SKU: 19724874212
schefflera arboricola column

schefflera arboricola column Huge Schefflera 'Arboricola' – Pafe Plants

$21.90 $24.33
Save 10%
No.2 Bestseller on uptowns.fr >

Pay in installments of $6.08 with ShopPay, AfterPay and Klarna

Shipping Estimate
USA
  • USA
  • CAN

Ships within 48 hours · Estimated delivery Aug 4 - Aug 9

Promo Codes Available:

For Your Every Summer RSVP, with Code: SUMMER15

Description

schefflera arboricola column Huge Schefflera 'Arboricola' – Pafe PlantsDescription Meet the Arboricolabringing Mary Poppins vibes with her eye catching and perfectly arranged umbrella leaves! She's got that classic, reliable charm that makes every room feel more put together, like when you finally manage perfect hair on a humid day. This Umbrella Plant is basically nature's answer to effortless chic while being surprisingly low maintenance. Native to Taiwan and Hainan, she's mastered the art of thriving indoors while

Description

Meet the Arboricola—bringing Mary Poppins vibes with her eye-catching and perfectly arranged umbrella leaves! She's got that classic, reliable charm that makes every room feel more put-together, like when you finally manage perfect hair on a humid day.

This Umbrella Plant is basically nature's answer to effortless chic while being surprisingly low-maintenance. Native to Taiwan and Hainan, she's mastered the art of thriving indoors while keeping her glossy green leaves looking picture-perfect.

Growing 3-8 feet tall, she's the ideal size for making a statement without taking over your living room like some overzealous houseguest. Plus, she moonlights as an air purifier—beauty and brains, people!



Care 

How do I care for an Arboricola?

Give your Arboricola bright indirect light, and water when her soil feels dry to the touch. She likes normal room temperatures and doesn't need much fussing. Just like a supermodel who eats takeout and still looks flawless.

 

Is Arboricola a good indoor plant? 

The Arboricola is fantastic indoors! She adapts like a champ to different conditions while quietly cleaning your air all day long. She's forgiving with watering schedules and doesn't throw tantrums if you forget her for a few days.


Does Arboricola like sun or shade? 

Your Arboricola prefers to be in bright indirect light, but she’ll tolerate some shade like a true professional plant. Direct sun will scorch her leaves, though—she's more "elegant brunch" than "beach volleyball," if you know what we mean.


How often should I water an Arboricola? 

Water her when the top few inches of soil feel dry, usually every week or two depending on your home's conditions. She's not dramatic about timing—just check the soil and you'll know when she's thirsty. Winter means less water, generally.


Can I put my Umbrella Plant outside in the summer? 

Your Umbrella Plant loves a summer vacation with some fresh air and natural humidity to perk her up. Just protect her from harsh afternoon sun and make sure to bring her back indoors before temperatures drop below 54°F (12°C).


Where is the best place to put an Umbrella Plant in the house? 

You can pop your Umbrella Plant near an east or north-facing window where she gets plenty of bright light without getting completely roasted alive. Make sure you avoid cold drafts and heating vents—she's not into that chaos, honestly.


Do Umbrella Plants like to be misted? 

Light misting occasionally is fine for your Umbrella Plant (like a spa day!). Heavy daily misting sessions? Tsk tsk - that's how you get fungal issues that nobody wants to deal with. A humidity tray works much better anyway.


How much light does an Arboricola need?

Your Arboricola wants about 4-5 hours of bright indirect light daily to keep her colors vibrant and her growth healthy. Less light means she'll get leggy and lose that full, lush look we all love her for in our homes.


What fertilizer is best for Arboricola?

Feed your Arboricola with balanced liquid fertilizer at half strength monthly during spring and summer, when she's actively growing. She's not a heavy eater—think light snacking rather than feast mode. Skip winter feeding entirely when she's resting.


Pet-friendly?

Your Arboricola isn't pet-safe—she contains compounds toxic to cats and dogs that can make them sick. Keep her up high where curious paws can't reach, because nobody wants an emergency vet visit over a plant nibble gone wrong.

 

Are Arboricola toxic to dogs?

Arboricola plants are toxic to dogs and can cause drooling, vomiting, and mouth irritation. Not something you want to deal with. If your pup gets a taste, call your vet immediately—it’s better to be safe than sorry.


Are Arboricola toxic to cats?

Arboricola plants are toxic to cats too, causing similar symptoms like drooling and stomach upset that can make them miserable. Keep her away from curious kitties who might think those glossy leaves look like a tasty snack worth investigating thoroughly.


Factoids

How tall do Arboricola get?

Indoor Arboricola plants typically max out around 3-8 feet tall, perfect for statement-making without any ceiling-bumping drama in your home. Outdoors in their natural habitat? They can hit 25 feet—but don't worry about that happening indoors, promise!


Is an Arboricola air-purifying?

Your Arboricola actively removes nasty stuff like benzene and formaldehyde from your air while looking gorgeous doing her job. She's basically a living air filter that never needs replacing—just occasional watering and appreciation for her hard work around the house.


Why is Arboricola called an Umbrella Plant?

Look at those leaves: 7-9 leaflets radiating from each stem like umbrella spokes in perfect formation! Once you see it, you can't unsee it. Nature designed her specifically to remind us of rainy day accessories.


Buy an Arboricola

Ready for a plant that's equal parts elegant and easygoing? This Arboricola brings serious style to your space without the high-maintenance drama. She's perfect for plant parents who want gorgeous greenery that actually fits into real life.

Our live video shopping calls let you point and say "That's the one!" No plant lottery here—you'll meet your future green companion before she ships, ensuring that perfect first impression that starts every great plant relationship!

Shipping Notes
  • Free Standard Shipping on $100+ Orders to the USA.
  • Except Preorder products are shipped in 48 hours.
  • Delivery to the USA:
  1. Standard Shipping : 3-10 business days
  • If time is of the essence, please consider selecting expedited delivery for faster service.
Exchange/Return Notes
  • We offer a 30-day return/exchange service after receiving.
  • Final sale items are not eligible for returns or exchanges.
  • To process your return/exchange, please contact us at [email protected]
  • Please click here for more details>>> Return & Exchange Policy
SKU: 19724874212

Discover Niche Categories That Outsell schefflera arboricola column

Top-Converting Item to Boost Your Average Order

4.4 ★★★★★
Based on 19 reviews
Sort
Highest Rating
Newest First
Oldest First
Product Reviews
L
Verified Purchase
Lyndon Unger
Lake Worth, US
★★★★★ 4
Great Introduction to the Various Schools of Apologetics
Format: Paperback
In reading "Five Views on Apologetics", I first had to wonder why the book was called "Five Views" and not "Three Views", since the first three authors admittedly had so much in common with each other that it seemed that their positions were subcategories of a singular system of apologetics. In fact, Habermas claimed Craig as an evidentialist on multiple occasions and admitted they had relatively minor disagreements. Feinberg was also an evidentialist, but he differed from Habermas and Craig in supposing that any one argument could possibly be persuasive to a skeptic. All three individuals definitely agreed on so much though that their three essays proved to be slightly disappointing as in the end, I figured that any one of them practically utilized a combination of all three approaches (I've heard Craig make cumulative case presentations...). I wondered exactly why they were representing different apologetic camps. Don't get me wrong: I like Craig and Hambermas and Feinberg; they're brothers in the Lord. I just find that evidentialism's off-shoots are so similar to each other that taking three chapters for the various forms of evidentialism didn't seem that worthwhile. Ironically, it seemed that the other two views of were related by what seemed like a mutual distaste for the other, Frame wrote that he "was rather disappointed at Clark's treatment of the role of the Bible in determining apologetic principles" (310) and the suggestion that Clark might not have "tried hard enough to find out what the Bible says" (310) also seemed like a needless jab, but Frame still commended Clark on plenty and suggested that "presuppositionalists too are Reformed epistemologists" (312). On the other hand, Clark wrote that Frame's essay is "the best version of presuppositionalism I have ever read" but then went on to suggest that presuppositionalism (at least as presented by Van Til) was either too confusing for him or was "obviously false" (255). Clark parroted the often repeated gross misunderstanding of presuppositionalism that "non-christians cannot know anything" (256), suggested that Frame implied this concept (257) and then spent several paragraphs refuting an obviously silly postulate; it's strange how Clark would insinuate that Frame would be so plainly stupid and I got the idea that Clark thought that all presuppositional apologists were somehow mentally lacking. Even in my early reading of Van Til, I understood that he was writing about how unbelievers cannot account for how they know anything, not whether or not they can know anything. What was even more alarming was Clarks' confession that "anyone can find some support for his or her position in Scripture" (275), as if scripture lacks a clear meaning and is somehow malleable enough to consistently conform to anyone's presuppositions. I was left dissatisfied by how Clark didn't seem to exhibit reformed theology and I was also puzzled why Frame didn't present the Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God (the main positive argument of presuppositionalism). What was even more humerous was how Craig presented a fairly solid version of the transcendental argument and gave Frame a slight poke for not presenting the "main course" of presuppositionalism. On the whole, I found "Five Views" to be reflective of much of my general feelings of the current state of apologetics; too distracted, too unscriptural, and too confusing. It was a difficult read at times; William Lane Craig's constant scampering into symbolic logic was frustrating and made me wonder whether the publisher clearly communicated the target audience to the authors. I was disappointed that none of the authors attempted to establish any component of their case from scriptural exegesis but instead presented philosophical constructs aided by proof texts (i.e. Habermas referenced Romans 8:16 on page 97 as `proof' that the Holy Spirit may work through apologetics to bring "full assurance to believers", arguably not the meaning of Romans 8:16). I also found myself wondering if the authors were agreeing on theological points due to lack of clarity (i.e. Craig's writing about the inner witness of the Holy Spirit was general enough that it sounded Mormon...). The book was good, and it DID expose me to five (arguably) different apologetic systems, but I hesitate to give it 5 stars due to some of the weak/unclear presentations of the systems and the thought that this isn't the best that evangelicalism has to offer. It's still a worthwhile buy and I'm likely being too hard on it. I'd recommend it as an intro book for a college level Apologetics class, or for someone who's already familiar with theology and the concept of apologetics but isn't familiar with it in depth.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on November 4, 2009
J
Verified Purchase
J. E. Lindsey
Los Angeles, US
★★★★★ 5
Great Contrasts
Format: Paperback
Cowan tells us, "This is a book about apologetics methodology, not a book of apologetics per se. That is, it is not a book that seeks to do apologetics as much as a book that discusses how one ought to do apologetics" (8). Cowan has achieved the stated purposes of this book in many ways, but due to limited space I will stay focused on three examples; Glossary of Key Terms and Concepts, format, and conclusion by Cowan. Glossary of Key Terms and Concepts (21-24) in this initial section of the book provide a clear and useful starting place for persons who are not academically familiar or comfortable with many terms used in the book. The fact that the key terms section included and defined conceptual terms supports the stated purpose of the book being a methodological rather than an apologetic book with multiple views from various writers' specific understandings and preferred styles of apologetics. As a new person to formal apologetics, this section helped launch me smoothly into the methodological discussions. I returned to these pages a few times to reacquaint myself with meaningful concepts. The format of the discussion with proponents making a methodological case for their form of apologetic followed by critiques from supporters of other apologetic systems brought clarity to the five methods addressed in this book. This format help to highlight both strengths and weaknesses in methods. Cowan as the general editor achieved the goal of keeping the writers away from apologetics and on the goal of providing defense and critiques of these five methods. Each supporter had a unique "tee-up" to their sections. Craig starts by stating, "...methodology in Christian apologetics...raising the age-old issue of the relationship between faith and reason." He goes on further in his introduction to tell a story about his struggle at Wheaton College and why his methodology was helpful to his faith (26). Habermas clarifies that his form of evidential apologetics is, "...characterized as the one-step approach..." (92).This initial piece of information was insightful to me and a helpful clarification between classical and evidential methods. Feinberg on Cumulative Apologetics points out, "A good place to begin the discussion of apologetic methodology is to ask about the nature of the case for theism and Christianity" (148). Frame was probably the most direct in his initial statement by saying, "In apologetics, as in every aspect of the Christian life, the most important thing is to glorify God. Therefore, it is important for us to look in God's Word, the Bible, to see if our Lord gives us any directives relevant to the apologetic task" (208). In principle agree, but I will admit, I find his form of apologetics to be too circular in nature to be convincing to an unbelieving skeptic - as a standalone method. Christians I think would all say, well of course. Clark's section begins with stories meant to set the stage that it is reasonable have faith. Clark writes, "My suppose-this and suppose-that stories are intended to raise the problem of the relationship of our important beliefs to evidence" (267). Each of the five supporters of their method successfully introduced their unique method of apologetics. Cowan regarding to his conclusions says, "Hopefully, this will not only help you, the reader, make your own decisions regarding apologetic methodology, but will also provide a basis for further discussion of the topic among scholars. Cowan's conclusions assured that main points of agreement and disagreement were clear. Here as with the other sections, the textual comments were method focused. My criticism is pointed at the spirit of the debate. The writers did not draw enough contrasting between apologetic methods to clearly show that their individual method should be favored. I think the tone was a little too stilted in the direction of "playing" nice. In a book that purports to have five methods, there were times it seemed like only three or four methods. I guess this is inescapable give that each apologetic style can share some parts in common with another. Yet Craig shares my feeling here, I believe, based on his statement, "Pity our poor editor! Ideally he would like to find a wild-eyed fideist on one end of the spectrum and a hard-nosed theological rationalist on the other. Instead he winds up with a presuppositionalist who argues like an evidentialist..." (122). Overall Five Views on Apologetics provides a good compare and contrast resource for anyone interested in these five common methods of apologetics.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on March 18, 2011
M
Verified Purchase
Mimi
Fort Morgan, US
★★★★★ 5
Condense Analysis of 5 of the most notable Apologist
Format: Paperback
Looking for a quick reference guide to the major theorist of Apologic study, this book is a great resource.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on October 12, 2024
W
Verified Purchase
Will L.
Fort Morgan, US
★★★★★ 5
Not an Intro to Apologetics
Format: Paperback
This book is not for the first-time student of apologetics. It's deep and, at times, difficult. However, for anyone with a serious interest in apologetics, this is a great way to find out which method suits your apologetic style and why. It was eye-opening for me. I am confident that God can use most (if not all) of the five distinct methods covered in the book. But it was very helpful to me to consider pros and cons of each and decide which approach seemed appropriate for me. Great book, if you feel ready for it!
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on July 25, 2006
R
Verified Purchase
rkveale
Dallas, US
★★★★★ 4
Good overview of apologetic methods but ....
Format: Paperback
I very much enjoy the counterpoint series by Zondervan. It can help me quickly come up to speed in a variety of theological topics. This book has 5 contributors and each one presents, each one comments on each other's essay and finally each one has some concluding remarks which allows the reader to readily judge the competing opinions. However after reading the various approaches it appears to me that the apologetical approach one uses is not as important as learning the various theistic arguments (both positive and negative) and then putting them into practice. I'm not convinced that studying apologetic methods will be that helpful. This is because the various approaches overlap and also because when actually talking with people one must be very flexible and move deftly with the flow of conversation. Yet still I give this book 4 stars as there are 5 top Christian thinkers contributing to this subject. On a personal note, one reason I read this book is because I was puzzled by presuppositional apologetics. I stand firmly in the reformed camp and I audited iTunesU courses in apologetics from Reformed Theological Seminary and Westminster Theological Seminary and was still confused on how presuppositional apologetics works in actual practice. I must sat that after reading this book I still don't see how this approach is useful in defending the faith. I have respect for John Frame but this apologetical approach seems more like a non-approach. I'll be moving on to more fruitful endeavors such as actually learning specific defenses for the Christian faith.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on November 23, 2011

recommand products

Anthurium in Self-Watering Pot| JM Flower
22.19
Areca Palm
28.58
Anthurium andraeanum sp. (Flamingo flower) – The Plant Lady SF
26.32
Dypsis Lutescens (Areca palm) | 100cm
29.28
Shop 'Areca Palm – Dypsis lutescens' Care & Growing Guide
20.62