GM i want to believe just because i love the idea of very very big trees!

nostr:nevent1qqsyrpxn9gt80tpx39my845xczd0e02e5fey67k2gnm4z6uazf8xlrsmqv22a

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I just love stone hexagons...

I don't subscribe to the large tree theory, but regardless of how they came to be, I just like the stone hexagons.

Stack sats and plant trees! 🌲

GM! 💜

😂

oNLy bIOLogY cAn maKE tEH sHapEseS huRRR

fAKe!!

Good examples. Seems it's likely just a stable shape. One of only 3 regular polygons that can form a "tiling" (along with equilateral triangles and squares).

Spot on. And equilateral triangles tessellate to… hexagons. Why? Because they’re the bestagons!

https://youtu.be/thOifuHs6eY

Cool, thanks for sharing. I recently learned that the hexagonal honeycomb is made by stacking circles of wax, then heating them a bit by flapping wings in front of them fast, and they then melt into shape as they push against each other.

Primal needs better influencers.

So many kooks and crystal mamas.

cool, now show me lava hardening in that shape

I'm pretty sure the onus is on you to find evidence of fossilized trees at these sites, since it was never a geological debate that that shit is cooled rock.

But 1/2 of your argument is that only biology can make geometric shapes. That has been shown to be a false claim which casts doubt on your entire argument and therefore the burden of proof is on you to prove that these formations cannot be formed by geological processes.

Since you made the initial claim why don’t we start with you showing us an example of a species of tree that has a trunk with vertices.

The new generation of trees is terribly lazy. Look at how close the ancient trees grew! Champs.

Big (trees) if true

Put the joint down man.