Page 5 of 5 [ 72 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 61
Gender: Female
Posts: 20,550
Location: Aux Arcs

11 Jun 2014, 9:09 pm

http://www.anh-usa.org/monsanto-latest-pr-stunt/


_________________
I am the dust that dances in the light. - Rumi


The_Walrus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,878
Location: London

12 Jun 2014, 6:15 am

RunningFox wrote:

God I am sorry but are you really this stupid? Fertilizers that make our guts sick are an excuse to neglect the soil and thus the tasteless nutrient deficient foods you buy in the store. It not as if it is some how saving man kind because we are able to do it.

The fruits and veg that grow in my back yard are planted in dark black super nutritious soils with the proper minerals and microflora and because of that they taste better. If millions of people can do it themselves in their back yard there is no reason commercial farmers cant either. They just do it to save money. Nobody is being saving from starvation because of it.

You are in no position to insult someone else's intelligence, so I suggest you stop. I have tolerated it so far, but if you continue to insult me I will report you. I am being civil with you and I would like to request that you return that.

Fertilisers don't "make our guts sick" as a rule. We have been using fertilisers since forever, and if anything modern fertilisers are healthier than smearing fields with faeces.

You can't have it both ways - either fertilisers are being overused, or plants are growing up starved of nutrients.

Before we had fertilisers, yields were much lower, food was relatively more expensive (as a proportion of household budgets), and we couldn't support such a large population. Since modern fertilisers, and indeed as a direct result of using those fertilisers, yields have gone up and malnutrition has gone down.
Image

Not everyone has access to the brilliant soils you are blessed with. In particular, sub-Saharan Africa needs to increase yields in areas that are undergoing desertification. Genetically modifying crops to be resistant to drought and make efficient use of soil nutrients is a good thing.



RunningFox
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 8 May 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 174

12 Jun 2014, 5:12 pm

The_Walrus wrote:
RunningFox wrote:

God I am sorry but are you really this stupid? Fertilizers that make our guts sick are an excuse to neglect the soil and thus the tasteless nutrient deficient foods you buy in the store. It not as if it is some how saving man kind because we are able to do it.

The fruits and veg that grow in my back yard are planted in dark black super nutritious soils with the proper minerals and microflora and because of that they taste better. If millions of people can do it themselves in their back yard there is no reason commercial farmers cant either. They just do it to save money. Nobody is being saving from starvation because of it.

You are in no position to insult someone else's intelligence, so I suggest you stop. I have tolerated it so far, but if you continue to insult me I will report you. I am being civil with you and I would like to request that you return that.

Fertilisers don't "make our guts sick" as a rule. We have been using fertilisers since forever, and if anything modern fertilisers are healthier than smearing fields with faeces.

You can't have it both ways - either fertilisers are being overused, or plants are growing up starved of nutrients.

Before we had fertilisers, yields were much lower, food was relatively more expensive (as a proportion of household budgets), and we couldn't support such a large population. Since modern fertilisers, and indeed as a direct result of using those fertilisers, yields have gone up and malnutrition has gone down.
Image

Not everyone has access to the brilliant soils you are blessed with. In particular, sub-Saharan Africa needs to increase yields in areas that are undergoing desertification. Genetically modifying crops to be resistant to drought and make efficient use of soil nutrients is a good thing.


You dont seem to have a strong working knowledge of this subject. Fertilizing crops forces them to grow without the healthy nutrients they need, it depletes the soil of nutrients and yes it is bad for you gut. I guess you don't understand this but there are a total of 3 compounds in most modern fertilizer, they are industrially made in chemically factories. The number of minerals needed by plants to produce a mineral rich fruit far exceeds 3. The number of minerals needed by the human body to be healthy is more than 3. Those minerals get into the soil from decomposing organic matter. Bacteria and Mycelium at the lowest level are needed to break down the larger organic compounds into structures that plants can absorb, depending on the Ph of the soil it will either be more bacterial or more fungal.

We have not been using fertilizer "for forever" it has only been a few decades. Properly composted manure is what has actually been used for forever and yes it is more healthy. Let me break down the math for you, a few thousand years is a lot longer than a few decades. Texts that talk about 3 field farming and resting the earth for two years before replanting predate the Bible as do other texts that talk about using soil amendments to make plants grow stronger. Yes, fertilizer can be overused and it does cause plants to be nutrient deficient, that is actually exactly how it works.

The fact is that well decomposed manure makes plants more resistant to disease and pests. My fully gown back yard plants dont need pesticides. Manure and other decomp doesnt make the ground unsafe. Spraying plants with chemical fertilizer makes them weaker and thus the need for all the pesticides in the first place.

Yes I know yields have gone up since using fertilizer, did you know that 40% of the food grown today isnt even consumed? Its just thrown away before being eaten. A lot of it is just chucked because it has visual blemishes or it isnt the perfect shape to be put through the machine processing. A lot of the stuff that ends up on store shelves is then again still not actually eaten. We now take it for granted and no one actually knows how or where their food is produced anymore. Amazing.


I am sorry but I really do not care about sub-Saharan Africa, that might sound harsh but to me it just sounds like a crappy place to live now. Maybe they should stop diverting so much water and stop cutting down rain forests, but thats just my opinion. If they can make their plants drought resistant that is great for them. Maybe they would also be better off building green houses instead of simply evaporating enormous amounts of water on crops that are exposed in the desert. But w/e.

I grew up in colorado in a family of farmer great grandparents on one half of my family and a botanist grandfather on my moms side who hybridized waterlily's. The rest were military and lawyers. I spent my youth waste deep in pond water. My grandfather worked at the Denver Zoo building tanks and designing complementary ecosystems and was a founder of the Water Garden Society. I know what the fk I am talking about on this subject. I was used as child labor from the time I could hold my head above water and I didnt do it without learning a few things along the way. Alls you are doing is making baseless contrary statements with no logic combined with no evidence. To put it lightly, if i spread everything you have said over my tomato garden they would grow quite well. Maybe you should convert some of your civility into knowledge, combing the two will get you a lot further.



Last edited by RunningFox on 12 Jun 2014, 7:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 61
Gender: Female
Posts: 20,550
Location: Aux Arcs

12 Jun 2014, 5:28 pm

Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 61
Gender: Female
Posts: 20,550
Location: Aux Arcs

12 Jun 2014, 7:00 pm

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/2430 ... -in-hawaii


_________________
I am the dust that dances in the light. - Rumi


The_Walrus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,878
Location: London

13 Jun 2014, 4:34 am

RunningFox wrote:

You dont seem to have a strong working knowledge of this subject.


I haven't wanted to play this card, but fine. I know more about this subject than you do. I am sure that any neutral observer reading this exchange would reach that conclusion.

I am studying at one of the top universities on the planet. I have been lectured on GE by one of the leading experts (and before you cry "industry shrill!", he principally studies plant proteins and the genes of cereals, his GE expertise is keeping abreast of developments and advising political bodies... not that they listen to him). I have also studied plant science and soil science. I am likely to emerge from my first year with a first class degree, and if I don't it will be down to physiology and biochemistry, not plants and soils. Finally, like you, I garden casually, if that means anything, and so do my family.

I am citing scientific journals and credible sources. You are not. Simply saying that I am saying things "with no evidence", when I quite plainly am presenting evidence, is silly and does not make it true.
Quote:
We have not been using fertilizer "for forever" it has only been a few decades. Properly composted manure is what has actually been used for forever and yes it is more healthy.

Organic fertiliser is still fertiliser.

Organic fertilisers do have some advantages over inorganic ones - in particular, they're less prone to leeching, which is a very real problem, and they're cheaper - but inorganic ones provide a targeted balance of N:P:K nutrients, they provide a constant release of nutrients in a form that can be exploited, and the ones used in soils that are known to be nutrient deficient are often supplemented, particularly in Western Australia. Zinc deficiency is a real problem, but we should be able to solve that by supplementing zinc.

Quote:
I am sorry but I really do not care about sub-Saharan Africa,

Well, I can't argue about that. I guess if you don't care about alleviating poverty then there's no need to support technologies that will do that.



RunningFox
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 8 May 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 174

13 Jun 2014, 6:41 am

This is just getting lame .

Generic "One of the top universities" is ambiguous enough to prevent you from actually having to prove where your going to school. If you are going to "play that card" then actually play it and tell us where you go to school and what your major is. Even if you were, one year of school means nothing. You would have taken nothing but the basic required courses in your first year.

Misslizard posted a good link talking about how synths create weak plants that make them susceptible to disease and bugs. Sorry that doesnt need a peer reviewed study, any green thumb could tell you that is common knowledge. Although I am sure that if I needed to I could find one.

If you are going to come right out and claim to know more than me your going to have to come up with something a lot better than "one of the leading experts" and "studying at one of the top universities on the planet." Tell us something that only a student at "at one of the top universities on the planet" would say and not just copy paste from a google search.

What would you like to talk more about? Lets talk more about fertilizers shall we? Yo do realize that plants need more than NKP to be strong correct? The synthetic fertilizers are prone to killing off the insects and microflora needed to support the soil correct? Organic ones contain lots of good bugs yes or no? Maybe you learned that in your first year at ambiguous worlds best school? Lets be specific, what effects do synthetic chemical fertilizers have on the aeration and water retention of soil as opposed to organic ones? Please, dazzle us all with your elite "I know more about this subject than you do" information. Because it seems to me that you can neglect the soil structure with the use of chemical synth fertilizer and end up with depleted soil that creates weak plants that cant survive without the addition of powerful pesticides, larvicides, herbicides ect...


I was clearly talking about industrially made synthetic fertilizer when I said it depleted the soil. I didnt just elude to it in a way that could be easily misunderstood either, I used those words specifically. You clearly misrepresented what I said to try and make me sound dumb.

RunningFox wrote:
3 compounds in most modern fertilizer, they are industrially made in chemically factories.

Does that sound like I was referring organic fertilizer or the synthetic petroleum byproducts used in synthetic fertilizer? I am sure that any neutral observer wont make this same mistake you did. I guess you could get me semantically at best but its clear what I meant.


The_Walrus wrote:
RunningFox wrote:

Quote:
I am sorry but I really do not care about sub-Saharan Africa,

Well, I can't argue about that. I guess if you don't care about alleviating poverty then there's no need to support technologies that will do that.


Funny, here is what I actually said.
RunningFox wrote:
I am sorry but I really do not care about sub-Saharan Africa, that might sound harsh but to me it just sounds like a crappy place to live now. Maybe they should stop diverting so much water and stop cutting down rain forests, but thats just my opinion. If they can make their plants drought resistant that is great for them. Maybe they would also be better off building green houses instead of simply evaporating enormous amounts of water on crops that are exposed in the desert. But w/e.


No I dont care about Africa to much in the grater context here. Like I already said,
RunningFox wrote:
If they can make their plants drought resistant that is great for them
really it is. But its not a permanent solution. using a straw man argument with regard to organic fertilizer is bad enough, trying to make me out to be some heartless goon who doesnt care if they live or die just makes you look bad. Again, you clearly just selectively edited my quote to change the meaning of what I said. How well does that go over in the scientific community at your elite school when you do the same thing there? Is it excepted pretty well to quote people like that and change the color of what they said? Sounds like a legit school.



I thnk I am done with this thread. It is impossible to talk about this stuff when you resort to twisting words.



Last edited by RunningFox on 13 Jun 2014, 6:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 61
Gender: Female
Posts: 20,550
Location: Aux Arcs

13 Jun 2014, 4:18 pm

http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/2 ... r-you-want


_________________
I am the dust that dances in the light. - Rumi