Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • Talk Rational: Talk as the ratio of two integers.

Topic: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World) (Read 193455 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • uncool
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #38975
Perhaps these  "studies"  are not published, but are an oral tradition handed down, apostolic-succession-style, by word of mouth ?   :dunno:
Now you're catching on.
Your, um, ideosyncrasies, illustrate the way the game "telephone" works.
They also illustrate the mindset quite nicely. Dave doesn't seem to get why "apostolic succession" is rejected as a method of science.

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #38976
... Dave doesn't seem to get why "apostolic succession" is rejected as a method of science.
This is of a piece with his frequent protests that his commitment to YEC and biblical literalism has nothing to do with religion, but is a purely  "scientific" conclusion.
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

  • borealis
  • Administrator
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #38977
To be honest, though, there are people for whom I do have contempt*, and who would not be welcome in my fantasy commune, were I to fantasize about organizing a commune.

* because of their "ideas", though that word seems a little euphemistic when applied to unshakeable prejudices and tribal loyalties**.

**  ETA:  and, of course, shitty ethics.

To be sure: and that's one of the many reasons communes are such delicate organisms. Their continued existence depends on   a robust philosophical agreement among members, and that is hard to get and harder to maintain over time, because people grow and change, or can't change when necessary, or take in partners who don't meet the approval of the others.

Dancing Rabbit seems to have done okay so far. Reading some of their members' words, it looks like they've kept their philosophy loose and their rules fairly simple. But none of them appear to be really old yet, and that's one place where the current concept of a commune tends to falter. Their 'village' isn't big enough to have figured out how to care for seniors and people with chronic illnesses, so that care gets farmed out to the outside world. So there's never a sense of certainty about one's permanent place, and that means everyone holds back a little, not trusting the community to care for them in the long run.

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #38978
Criticizing ideas
"I really wish some of you people would pull your heads out of your butts before you post.  So tiresome to have to wipe feces off my screen constantly"
What idea is being criticized here?
I forget.  There is a constant barrage of stupid ideas at this place.

  • Faid
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #38979
Nice try.
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 #38980
Also,    :ironicat:
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

  • Sea Star
  • Not an octohatter
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #38981
Criticizing ideas
"I really wish some of you people would pull your heads out of your butts before you post.  So tiresome to have to wipe feces off my screen constantly"
What idea is being criticized here?
I forget.  There is a constant barrage of stupid ideas at this place.
Well then you're not criticizing any idea. You are insulting posters. Quit that.
Quote from: Dave Hawkins on Today at 07:50:40 AM
Lol
Sea Star has been trolling me this whole time.

  • RAFH
  • Have a life, already.
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #38982
Quote
Dave:

"It's you that expresses contempt for other humans"

No.

I express contempt for their ideas.
 
Quote
Dave:

#diarrheamouth

Do you see where I'm going with this?  Or has the stupid stick been pulled through your ears one too many times?

Listen you dingbat... You people have no common sense at all.

RAFH has replaced Pingu as the local diarrhea mouth village idiot.

Good Lord you're an idiot.

Waste of time with this crowd. You can't fix stupid.

You are a moron.

You really are an idiot.

You are the Picasso of stupid.

Have I mentioned that you are an idiot?

You are worse than an idiot. You are a dangerous idiot.

You are just an idiot

Some of them may even get frontal lobotomies so they can be like you guys!

Talk about an arrogant blowhard

good God you are an idiot.

What a maroon.

I really wish some of you people would pull your heads out of your butts before you post.  So tiresome to have to wipe feces off my screen constantly.

you are a complete idiot.

Again you are an idiot if you don't think I know what slash-and-burn means.
Ironically, most of those phrases Bluffy borrowed from the rest of us.
Are we there yet?

  • RAFH
  • Have a life, already.
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #38983
I have to admit I'm pretty chuffed to have been designated as Pingu's successor. It's a real honor. I sincerely hope I can live up to the standards Pingu has set.
Are we there yet?

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #38984
The really obvious point to this last tangent is that there does indeed seem to be some value in octohatter style ecology and that hmg as a principle even assuming it works as advertised requires understanding local ecology rather than the stupidly simplistic bunch move rest which is itself adapted to a particular ecological range.
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 #38985
Nope.

Bunch move rest works everywhere there are green plants and grazers to eat them.

No octohattery needed.

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #38986
Nope.

Bunch move rest works everywhere there are green plants and grazers to eat them.
Leaving aside the fact that "bunch move rest" and, more to the point, "works" are not defined here - how do you "know" it (whatever you think "it" is) works (whatever you think "works" means) ?

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

  • uncool
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #38987
Because of studies passed down apostolic-succession style. And Dave is never going to discuss them. But these studies exist, believe him, and they prove exactly what he says!

  • Fenrir
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #38988
Maybe the dog ate them?

Or, I know, have you looked under the seats in the car? All sorts of crap gets down there.
It's what plants crave.

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #38989
Nope.

Bunch move rest works everywhere there are green plants and grazers to eat them.
Leaving aside the fact that "bunch move rest" and, more to the point, "works" are not defined here - how do you "know" it (whatever you think "it" is) works (whatever you think "works" means) ?


Bunch means put the animals into a tight group for example 500,000 lbs on a 1 acre paddock.  Move means move them frequently ... like once a day or more.  Rest means let the vacated paddock rest and don't graze it again for 2 or 3 months.  "Works" means several things. Most importantly, higher density is supported, usually at least double.  There are other aspects but that's one very important one.

  • RAFH
  • Have a life, already.
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #38990
Nope.

Bunch move rest works everywhere there are green plants and grazers to eat them.
Leaving aside the fact that "bunch move rest" and, more to the point, "works" are not defined here - how do you "know" it (whatever you think "it" is) works (whatever you think "works" means) ?


Bunch means put the animals into a tight group for example 500,000 lbs on a 1 acre paddock.  Move means move them frequently ... like once a day or more.  Rest means let the vacated paddock rest and don't graze it again for 2 or 3 months.  "Works" means several things. Most importantly, higher density is supported, usually at least double.  There are other aspects but that's one very important one.

Still waiting with bated breath for some papers that support your claims. Lacking such, and by now it's been years such support has been requested, it can only be assumed there isn't any.
Are we there yet?

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #38991
Papers schmapers.

Nah.

I'd rather get it from the horse's mouth.

(Greg Judy, Joe Hopping and Cody Holmes being the "horses")

  • Fenrir
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #38992
Papers schmapers.

Nah.

I'd rather get it from the horse's mouth.

(Greg Judy, Joe Hopping and Cody Holmes being the "horses")

That bit you are looking at, that is not the horses "mouth".

I highly suspect those gentlemen would be rather peeved at your particular interpretation of their stuff.
It's what plants crave.

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #38993
Which one tried it in the rainforest?

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #38994
Which one tried it in the rainforest?

The Godfather, Allan Savory, has done it in Zimbabwe ... similar climate with rainy season and dry season.

You know ... where Testy's firehose washes all the soil away?
  • Last Edit: May 16, 2018, 05:52:54 PM by Dave Hawkins

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #38995
I don't know of anyone who has actually done exactly what I am proposing in the Amazon rainforest.

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #38996
Which one tried it in the rainforest?

The Godfather, Allan Savory, has done it in Zimbabwe ... similar climate with rainy season and dry season
:no:
"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 #38997
Which one tried it in the rainforest?

The Godfather, Allan Savory, has done it in Zimbabwe ... similar climate with rainy season and dry season.

You know ... where Testy's firehose washes all the soil away?

see those tiny blue areas of 1000+ mm (about 40 in) annual rainfall?

Any guess what the average rainfall in the rainforest in guyana is?

Actually, how about a guess as to the average rainfall in missouri?
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

  • Fenrir
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #38998
Which one tried it in the rainforest?

For which one is actual comparable objective data available? For anywhere?
It's what plants crave.

  • uncool
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #38999
Which one tried it in the rainforest?

For which one is actual comparable objective data available? For anywhere?
Dave don't need no "actual comparable objective data"! He got everything he needs from the horse's mouth!