tree_enthusiast12
ArboristSite Lurker
Hi there, I had a question about an interesting spotted gum tree that I came across. I have posted about this tree before, but I promise the question is new. Before I begin, I wanted to supply the definition of a tree like this. "Corymbia maculata, commonly known as spotted gum, is a species of medium-sized to tall tree that is endemic to eastern Australia." The definition of mottled is "marked with spots or smears of color." Now, I have seen these trees, and in all cases, have noticed that the bark on the tree trunk seemed to be splotchy.
Here are examples:
Now, the tree of particular interest is this one:
For some context, this is the first ever picture of this tree. This was taken as a picture because it was purported to look like a man bending down in prayer in the religion of Islam. It was purported to be a miracle online. At first glance, the bark pattern on the trunk that looks like an arm seems like any other pattern, but when looking at other pictures of this same tree, it looks more straighter and less splotchy compared to the following pictures of the same tree. It also, in general, looks less splotchy and different from bark patterns that I usually see on spotted gum trees.
Here are other pictures of the same tree. I have attached as many as I can find:
To me, these look much more obviously splotchy and mottled than the first photo I posted. Given that a) the black and white photo is the first picture ever of the tree and the whole purpose of it was to report it to be a miracle and b) the pattern looks unlike any other pattern that I've seen on a tree of this type, is it possible that a human manipulated this to make the pattern look more like an arm and thus more like a person bending over? It seems uncanny of a coincidence that the same picture of the tree that happens to have a pattern that looks like an arm and is shaped in a way that doesn't look as splotchy also happens to be the first ever picture of the tree. Or am I just seeing things? If it was a human, how do you think they would have gone about this? Using a tool? If there was a tool, wouldn't there be marks around the edges of that shape indicating this or no? To me, the pattern looks obviously different, and yet I don't see any signs of human intervention near the edges of that pattern. Thus, this is confusing me quite a lot.
Here are examples:
Now, the tree of particular interest is this one:
For some context, this is the first ever picture of this tree. This was taken as a picture because it was purported to look like a man bending down in prayer in the religion of Islam. It was purported to be a miracle online. At first glance, the bark pattern on the trunk that looks like an arm seems like any other pattern, but when looking at other pictures of this same tree, it looks more straighter and less splotchy compared to the following pictures of the same tree. It also, in general, looks less splotchy and different from bark patterns that I usually see on spotted gum trees.
Here are other pictures of the same tree. I have attached as many as I can find:
To me, these look much more obviously splotchy and mottled than the first photo I posted. Given that a) the black and white photo is the first picture ever of the tree and the whole purpose of it was to report it to be a miracle and b) the pattern looks unlike any other pattern that I've seen on a tree of this type, is it possible that a human manipulated this to make the pattern look more like an arm and thus more like a person bending over? It seems uncanny of a coincidence that the same picture of the tree that happens to have a pattern that looks like an arm and is shaped in a way that doesn't look as splotchy also happens to be the first ever picture of the tree. Or am I just seeing things? If it was a human, how do you think they would have gone about this? Using a tool? If there was a tool, wouldn't there be marks around the edges of that shape indicating this or no? To me, the pattern looks obviously different, and yet I don't see any signs of human intervention near the edges of that pattern. Thus, this is confusing me quite a lot.
