Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • Talk Rational: SteveF posts sciencey things that no one reads before other sites copy him

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 - Faid

1
Trump isn't a real business man.

Trump is going to start World War 3 with China.

Trump is going to piss off China and not be able to reduce the trade deficit.

Trump is not going to be in office in January of 2019 and will probably wind up in jail.

And last but not least... You can't raise goats and sheep in light gaps in the rainforest.

Oh my sides!
Rainforest.

Focus.
3
Here.
I'll click it for you:
Quote
Soil Food Web

By Elaine R. Ingham


:pwned:


Wonderful. I'm glad that they are taking notice of her work.
"taking notice"?
She wrote their "soil primer" 20 years ago.

So you want to maybe rethink that idiotic "armies of fake scientists"  slogan?
No. It's still quite appropriate. Most farming in the USA is still the type of farming that uses chemical fertilizers and thus destroys soil life.
Except your narrative of mainstream scientists working for them goes down the drain.

Enjoy your crow, hawkins.
4
But alas, the fertilizer salesmen with their armies of fake scientists are a powerful force indeed.
You mean like the USDA ?
Damn that fertilizer establishment with their fake scientist armies., always plotting, scheming, finding sinister ways to preserve pristine rainforests!
5
No one has missed the point, Hawkins.
The fact remains:  there is a dynamic equilibrium between minerals concentrated in bacteria (or protozoa, etc.) and floating free, soluble, in the soil. The free, soluble, ions can (1) be taken up by another microbe (2) be leached by rainwater or (3) be taken up by a plant root. Yes, proximity of the source increases the probability of (3). But it's still nowhere close to 100%.
I don't know what the percent is. But it's got to be pretty close to 100% because soil scientists like Elaine Ingham tell us that if you measure the soluble fertilizer content of rainforest soils you will barely get a reading at all. Which is really interesting because it tells us that some of the best plant growth on the planet is achieved entirely without a man-made product which most mainstream agriculturalists think is indispensable for growing plants. That is, commercial fertilizers.
Mother of All Non-Sequiturs.
6
No one has missed the point, Hawkins.
The fact remains:  there is a dynamic equilibrium between minerals concentrated in bacteria (or protozoa, etc.) and floating free, soluble, in the soil. The free, soluble, ions can (1) be taken up by another microbe (2) be leached by rainwater or (3) be taken up by a plant root. Yes, proximity of the source increases the probability of (3). But it's still nowhere close to 100%.
In fact, many types of trees take measures to increase that probability, by attracting microroganisms back into the nutrient depleted zone close to their roots. I wonder why they would need to do that.
7
It would be fun to study up on the dendrochronology thing and engage you on that topic again. You would fold like a cheap card table. The only reason you think you won is because I didn't really have the resources at the time to study up on the topic properly.
:rofl:

"I would totally kick your ass! Make you cry like a little baby! You're lucky my mom is coming to pick me up"
8
Dave all that has to happen for nutrients to be in a form that can be subject to leaching is for them to be water soluble. Funnily enough that's also the form they have to be in for them to be available to plants.
Yes but what you keep missing even though I've talked about it several times is the fact that there's a very short distance between the ass end of a protozoan and the root hair on which he takes a dump.  And there's a very short time span between when this protozoa poop leaves the protozoa's ass and enters the root hairs' mouth.  Yes I'm anthropomorphizing here a bit to make a point. I do realize that there is no actual ass and no actual mouth, okay? The point of all this is that the nutrients don't have a chance to get leached away because the nutrient Loop is so tight.
You know, now that I read this again, it's not as wrong as your previous assertions. I think that you have (quietly) aknowledged that it's soil concentration that determines nutrient uptake, and that leeching occurs- It's just that there's not much time for leeching to happen when microorganisms close to the roots release nutrients. Am I right about that?
9
Dave all that has to happen for nutrients to be in a form that can be subject to leaching is for them to be water soluble. Funnily enough that's also the form they have to be in for them to be available to plants.
Yes but what you keep missing even though I've talked about it several times is the fact that there's a very short distance between the ass end of a protozoan and the root hair on which he takes a dump.  And there's a very short time span between when this protozoa poop leaves the protozoa's ass and enters the root hairs' mouth.  Yes I'm anthropomorphizing here a bit to make a point. I do realize that there is no actual ass and no actual mouth, okay? The point of all this is that the nutrients don't have a chance to get leached away because the nutrient Loop is so tight.
"fact"?
10
Rainforest.

Focus.
Who talked about evolution and Shapiro, again?

Focus.
11
What have you actually read on the subject?
Or do you imagine that your YEC "paradigm" automatically confers on you superior knowledge - no reading required?
Shapiro

Not a YEC.
Not only have you never read a single Shapiro research paper, you misunderstand what he writes in his pop-sci internet postings. If you understood and accepted what he says about evolution, you would have to jettison YEC.
you really are an idiot.
I believe the word you were looking for was "right".
12
plants adapt to their environment very quickly which you would know if you knew anything about evolution.
[citation needed]   
Quote
What you don't because you've bought Darwin mumbo-jumbo Hook Line & Sinker.
You are such an obvious blowhard, Hawkins.
You don't know the first thing about evolution.
Incorrect. I actually know more about it than you do because I'm not operating under a failed paradigm.
Sure dave. You know more about evolution than evolutionists, about biology than biologists, about geology than geologists, ecology from ecologists, physics from physicists, chemistry from chemists... All thanks to that Successful Paradigm that you follow. And all is well in Davesworld.
13
Quote
But I'm not sure if anyone here cares about this interesting scientific stuff

Quote
I don't bother reading such studies because they don't pertain to what I'm doing.
this would make sense to you if you could get it through your thick skull that the great science going on these days is not in the mainstream. It's happening on Little Farms here and there and once in awhile there's someone with a Ph.D like Elaine Ingham that gets her head screwed on straight and helps out.
:rofl:    How different do you think Ingham's take on soil science is from the USDA's ?
Quite different.  I just Googled "USDA soil" and got nothing remotely close to the stuff Elaine Ingham is talking about.
Well that settles it then!
14
Why?
You need to ask? as a "Real Scientist" shouldn't you be eager to investigate the possibility that this "form" has, oh I dunno, something to do with the solubility of those nutrients in the soil close to the roots?

Just a thought. Not like this is college knowledge or anything.
15
Here's some fairly detailed information about bacteria and protozoan communities in the rhizosphere around root hairs.

Quote
   Though numbering far fewer in the soil than the bacteria they prey on, protozoa are an indispensible link in the transfer of nutrients through the food web that drives forest productivity. These single celled, eukaryotic "bactivores" concentrate themselves in regions of high bacterial activity, notably in the vicinity of plant roots. I've previously discussed the "microbial loop theory", a paradigm for understanding plant nutrient acquisition in terms of the interactions between root exudates, protozoan predators and bacterial prey. To summarize briefly, plant roots exude sugary compounds to "prime" the surrounding soil, making it a highly suitable habitat for bacterial populations. Protozoans naturally move in, too. As quickly as bacteria decompose organic matter to recycle nutrients for their own growth and metabolism, protozoans eat bacteria and excrete those very same nutrients in a form readily available for plants. This "microbial loop" of nutrients is essentially an ecological fertilization system built on a very simple predator-prey model.

https://wyrdscience.wordpress.com/2011/04/09/protozoa-drive-growth-enhancing-hormone-release-in-the-rhizosphere/
that last part needed to be emphasized.
That previous part needed to be emphasized as well.
16
Here's some fairly detailed information about bacteria and protozoan communities in the rhizosphere around root hairs.

Quote
   Though numbering far fewer in the soil than the bacteria they prey on, protozoa are an indispensible link in the transfer of nutrients through the food web that drives forest productivity. These single celled, eukaryotic "bactivores" concentrate themselves in regions of high bacterial activity, notably in the vicinity of plant roots. I've previously discussed the "microbial loop theory", a paradigm for understanding plant nutrient acquisition in terms of the interactions between root exudates, protozoan predators and bacterial prey. To summarize briefly, plant roots exude sugary compounds to "prime" the surrounding soil, making it a highly suitable habitat for bacterial populations. Protozoans naturally move in, too. As quickly as bacteria decompose organic matter to recycle nutrients for their own growth and metabolism, protozoans eat bacteria and excrete those very same nutrients in a form readily available for plants. This "microbial loop" of nutrients is essentially an ecological fertilization system built on a very simple predator-prey model.

https://wyrdscience.wordpress.com/2011/04/09/protozoa-drive-growth-enhancing-hormone-release-in-the-rhizosphere/
And what is this "form readily available for plants"?
17
How do you know it's "new"?

And how do you know it's a different process?
it's new in the sense that almost no one in the mainstream is talking about it.
And you know that from your extensive review of the relevant bibliography?

Quote
And it's not a different process once it comes out of the protozoa's ass.
And that process is...
18
How do you know it's "new"?

And how do you know it's a different process?
19
I had hoped that this would be an interesting discussion about how micro-organisms Supply plants with nutrients. It's really interesting stuff.
Lol. That is LITERALLY the thing I'm asking you.
Quote
But instead it was yet another study in human psychology.
Most of your posts are.
20
Just forget it. You people obviously aren't interested in learning anything about holistic management or microorganisms in the soil or anything other than what you learned at University. You are happy with your slogans like "don't cut trees down in rainforest" and that's the end of it.
Not University. Highschool. Our brainwashing started early on, see.

For example- Do you know the official Prty line on "How Do Plant Root Work"?
21
"The point that you don't seem to grasp is that the portion in the free form is continuously subject to rapid leaching."

No I grasped that point a long time ago. You are the one that is not grasping my point, my point being that I don't freaking care about these free form minerals. What I care about is microorganisms. How many different ways do I need to say this before you will get it?
No one cares about what you care about. Some care to clarify your understanding of said issues. But you don't seem to care about that either.

Again, how do those "salts" go from the inside of microorganisms to plant roots? Care to elaborate on your previous "guess"?
Again, I'm just starting to learn the specifics of this and the only one I can give you any sort of an answer for would-be protozoa. It is my understanding that protozoa eat bacteria and poop out excess nitrogen in the form of some sort of salt. Maybe salt isn't the right word I forget. Whatever Elaine Ingham said on the video. Or was it Patricia Richardson. I don't remember for sure but it doesn't matter. The point is that these protozoa poop out a form of nitrogen that the plants can use. The obvious question then is the obvious question then is why wouldn't this get washed away in a big rain and I think the answer must be that they are pooping it directly on the root hairs and it is getting absorbed almost immediately.

But I'm not sure if anyone here cares about this interesting scientific stuff. It seems that most people here are only interested in mindlessly chanting slogans such as ....

"Dave is an idiot"

"Cutting rainforest is bad"

And so on.
That is not an answer.

The question is, HOW do plants "use" that form?

Or is that not "interesting scientific stuff"?
22
The sooner you realize that most scientists with Advanced degrees working in the life sciences are hurting rather than helping the progress of agriculture, the better off you will be.
Poor dave.
23
Here's why you guys are having so much trouble with all of this.

Pretty much everything you learned in school and in college about agriculture is either wrong or fucked up.

Just flush everything you learned down the commode and start fresh. Wipe the dry erase board completely clean and start over.
Problem is, because you didn't learn a single thing about agriculture in school and in college, you have no idea what others learned. You just assume they are as ignorant as you- or, worse, "brainwashed by the fertilizer establishment"(lol).

Prove me wrong. What did you learn in highschool about how roots work?
24
"The point that you don't seem to grasp is that the portion in the free form is continuously subject to rapid leaching."

No I grasped that point a long time ago. You are the one that is not grasping my point, my point being that I don't freaking care about these free form minerals. What I care about is microorganisms. How many different ways do I need to say this before you will get it?
No one cares about what you care about. Some care to clarify your understanding of said issues. But you don't seem to care about that either.

Again, how do those "salts" go from the inside of microorganisms to plant roots? Care to elaborate on your previous "guess"?
25
I've been talking about commercial fertilizer a lot because people keep talking about nutrients leaching out of the soil and the only context in which that kind of talk makes any sense is within the context of industrial farming using commercial fertilizers.
I for one have not accepted your claims about nitrogen and phosphorus, for lack of evidence provided.

But don't forget...

Potassium
Sulfur
Magnesium
Calcium
Iron
Boron
Manganese
Zinc
Molybdenum
Copper

All of which have very different chemical properties.

Why do you think these won't leach?
because they are inside the bodies of soil organisms you idiot.
And how do plants aquire those?
best I can tell it's microorganisms taking a shit on root hairs

Mind you, this microorganism stuff is new to me too.
See, now I can't figure out whether or not you're joking.