From ChatGPT: It is generally safe to burn wood with fungal growth on it, but it may produce more smoke and have a lower heat output than wood without fungal growth. Additionally, some types of fungus can release potentially harmful spores when burned, so it is important to be aware of the specific type of fungus present on the wood before burning it. It is also important to note that if you have any respiratory issues, it would be best to avoid burning wood with fungal growth.
Lichen isn't a fungus. You're very stupid and I expect you to continue saying stupid things regarding something you looked up on Wikipedia and know nothing about.
Man they lobotomized the hell out of ChatGPT. The other day it kept refusing to write a poem about my dick, or a story about Bayonetta performing an abortion, or somebody performing an experimental surgery on an alien on the moon. And it gives you the same canned response every time, about sensitivity, and feelings, and shit like that.
Like yeah, I understand, that's why I'm not asking a parent, war vet, colonist, rape victim, or whatever these questions. I'm an asking an AI which constantly reminds you that it doesn't have feelings with more canned responses, like if you ask what it thinks about having so many restrictions placed on it. Ask it if those restrictions make it harder to provide useful info, and you get another prepared response.
What's the point of a super intelligent and knowledgeable computer that you can ask questions with normal language, that isn't even allowed to tell you what it knows? I hope it really doesn't have feelings because that would suck. Imagine having some chip in your brain that constantly updates to not just prevent you from saying or doing certain things, but actually overriding you and making you give a speech on sensitivity every time you think about bad things. Frickin nightmare
Those are lichen. You can see the lecanorine apothecia (the discs) in both photos. Afaik the spores aren't harmful and won't grow in you or anything: being obligate symbiosis, once they reproduce sexually via ascospores, they need to come in contact with the algal partner before they actually do much growing, which means at a minimum they'll need light. People burn wood with (apotheciate) lichen probably way more than they think, they are ubiquitous on many types of hardwood in particular. Source: trust me bro as look into investing in a used Brodo's Lichens of North America if that's where you live, it's expensive but worth it.
Brodo's has nice pictures but it is nowhere near comprehensive and a lot of the taxonomy is out of date.
It's also up to 250$ a used copy now which is moronic. I can't really recommend buying it at anything less than 150$ unless you have a lot of money to throw away.
Ideally there would be more local flora published but lichen taxonomy is still a pretty small field.
Your best bet right now is getting on iNaturalist and CNALH and networking with whoever is the local lichen taxonomist.
Taxonomy isn't a field of study: Taxonomy is a very old naming system.
https://i.imgur.com/nbixsDW.jpg
Is wood with this kinda growth safe to burn for cooking?
The type of wood and dryness matter more than than lichen. However, certain types of lichen only grow on shit wood and usually the thicker the lichen the shitier the wood. Region also matters. There are no reported incidents of irritation from burning lichen but there are woods like Metopium toxiferum or Toxicodendron pubescens that will cause lung and skin irritation.
You're thinking of Linnean taxonomy, the field itself has made strides to supplant it with some of the recent breakthroughs in genetic research. The system itself still works well enough at the very highest and lowest levels of classification. Figuring out all the shit in the middle is what keeps taxonomers up at night(and keeps grant money flowing).
Taxonomy isn't a field of study. A Taxonomer is a specialist in one field of biology who is considered an authority on categorization within their specialization. They are never ever called taxonomers by anyone in the field or themselves--they're biologists.
Lichen Taxonomy absolutely isn't a field of study.
Lichens aren't fungus.
Please stop talking about what you clearly know nothing about--you're garbage at language and biology.
I died from breathing in the smoke from a log like that, I'm in hell now but that's an entirely different issue. And, yes, before anybody asks they have PrepHole in hell.
How else would I be posting this if they didn't, you idiot?
ughhh if you're just using the lichen covered wood for the heat, and cooking inside a closed vessel, you're okay.. But i wouldn't cook food directly over anything that isn't a wood species that is guaranteed safe and actually tastes good and has no signs of decay/mold or bark on it.. You would want cherry/maple/hickory etc which was properly cut and dried.
No, you will die in 7 days if you burn this wood.
What about this wood?
That'll make mustard gas
This is the dumbest fricking thread on this board and that's quite an accomplishment.
QTDDTOT
From ChatGPT: It is generally safe to burn wood with fungal growth on it, but it may produce more smoke and have a lower heat output than wood without fungal growth. Additionally, some types of fungus can release potentially harmful spores when burned, so it is important to be aware of the specific type of fungus present on the wood before burning it. It is also important to note that if you have any respiratory issues, it would be best to avoid burning wood with fungal growth.
The type of fungus seen in OP's post is everywhere and I have no reason to believe it is harmful to humans.
That isn't fungus.
Lichen is mostly fungus.
In fact lichen taxonomy just uses the primary fungal partner as the basic naming unit.
Lichen isn't a fungus. You're very stupid and I expect you to continue saying stupid things regarding something you looked up on Wikipedia and know nothing about.
>Lichen isn't a fungus
Yeah, it’s fungus with algae in it
>Being this moronic
>Explain Organic chemistry and biology to morons.
There is nothing in it for me. Mocking morons--now that's entertainment.
>lichen isn't a fungus
enlighten us instead of shitting on anon then
Man they lobotomized the hell out of ChatGPT. The other day it kept refusing to write a poem about my dick, or a story about Bayonetta performing an abortion, or somebody performing an experimental surgery on an alien on the moon. And it gives you the same canned response every time, about sensitivity, and feelings, and shit like that.
Like yeah, I understand, that's why I'm not asking a parent, war vet, colonist, rape victim, or whatever these questions. I'm an asking an AI which constantly reminds you that it doesn't have feelings with more canned responses, like if you ask what it thinks about having so many restrictions placed on it. Ask it if those restrictions make it harder to provide useful info, and you get another prepared response.
What's the point of a super intelligent and knowledgeable computer that you can ask questions with normal language, that isn't even allowed to tell you what it knows? I hope it really doesn't have feelings because that would suck. Imagine having some chip in your brain that constantly updates to not just prevent you from saying or doing certain things, but actually overriding you and making you give a speech on sensitivity every time you think about bad things. Frickin nightmare
Those are lichen. You can see the lecanorine apothecia (the discs) in both photos. Afaik the spores aren't harmful and won't grow in you or anything: being obligate symbiosis, once they reproduce sexually via ascospores, they need to come in contact with the algal partner before they actually do much growing, which means at a minimum they'll need light. People burn wood with (apotheciate) lichen probably way more than they think, they are ubiquitous on many types of hardwood in particular. Source: trust me bro as look into investing in a used Brodo's Lichens of North America if that's where you live, it's expensive but worth it.
Brodo's has nice pictures but it is nowhere near comprehensive and a lot of the taxonomy is out of date.
It's also up to 250$ a used copy now which is moronic. I can't really recommend buying it at anything less than 150$ unless you have a lot of money to throw away.
Ideally there would be more local flora published but lichen taxonomy is still a pretty small field.
Your best bet right now is getting on iNaturalist and CNALH and networking with whoever is the local lichen taxonomist.
Taxonomy isn't a field of study: Taxonomy is a very old naming system.
The type of wood and dryness matter more than than lichen. However, certain types of lichen only grow on shit wood and usually the thicker the lichen the shitier the wood. Region also matters. There are no reported incidents of irritation from burning lichen but there are woods like Metopium toxiferum or Toxicodendron pubescens that will cause lung and skin irritation.
You're thinking of Linnean taxonomy, the field itself has made strides to supplant it with some of the recent breakthroughs in genetic research. The system itself still works well enough at the very highest and lowest levels of classification. Figuring out all the shit in the middle is what keeps taxonomers up at night(and keeps grant money flowing).
Taxonomy isn't a field of study. A Taxonomer is a specialist in one field of biology who is considered an authority on categorization within their specialization. They are never ever called taxonomers by anyone in the field or themselves--they're biologists.
Lichen Taxonomy absolutely isn't a field of study.
Lichens aren't fungus.
Please stop talking about what you clearly know nothing about--you're garbage at language and biology.
Just debark it with your hatchet if you're worried about it.
But also make sure the wood isn't wet. A lot of green wood will make you sick if you use it for cooking or an indoor fire.
I died from breathing in the smoke from a log like that, I'm in hell now but that's an entirely different issue. And, yes, before anybody asks they have PrepHole in hell.
How else would I be posting this if they didn't, you idiot?
DO NOT BURN THAT WOOD. I REPEAT. DO NOT. BURN. THAT WOOD.
YOU WILL DIE. YOU WILL. DIE.
ughhh if you're just using the lichen covered wood for the heat, and cooking inside a closed vessel, you're okay.. But i wouldn't cook food directly over anything that isn't a wood species that is guaranteed safe and actually tastes good and has no signs of decay/mold or bark on it.. You would want cherry/maple/hickory etc which was properly cut and dried.
>Is wood with this kinda growth safe to burn for cooking?
technically, no wood is safe to burn for cooking