gardening forum. Most people would have sheepishly kept quiet after that.
2. Fake plants are often modelled after real ones...no surprise.
3. If you're going to post a photo of a flowering cherry (or anything actually), why not make sure that it's in focus?

Nothing wrong with posting the original picture if she didn't know it was fake. I didn't know it was fake either. There were some "red flags", but not enough to make me realize it was a fake tree. I guess I was thinking more about the purpose of the wrap than about the tree, which may be what Juju was doing too.

Posted by smivies z5b ontario (My Page) on Mon, Feb 3, 14 at 21:55

Here is a focused one:

{{gwi:325918}}

Second kind being asked about is one of the Prunus campanulata hybrids.

Not only does Bonaparte's gull perch in trees, it nests in them.

This post was edited by bboy on Tue, Feb 4, 14 at 2:24

Bboy wrote, "Not only does Bonaparte's gull perch in trees, it nests in them."

As previously noted, Chroicocephalus philadelphia's (Bonaparte's gull's) range does not include China.

Hi Brandon,
A true man can accept and admit own errors and grow to a better man. After all, we are all learning throughout our life. This is partially why I am firmly against absolutism brought by the scripture. Let's encourage different voices to enrich GW :-) The listed items below are indeed, your wrongs, if bboy's information is correct

Posted by brandon7 7 TN (My Page) on Mon, Jan 27, 14 at 20:50
Chroicocephalus ridibundus (Black-headed gulls) do not normally (if ever?) roost in trees. They nest on moorland, beaches, or rocky areas.

Posted by brandon7 7 TN (My Page) on Mon, Jan 27, 14 at 19:24
... Most gulls prefer to roost in places where they have an open view (like on a cliff) and a flat surface (not small tree branches).

Species shown perching in trees on this thread looks like Bonaparte's gull, so there may be a related species present in China - this possibility does not seem to have been followed up by anyone here.

And the fact that the Chinese gulls have already been shown perching on comparatively small tree branches is the key point anyway - somebody could perfectly well have wrapped the fake tree because they have seen gulls in other trees nearby.

However, that may not be it as I have seen fake trees wrapped in material outside religious sites here.

In locations away from salt water, where small gulls are not seen congregating in trees.

Jujujojo,

I think I've seen before that English is not your primary language, but SURELY you can read well enough and reason well enough to see that your list of my "wrongs" aren't wrong at all. Nothing Bboy wrote directly contradicts either statement. Either you are reading extremely sloppily, you aren't comprehending what you are reading, or you aren't using a reasonable amount of logic in your deductions!
____________________________

Bboy wrote, "Species shown perching in trees on this thread looks like Bonaparte's gull, so there may be a related species present in China - this possibility does not seem to have been followed up by anyone here."

Earlier, I wrote, "Yes, but Chroicocephalus philadelphia's (Bonaparte's gull's) range does not include China. Maybe another species has similar behavior?"

Brandon,

The following three posts are your explicit wrongs:

Posted by brandon7 7 TN (My Page) on Mon, Jan 27, 14 at 20:50

Chroicocephalus ridibundus (Black-headed gulls) do not normally (if ever?) roost in trees. They nest on moorland, beaches, or rocky areas.

(jujujojo has posted pictures of the Black-headed gulls normally and comfortably roosting on trees. Therefore, Brandon is wrong.)

Posted by brandon7 7 TN (My Page) on Mon, Jan 27, 14 at 19:24

... Most gulls prefer to roost in places where they have an open view (like on a cliff) and a flat surface (not small tree branches).

(Firstly, jujujojo has posted pictures of the Black-headed gulls happily roosting on small branches. Secondly, bboy has pointed out that: Not only does Bonaparte's gull perch in trees, it nests in them. Obviously, these gulls choose to nest in trees. Therefore, Brandon is wrong.)

Posted by brandon7 7 TN (My Page) on Thu, Jan 30, 14 at 17:06

"Now, I hope you believe gulls can rest on trees."
Did you even bother to actually read the conversation above? It appears that you missed a BIG part of it. And, ditto what Mike said above.

(Mike posted right above Brandon's post: "... nesting is a lot different than temporarily hanging out on a limb for a handout ... you will never see a Seagull resting on a limb. Driftwood, rocks, and sand on the beach, but never in the trees. Mike"

Based on the post of Bboy, the statement of Mike is wrong. Brandon claimed such wrongful statement "ditto". Therefore, Brandon is wrong once again. But, shockingly, Brandon staunchly refuses to admit his explicit wrongs. How old is Brandon?)

Here's a picture from inside my house. I have made a living out there as a commercial waterman for many years. You may be surprised what gulls will do.
If the tree is plastic...the wrap is probably there to hide the unsightly mechanics of a fake tree.

Al

Listen carefully and you can just make out Rod Serling advising us "The Trees Forum has just entered the Twilight Zone."

"Firstly, jujujojo has posted pictures of the Black-headed gulls happily roosting on small branches."

That does nothing to disprove what I said.

"Secondly, bboy has pointed out that: Not only does Bonaparte's gull perch in trees, it nests in them."

...which has nothing to do with the statement to which you try to apply it! Bonaparte's gulls aren't "most gulls" and the aren't black-headed gulls. Who's wrong now?

"Mike posted..."

Well, now you have taken Mike's statement out of context so badly that it doesn't resemble his original intent! Who's wrong now?

Juju, it is amazing that you seem to be able to type a sentence out in English, but have little understanding of the meaning of other people's words! Amazing!

This post was edited by brandon7 on Tue, Feb 4, 14 at 20:12

Hi Brandon,

All the pictures of gulls in this entire thread are exclusively the black headed gulls. That is: all of them are black headed gulls.

The black headed gulls change the color of the feather on their heads in winter. That is, in this season, all black headed gulls have white heads.

Brandon, our world changes all the time. It is different from the absolutism based on scripture.

This question has been resolved long ago. But obviously, you have been confused.

Here is a post from your allies in Canada, read clear and simple English, okay?

Posted by smivies z5b ontario (My Page) on Mon, Jan 27, 14 at 20:38

Black-headed gulls are a found from eastern North America to Europe to Asia....their winter head plumage is white, black in summer.

"All the pictures of gulls in this entire thread are exclusively the black headed gulls."

Not sure why you would make that statement. It seems irrelevant to the previous post....but, OK?

"Brandon, our world changes all the time. It is different from the absolutism based on scripture."

Another seemingly irrelevant statement, but also probably against GardenWeb's TOS. You really shouldn't let your assumptions mislead you so, but, when you do, you surely shouldn't write about them here, especially if they involve religion or politics!

"But obviously, you have been confused."

LOL! To borrow some of VV's words, that statement has excruciatingly extreme irony!

Posted by brandon7 7 TN (My Page) on Tue, Feb 4, 14 at 18:44

"jujujojo has posted pictures of the Black-headed gulls normally and comfortably roosting on trees."

Not in this thread you haven't! Who's wrong now?

Brandon, can you comprehend that the post below is a response to you?

Posted by jujujojo (My Page) on Tue, Feb 4, 14 at 18:56
Hi Brandon,

All the pictures of gulls in this entire thread are exclusively the black headed gulls. That is: all of them are black headed gulls.

For example, this one:

{{gwi:325915}}

Brandon, can you see that the Black-headed gulls normally and comfortably roosting on trees in the picture?

Brandon, can you comprehend the relation I pointed out? Which English sentence do you not understand? Are you capable of seeing your obvious wrongs?

This post was edited by jujujojo on Tue, Feb 4, 14 at 19:27

"Brandon, can you see that the Black-headed gulls normally and comfortably roosting on trees in the picture?"

For most of this thread, I have not claimed that black headed gulls never roost in trees. I stated that they normally don't do so and that they prefer to nest on moorland, beaches, or rocky areas. I did, by mistake, make that statement a few posts up, but have corrected it.

More broadly, I never claimed, up to this point, that gull activity in or around the tree, was not responsible for the wrap, although apparently it indeed isn't. If I remember correctly, you were the one that "trusted" that the wrap was to prevent damage from the birds. But, I wouldn't expect you to admit that you were wrong all along.

This post was edited by brandon7 on Tue, Feb 4, 14 at 20:25

Also, you wrote, "Mike posted right above Brandon's post: ... nesting is a lot different than temporarily hanging out on a limb for a handout ... you will never see a Seagull resting on a limb. Driftwood, rocks, and sand on the beach, but never in the trees."

What he Mike actually wrote was "Jujujojo, nesting is a lot different than temporarily hanging out on a limb for a handout. Along the beach, here on the Pacific coast, bordered by forest right down to high tide, you will never see a Seagull resting on a limb. Driftwood, rocks, and sand on the beach, but never in the trees."

While it's fine to leave out parts of a quote and properly note that you've done so IF it doesn't change the meaning of what was said, it's not OK to purposefully leave out things so as to twist the meaning of the quote to fit your own purposes. This appears to me what you have intentionally done in this case.

Brandon, let's focus on one item a time, here

Posted by brandon7 7 TN (My Page) on Tue, Feb 4, 14 at 18:44

"jujujojo has posted pictures of the Black-headed gulls normally and comfortably roosting on trees."

Not in this thread you haven't! Who's wrong now?

In this post, Brandon mistakenly claimed that "jujujojo has not posted pictures of the Black-headed gulls normally and comfortably roosting on trees."

Clearly, Brandon is wrong. Brandon, are you wrong right here? Are you capable of reading English? Do you have slightly long term memory?

Let's focus on one item a time. And clarify your confusion one by one. Brandon, this is the scientific approach.

This post was edited by jujujojo on Tue, Feb 4, 14 at 21:18

If you read above, I said, " I did, by mistake, make that statement a few posts up, but have corrected it." Now, which of your numerous mistakes shall we concentrate on?

Posted by brandon7 7 TN (My Page) on Tue, Feb 4, 14 at 21:31

Brandon, so you admit that you are wrong.

Next, let's look at the second item. Do you insist this statement to be true? The statement is: "Along the beach, here on the Pacific coast, bordered by forest right down to high tide, you will never see a Seagull resting on a limb." You made it bold in your post.

There is certainly no reason to doubt Mike's statement. So far as I am concerned he has infinitely more credibility than certain other people do. I have not done a study of gulls in Mike's area, so have no first-hand knowledge to be able to state that there are never exceptions to what was said. However, I think it's safe to assume that his statement is generally correct!

Now, which one of your mistakes shall we cover. Here's a list of a few of them:

"I trust Al."

1. While there's nothing wrong with trusting someone who's earned trust, Al's statement has been shown to be less likely than other explanations.

"This is not a fake tree. It is a true tree. I love it, see bboy's ID."

2. It seems the tree is likely a fake. You did finally admit this.
3. Bboy hadn't really ID'd the bird, but just said it looked like Bonaparte's gull.
4. It turns out that they are not Bonaparte's gulls.

"Now, I hope you believe gulls can rest on trees."

5. No one had made the broad statement that gulls never rest in trees. You corrected this but then went right back to the assumption, again, later on.

"I can tell. As long as you do not persecute those who do not believe the existence of any god..."

6. IMO, this was a rather bizzare thought to be inerjected into the conversation and probably a mistake because of the TOS of this website.

"Brandon, you know, Charles Darwin loves you."

7. Charles Darwin is dead and never knew me.

"Is that the little voice whispering into your ear from that supernatural being?! Perhaps, if you are more cultured,..."

8. Another likely violation of the TOS and pretty rude.

"I have no party line."

9. You have proven that wrong in many of your own posts and have been called out for it over and over.

"The listed items below are indeed, your wrongs, if bboy's information is correct."

10. Neither statement was incorrect.
11. Nothing that Bboy has said contradicted the statements.

When you misquoted Mike.

12. You seemed to intentionally misrepresent what Mike had said by leaving out a substantial and qualifying part of the statement.

Posted by brandon7 7 TN (My Page) on Tue, Feb 4, 14 at 22:15

I think you could use a couple classes in logic which will help you identify propositions that can be judged as right or wrong. Not every sentence has a Boolean value.

This post was edited by jujujojo on Tue, Feb 4, 14 at 23:40

I bet even someone fresh out of grade school could easily identify your numerous mistakes.

This post was edited by brandon7 on Wed, Feb 5, 14 at 0:22

BTW, do you know anything about trees (not the fake ones)?

Posted by brandon7 7 TN (My Page) on Tue, Feb 4, 14 at 14:59
Jujujojo,

I think I've seen before that English is not your primary language, but SURELY you can read well enough and reason well enough to see that your list of my "wrongs" aren't wrong at all.

Brandon, eventually you admitted that you are wrong several posts down. You did not recognize the birds with white facial plumage "black headed" gulls.

As you can see, I love trees. I have accumulated knowledge and continuously enjoy learning more. The main point is that I do not fear being corrected. I think there is a major culture difference between us: I am Relativism and you are Absolutism.

"Brandon, eventually you admitted that you are wrong several posts down. You did not recognize the birds with white facial plumage "black headed" gulls."

Recognition of the bird had nothing to do with it, but I do see how you could make that assumption (just that assumption).

I think you have nearly completely misunderstood everything that has been said by me and others throughout this thread. You make many assumptions and, more than not, they are way way off base. Anyway, as with the other thread, I am becoming bored with the whole conversation and have decided to move on. Catch ya later.

Posted by brandon7 7 TN (My Page) on Wed, Feb 5, 14 at 12:29

I think you have nearly completely misunderstood everything that has been said by me and others throughout this thread. You make many assumptions and, more than not, they are way way off base. Anyway, as with the other thread, I am becoming bored with the whole conversation and have decided to move on. Catch ya later.

Brandon,

I have no intention to change a culture, a religion or a nation. But, you have finally realized how off base you are - by assuming that is my misunderstanding (including my, alleged, way off base assumption). As I have pointed out, you have been, according to what you said and the proper English grammar, squarely wrong. These are not my "assumption". These are reality that you are in denial. I am glad to clarify it.

Watch all you want, after all, that is no secret anymore. The entire world knows it.

This post was edited by jujujojo on Wed, Feb 5, 14 at 16:17

"I think it would be good that you do not come to exchange with me in the near future on GW."

Wonderful idea. As long as you don't post, I won't have to point out your repeated, consistent, and numerous misconceptions and mistakes. 12 to 1 isn't bad! 12 to 0 would have been better, but everyone is entitled to a few mistakes. Wow, just wow!

"Deeply experienced in your nation and your culture, and the Philippines, I thoroughly understand the source of your behaviors. It is almost like your animal instinct because, together with religion, you are fed these since childhood. The society, such as your workplace, reinforces such behaviors.

You do realize that you, yourself, are stereotyping all Americans by saying this I hope. The English word for judging someone for something while also doing the same thing is "hypocrite"

Posted by j0nd03 7b AR (My Page) on Wed, Feb 5, 14 at 14:33

j0nd, I was posting to Brandon, not you. I wonder why you expand this to "all Americans". Supply your reasons. Thanks.

Brandon, you have already posted to me "Catch ya later." Now, you are posting back again. Is this your credibility?

"I wonder why you(?) expand this to "all Americans". Supply your reasons. Thanks." -jujujojo

"The society... reinforces such behaviors" -jujujojo

All your words.

As I stated in the other topic, I refuse to debate with you. Feel free to disengage with me in other topics in the same manner you have invited Brandon to cease interactions with yourself. If this forum had an ignore feature, our problems would be resolved.

Peace out

Posted by j0nd03 7b AR (My Page) on Wed, Feb 5, 14 at 16:59

Any society is consisted of the good, the bad and the middle. But the bad have an overwhelming effects. Homeless teens and those in foster care are left for society, and they tend to grow into troubled youth. This is why society does not mean "All Americans". The two concepts are different.

Let me try to say something that you might like. From my first hand experience, the scenes of US South East are more lush than the rest of the country. The cultures of the US South East are somewhat more friendly and polite than the North, especially more benign then the Mid-West.

This post was edited by jujujojo on Wed, Feb 5, 14 at 21:16

Brandon, there is a small confusion. I asked around about you. You are said to be a retired expert who have some symptoms of Alzheimer's disease. But from our exchange, you appear to be a college student. Are you Brandon or the son, or grandson of Brandon, like Brandon III ?

This thread itself became a flock of gulls taking flight and scattering.

Riddle me this, how the f did this post garner 80+ posts?

Must be nesting season.

I'm the one who must have Alzheimers. I forgot all about this post.

Thanks Brandon for sticking up for me on the out of context quote. Yes, I was just referring to the gulls I know here on the Pacific Coast. I know nothing about Chinese Gulls. I sure would like to go to China though. Western China where the plant hunters went.

You'd be surprised how much bamboo I've sold to Chinese Americans and how many gardens I have installed for them. I even landscaped a Chinese restaurant once with an Asian theme. That was fun. Negotiating contracts was a definite learning experience though. Looking back, I needed that experience.

Mike