may be cutting 2 trees in general isn't that big a deal in some situations, but looking at the photo it was definitely overkill in that situation - these trees were easily climbable and once up there it would be enough just to cut the branches the payload stuck onto.
Author here, the payload hung about 20 meters ( ~60 feet) above ground, we tried to climb up those trees but couldn't make it up to more than 5 meters. We also lent a ladder, but realized that even a 15 meter ladder is not enough to reach the payload. It's also very dangerous without climbing experience and without any climbing equipment to climb up such trees.
It was the only option for us to cut those trees down, since the wood workers of the town were just a few kilometers away from us. They directly processed the trees to firewood, which they were intended for. :)
> They directly processed the trees to firewood, which they were intended for. :)
I honestly do not understand why you take video and pictures of a planet you do not care about. To try out your RPi toy, I guess? Or for some kind of publicity I do not quite understand?
A tree's function is not to "get processed." It is the terms you use that are failing you. By "get processed" you mean "to be killed." And by "function" you mean "the value humans commonly attribute to it." Politics is indeed the art of using this kind of language-bending. You follow these by coming up with a bunch of excuses to legitimize the unnecessary damage you caused to the flora of that region out of sheer arrogance.
> It's also very dangerous without climbing experience and without any climbing equipment to climb up such trees.
You either try, or accept defeat and design a better vehicle.
(1) I don't kill your partner just because s/he has parked her/his car at the spot where I wanted to park. (This is an exaggeration solely because we attribute more value to ourselves, out of arrogance, than to anything that we deem "other.")
(2) You don't burn the computer because your software has a bug. (This example is for those readers who persist on not shedding the aforementioned arrogance.)
> I honestly do not understand why you take video and pictures of a planet you do not care about.
And how exactly did you come to this conclusion? Cutting down 2 trees makes him a bad person?
Germany is consumed up to almost a third of its surface by forests. In the last 10 years alone there was an estimated growth in forest areas of 0.4%, that is about 500km².
Do you know what that is called? Preservation of resourses. Cutting down 2 trees doesnt really mean anything when there are thousands of trees planted every week.
If you care so dearly about trees, make sure to never buy furniture again and sell your house while you're at it.
Trees are a renewable source of energy / building materials. So again, its not that much of a big deal.
Try to direct your efforts towards things that you can actually change for the better.
> A tree's function is not to "get processed."
No it's not. It's function is what we choose for it to be. Why? Because we can. But it is going to die sooner or later anyway. Cutting it down for it to processed into firewood is neither cruel nor arrogant, it is simply efficient.
That aside, as I understood it, the forest workers were in that area cutting down trees anyway. So no unnecessary harm done by OP and his mates.
> Politics is indeed the art of using this kind of language-bending
Now you're just looking for an excuse to bash him..
Also, be wary that not everyone on the internet is a native english speaker.
Written words may be interpreted in different ways by different people.
He only stated what the forest workers were using the trees for.
> You either try, or accept defeat and design a better vehicle.
I'm sure that's what you would have done in that situation. Sadly, not everyone is such a good person.
>(1) I don't kill your partner just because s/he has parked her/his car at the spot where I wanted to park. (This is an exaggeration solely because we attribute more value to ourselves, out of arrogance, than to anything that we deem "other.")
According to your logic, we attribute more value to ourselves than to anything else.
And thats perfectly fine. When you think about it, each person is the center of his/her universe and everything around them stops existing if they cease to exist. Of course we're arrogant, that is just part of the human psyche.
It's perfectly normal to give things different values. As long as your views don't do any serious damage, that is. It determines what you really care about and what your passions are.
Let people decide for themselves what they deem important and go live on your own self-designated moral highground.
>(2) You don't burn the computer because your software has a bug. (This example is for those readers who persist on not shedding the aforementioned arrogance.)
No, because when your software has a bug you go fix it. Logical thinking has a way of making things easier.
That doesn't have anything to do with arrogance.
When your probe is stuck on top of a tree that you can't reach and there are forest workers nearby, go ask them and your problem shall be solved.
See?
But honestly at this point your exaggerationg so much that I don't even know what you're trying to get at.
And I don't even care. Guess I'll have to blame my arrogance for that.
> An acre and a half of Amazon rainforest disappears every hour, and this is the deforestation you get upset about.
According to this logic, I ought to not get upset, nor criticize any policy, perspective, or activity that causes less deaths than a previous or current one did.
Assuming that for you, trees < animals < humans,
since the European colonization of Americas killed off about 100 million human beings,
I will have to wait for a catastrophe that kills off 101 million people to criticize anything that happens on earth.
We killed two trees for a 15 minute long youtube video.
Is this how little respect we all have for life?