Sustainable Agriculture.

[Robert Sturgeon]

Maybe Robert is not a gourmet, and cant taste the difference.

Taste the difference between "organic" and conventionally
grown produce? No, I can't -- and neither can you.

Be that as
it may, the world is full of gourmets who think they can,

They pay more for "organic" produce, and imagine there's a
taste difference, to help justify their increased costs. Of
course, if they go by the taste difference between
vine-ripened produce and green-picked produce, they
certainly will notice a difference. It has nothing to do
with "organic" farming practices.

and
increasingly full of people who are concerned about the chemicals in
their food, having read what some exploited, non-caring workers have
done while processing food they know they wont eat nor feed to their own
kids.

But when push comes to shove, it'll be the communities that have the
healthiest and smartest next generation that will be able to compete in
the global market, and those that have too many on the dole cause their
brains dont work right that will be fucked.

That's true. The societies which have more fruits and
vegetables available to them will do better than societies
with less fruits and vegetables available to them. By
pushing this "organic" nonsense, you are endangering your
society.

And the question is, what is that economic opportunity, to increase the
number of creative innovative young workers going to be worth, and what
will the community pay the people who grow their own food to increase
the odds of their children's success?

Will society pay you to grow your own food in your own
garden? Oh sure, and maybe it'll pay you to wash your own
car and vacuum your own carpets, but I wouldn't bet on it.

Maybe Robert dont have kids, and it aint his problem.

I have two healthy adult daughters who grew up in the very
midst of all those evil farm chemicals. They are both
extremely healthy.

That is, it wont
be, until he wants to retire and sell out at a good price. Which there
wont be if there is a shortage of competent people to run the operation.
Which, to hear the personnel managers talk about it, there already is.

I grant that there are a lotta links out there that say that there is no
nutritional diff with organic food.

And they're right -- there is no difference.

(rest of incoherent, irrelevant rambling, snipped)

 

[Robert Sturgeon]

There are people who are now following the Athenian model, invested in
farmland while living in the city, and taking trips out there to help
with the harvest or whatever, their presence assuring them that food is
grown in a way they think is good for their kids.

And this is a societal trend? I doubt that.

I dont see that the farmers doing this are any closer to bankruptcy; I
do see that the stock of the banks, the petrochemicals, the GM seed
producers, the fuel dealers, the grain mills, etc, is all up, while the
stock of their customers, the farmers, is all down. Why are farmers
listening to those people?

Farmers aren't as stupid as you seem to think. They are in
business. Why do they get crop loans? To get the money to
improve their operations. Why do they use farm chemicals?
To make more money than they otherwise could. Why do they
use the best seeds, especially GM seeds? To make more money
than they otherwise could. Why do they use diesel and
gasoline, instead of oats and hay, as fuel for their farm
machinery? Because they aren't a bunch of atavistic fools.
Why do they sell their grain to mills? Who the goofy heck
else is going to buy it???

I grant you Robert, that there is a lot of "eco-propaganda" but they
aint the only ones producing propaganda. A lot of what is recommended
for 'organic farming' is bullschit, just as the 'agricultural policy'
set by a buncha lawyers in Washington is. Either way, the farmer will be
scrod. (pluperfect subjunctive)...

In that case I guess I won't worry about it...

Nobody eats cotton,

Really? No, no one eats cotton fibers. But people
certainly eat cotton oil, and cotton seed is fed into the
food chain when it's fed to livestock.

so I think 'organic cotton' is overdone.

It's even more pointless than all the rest of the "organic"
bullshit.

Some mite
sell in healthfood stores to people who are allergic to everthing.

If they really think they're getting an allergic reaction to
conventially-grown cotton fibers as compared to
"organically" grown cotton fibers, they're sadly mistaken.
A fool and his money, and all that...

The
trace minerals agribusiness tests for relates to the tonnage of the
crop, not the nutrition of the product. YMMV; you havta start with a
soil test, not only of the surface, but with a post hole digger, down
below the hardpan to see if planting deep rooted crops like alfalfa will
pay off, or whether it'd be gonzo simpler to add greensand or some other
trace mineral mix.

Wow, why didn't we farmers think of this radical new idea --
soil tests -- before???

After you get done telling professional farmers how to farm,
I guess you could go tell Beretta how to make shotguns.

(rest snipped)

We in the United States have the cheapest, safest, most
nutritious, and most secure food supply in the entire
history of the world, and some people want to fix that
problem.

 

[digitalmaster]

Yeah, they used to call kids with dyslexia, learning disorders,
Parkinson's disease, Autism and a host of immune system disorders
...retarded.

Now we know more and have progressed from barbarism in some cases.

Funny thing is many of these children "lacking discipline" and not getting
the shit beat out of them turn out to be geniuses but they cannot
understand how to tie their shoes. I guess they should have just been beat
and stifled from expressing themselves when their nervous systems are
reacting to all the toxic chemicals we think are best for them so they
won't get sick on us.

I bet you have had your children injected with mercury compounds on a
scheduled basis too. It's called "thimersol" and it is the USFDA
recognized preservative for all your vaccines you have been killing your
kids with.

Different strokes?

i did not suggest that there was no such thing as add...as noted in my first
post.Nor did I suggest that beating children was the answer to autism and
other disorders.This is exactly the kind of reply I expected from
somebody.People want to have something to blame discipline problems on
besides theirselves.As I stated before there are many cases of add
adhd.There are also many cases where add is used as an excuse when a child
becomes hard to handle and parents don't want to put out the time and effort
to correct the child and keep them inline.They find it much easier to dope
the child up.I have seen many families where small children are allowd to
speak to their parnts any way they wish,not do what they were told,and never
get punished for any wrongdoing.These parents say "I don't know, he/she must
have some ADD.
I also personally know a doctor who has had many parents come to him and
insist that his diagnosis be ADD when ,in his proffesional opinion,the
problem was improper parenting.
Of course instead of considering a subject and thinking clearly,some people
would rather run on emotion and state obvious extremes that were not
intended.

 

[Gerald L R Stubbs]

The message <[email protected]>

But you said that there were problems ...

I also said that the problem, lack of the trace element boron, was a
very local one.
It is cured by applying fertiliser with boron added to it.

 

[Gerald L R Stubbs]

The message
<446e8850$0$17545$61c65585@un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com

Robert Sturgeon wrote:

Only because "modern agriculture" defines how efficeny is measured and
it is basically very narrow and short term.
Definitely not sustainable because it relies greatly on external inputs
that are heavily sussidised by the rest of society.

I see : so old fashioned agriculture did not rely upon imputs, is that
what you are saying ? It was some sort of perpetual motion machine -
is that it ?

 

[Gerald L R Stubbs]

But we don't NEED to eat as many eggs as that!

If someone wants an egg or two for breakfast, who are you to say that
he should not ? The sum total of all these breakfast eggs, and others
eaten during the day in sandwiches, omlettes, in cakes, mayonaise and
all the other uses for eggs is a collosal figure.

 

[Day Brown]

The parenting data is ambiguous. In "The Blank Slate" by Pinker, he
reports on idential twins, adopted out at birth to different families,
were given talent and personaltiy profile tests.

It was easy to tell on the basis of the scores who the twins were. If
one twin is schizophrenic, the other has a 70% chance of mental crisis.

Then too, we now recognize the risks of lead, mercury, and
organo-phosphates on development. We put trace amounts of iodine in the
salt and flouride in the water for obvious health beneift; why would we
assume that trace elements and nutrients would not also psychological
effects on development?

We also recognize the effects trauma has, and they are even getting some
numbers from the lab reports to identify it. There are likewise changes
in the hormone profile that result from pain or trauma that can motivate
appropriate behavior.

When looked at in detail, the agendas of both the conservatives and the
liberals are *wrong*. We need a new centrist Pragmatic Party to look at
what the data is actually telling us, and design policy in accordance. I
dont, however, expect that to happen. Far more likely is economic crisis
and famine that will kill off masses of inept, lazy, stupid, insane, and
maladaptic people and motivate the survivors to be more rational.

 

[Day Brown]

And they're right -- there is no difference.

(rest of incoherent, irrelevant rambling, snipped)

Be that as it may, there are enough links from enough professionals in
the health field that people will *believe* there is a diff, and those
farmers who can figure out how to meet that demand will get to laff all
the way to bank.

Moreover, it will increase food production on a more local level, just
to minimize fuel transporation costs if nothing else. and while you see
the physical labor involved as tedium, others see it as *exercise*. And
they get to see the food that they plan to feed their kids up close, and
will pay handsomely for the peace of mind that comes of it.

Large operations carried on without awareness of these political
ramifications will find far fewer buyers. Land that has been treated in
a way that is politically correct will go for a *premium*. And sure, the
agribusiness petrochemical way may produce 3 times the crop, but so
what? the cost of operations has trebled as well, and the only people
who are consistently *profiting* are the bankers, fuel suppliers,
Equipment dealers, GM seed companies, commodity bropkers, etc.

So while the organic farmer only gets 1/3 the crop, he gets 3 times as
much money for it. He dont need nearly as much land, and his payments to
service the debt on it are much less.

you mite be right in your analysis, but farmers are only *1%* of the
population, and agricultural policy is made by rich lawyers. There is a
growing ecological awareness in general which will result in the GOP
loosing control of the house and maybe the senate this fall. Which is
also likely to result in Democratic demagogoues cutting the support to
large agribusness operations whether this is good for the stable supply
of food or not. Yet another possible cause for TSHTF.

And if that happens, the support system agribusiness needs will be gone.
*ONLY* organic farmers, able to produce on local resources will stay in
business.

 

[Gerald L R Stubbs]

No he doesn't. He lives on Earth, like you and me. Even in UK, like you and
me.

Be obtuse if you wish. He lives in a world of privilege where he does
not do the most simple things that ordinary people do. By ordinary, I
mean practically everyone except Prince Charles.

No he doesn't.

Ok. He does not acknowledge people like Frank Lloyd Wright or Le
Corbusier, or the Bauhaus movement in Germany pre-war. Instead, he
wishes that architects continue to design houses and public buildings
after Palladio. He seems quite happy with Georgian, Queen Anne,
Tudor, even stuff as modern as Regency. Baroque is ok by him as well.

But Art Nouveau, Art Deco, or anything after 1900 he views with suspicion.

That sort of attitude denies the basic human instinct of going forwards.
He wants time to stand still in a romantic England of his imagination
which is a strange mix of past architectural styles brough back to life
in a strange amalgam now. Now... With Pondbury he has built a small
town that pretends to be the culmination of centuries of organic
construction. It is not. It was built in short order to look like it
was old. How pseud, how silly a thing to attempt to do !
How very Prince of Wales. And he desires to be applauded for it.

Whenever I think of the Prince of Wales I see him wandering around
naked. It is about time that someone told him that he has no clothes.
The problem is that he is so isolated by sycophantic employees who are
frightened to tell him the truth that his imagination runs riot without
check.

We have a convention with our constitutional monarchy that they keep out
of government affairs. He has a record of persistent letter-writing to
government ministers, as though anyone is interested in his opinion and
what he has to say.

Oh, well, if it was in the paper it must be true

Yes, yes. It was obviously a photograph taken in Poland where that
practice does not exist, and has never. The photograph was taken on
one of his organic farms, I assure you.

That's a personal opinion, not a proven fact.

Yes, of course it is opinion. However it is an opinion that is shared
by many people apart from myself, and who like me regard The Prince of
Wales and his opinions as an archaic sad joke.

 

[mike wilcox]

Taste the difference between "organic" and conventionally
grown produce? No, I can't -- and neither can you.




They pay more for "organic" produce, and imagine there's a
taste difference, to help justify their increased costs. Of
course, if they go by the taste difference between
vine-ripened produce and green-picked produce, they
certainly will notice a difference. It has nothing to do
with "organic" farming practices.




That's true. The societies which have more fruits and
vegetables available to them will do better than societies
with less fruits and vegetables available to them. By
pushing this "organic" nonsense, you are endangering your
society.




Will society pay you to grow your own food in your own
garden? Oh sure, and maybe it'll pay you to wash your own
car and vacuum your own carpets, but I wouldn't bet on it.




I have two healthy adult daughters who grew up in the very
midst of all those evil farm chemicals. They are both
extremely healthy.




And they're right -- there is no difference.

(rest of incoherent, irrelevant rambling, snipped)

I for one don't agree, hell have you ever had a fresh egg from a free
range hen? If you can't tell the difference there is something wrong
with your taste buds.

Studies have been completed, one UK study published in the British Food
Journal,1997, compared the mineral content of fruit and vegetables
between 1930s-1980s. They found that there was a big reduction in
calcium, magnesium, iron and copper. The calcium content of vegetables
fell 80%, magnesium fell 65% and copper fell 20% from their original
1930s levels.

All you have to do is drive by a corn field before it comes up in the
spring, the soil is a dead pale biege color, devoid of any live activity
at all, there been so much herbicide on it the not even weeds can grow a
year later.

 

[Gunner]

I for one don't agree, hell have you ever had a fresh egg from a free
range hen? If you can't tell the difference there is something wrong
with your taste buds.

Studies have been completed, one UK study published in the British Food
Journal,1997, compared the mineral content of fruit and vegetables
between 1930s-1980s. They found that there was a big reduction in
calcium, magnesium, iron and copper. The calcium content of vegetables
fell 80%, magnesium fell 65% and copper fell 20% from their original
1930s levels.

All you have to do is drive by a corn field before it comes up in the
spring, the soil is a dead pale biege color, devoid of any live activity
at all, there been so much herbicide on it the not even weeds can grow a
year later.

Which chemical reaction of herbicides removes calcium, magnesium, iron
and copper from the soil?

Please present your work. Use as much whitespace as necessary.

Then Ill ask you if over planting a specific crop may have caused the
crops to absorb all the trace elements of which you speak.

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the shit out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

 

[Day Brown]

Which chemical reaction of herbicides removes calcium, magnesium, iron
and copper from the soil?

Please present your work. Use as much whitespace as necessary.

Then Ill ask you if over planting a specific crop may have caused the
crops to absorb all the trace elements of which you speak.

Petrochemicals are syptomatic of the system, but not the direct cause.

Continued cropping of the kind of shallow rooted plants that produce the
highest profit strips the trace minerals from the top soil over time. As
I have already said, agribusiness adds Nitrogen, Phoshorus, & Potash so
as to maintain the higest tonnage/acre without regard to the nutritional
value of the crop, which they dont get paid for.

I was born on a farm in 1939, and remember how we usta grow alfalfa
every 3rd or 4th year, partly as fodder, but also because farmers knew
how it improved the condition of the top soil. Since then studies have
shown that crops like alfalfa, which are not immediately profitable, do
however had deep roots that draw up micro-nutrients and trace minerals
from deep in the subsoil.

But whatever you may think, health professionals have realized that some
trace minerals like zinc, copper, and iron are essential for proper
mental development, and *they* will pay much more for food which is
grown in soil that has them. Thus the sales of greensand and other such
sources of trace minerals to organic farmers.

It is not a specific crop, altho some like corn are 'heavy feeders', but
the *continuous* harvest year after year from such crops that maximize
the profits near term, but ignore the long term effects like this. We
have an example of the long term results of doing it right.

When Tokugawa took over in 1603, he observed that clearcutting caused
flooding of the lowlands and erosion was ruining the topsoil. He had the
loggers butchered since they were not interested in other people's
problems. Then, he told the farmers to go into the forest and rake
leaves to enrich the topsoil. Which we now know have trace minerals
brought up by the deep roots of trees. He established a policy of
*importing* timber, which still goes on, but which has resulted in a
much larger forest system than you'd expect for such a small country.

And we now know the beneficial mental developmental effects of these
trace minerals, and everyone can see the intellectual flowering and the
richness of the arts which Japan produced as a result. Which still goes
on, with their kids getting academic test scores that are way beyond
anything teachers in the USA expect.

In as much as your retirement depends on the next generation being able
to compete with those poeple, you'd think... well maybe you dont think.

 

[Day Brown]

I dont characterize the arguments of others. I post the facts as I know
them, and am perfectly willing to be advised of more facts that relate
to the issue at hand.

I note that those who dont have any more facts resort to ad hominum and
sarcasm. But I am not here to match wits and repartee; when I limit my
comments to the facts and the logical deductions from them, I more often
see others present other facts for my consideration, for which I am
grateful.

Agriculture, like all other fields, constantly adjusts to new factors
and new opportunities. There are many who have done things the same way
for decades and provide challenges to new ideas. For which I am
grateful. But when I see the sarcasm, I dont see challenges. Those who
resort to unwarranted dismissiveness will provide less competition as
the changes in agriculture or other fields emerge- either slowly as the
price of petrochemicals rise or rapidly as the whole economy tanks from
the ineptitude and corruption we all know is going on.

By 'sustainable', I had in mind an agricultural model that would work
either way- be less reliant on the increasingly costly petrochemicals,
and if TSHTF, still be productive on local resources to be sold into the
local market. We wont be shipping grain to the Mid East for oil.

 

[Day Brown]

Good post...with deep roots.

Well thanx. Its nice to know that there are still some readers who can
think instead of just think up quick comebacks, ad hominum, and sarcasm.

It is distressing however, to realize how few such readers and posters
are. If the current ineptitude and corruption of the leadership results
in economic crisis, it will be they who are able to think outside of the
dogmatism of agribusiness and eco-puritanism who will remain in the gene
pool, so we may do each other some good.

 

[zatoichi]

Maybe Robert is not a gourmet, and cant taste the difference. Be that as
it may, the world is full of gourmets who think they can, and
increasingly full of people who are concerned about the chemicals in
their food, having read what some exploited, non-caring workers have
done while processing food they know they wont eat nor feed to their own
kids.

Although I don't mind being called gourmand,I can not say for certain
that I have above average sense of taste.I think food is in so many
ways much more than just a source of energy.It can be a happening,
excuse for gathering those you are fond of,a ritual,something you can
look forward(tomorrow we are having stuffed squids on grill) etc.Can
you imagine holidays and family get-togethers without a delicious
meal?Good meal can turn a bad day into livable one.Whenever I am out
of home and depend on someone else to prepare me the food
(camps,hotels,ships,Army),the very first thing I do is try to make an
acquaintance with a cook.It can be a real blessing plus I get one more
person to talk with.

All this ramblings above sums to two things:
I *am* keen on good food.
I *don't* have uber sense of taste.

And you don't have to have some uber sense of taste to be able to tell
the difference between food grown "the old way" and this new
"synthetic shit"

What do I mean by "the old way"? I didn't use the term "organic" on
purpose,because quality and tastefulness of that organic stuff can vary.

As far as possible from any civilization.
Using farming procedures as primitive as possible.
Using "old" kinds of seeds.
If you can max these conditions,believe me you will have your fruits
and veggies so succulent and rich in flavor,that you will have a hard
time eating those from your market.
If you can't max these conditions,then difference slowly drops
down,and as you "modernize" your set-up,it becomes smaller and smaller
till you can't tell the difference.

I haven't the faintest,what are the causes for the difference in taste
between "old" and "new" food.Of course fresh is better,of course vine
ripped is better,but nothing to do with that."Old" food simply *tastes
better*.And it's not only the green stuff,it's the same thing with meat.

Someone ought to investigate these things one of these days,and find
some kind of balance between "old" and "new",'cos every day we are
eating shittier and shittier food.

These family farms didnt set out to be organic; they were just too poor
to be taken advantage of by banks, petrochemical suppliers, equipment
dealers, hybrid or GM seed outfits. I dont recall hillbillies as ever
being regarded as all that smart, but they score better now than the
kids in the suburban schools. The hillbilly kids never had the money, so
they never put the junkfood/sodapop vending machines in the schools. the
folks at home still have gardens, so the kids eat more turnip greens
than ice cream.

Then too, you can look at the scores where there are mine tailings in
the water or crop dusters in the air... and compare that with the AR
Ozarks which have neither. The epidemiological *data* is compelling.

What are the things that determines you or me as a human being,an
individual?
1)Genetic input from your parents.
2)Social environment(sure lots of stuff goes here)
3)Physical interaction between you and the rest of Cosmos =
*FOOD* and water,air that you breath,muscle activity
___________________________________________________________________
Some say that there is also an active component involved that does not
derive from those mentioned.That isn't certain and is not obvious.
Things above are.
___________________________________________________________________

Of course, final product (or current one) - human being - is complex
interweaving of all these factors,not just simple sum.But even more
so,the reason why you *shouldn't* hold food as something that just
needs to be thrown into your mouth.It's the stuff,among those
above,that has made you to be a man,that you are today.

Don't you want to have have kids who are not physically weak and prone
to all kinds of allergies? Don't you want to have kids w/o that ADD
and dyslexia shit?
But you're still gonna let them eat that synthetic GM animal feed that
is advertised on TV 24h?
You might be lucky and have the healthiest and smartest kids in the
world.Just imagine what kind of ubermenchs would you have had if they
have eaten properly. ;-)

 

[zatoichi]

I for one don't agree, hell have you ever had a fresh egg from a free
range hen? If you can't tell the difference there is something wrong
with your taste buds.

*Exactly*.
But even then,you'd have to be color blind too,not to see the
difference.Plus they have tougher eggshell.

 

[Day Brown]

Don't you want to have have kids who are not physically weak and prone
to all kinds of allergies? Don't you want to have kids w/o that ADD and
dyslexia shit?
But you're still gonna let them eat that synthetic GM animal feed that
is advertised on TV 24h?
You might be lucky and have the healthiest and smartest kids in the
world.Just imagine what kind of ubermenchs would you have had if they
have eaten properly. ;-)

Unfortunately, parents dont want to think of the crap their parents fed
them in order to save a little money and convenience. Much less consider
what they are doing to their own kids. So- its the young who have not
yet had kids to damage with chemical exposure who are most open to what
the *data* actually implies.

 

[Abraham Evangelista]

What's ramen?

Japanese style instant noodles with broth, often served in a small
styrofoam cup. I'm not sure what they call them over there on your
side of the ocean.

Getting back to the topic at hand, it's also a prepared food, quit
salty, and high in fats and MSG, and also not generally healthy, nor
terribly tasty, which would be why I toss cuttlefish in it when I'm
fool enough to eat it.

Here in the states at least, it's dirt cheap. The cup packaged
varieties can be had for less than $0.50 USD, and the bag/vacuum
packed varieties often retail for less than $0.20.

 

[Gunner]

Well thanx. Its nice to know that there are still some readers who can
think instead of just think up quick comebacks, ad hominum, and sarcasm.

It is distressing however, to realize how few such readers and posters
are. If the current ineptitude and corruption of the leadership results
in economic crisis, it will be they who are able to think outside of the
dogmatism of agribusiness and eco-puritanism who will remain in the gene
pool, so we may do each other some good.

So yall are admitting that the 'cides are not removing the trace
minerals and heavy metals from the soil as was claimed?

Thanks for the confirmation.

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the shit out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

 

[Mary Fisher]

If someone wants an egg or two for breakfast, who are you to say that
he should not ?

Stubbsy, read what I say, don't put your own interpretations on it. I said,
using capital letters, that we don't NEED to eat as many eggs as that.

Want and need are very different.

The sum total of all these breakfast eggs, and others
eaten during the day in sandwiches, omlettes, in cakes, mayonaise and
all the other uses for eggs is a collosal figure.

It is. But we don't NEED all those eggs.

Mary