Healthy soil and sustainable growing

[Dan Conine <dconine@bertramwireless.com>]

> Mitch Wrote:
>
> I have viewed the video and was perplexed.  I couldn't see the motivation 
> for creating it.  It was well produced and dramatic, with many people 
> presented as scientists and experts (equally as unknown to me as those in 
> pro-climate-change movies).  The best I could come up with is the desire 
> that we should continue consuming as much as possible - hardly a motive to 
> trust.
I agree, Mitch. Unfortunately, the Al Gore video is also being used as a prop 
to tell people (not necessarily by Gore) that if we change to windmills or 
funnel money into alternative energy, that everything will be OK.

Everything will NOT be OK anymore. There are too many consuming too much, and 
ignoring the warning signs for everything that is going wrong. It isn't just 
the climate. There are problems with how everyone is competing for resources, 
time, and mental acuity amidst an onslaught of CWDN (crap we don't need) and 
nutritional illnesses. As problems arise, we dump more energy and money into 
creating 'systems' to deal with them, rather than cutting back on our 
activities that created the problems. More technology means more overhead, 
which means exponentially increasing energy and mineral consumption, with its 
associated effluents of pollution and land destruction.

It took billions of years for chlorophyll based plants to change the 
atmosphere enough to allow animal organisms to have enough oxygen to become 
mobile consumers. We are taking the carbon that these plants removed from the 
air and spewing it back into the atmosphere in a matter of decades.

The recent cold spells are not so much a matter of temperature in the middle 
latitudes as they are a manifestation of increased energy at the poles, which 
causes the eddies and air masses to move further south, increasing the rate 
at which energy is exchanged between the poles and the equatorial areas. 

The weather is chaotic: sensitive dependence on initial conditions. It is 
unpredictable at certain levels, but our ability to understand it from day to 
day within a state, or year to year on the whole planet, is predictable 
within the limits of our technology and our information. Waiting for 
consensus will never achieve an accurate picture of the future, because we 
are changing the future and consensus ALWAYS requires agreement on HISTORICAL 
data, refusing to have any vision which is based upon theory. This is fine if 
you are figuring out how to make a better cupholder, but consensus is useless 
when it comes to leadership.

I don't know who came up with this idea that what is happening on Mars or 
Neptune is the same as what is happening on our planet, but they should go 
back to Fox news and be throttled along with the "environmentalists" who were 
so eager to jump on the hydrogen car bandwagon.

Paul, I apologize for the rant. I think you and I both should try not to get 
too defensive. I thought I was trying to explain my view of the science, but 
when I proofread what I write, it always comes out as a rant. It is 
frustrating with so many problems to work and no reasonable group of people 
to lean on for help. This list is trying to work on the soil problem. We veer 
away at times, but it comes back to our goal of finding methods of living for 
a future usefulness, rather than simply following the consumption path. 

Dan