Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • Yes, he's objectively a crazy pile of circus peanut shit.

Topic: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World) (Read 192560 times) previous topic - next topic

nesb, borealis, Dave Hawkins, Testy Calibrate (+ 2 Hidden) and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.
  • Photon
  • I interfere with myself
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34125
Lol

Rage on Photon, rage on!
Whatever floats your boat, Dave. Nobody rational will ever sign up with you because of your snake oil rhetoric and default asshole personality. If you want to remain a marginalized and ignored movement of one, just continue what you are doing. When you want to make a difference for real, I guess you can get back to us. Until then, please enjoy your hobby horsing, and try not to kill too many more animals due to your arrogant ignorance and militant incompetence.

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34126
"Get back to us"

Lol

Photon chairs the Committee for Approval of Sustainability Projects

  • Photon
  • I interfere with myself
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34127
"Get back to us"

Lol

Photon chairs the Committee for Approval of Sustainability Projects
Nope, wrong again. But you still aren't convincing another human being that your TLAR approach to idiosyncratic grazing is actually accomplishing anything at all. For the years of your effort, that must be numbingly disappointing for you.

  • fredbear
  • Militantly Confused
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34128
"Get back to us"

Lol

Photon chairs the Committee for Approval of Sustainability Projects
It truly is astonishing that you are single, Dave.
"...without considering any evidence at all - that my views are more likely - on average - to be correct.  Because the mainstream is almost always wrong" - Dave Hawkins

  • Faid
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34129
Lol

Rage on Photon, rage on!
...Huh?

Where, exactly, was photon "raging on"?
Who even made the rule that we cannot group ducks and fish together for the simple reason that they are both aquatic? If I want to group them that way and it serves my purpose then I can jolly well do it however I want to and it is still a nested hierarchy and you can't tell me that it's not.

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34130
Milk production only, not the other. And a "real" scientist would not approve of my record-keeping with respect to milk production, but I don't care because I'm not trying to please "real" scientists. What I do serves my purposes.
But how would you compare between 'about half gallon' and 'almost a gallon between 2 goats'? That won't help you track each gal's supply.
I'm not sure those are the exact phrases you used, but it doesn't strike me as accurate enough for it to be meaningful.
Depends on your holistic goals.  It's meaningful for mine.

What are your 'holistic goals'?
1) to develop a good base of experience with micro HMG
2) to deploy micro HMG on my own small 10-acre property with the goal of making duplicatable systems which could be implemented in a sustainable subdivision
3) to develop sustainable housing according to my own definition of sustainable
4) to develop excellent relationships with my home county officials so that I get their cooperation in advancing my sustainability goals
5) to become an expert at elder care with my own elderly parents
6) to transition my cash income source from my city job to a sustainable Farm business, probably using sheep
7) to launch my first sustainable subdivision in my home County
8) to integrate elder care with childcare within this sustainable subdivision
9) to create a charter school within this sustainable subdivision

To name A few ...

  • Sea Star
  • Not an octohatter
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34131
Milk production only, not the other. And a "real" scientist would not approve of my record-keeping with respect to milk production, but I don't care because I'm not trying to please "real" scientists. What I do serves my purposes.
But how would you compare between 'about half gallon' and 'almost a gallon between 2 goats'? That won't help you track each gal's supply.
I'm not sure those are the exact phrases you used, but it doesn't strike me as accurate enough for it to be meaningful.
Depends on your holistic goals.  It's meaningful for mine.

What are your 'holistic goals'?
1) to develop a good base of experience with micro HMG
2) to deploy micro HMG on my own small 10-acre property with the goal of making duplicatable systems which could be implemented in a sustainable subdivision
3) to develop sustainable housing according to my own definition of sustainable
4) to develop excellent relationships with my home county officials so that I get their cooperation in advancing my sustainability goals
5) to become an expert at elder care with my own elderly parents
6) to transition my cash income source from my city job to a sustainable Farm business, probably using sheep
7) to launch my first sustainable subdivision in my home County
8) to integrate elder care with childcare within this sustainable subdivision
9) to create a charter school within this sustainable subdivision

To name A few ...
So in order to make it duplicatable, shouldn't you be able to describe expected outcomes?
How would you do that without the 'facts and figures' to allow potential investors/residents make an informed decision about their future?
Quote from: Dave Hawkins on Today at 07:50:40 AM
Lol
Sea Star has been trolling me this whole time.

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34132

9) to create a charter school within this sustainable subdivision

To name A few ...
:eek:
Love is like a magic penny
 if you hold it tight you won't have any
if you give it away you'll have so many
they'll be rolling all over the floor

  • Faid
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34133
It all comes round to teaching creationism to kids, I 'spose.
Who even made the rule that we cannot group ducks and fish together for the simple reason that they are both aquatic? If I want to group them that way and it serves my purpose then I can jolly well do it however I want to and it is still a nested hierarchy and you can't tell me that it's not.

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34134
I can't imagine a less qualified teacher than Dave.
Love is like a magic penny
 if you hold it tight you won't have any
if you give it away you'll have so many
they'll be rolling all over the floor

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34135
I can't imagine a less qualified teacher than Dave.
You have read a Socrates thread haven't you?
Why do I bother?

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34136
Milk production only, not the other. And a "real" scientist would not approve of my record-keeping with respect to milk production, but I don't care because I'm not trying to please "real" scientists. What I do serves my purposes.
But how would you compare between 'about half gallon' and 'almost a gallon between 2 goats'? That won't help you track each gal's supply.
I'm not sure those are the exact phrases you used, but it doesn't strike me as accurate enough for it to be meaningful.
Depends on your holistic goals.  It's meaningful for mine.

What are your 'holistic goals'?
1) to develop a good base of experience with micro HMG
2) to deploy micro HMG on my own small 10-acre property with the goal of making duplicatable systems which could be implemented in a sustainable subdivision
3) to develop sustainable housing according to my own definition of sustainable
4) to develop excellent relationships with my home county officials so that I get their cooperation in advancing my sustainability goals
5) to become an expert at elder care with my own elderly parents
6) to transition my cash income source from my city job to a sustainable Farm business, probably using sheep
7) to launch my first sustainable subdivision in my home County
8) to integrate elder care with childcare within this sustainable subdivision
9) to create a charter school within this sustainable subdivision

To name A few ...
So in order to make it duplicatable, shouldn't you be able to describe expected outcomes?
How would you do that without the 'facts and figures' to allow potential investors/residents make an informed decision about their future?
Yes, and I can already do that with sheep and dairy goats.  Two dairy goats will produce between 100 and 150 gallons of milk per lactation depending on feed quantity and quality - I prefer supplementing with tree hay.  Sheep will produce 2 lambs per ewe 2nd year and beyond.  Dairy cow should produce about 600 gallons per lactation, but I have not personally verified that number yet in my system.  I'll know that number by next year.  Also, I should have a pretty good idea if my stocking rate is correct by this time next year.

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34137
Also, I should have a pretty good idea if my stocking rate is correct by this time next year.
How will you obtain that "pretty good idea" ?
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34138
Also: this cannot be stated enough:

9) to create a charter school within this sustainable subdivision

To name A few ...
:eek:

"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34139
Also, I should have a pretty good idea if my stocking rate is correct by this time next year.
How will you obtain that "pretty good idea" ?
Apply for a government grant so I can hire interns wearing lab coats armed with test tubes and meters.

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34140
Also, I should have a pretty good idea if my stocking rate is correct by this time next year.
How will you obtain that "pretty good idea" ?
Apply for a government grant so I can hire interns wearing lab coats armed with test tubes and meters.

See, this is why

9) to create a charter school within this sustainable subdivision

To name A few ...
:eek:
... cannot be said enough.
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

  • Pingu
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34141
And once again, Dave slithers away from the question - which for once HE posed - as to how to determine whether a claim is correct or not.

No, Dave, you do not need a lab-coat to figure out whether you have implemented the keys to Judy's success on your own property.

You can simply figure out a few key indicators of success, and see how yours match up to his.

But you won't.  Possibly because you are too stupid, possibly because you are smart enough to know that they won't.
I have a Darwin-debased mind.

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34142
Yes I know I don't need a lab coat. I was just poking fun at people like you who have a much too narrow definition of what science is. I have already explained the metrics I use and if you don't like it that's fine, but it's better science - and more useful -  than the science that you do.

  • Pingu
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34143
Yes I know I don't need a lab coat. I was just poking fun at people like you who have a much too narrow definition of what science is.

It's as narrow as it needs to be, and your stupid jokes about lab coats show just how little you understand it.

We exclude from the category of "science" things like assuming your conclusion, and not attempting to falsify your hypothesis.

That may strike you as "narrow" but it is by excluding stuff that doesn't fit within these constraints that we can be reasonably confident that we are not fooling ourselves and others.

That is a good thing, not a bad thing.

I have already explained the metrics I use and if you don't like it that's fine, but it's better science - and more useful -  than the science that you do.

No, you have not explained your metrics.  Or rather, you have handwaved the word "metrics" around in a manner that you think implies you have explained how you are measuring your success.

We aren't asking for your UNITS Dave.  We are asking how you will MEASURE in those units.

Saying "carrying capacity" is your "metric" tells us nothing about how you will MEASURE carrying capacity.  It's as though you asked me how I was going to measure my garden, and I said "in square metres".  That tells you nothing about HOW I am going to measure it.

So you are either too stupid to understand the difference, or, as I said, smart enough to realise that the question is one you would be better to avoid.
I have a Darwin-debased mind.

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34144
Say whatever you want. It won't change the fact that I'm doing good science. Science which is much more useful than the kind you do. You might say that I'm democratizing science. People like you are actually enemies of science because you restrict it to such a narrow definition that only a few Elite scientists with fancy Science degrees can do science. And of course that's a lie because anyone can do science. Even kindergarteners. And they should. You are just like the papist clergy of Martin Luther's day who  said that the common people were too stupid to read the Bible in their own language.

  • Pingu
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34145
Say whatever you want. It won't change the fact that I'm doing good science. Science which is much more useful than the kind you do. You might say that I'm democratizing science. People like you are actually enemies of science because you restrict it to such a narrow definition that only a few Elite scientists with fancy Science degrees can do science. And of course that's a lie because anyone can do science. Even kindergarteners. And they should. You are just like the papist clergy of Martin Luther's day who  said that the common people were too stupid to read the Bible in their own language.

no.
I have a Darwin-debased mind.

  • Faid
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34146
Say whatever you want. It won't change the fact that I'm doing good science. Science which is much more useful than the kind you do. You might say that I'm democratizing science. People like you are actually enemies of science because you restrict it to such a narrow definition that only a few Elite scientists with fancy Science degrees can do science. And of course that's a lie because anyone can do science. Even kindergarteners. And they should. You are just like the papist clergy of Martin Luther's day who  said that the common people were too stupid to read the Bible in their own language.
What a pitiful waste of words and time that post was.

You have a VERY distorted view of reality, dave. But I guess that's the kind of world you're fantasizing of living in (and saving).

A Superhero like yourself needs villains, otherwise the patches on his cape will start to show.
Who even made the rule that we cannot group ducks and fish together for the simple reason that they are both aquatic? If I want to group them that way and it serves my purpose then I can jolly well do it however I want to and it is still a nested hierarchy and you can't tell me that it's not.

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34147
Quote
"Saying "carrying capacity" is your "metric" tells us nothing about how you will MEASURE carrying capacity.  It's as though you asked me how I was going to measure my garden, and I said "in square metres".  That tells you nothing about HOW I am going to measure it."

I think your brain is too far gone from decades of narrow science brainwashing.

But I'll try this one more time... Maybe if I say it in a different way it will sink in.

You say that you want to know how I will measure carrying capacity.

Now your narrow science brainwashing restricts you to thinking of measurements  as something you can only do with rulers and digital meters and so on.

Not the case. You can do measurements in other ways. Expand your mind. Get out of your Tiny Box.

In my case, the metric is Animal Units. (AU) Got it? So I'm going to be measuring how many animal units can be supported on my 8 Acres of pasture. See? How do I measure that? Well as I said, at first I make an educated guess so my initial stocking rate will be  approximately 2 acres per animal unit. Over time, monitoring animal and pasture condition on a daily basis, I will be able to tell if this is appropriate for my piece of land. Hopefully it will be, and hopefully over time, I will be able to increase my stocking rate to something like one acre per animal unit or maybe even three quarters of an acre per animal unit.

Now is that clear?

  • Faid
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34148
You just made the same vague assertions using different words. Amazing.
Who even made the rule that we cannot group ducks and fish together for the simple reason that they are both aquatic? If I want to group them that way and it serves my purpose then I can jolly well do it however I want to and it is still a nested hierarchy and you can't tell me that it's not.

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #34149
I have already explained the metrics I use
At this point I can only guess what my carrying capacity is. A dairy cow counts for at least one and a half animal units, maybe two. And I really don't know how many sheep and goats it takes to equal one animal unit ... assuming I keep all offspring on site until they reach 9 months of age, I'm guessing that 3 to 4 ewes / goats with their offspring might equal one animal unit.
Yep. You've "explained" them all right.
Quote
and if you don't like it that's fine,
Oh, I like it just fine.
Like I always say, everyone should have a hobby.
It's just when you go fantasizing that it's science - not just science, in fact, but much more sciency science than actual scientists do - and that you're on your way to "Saving Agriculture" (thereby "Saving the World" ) that you run into serious psychiatric territory.
Quote
but it's better science - and more useful -  than the science that you do.
See?  Like that ^^^^.
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins