Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • "my job here is done," brownback said as he floated into the sky on his umbrella, an emaciated george banks crying and sucking the marrow out of the bones of his children beneath 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 - borealis

"You know what virtually guarantees that you won't become a true hero like those guys? Comparing yourself to those guys."


Comparing ourselves to people like this is good because it makes us realize how far short of their standard we fall.  I am not even close to the level of self-sacrifice and love for others that I see in the life of Jesus and the life of Gandhi, but I do see progress in my life. I certainly am closer to being like them in these ways than I was say 10 years ago.

But how does being a right cunt have anything to do with being like Jesus or Gandhi?

Gandhi was a right cunt irt women.
via facetious at MR:

Mary Beard has been excised from much of her screen time in the American version of the BBC series Civilisations because of an aversion to showing "a slightly creaky old lady with long grey hair", she has suggested.
Professor Beard, 63, who co-presented the series with Simon Schama and David Olusoga, said that she was "rather sad" about the decision, which was taken without her consent.
She wrote on Twitter in response to a review of the American version by the Wall Street Journal, which described the PBS broadcast as "anodyne".
She told her 192,000 followers: "Really hope that friends in USA realise that my Civilisations episodes on PBS are very different from original BBC versions, have been drastically changed. The originals were far from 'anodyne' I promise."
Ignore what Borealis says.  She likes to run her mouth and it's almost all completely irrelevant.

You talk to your mother like that?

You hate what I say because a tiny corner of your brain is telling you a good deal of what I say is relevant and correct. You just don't like it.

Oh, and you're a dyed in the wool misogynist, there's that, too.
No. It's complete bullshit.  You are just like Pingu ... waxing eloquent with pure bullshit. So glad she's gone.  She is the most anti knowledge person I've ever met.  You are a close second.

Indeed. She thought you weren't irredeemably stupid and tried to teach you something.

Nevertheless, I'm proud to be associated with her in any way.
Also, Dave, I've been conversing with people on the internet since 1996 and you are by far the most rude, obnoxious, hateful man I've encountered so far who wasn't an outright self-described white supremacist.
Ignore what Borealis says.  She likes to run her mouth and it's almost all completely irrelevant.

You talk to your mother like that?

You hate what I say because a tiny corner of your brain is telling you a good deal of what I say is relevant and correct. You just don't like it.

Oh, and you're a dyed in the wool misogynist, there's that, too.
It's not even that it would necessarily be bad for the Waiwai to have small goat herds; it's that Dave has no interest in knowing anything about what could go wrong.

I knew a man (now passed away) who almost single-handedly caused the near-extinction of a North American oyster species in the early fifties through the importation and cultivation of a foreign oyster in the same waters.

Dave says there are already similar sized ruminants: you think there weren't any rabbit-sized herbivores in Australia, Dave?

The whole point of international effort in Guyana and helping the Waiwai have healthy, prosperous communities is to preserve a large area of pristine rainforest which has so far escaped being over run with logging and agriculture. Besides the small human population, this is partly due to none of the tree species there being seen as lucrative prospects for timber, and the soil and climate being unsuitable for conventional agriculture (the soil is poor, and it is too wet).

All over South America invasive species have taken a toll - North American beavers in Tierra del Fuego caused devastation, feral pigs and imported wild boar are problems in several countries, imported Ash trees out-shade rainforest trees, mongoose, imported to control black rats (another invasive) not only failed with the rats but kill many trees with their nest habits while forcing out native animals.

There are probably many others, but in spite of Dave's faith in the all-knowingness of the internet, environmental information is scarce from many smaller countries, probably because they haven't the resources to devote to such studies.

A few goats might be fine. Or they might succumb to a local disease or parasite. Or eat poisonous plants. Or bring parasites or diseases with them that the goats are immune to but local herbivores might be decimated by. Gee, Dave, would it hurt so much to find these things out beforehand?
"they are entirely different kinds of forest."



Do they not both involve photosynthesis to create woody and leafy biomass?

Do they not both require a certain level of moisture and fertility in the soil?

Do you think goats like to eat leaves from the TDF but not the ARF?

Or what?

Quit talking out of your ass. 
If they weren't significantly different they wouldn't have different names

Got any reason to believe they are not significantly different?

Didn't think so.
I'd give Dave one thing: the different names do hide that they fall under the same highest-level subheading of forest. Namely, tropical deciduous forests and rainforests are both tropical, leading to certain types of seasons and temperatures generally in common. Beyond that, they're about as different as can be.

[Pedantic wanker]Not all rainforests are tropical.[/pedantic wanker]  :grin:

Was about to step in with that. :D
Yes ?
And... ?
So why wouldn't goats and sheep do well in the Amazon rain forest?
fuck but you are blinded by your priors.
For once in your life why don't you explain your criticism in detail

For once in your life why don't you read and understand your own chosen sources. Neither of your links have a single thing to do with farming goats in a rainforest.
Yes ?
And... ?
So why wouldn't goats and sheep do well in the Amazon rain forest?

Because tropical rainforests and tropical deciduous forests are not the same ecosystems, not the same biomes, not the same climates, they are entirely different kinds of forest. Why would you even - never mind.
Dave's friends (or maybe his friends' kids) last March, talking about using iphones and GPS these days instead of machete slashes to not get lost.

"Get her" for what, Dave?

What is she doing that makes her "an ass"?
For one thing, saying I would be a menace in spite of the fact that she knows that the village leaders have requested help from me.
Borealis does not know that the village leaders have requested help from you. What she does know is you have claimed that the village leaders have requested help from you. However, you have negative credibility on most subjects and issues and are well known for enhancing your views and claims. If you want Borealis and anybody else here to know the village leaders have requested your help, then post the email or a photo of the letter in which they did so. Or a recording of the telephone call. Yeah, that might be cumbersome but it's what it would take, barring someone with far more credibility than you witnessed the phone call or a face to face meeting.

Those points, yes. Also, we don't know what Dave told the village leaders regarding what he could do. We don't know what Dave told them about feeding goats, whether he even talked about pasture or emphasised their tree eating abilities or what. We don't know how much of their positive response was being polite to an American friend. We don't know much at all about their interaction and whether Dave offered and they said sure that's a nice offer or they actually said sure bring us some milk goats at least the younger kids can drink it  or they said bring us female goats so we can raise meat goats. So.

We aren't confused, Dave. We all know that overgrazing, especially in arid landscapes, is detrimental. We also know that there are other forces at work over the long term which cause climate to to shift and change. We all know that a fragile ecosystem can be harmed by human impact.

The issue is that you pounce on a title or sentence and don't read anything else, nor do you vet your sources in any adequate fashion, which is why you end up promoting junk science and 60 year old debunked dentist's journals.
For fuck's sake, Dave, can you read Voxrat's posts?

Quote from the article already.

Also lol.
"Goats are the prime suspects," said Wright. "I've literally seen a goat eat a brick -- they aren't picky eaters at all, and they eat a lot for their size. It wouldn't take many goats on a stressed out landscape to make a pretty big impact."

Literally the entire article is about the effects of domesticated animals.


Of course, those goats of old weren't being dragged around in cages.
maybe you should be thinking outside the box. Capybara herds. Large edible rodents.
"Get her" for what, Dave?

What is she doing that makes her "an ass"?
For one thing, saying I would be a menace in spite of the fact that she knows that the village leaders have requested help from me.

That's because the village leaders do not know what a menace you would be.
And how would introducing a dairy goat herd into a field close to the village be menacing?

And yes they have specifically requested milk producing animals

"A" dairy goat herd might be fine. You are fantasising about multiple herds. The current gardening practice is to move their gardening spots frequently. A herd needs permanent pasturage.

The climate is very different from Missouri - you know this, but it doesn't seem to be something you are considering. You take no thought regarding diseases, parasites you may be introducing, parasites the goats may not have encountered.

About half the indigenous population is lactose intolerant - so why do the waiwai specifically want milkers? Doesn't make a lot of sense to grow a crop half of them won't be able to eat.

And here's another thing - Guyana has grasslands, and a meat and dairy industry. Why would you want to duplicate that in a much less suitable biome?
The point of my recent posts of course is that ...


Unless people with brass balls like me rise up and stop it.

I myself have begun reversing centuries of degradation on my own little 10 Acres.

And I'm in the "Thinking Phase" of helping to keep the Industrialists out of Wai Wai lands.
Call it preaching if you want ... But this needs to be emphasized.

If you have any interest in trying to reverse this horrible Trend as I am trying to do then give me your ideas.

You don't have to like my ideas. You can have your own ideas. Do you think no-till agriculture is better? Then say so and explain why. Do you think City gardening is better? Then say so and explain why you think so.

But if you don't really believe that agriculture is in trouble then you probably will not enjoy this thread very much and you should probably go somewhere else.

This is absolute proof you either don't read or don't remember what other people say. You're reacting to your idea of what we've said. Also those are simplistic 'either/or' proposals that don't fit complex reality.

Example: should the US be subsidising and encouraging/mandating the growing of massive amounts of corn strictly for biofuel? Hey, it's no-till!!! What could go wrong? What has already gone wrong?

Your approach is simplistic and naïve and above all intellectually lazy. You believe in big buttons and keystone species because if those things are simple and true, 'fixing' agriculture will be easy-peasy.

You want to introduce animal agriculture to the Waiwai to keep industrial ag away, ignoring that you've been told there are large international payments being made to Guyana to prevent that and logging. You blithely think there'd be no harm in bringing non-native herbivores into what is already a delicate natural ecosystem. You've been 'experimenting' in Missouri, on already established pasture, with deep fertile topsoil and a reasonable rainfall. You think it'll be the same with thin infertile soil and 4 metres annual rainfall. You have no thought for the effects of one thing on another - does not even cross your mind. You won't learn about delicate native species that might be especially vulnerable. You'd be a menace.
Once again...

I see you as people who like to talk about science on the internet.

You don't really see us as people, Dave. You make absolutely no effort to get to know us as people. You don't engage in the kind of incidental conversation that lets the rest of us learn personal things about each other as individuals. You never leave your own threads, just like Pahu and GIA and Socrates*. You are not interested in us as people, only in arguing and preaching at us.

*Including you, three Creationists and a cranky neo-gnostic. Notable.
You're leaking a bit of megalomania there, Dave.
Canadian First Nations fighting to maintain their ecosystems against the onslaught of industrialization. These industrialists try to legitimize their destructive agendas by commissioning scientific studies by academics like Voxrat.

You should note that maintaining their ecosystems does not include farming goats, sheep, or cows. Unlike you, Haida FN wish to live in harmony with nature, not turn her rainforests into pastures.
Will there be 5 year plans, Dave?
This is hilarious.
Laugh if you like but we have to come up with something better than what they're doing here in Missouri anyway.  I've already mentioned the perfect example of our stupid land policies here in our area. Recently 138 good Acres of mixed pasture and trees was sold to a row crop farmer and he immediately ruined it by tilling it up.  A lot of homeless people and people on welfare could have been placed on that land and taken off welfare rolls.

But no.

And the reason it's "no" is because of people like Borealis laughing at better ideas.

That was sooo not what I was laughing at, David.
Mindless blathering

You never recognise knowledge or information if it even marginally conflicts with your rooted, wrong position.

You don't know what you've killed. You don't know what you've encouraged.

You're a proud know-nothing.
Borealis says ...

"Because ordinarily you don't care in the slightest about wildlife or wild plants,"


I don't KNOW much about various wildlife or wild plants.

That's different than not caring.

I do care.  And I know the best way to care for them is to manage the keystone species properly. If you do a good job of this, there is no need to have all that detailed knowledge of all the downstream stuff.

You don't know that. You think you do. You may be entirely mistaken as to what any alleged keystone species even is. On the tundra, you might think it was caribou. Or wolves. But it is probably reindeer moss, a lichen. Or Arctic Foxes, whose dens function as fertile oases, nurseries for many species. Without the moss, no caribou. Without the foxes, a much more barren landscape and the possible extinction of several small rodent species and a variety of insects.

There is an interconnectedness which is not well-described by the keystone species trope, which focusses too much on large, obvious mammals. Sometimes the mere removal of a large tree will change the biome sufficiently, via loss of shade, to kill formerly thriving plants. When I moved here, there was a small stable population of the wild orchid, Goodyera pubescens, in the woods near the lake. During a hurricane, several trees fell around the spot where they grew. And the orchids all died from too much light.

But you, with your blasé notions of magickal keystone species as the ONLY thing that affects species survival, would not even have known a species disappeared.
Of course I'm not yet feeding even one person yet. Not my goal yet. My immediate goal is to develop sustainable systems.  A LATER goal will be maximizing calories per acre.
... and a still LATER goal will, presumably, to get at least one other human on the planet to sign up with your program.
And still LATER than that goal will be to become the Savior of the Guyanese Wai Wai.

(Then on to Saving* The World!)

* (Partly by Saving Agriculture; partly by enthusiastically supporting Donald Trump and his band of ecology-despising billionaire oligarchs. )

Given what I've read so far, the Waiwai are well on their way to saving themselves, with some local and international help.

I can't help but wonder how much of what Dave relates as to his friendship with the current Waiwai chief is really just the chief being polite and maybe trying to see if Dave really is capable of useful input.

There's a scene in Black and White in Colour, which is set in Cameroon in WWI... the main story in the film is, of course, about white people, in particular the French and German outposts. But there are also two priests, who spend much of their time 'converting' the local black people, forcing them to exchange indigenous art works for plaster Marys. They then sell the art in Europe. At one point the priests are being carried through forest on litters carried by locals. The porters are singing a call and response chant. One of the priests sighs and says "I just love this song!" Meanwhile, a translation rolls across the bottom of the screen: Call: "My priest is very heavy" and response: "But my priest's feet stink."