Its location is kept a secret, but it's rumored that if you know the right dendrologist, they might take you on a hike to it....
climbs one of the potential candidates for the world's tallest tree
Does anyone know why they don't use a chest harness that slumps you into a safe position? Or why falling unconscious is common enough to mention it?
I'm not sure it's accurate to say that hanging upside down is any better if a climber is incapacitated. As a practical matter, a saddle that was trying to continually flip you over would drive a climber crazy.
There's a bit of debate in the climbing community about the importance of suspension trauma, and how long you have before you need to worry about it during a rescue.
Before laser rangefinders were cheap and accessible, the method used (angle and an approximation of horizontal distance) would often grossly overestimate the height of the tree.
The modern sine method is much better, but still had problems with leaning trees, and will tend to underestimate height.
The most reliable method is to get someone up there and do a tape drop.
A tape measure is simple and easy to do accurately. And of course they will want to climb the tree anyway.
Here is a definition of arborist if you are interested.
"An arborist, tree surgeon, or (less commonly) arboriculturist, is a professional in the practice of arboriculture, which is the cultivation, management, and study of individual trees, shrubs, vines, and other perennial woody plants in dendrology and horticulture. "
Also, what privilege are you ashamed of exactly? That type of self-flagellating virtue signaling is very toxic for your well-being and the people around you. I hope you are aware of that.
One day, when my companions of the Fore tribe and I were starving in the jungle because another tribe was blocking our return to our supply base, a Fore man returned to camp with a large rucksack full of mushrooms he had found, and started to roast them. Dinner at last! But then I had an unsettling thought: what if the mushrooms were poisonous? I patiently explained to my Fore companions that I had read about some mushrooms' being poisonous, that I had heard of even expert American mushroom collectors' dying because of the difficulty of distinguishing safe from dangerous mushrooms, and that although we were all hungry, it just wasn't worth the risk. At that point my companions got angry and told me to shut up and listen while they explained some things to me. After I had been quizzing them for years about names of hundreds of trees and birds, how could I insult them by assuming they didn't have names for different mushrooms? Only Americans could be so stupid as to confuse poisonous mushrooms with safe ones. They went on to lecture me about 29 types of edible mushroom species, each species' name in the Fore language, and where in the forest one should look for it. This one, the tanti, grew on trees, and it was delicious and perfectly edible.
The modern arborist has a large knowledge base, an antiquidated term is "tree surgeon" - I find it to be quite apt. "Angiosperm" isn't an exotic word at all to the vast majority of tree folk.
In the US, the typical path to become a certified arborist will require a degree (typically associates) in arboriculture, horticulture, or forestry, and several years of direct experience.
I bet that a drone could do the measuring job also.
Yes, if you cut down all the trees around it ...
Playing devil's advocate for a second: If you really think about it, if everyone blindly accepted everything all the time , think how boring life would be. Sometimes not putting two and two together makes the discovery much more interesting. I like a fun surprise every now and then.
There's no correlation at all between vocabulary used and intelligence. More intelligent people will actually use a smaller vocabulary if anything.
I think the "elites", who are of lower intelligence and only fit for parroting half understood declarative knowledge, have successfully managed to manipulate public opinion that declarative knowledge is superior to actually knowing how something works.
 They have high psychological/manipulative intelligence though, which is needed to convince others to do the actual work.
Back in the Reagan days, it came out that his presidential decision-making process for most things was to get it on a one-page memo with a yes/no checkbox. Boy howdy, did we have a lot of fun mocking that idiot who didn't know what he was signing! A lifetime later, I've come to realize that was a brilliant strategy on his part. He didn't waste time on deep study of every little thing that needed his decisions all the time. He surrounded himself with trusted advisors who could neatly sum up the pros and cons for him, so he could focus on the decision, not the analysis.
I thought Reagan was an idiot, because I was an idiot.