Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • TalkRational: A Republic of Glitter

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - RAFH

51
No Ben. No Martin. Not even going to refute your nonsensical statements.
So, you don't think the optimum would be to squish as many cows as possible onto a pasture? So your definition of "living cells per unit area" as a measure of the health of an ecosystem is not actually useful?

And you don't think humans made Antarctica a desert? So your statement that "all deserts are man-made" is wrong?

It wouldn't kill you to admit when you got certain things wrong, Dave. It's how people learn.
Bluffy does not need to learn.
52
No Ben. No Martin. Not even going to refute your nonsensical statements.

Moving on now that people have no excuse for not understanding "the basics." Yes I saved them off so I can repost them from time to time for people that can't keep up.

Once again, like most militantly ignorant narcissistic DK posterboys, you confuse and conflate "understanding" what some one is saying with "agreeing" with what they are saying.

It may come as some surprise to you Bluffy, though there's no reason it should given the number of times you've been told by virtually everyone that they understand what you are saying about HMG, that most everyone here understands what you are saying about HMG. The issue is not a matter of understanding but of agreement. While there are some kernels of validity in your Manifesto much of it is just assertion. Assertion unsupported by any factual data, but rather just more assertions. It relies heavily upon extensive but flimsy assumptions. And it ignores any negative consequences, such as what happens when you remake the world into one giant array of 3 acre cattle ranches. It's all fine and dandy for you to say your 40 acre experiment in Guyana is not going to significantly affect the wildlife of the area and to even suppose it will be a boon to such, but that's not your end goal. Your end goal is total world domination. And in that scenario, you have no place for the rest of the biosphere, for the rest of the ecosystems that already exist. Not to mention you ignore all the problems with forcing ecosystems into existing circumstances. That strategy has not had much success other than quick profits, usually leaving the mess behind. It's like people who litter.

Think about it Bluffy, I can make a great case for making AK74s or AR15s or M4s, whatever you want to call them, for the entire population. Hey, it would be valuable jobs creation, and we need to protect ourselves from whomever, foreign or domestic, right? And, you know the little start-up gun foundry I'm discussing isn't going to have much effect nationally. How could it? But, wait, our goal is to make sure every man, woman and child over 18, months that is, has their own assault rifle and plenty of ammunition in lots of 100 round double ended clips (so 200 rounds total, just flip that clip around and you're ready for the next 12 seconds of streaming, steaming lead. Just imagine, with everyone armed with their own submachine gun, them bad guys wouldn't dare do anything, probably too scared to even come outside*.


*no doubt, bad guys often have a fairly good if perverse sense of survival. With all the shooting going on, the only safe place is a heavy nuclear attack bunker a long ways underground.
54

Bluffy, your statements above indicate you believe there is no substantive difference in climate and/or soils between somewhere in New York and southern Guyana. Is that what you believe?
No, they do not indicate that.

Learn to read.

Yes, they do. Perhaps you should clarify your position.
Do you believe there is no substantive difference in climate and/or soils between somewhere in New York and southern Guyana? Is that what you believe? Or not. Please answer narrowly.
Of course I don't believe that.  Stupid question. 


Then you can't compare them as far as how your scheme works to generalize.
Sure you can. 

Again, the 3 basic principles work anywhere in the world where there are ...

1) Perennial grasses
2) Grazing herbivores

Got evidence?

Your repeated assertions are meaningless and pretty much what almost everyone has been complaining about. You can't evade reality by changing scales.
55
You people are lazy.  Get up early like I do and READ.

Bullshit Dave. You haven't answered my question. You've answered what happens to animals and other ecosystems under a hypothetical small-scale project, but you refuse to answer what happens in your 'large scale, save the planet, type plan'.
Which is the question I want you to answer.

I'm thinking that your large scale plan requires the wholesale destruction of any ecosystems not compatible with your 'oak savannah' style farm. Refute me.
Dunno.  But let's to get to first base first, ok?

You don't know? Yet this is your Plan for Saving the World?
Don't you think it might be appropriate to find out before you head off down the track?
If you were going to drive somewhere, Florida say, shouldn't you make sure you have sufficient gas or the means to refill before you leave? And, no, just because you can usually drive off to Wendy's on a moment's notice with little or no risk of running out of gas, that doesn't translate to going to Florida.
56
That was not my answer.  Keep looking.

Well, seeing as Dave refuses to answer, and refuses to link to his previous "answer", I think we can safely assume that Dave's grand plan requires the destruction of most of the existing ecosystems on earth. and the replacement of them with "oak savannah" style farmland.

So the answer as to where lions and tigers and bears live is .............nowhere.
You're wrong. Keep looking.


No Dave. Stop being such a chickenshit. Link to it.
Find it yourself.  Try to keep up. Why do you care anyway? 

Afdave's Third Law: If you have an objection to any point I've raised, I've already addressed it. No, I won't tell you where.

The Laws always rule, the Laws always prevail.
57
That was not my answer.  Keep looking.
What was not your answer to what?
Stay confused, Raffy, stay confused.
Don't even know what you were referring to?

:sad:
58
Quote
Why wouldn't you use a 40 acre plot that they've already cut and abandoned?
Sure if fertility is enough to establish grasses. 
Quote
And, if you cut 40 out of a million, probably not. But for sure they won't live on that 40 acres.
  True, but remember I'm not planning on clear cutting vast swaths like the conventional cattle ranchers are doing.  I'm suggesting small plots dotted like patchwork in the existing rainforest so I don't know why the wildlife would not still have plenty of habitat.
Quote
Also, you could stock how many cows on well managed 40 acres? 30? More?
I don't know.  But I did hear recently of a lady in Maine who has a large section of her pasture that produces 11 tons of dry matter per year.  That's freaking 22,000 lbs - enough for about 2 cows.  If I could achieve half of that forage production then 40 acres = 40 cows.  But I doubt I would run cows at all.  Or maybe just a few for some milk.  I am envisioning sheep and hogs for meat and chickens for eggs.
Quote
Are the wai wai lactose tolerant?
No idea, but I doubt it.  You guys have drunk some weird Koolaid on that issue.
Maine? Fucking MAINE? Goodamn you are an idiot.
Actually ... New York ... I had that wrong.  What have you got against "fucking Maine"?
It's not useful in comparing to Guyana.  You have now fully entered the poisonwood bible dad territory.
Sure it's useful. The sun shines in both places does it not? Grass grows in both places does it not? Cattle and sheep exist in both places do they not?  I don't care what part of the world you are talking about... 11 tons of dry matter per acre per year is freaking amazing forage growth. It's inspiring mainly.
Bluffy, your statements above indicate you believe there is no substantive difference in climate and/or soils between somewhere in New York and southern Guyana. Is that what you believe?
No, they do not indicate that.

Learn to read.

Yes, they do. Perhaps you should clarify your position.
Do you believe there is no substantive difference in climate and/or soils between somewhere in New York and southern Guyana? Is that what you believe? Or not. Please answer narrowly.
Of course I don't believe that.  Stupid question. 
Then perhaps you can explain why you reported the observations:  "The sun shines in both places does it not? Grass grows in both places does it not? Cattle and sheep exist in both places do they not?" apparently in an attempt to make it seem like the two locations are pretty much the same?
Have you an alternate explanation for your statements?
59
That was not my answer.  Keep looking.

Well, seeing as Dave refuses to answer, and refuses to link to his previous "answer", I think we can safely assume that Dave's grand plan requires the destruction of most of the existing ecosystems on earth. and the replacement of them with "oak savannah" style farmland.

So the answer as to where lions and tigers and bears live is .............nowhere.
You're wrong. Keep looking.

You don't have an answer, do you?

You're so transparent, Bluffy, I'd be surprised if they can get an xray of you.
60
Quote
Why wouldn't you use a 40 acre plot that they've already cut and abandoned?
Sure if fertility is enough to establish grasses. 
Quote
And, if you cut 40 out of a million, probably not. But for sure they won't live on that 40 acres.
  True, but remember I'm not planning on clear cutting vast swaths like the conventional cattle ranchers are doing.  I'm suggesting small plots dotted like patchwork in the existing rainforest so I don't know why the wildlife would not still have plenty of habitat.
Quote
Also, you could stock how many cows on well managed 40 acres? 30? More?
I don't know.  But I did hear recently of a lady in Maine who has a large section of her pasture that produces 11 tons of dry matter per year.  That's freaking 22,000 lbs - enough for about 2 cows.  If I could achieve half of that forage production then 40 acres = 40 cows.  But I doubt I would run cows at all.  Or maybe just a few for some milk.  I am envisioning sheep and hogs for meat and chickens for eggs.
Quote
Are the wai wai lactose tolerant?
No idea, but I doubt it.  You guys have drunk some weird Koolaid on that issue.
Maine? Fucking MAINE? Goodamn you are an idiot.
Actually ... New York ... I had that wrong.  What have you got against "fucking Maine"?
It's not useful in comparing to Guyana.  You have now fully entered the poisonwood bible dad territory.
Sure it's useful. The sun shines in both places does it not? Grass grows in both places does it not? Cattle and sheep exist in both places do they not?  I don't care what part of the world you are talking about... 11 tons of dry matter per acre per year is freaking amazing forage growth. It's inspiring mainly.
Bluffy, your statements above indicate you believe there is no substantive difference in climate and/or soils between somewhere in New York and southern Guyana. Is that what you believe?
No, they do not indicate that.

Learn to read.
I do know how to read, learned all about it about 60 years ago.
Tossing out snide taunts is not a particularly effective tactic to divert attention from the fact you just realized you stepped into the biggest juiciest pasture pie of the day.

I don't see how your statements could be interpreted in any other way. In support of your claim the reported claims of an unknown person's record harvest in New York are relevant to Guyana, you stated "The sun shines in both places does it not? Grass grows in both places does it not? Cattle and sheep exist in both places do they not?" apparently in an attempt to make it seem like the two locations are pretty much the same, I mean, "the sun shines in both places, does it not?" and "Grass grows in both places, does it not?" and "Cattle and sheep exist in both places, do they not?" pretty much suggests you believe the two locations have lots in common.

New York, latitude range = 40N to 45N           Guyana = 2N to 4N
temperature range =          28F to 85F                              80F to 95F
rainfall =                              40" to 45"                              about 90"
They don't seem very similar to me.
Perhaps you can clear up what your statements actually mean.

61
That was not my answer.  Keep looking.
What was not your answer to what?
62
Quote
Why wouldn't you use a 40 acre plot that they've already cut and abandoned?
Sure if fertility is enough to establish grasses. 
Quote
And, if you cut 40 out of a million, probably not. But for sure they won't live on that 40 acres.
  True, but remember I'm not planning on clear cutting vast swaths like the conventional cattle ranchers are doing.  I'm suggesting small plots dotted like patchwork in the existing rainforest so I don't know why the wildlife would not still have plenty of habitat.
Quote
Also, you could stock how many cows on well managed 40 acres? 30? More?
I don't know.  But I did hear recently of a lady in Maine who has a large section of her pasture that produces 11 tons of dry matter per year.  That's freaking 22,000 lbs - enough for about 2 cows.  If I could achieve half of that forage production then 40 acres = 40 cows.  But I doubt I would run cows at all.  Or maybe just a few for some milk.  I am envisioning sheep and hogs for meat and chickens for eggs.
Quote
Are the wai wai lactose tolerant?
No idea, but I doubt it.  You guys have drunk some weird Koolaid on that issue.
Maine? Fucking MAINE? Goodamn you are an idiot.
Actually ... New York ... I had that wrong.  What have you got against "fucking Maine"?
It's not useful in comparing to Guyana.  You have now fully entered the poisonwood bible dad territory.
Sure it's useful. The sun shines in both places does it not? Grass grows in both places does it not? Cattle and sheep exist in both places do they not?  I don't care what part of the world you are talking about... 11 tons of dry matter per acre per year is freaking amazing forage growth. It's inspiring mainly.
Dave, when I say you are an idiot and quote a post like this, it just makes it worse when you ask me to be more specific. This is just a whole different class of stupid.
That's our Bluffy, always at the forefront of stoopeedity. The militantly ignorant narcissistic DK posterboy kind of stoopeedity.
63
Politics and Current Events / Re: Comic relief thread
oh dear lord
Um, dual male 12 gauge connection/extension cord?

it's called a "suicide cable" for good reason, but this one is especially bad

Quote
I ordered three of these. One of them was wired correctly. The other two were wired incorrectly. The hot terminal on one end was wired to the neutral on the other, and the neutral was wired to the hot. This will cause a short circuit if your generator's neutral is bonded to its ground. It will also cause a short circuit if you use it to jumper one outlet to another in order to connect the 2 legs of the main panel. Use a meter to verify that the cord is wired correctly before using it.



I wish the company paid more attention to their quality control. I ordered two of these and one was unusable because the prongs were too short to keep the plug plugged in.



I plug on end into a standard 120v ac socket and the other into my pool to kill all the frogs
10/10 would buy again


Ah, the last one I take it. I'm not sure that would actually work given the vicinity of the prongs and that the breaker would trip anyway. But it is amusing.
64
Quote
Why wouldn't you use a 40 acre plot that they've already cut and abandoned?
Sure if fertility is enough to establish grasses. 
Quote
And, if you cut 40 out of a million, probably not. But for sure they won't live on that 40 acres.
  True, but remember I'm not planning on clear cutting vast swaths like the conventional cattle ranchers are doing.  I'm suggesting small plots dotted like patchwork in the existing rainforest so I don't know why the wildlife would not still have plenty of habitat.
Quote
Also, you could stock how many cows on well managed 40 acres? 30? More?
I don't know.  But I did hear recently of a lady in Maine who has a large section of her pasture that produces 11 tons of dry matter per year.  That's freaking 22,000 lbs - enough for about 2 cows.  If I could achieve half of that forage production then 40 acres = 40 cows.  But I doubt I would run cows at all.  Or maybe just a few for some milk.  I am envisioning sheep and hogs for meat and chickens for eggs.
Quote
Are the wai wai lactose tolerant?
No idea, but I doubt it.  You guys have drunk some weird Koolaid on that issue.
Maine? Fucking MAINE? Goodamn you are an idiot.
Actually ... New York ... I had that wrong.  What have you got against "fucking Maine"?
It's not useful in comparing to Guyana.  You have now fully entered the poisonwood bible dad territory.
Sure it's useful. The sun shines in both places does it not? Grass grows in both places does it not? Cattle and sheep exist in both places do they not?  I don't care what part of the world you are talking about... 11 tons of dry matter per acre per year is freaking amazing forage growth. It's inspiring mainly.
Bluffy, your statements above indicate you believe there is no substantive difference in climate and/or soils between somewhere in New York and southern Guyana. Is that what you believe?



No, He believes he can HMG cow stomp poop and piss that poor low nutrient Guyanan soil into muscular high som nutrient-bursting soil that will cause pasture grasses to spring up 9 feet high every year. Climate's just a bonus.

Hope he knows how to HMG botflies.
Unfortunately, while I suspect your characterization of Bluffy's response has a high probability of being quite close to whatever Bluffy does respond with, if there is a response, your hypothesis fails right off.  I asked Bluffy if he believes there is not substantive difference in climate and/or soils between New York and Guyana. Not how he would deal with the mosquitoes and flies. Or even how he would do anything, just if he believes there is no substantive difference in the climate and/or soils between New York and Guyana.
65
Quote
Why wouldn't you use a 40 acre plot that they've already cut and abandoned?
Sure if fertility is enough to establish grasses. 
Quote
And, if you cut 40 out of a million, probably not. But for sure they won't live on that 40 acres.
  True, but remember I'm not planning on clear cutting vast swaths like the conventional cattle ranchers are doing.  I'm suggesting small plots dotted like patchwork in the existing rainforest so I don't know why the wildlife would not still have plenty of habitat.
Quote
Also, you could stock how many cows on well managed 40 acres? 30? More?
I don't know.  But I did hear recently of a lady in Maine who has a large section of her pasture that produces 11 tons of dry matter per year.  That's freaking 22,000 lbs - enough for about 2 cows.  If I could achieve half of that forage production then 40 acres = 40 cows.  But I doubt I would run cows at all.  Or maybe just a few for some milk.  I am envisioning sheep and hogs for meat and chickens for eggs.
Quote
Are the wai wai lactose tolerant?
No idea, but I doubt it.  You guys have drunk some weird Koolaid on that issue.
Maine? Fucking MAINE? Goodamn you are an idiot.
Actually ... New York ... I had that wrong.  What have you got against "fucking Maine"?
It's not useful in comparing to Guyana.  You have now fully entered the poisonwood bible dad territory.
Sure it's useful. The sun shines in both places does it not? Grass grows in both places does it not? Cattle and sheep exist in both places do they not?  I don't care what part of the world you are talking about... 11 tons of dry matter per acre per year is freaking amazing forage growth. It's inspiring mainly.
Bluffy, your statements above indicate you believe there is no substantive difference in climate and/or soils between somewhere in New York and southern Guyana. Is that what you believe?

66
I guess I'm the exception then. In my experience even the ones that don' t speak English that well never systematically leave out the articles

I often translate manuals etc. that are written in "Japanese English". Even from extremely well-known brands, the article use may be erratic, especially when it's obvious that the text was prepared hurriedly. Had the use/non-use been systematic, the number of ambiguities would be lower, but sometimes you wonder if an article omission is an error or is meant to carry information.
Ah, the old "conspicuous by it's absence" trick.
67
Politics and Current Events / Re: Comic relief thread
oh dear lord
Um, dual male 12 gauge connection/extension cord?
68
quote author=socrates1 link=msg=160339 date=1518968374]
More:
Quote
"Homo sapiens, despite being so well known, was a species without a past until now," says María Martínon-Torres, a palaeoanthropologist at University College London, noting the scarcity of fossils linked to human origins in Africa. But the lack of features that, she says, define our species -- such as a prominent chin and forehead -- convince her that the Jebel Irhoud remains should not be considered H. sapiens.
It is rarely admitted that there is a scarcity of fossils linked to human origins in Africa.
[/quote]

[
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/44/African_Mitochondrial_descent.PNG/330px-African_Mitochondrial_descent.PNG

Map of early diversification of modern humans according to mitochondrial population genetics (see: Haplogroup L).

It is odd that nobody has published anything about how this claimed lineage is wrong in the light of the claims about Jebel Irhoud.
As noted by Saunt Taunga, DNA evidence is much more definitive and reliable than bits and pieces of bone originally found by a miner and given to an engineer who kept it for a bit as a souvenir. See the above emboldenized comment from your own post.

Note the map provided does not include Morocco as either an early origin or destination.


69
They are pretty much guaranteed to be.
Who are pretty much guaranteed to be what?  :confused:

ETA:   OK I think I see the problem:

 
Quote
Are the wai wai lactose tolerant?
No idea, but I doubt it.  You guys have drunk some weird Koolaid on that issue.
They are pretty much guaranteed to be.

Both you and Hawkins read the (unattributed) quote as "INtolerant".

Dave: how much milk consumption have you observed among adult Wai Wai?

:icare:
The unattributed quote was of Testy.
Okay so Martin wants to know about lions and tigers and bears oh my... here's what I have to say about that... if I do a project other than in Missouri it will probably be in southern Guyana at the Wai Wai Village that I visited in 2011. I have a good relationship with the chief and he has been asking me for a long time to come and help them with sustainable agriculture. Of course one of the biggest reasons I have not returned yet is because I have to have Some first hand experience under my belt. I'm now getting that but I won't consider myself fully qualified until I go at least a year or two with sheep and a dairy cow and also have some success with integrating chickens into the mix. Once I get that experience, then I will be ready to launch a project.

The first project at this Village might be cutting a clearing of perhaps 40 acres and establishing grasses. The villagers are currently cutting clearings like this already which they use for planting cassava but they can only grow cassava for 2 to 3 years before needing to abandon the field for lack of fertility.  My Hope of course would be that this 40-acre field that I establish could be used continuously year after year without ever having to abandon it by using holistic managed grazing.

Now let me ask you... do you think this project would have any sort of noticeable impact on howler monkey populations or spider monkey populations or Jaguar populations or tapir populations in the area? 

I cannot see that it would at all.
Why wouldn't you use a 40 acre plot that they've already cut and abandoned? And, if you cut 40 out of a million, probably not. But for sure they won't live on that 40 acres. Also, you could stock how many cows on well managed 40 acres? 30? More? Are the wai wai lactose tolerant?

He was asking rhetorically if the Wai Wai were lactose tolerant. Then answered himself with the map showing Guyana to be 60% to 80% lactose intolerant.

Bluffy, having not really read Testy's post replied:
Quote
Why wouldn't you use a 40 acre plot that they've already cut and abandoned?
Sure if fertility is enough to establish grasses. 
Quote
And, if you cut 40 out of a million, probably not. But for sure they won't live on that 40 acres.
  True, but remember I'm not planning on clear cutting vast swaths like the conventional cattle ranchers are doing.  I'm suggesting small plots dotted like patchwork in the existing rainforest so I don't know why the wildlife would not still have plenty of habitat.
Quote
Also, you could stock how many cows on well managed 40 acres? 30? More?
I don't know.  But I did hear recently of a lady in Maine who has a large section of her pasture that produces 11 tons of dry matter per year.  That's freaking 22,000 lbs - enough for about 2 cows.  If I could achieve half of that forage production then 40 acres = 40 cows.  But I doubt I would run cows at all.  Or maybe just a few for some milk.  I am envisioning sheep and hogs for meat and chickens for eggs.
Quote
Are the wai wai lactose tolerant?
No idea, but I doubt it. You guys have drunk some weird Koolaid on that issue.
In other words, Bluffy is doubting the Wai Wai are lactose tolerant. Which is probably true. They most likely are not lactose tolerant. Bluffy once again gets it right by shooting himself in his gun hand.

But, as Bluffy will maintain, the real story here is you misunderstood the entire context and suggested both Testy and Bluffy were using "tolerant" when they meant to use "intolerant" when it was actually only Bluffy that did so.

Really, Vox, you are such an idiot. As Bluffy has so often indicated.
70
2000 sq miles apparently
https://wilderness-explorers.com/guyana/lodges/dadanawa/
Ah, that's 1,280,000 acres, for a stocking rate of 1 cow per 256 acres.

Presumably that 2000 sqmi is the total property size and not all of it is used as pasture. On the other hand, even if they were using just 1/10th of the land, that would still be 25.6 acres per cow. To get down to Bluffy's numbers, 1 cow per 3 acres or the equivalent (actually less), they'd have to use less than 1.2% of their land, just 15,000 acres. Sure, that sounds like a lot, but in comparison to 1.3 million acres, it's not much.
71
https://mcfrye.com/the-parkland-mass-shooting/
Also quite nice. And I believe McFrye is right. This disaster may well be the rock on which the Republicans wreck.
72
Guyana does have cattle ranches. Maybe Dave could talk to these people:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dadanawa_Ranch

They run an ecotourism venture besides the ranch. People that have been there seem to like it.
Sez it's in an existing savanna. Not cut out of the rain forest.

Also sez they run 5000 head of cattle. I wonder on how many acres.
73
Quote
Why wouldn't you use a 40 acre plot that they've already cut and abandoned?
Sure if fertility is enough to establish grasses. 
Quote
And, if you cut 40 out of a million, probably not. But for sure they won't live on that 40 acres.
  True, but remember I'm not planning on clear cutting vast swaths like the conventional cattle ranchers are doing.  I'm suggesting small plots dotted like patchwork in the existing rainforest so I don't know why the wildlife would not still have plenty of habitat.
Quote
Also, you could stock how many cows on well managed 40 acres? 30? More?
I don't know.  But I did hear recently of a lady in Maine who has a large section of her pasture that produces 11 tons of dry matter per year.  That's freaking 22,000 lbs - enough for about 2 cows.
on what amount of land? In any case, you should produce the citation.
If I could achieve half of that forage production then 40 acres = 40 cows.  But I doubt I would run cows at all.  Or maybe just a few for some milk.  I am envisioning sheep and hogs for meat and chickens for eggs.
Have you checked out how sheep do in high heat with lots of rain? Ditto for hogs, though I have less doubts there as wild pigs seemed to do pretty well in the back woods of Hawaii.
Quote
Are the wai wai lactose tolerant?
No idea, but I doubt it.  You guys have drunk some weird Koolaid on that issue.
You don't know? You've not even looked into it? ]
The map shows 60% to 80% of the populations of Guyana are lactose intolerant.
When you lived there or visited, did you notice the Wai Wai guzzling down large quantities of milk?
And remember, over half your calories are coming from milk.

I can only say it's a damned good thing you are not in charge of planning anything that might be important to someone other than yourself.
74
Okay so Martin wants to know about lions and tigers and bears oh my... here's what I have to say about that... if I do a project other than in Missouri it will probably be in southern Guyana at the Wai Wai Village that I visited in 2011. I have a good relationship with the chief and he has been asking me for a long time to come and help them with sustainable agriculture. Of course one of the biggest reasons I have not returned yet is because I have to have Some first hand experience under my belt. I'm now getting that but I won't consider myself fully qualified until I go at least a year or two with sheep and a dairy cow and also have some success with integrating chickens into the mix. Once I get that experience, then I will be ready to launch a project.

The first project at this Village might be cutting a clearing of perhaps 40 acres and establishing grasses. The villagers are currently cutting clearings like this already which they use for planting cassava but they can only grow cassava for 2 to 3 years before needing to abandon the field for lack of fertility.  My Hope of course would be that this 40-acre field that I establish could be used continuously year after year without ever having to abandon it by using holistic managed grazing.

Now let me ask you... do you think this project would have any sort of noticeable impact on howler monkey populations or spider monkey populations or Jaguar populations or tapir populations in the area? 

I cannot see that it would at all.
Why wouldn't you use a 40 acre plot that they've already cut and abandoned? And, if you cut 40 out of a million, probably not. But for sure they won't live on that 40 acres. Also, you could stock how many cows on well managed 40 acres? 30? More? Are the wai wai lactose tolerant?

Oops.

Oh well, then he'll only need a third to a quarter as much land for producing milk. A lot more ecological.
75
Dave. Nobody cares about your "trials", or these small scale projects you imagine you'll do one day.

Your plan to save the world requires that your ideas be scaled up and implemented pretty well everywhere, yes? (eg: Your maths).
What we want to know is under this long term plan of yours, what happens to the lions and tigers and bears.

You can't say that your work is too minor in scale to affect wildlife populations, and then argue that it should be applied everywhere.
That's not a logical leap.

If your plan is to have a few acres in Missouri and a few in Guyana, then nobody is really going to care about your impact on ecosystems.
But that's not your plan is it? eg: " I would advocate for this general configuration everywhere on earth that it's possible" - Dave.
So the question is what happens to the existing ecosystems under that plan?
And that seems to be a question you really don't want to answer.
What happens to them? Why, Bluffy will be raping the shit out of them.