Healthy soil and sustainable growing

["TradingPostPaul" <tradingpost@riseup.net>]

I don't use my anecdotal evidence to sell anything. Big difference. 

You want to know if I had a control plot. Sorry you had to waste all the
time for that laundry list of questions, though. The answer is, the blow
sand I started with wouldn't even grow weeds, and irrigation water went
right through it in seconds. It was not possible to even plant anything in
the unamended "soil" (blow sand).

You state  you don't
>sell ANY products other than good wholesome non-GMO, non-pesticide crops
>grown on healthy soil amended with rock powders and all-natural
fertilizers
>and compost tea.

Good!

paul, tradingpost@riseup.net
---------------
The outstanding scientific discovery of the twentieth century is not
television, or radio, but rather the complexity of the land organism. Only
those who know the most about it can appreciate how little we know about
it. 
   - Aldo Leopold in  Round River, 1933
*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 6/15/2006 at 6:38 PM Ryan Albinger wrote:

>Without anecdotal evidence, farming and gardening would be completely
>absent of progress.  Not everything works is in scientific format.  Cases
>in point:
>
>** I foliar fed nutrients to my crop last year.  An independent crop
>consultant viewed the control to the treated plot and observed about a 4
>inch increase in plant height, a higher crop yield, reduced insect
>pressure, and better standability.  Scientifically, these are worthless
>results because they are not validated by multiple sets of data over
>multiple years or multiple locations.  Scientifically, a positive outcome
>has been observed in one data set, but beneficial outcomes can not be
>accepted without further study.  Foliar feeding these nutrients can not
>assume a positive outcome on a scientific basis.  Anecdotally, it is a
>venture to pursue with great interest and at this high outcome, much good
>can come about.
>
>** Paul, you stated that on the blow sand that you made a garden of by
>amending with aged manure and other amendments, you got improved
conditions
>and yields, I'm not doubting it.  Did you maintain a control plot of equal
>production methods? Did you sample the soil for nutrient levels in both
>plots? Do you have recorded harvest weights and produce quality verifying
>your production increase?  Does the nutrients applied through the
>amendments raise the soil nutrient levels that nutrient levels alone
raised
>the production?  Can you hypothesize from your data that the value of
>organic matter played to the yield of the crop?  What watering method and
>levels did you apply?  At what time of day? Frequencies of watering? Soil
>moisture levels over varying plot treatments?  What was the evaporative
>rate of your environment?  Did the evaporative rate of the soil at a depth
>of 6 inches change with the varying experiments? At 12 inches?  Did the
>experiments cause decreased soil compaction levels as measured by a
>pentrometer?  How did soil density measurements change over experiments?
>Over the course of the season?  Did water holding capacity trend in line
>with the amount of compaction observed?  What was the total cost and
>non-cash costs of the soil amendments applied?  How did the cost of
>amending the soil favor in increased production, quality, and sale value
>across all experimental methods?  Was it more economical to apply the
>amendments or not?  What were the increases in value and return on
>investment for each?  What if non-cash costs were assigned a value?  What
>if market prices did not vary accross production experiments and produce
>was priced solely on weight, what are the changes observed in the economic
>costs?  Does that method change what is the most profitable amending
>program?  Will a rise in water prices change the water practices of the
>amended experiments and can it be concluded from your data that one
>amending program will be most benefited and least affected?  If food
>quality was a determinant in your amending program, what rise in food
>quality were observed in the experimental trials?  Did the nutrient levels
>correspond with amendment program?  Can data be derived from the data set
>which amendment resulted in the highest rise of food quality?  What is the
>hypothesis of this experiment?  Without any data your statements are
>completely anecdotal and scientifically worthless, thus on that basis,
>everything done to make that production has no scientific basis to be used
>elsewhere with a belief positive results will follow.  That is fact, not
>myth.  The devil is in the details and if details are required in the
>scienctific format then "ain't nobody know much 'bout nothing" 
>
>Ryan Albinger
>Full Disclosure: I do not profit in any way, shape, or form from the sale
>of compost tea production, equipment, adverstising, or education.  Nor do
I
>sell ANY products other than good wholesome non-GMO, non-pesticide crops
>grown on healthy soil amended with rock powders and all-natural
fertilizers
>and compost tea.