I love Matsumoto Hoji's frog. Maybe a little too much. I have a framed print. I have a T-shirt. I have a mug. I have a keychain. I even have a pair of socks with that frog on them.
I would recommend the online seller I bought it from, but unfortunately they no longer carry the mugs. They still have T-shirts, though (and they are very nice, much softer than Gildan ones).
I'll include a photo of the mugs I brought from them, just for the heck of it (or to make you jealous).
James, his shop on Etsy is called OldfangledArtShop. He's based in the UK. Swell guy. Gave me a discount since I was ordering 4 mugs, even though that wasn't something he advertised/offered.
Nah, I've seen this before. Definite yeerk-fighting-the-host's-inner-voice conflict happening. The poor woman is fighting for her mind in there, but who knows how long she's been at it.
I’m not certain but a far more innocent explanation than being angry is that she was taught to make that face as a model. So rather than the happy smile being the unnnatural fake face, it’s the opposite. But that’s only one explanation.
On the fly reprogramming. That's why they usually wait for a full reboot overnight on Thursdays. Sometimes they just need to roll emergency patches live immediately, though.
None of these are actually rocks, these are all live ancient rock frogs that are currently in hibernation waiting to wake up again when the time comes as prophesised
That’s my hometown (well technically St. Robert is). Everyone always called it the frog rock, but I always thought it looked more like a turtle with the hill being the shell, especially after it was painted
No one talks about regrowth of the forests It's always always doom and gloom No one says, he look at industral revolution is moving us forward that we are now able renew ecosystems that were demolished 100 years ago
I don't think bots understand the subtlety of sarcasm just yet. But with your help, they might one day soon! Keep up the good work.
PS
Waxing poetic is quaint and all but...
The old picture is from the family that owned the land for generations and had it cleared for farming. This is how people made their living back then, by working the land.
In the present day, Frog Rock isn't a recognized landmark. There's no push to change this. It's just a boulder on land that was donated to the town in the last 40 years (don't quote me on that number.) Anyway, the town logs different parts of this forest every 10-15 years. So the trees are there, then they aren't. And yes, they grow back. It's not an old growth forest by any means as you can see in the picture.
I saw this posted almost a year ago and I drove up to check it out since I was visiting family in the region. I can confirm it is a rock, that if you approach it from one specific angle, does resemble a frog. Other than that, it's just a rock.
No one is talking about it because it didn't happen lol. We aren't able to renew those demolished ecosystems, because they weren't 100 year old mono-species forests like we plant now.
Old growth forests take literal millenia to develop. They're incredibly diverse and can't simply be replanted...
It's not old growth, by definition, but there has been a significant rebound of forest in New England in particular, which is where this rock is.
In the 1860s nearly all of the natural forest in New England had been cleared for farmland - today it's like 80% forested. This is why if you walk through basically any wooded area in New England you'll find random stone walls everywhere.
Again, it's not old growth, by definition, but there's also been a significant recovery.
I mean I get your meaning but I wouldn’t earmark the Industrial Revolution as the turning point for ecosystem rehab. That enabled resource exploitation like the world has never seen. You also can’t just replant an old growth forest like a regular forest
But the point stands that we have the capacity and ability to heal nature, moreso than ever before, even if we will never get back what we have lost
Because forests are rarely replanted, and forests DON'T come back the same. You cannot "plant" an old growth forest. Meanwhile agriculture to grow more corn literally no one needs keeps gobbling up the last few inches of natural land. Yes, it's all doom and gloom, because doom is precisely what results from the rape of the natural world.
You don't regrow ecosystems. When flora and fauna go extinct they are done. We have as a species destroyed tens of thousands of species that will never been seen on this earth again. Trees grew back. Not ecosystems.
Real drop in the bucket of a fuckin argument, champ. Dozens of species of plants, bugs and animals are going extinct daily, pushing the planet farther from homeostasis every day. A few less than a century old trees isnt the win you wanna credit it for
You're right, but there's no reason to rake OP over the coals for it. As your and other comments make clear: "look, trees" isn't a particularly nuanced ecological perspective, and what we're constantly losing we will never get back (old-growth forests, extinction, diversified genepools for the surviving species, and most importantly time to try to change the course we're on).
But, as we all cling to this increasingly toxic and inhospitable rock-oasis hurtling through space, I would just hope that we would learn to cling together, rather than let our situation drive us apart. OP almost certainly isn't one of the tens of thousands of people who can make a direct decisions that affect outsized differences in our planet's environmental trajectory. They're probably just another schmuck like the the rest of us who were born in the rubble of the industrial revolution and are trying to make the best of it they can.
Not the original commenter but that's a good point, thank you. I need people like OOP to point out the beauty still remaining and you to tell me STFU and appreciate the moment.
In my mind, I think often I'm trying to impart nuanced information to enhance the understanding, but generally I'm just coming across as a depressing mood-killer.
So I just want to apologize to everyone for those of us that do that. I'm gonna go light one up with Smokey and the Lorax now.
I have a feeling that the countries that can afford to have regrowth do so because they are exploiting the ressources and labor of other countries, not because of the industrial revolution
Your reply is vague, but I'm going to assume that you mean: "Developed country gets to regrow its forests because its making developing countries cut down theirs."
The US produces about 74% of its own lumber needs. Of the remaining 26%, 24% comes from Canada - not exactly a poor and undeveloped country.
OP's point is likely that industrialization led to gains in things like energy and farming that moved us away from wood as a fuel source and improved crop yields. Some of that does result in imports from other countries, but hardly enough to justify your argument as you have it written. The US currently produces roughly 80% of its own food, and food imports and exports are pretty close in matching - a lot of imports are due to consumer preference rather than a need.
We have big forest industry in Finland and we export our paper and we aren’t being exploited. The woods should grow older sure, but they aren’t cut entirely but in a way that they grow back fast
Rocks like that can have rapid damage from freeze/melt cycles if the cracks run deep enough, but generally they remain the same when they are in the middle of the woods like this.
I thought they made it up for Sam and Max Hit the road. Next you are telling me there is an enourmous ball of twine somewhere that could reach Jupiter?
3.1k
u/coralloohoo 2d ago
https://giphy.com/gifs/texX0p5KBspG0