151
The large cross-section is from a 41-year-old tree; the small one is from a 98-year-old one (lemmy.world)
submitted 2 weeks ago by ickplant@lemmy.world to c/mildlyinteresting@lemmy.world
7 comments fedilink hide all child comments
all 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world 42 points 2 weeks ago

Bet that small one is dense af!

[-] Tujio@lemmy.world 54 points 2 weeks ago

Nah, they chopped that one down 96 years ago.

[-] islandcoda42@lemmy.zip 24 points 2 weeks ago

I recently removed some 2X4’s from a house built in the early 80’s and it was ridiculously dense with legit too many rings to count. Nowadays there’s like three rings in them

[-] Adverse_Reaction@anarchist.nexus 4 points 2 weeks ago

Altitude is the my guess as to the difference, assuming they are even the same kind of tree

[-] ickplant@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

It’s altitude plus lack of water.

[-] LincolnsDogFido@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 weeks ago

This picture has me in it and I don't like it.

[-] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago

Bonsai?

this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2026
151 points (100.0% liked)

Mildly Interesting

27506 readers
98 users here now

This is for strictly mildly interesting material. If it's too interesting, it doesn't belong. If it's not interesting, it doesn't belong.

This is obviously an objective criteria, so the mods are always right. Or maybe mildly right? Ahh.. what do we know?

Just post some stuff and don't spam.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
marcar@lemmy.world
WhatsHerBucket@lemmy.world
Jimbabwe@lemmy.ml
Zerlyna@lemmy.world