Paleo Diet: Raw Paleo Diet and Lifestyle Forum
Raw Paleo Diet Forums => Off Topic => Topic started by: TylerDurden on September 16, 2015, 05:19:44 pm
-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3236134/Marine-life-halves-45-years-Overfishing-climate-change-pollution-blamed-potentially-catastrophic-decline.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3236134/Marine-life-halves-45-years-Overfishing-climate-change-pollution-blamed-potentially-catastrophic-decline.html)
This hurts us, especially those of us not near the coast.
-
Cheap vat-grown meat is the solution.
-
Cheap vat-grown meat is the solution.
The expense will be vast, and the resulting product cannot ever hope to equal the nutrition found in raw, grassfed/wild meats. Besides, what if they produced all such meat precooked?
-
The expense will be vast, and the resulting product cannot ever hope to equal the nutrition found in raw, grassfed/wild meats. Besides, what if they produced all such meat precooked?
The expense will decrease exponentially, as it always does with new technologies. At its heart, it uses far less land, water, time, and human input...therefore it will be cheaper than farmed meat.
As far as nutrition goes, the meat will absorb the nutrients it is grown in. If it's grown in a rich nutrient solution, then it will be nutritionally rich.
As far as being sold pre-cooked, that's a non-issue. It's already easy to set up a hydroponics or aquaponics operation in your home, relatively cheaply. Home-grown vat-grown meat would be similarly easy, once the process is streamlined.
As time passes, we are moving back to local production of everything.
1. Electricity from solar
2. Goods from 3-D printers
3. Food grown hydroponically
Etc. it's a trend that shows no sign of reversing. Why would it? And don't babble on about the collapse of society. We're actually far more safe and stable now than at any time during the Cold War.
-
Err, mass current migrations occurring due to f*cked up 3rd-world governments, due to wars etc., current huge droughts in the US with every sign things will be even worse in the future, mass ecosystems being wiped out, and so on and on.
I have only been able to grow some sprouts in a hydroponic way, I suspect that they are nowhere near as good as the genuine article. Meat also does not just require an input of nutrients, the base nutrients need to be processed in an animal stomach and then redistributed as muscle etc. Any other roundabout method would inevitably lead to far lower quality. Plus, growing meat hydroponically cannot possibly replicate the benefits of exercise on the meats.
Solar energy is also a dud. I just recently checked, due to a foolish recommendation by a relative, and found that a certain Italian villa would require at least c.50,000 euros+ to get the solar energy I needed, with almost a decade required to get back enough costs. In the UK, there used to be plenty of Green financial incentives to buy solar energy but they have now been done away with, so that it costs even more in the UK.
-
Solar energy is improving exponentially every year in price, efficiency, and adoption. So you lost that point.
Since you're too lazy to research hydroponics, I'll summarize my many years of research.
1. It's easy to equal the best soil-grown vegetable quality with hydroponics. Just use the strongest mineral nutrient solution the plant can take, and do a little foliar feeding, and boom! You're done.
2. With fruiting plants it's a little harder, so you have to use more foliar feeding. Otherwise, that's it.
As far as 3rd-world instability goes, that's NOTHING compared to the 1st-world instability we survived in World War II and , to some extent, the Cold War.
I win.
-
Solar energy is improving exponentially every year in price, efficiency, and adoption. So you lost that point.
Since you're too lazy to research hydroponics, I'll summarize my many years of research.
1. It's easy to equal the best soil-grown vegetable quality with hydroponics. Just use the strongest mineral nutrient solution the plant can take, and do a little foliar feeding, and boom! You're done.
2. With fruiting plants it's a little harder, so you have to use more foliar feeding. Otherwise, that's it.
As far as 3rd-world instability goes, that's NOTHING compared to the 1st-world instability we survived in World War II and , to some extent, the Cold War.
I win.
agree with you on solar but i'm skeptical of hydroponics. im sure they can grow plants that look healthy but just like commercial produce grown on huge industrial farms, is the food actually nutritious or low in most trace minerals? i think we may find out decades later that hydroponically grown vegs are also inadequate.
-
agree with you on solar but i'm skeptical of hydroponics. im sure they can grow plants that look healthy but just like commercial produce grown on huge industrial farms, is the food actually nutritious or low in most trace minerals? i think we may find out decades later that hydroponically grown vegs are also inadequate.
Actually, it's pretty simple to test the nutritional content. A refractometer can give you a good rough idea of the total nutrient content, and lab testing shows that hydroponic veggies are of at least similar nutrition as soil-grown, if not better. Fruits are harder to make work, but you just have to foliar feed the leaves with a nutrient solution maybe once a day.
-
Actually, it's pretty simple to test the nutritional content. A refractometer can give you a good rough idea of the total nutrient content, and lab testing shows that hydroponic veggies are of at least similar nutrition as soil-grown, if not better. Fruits are harder to make work, but you just have to foliar feed the leaves with a nutrient solution maybe once a day.
yeah, i believe that brix stuff is useful but i dont trust hydroponics. There are a lot of things going on in the soil to help the plants (different beneficial fungi and bacteria, who knows what else) and just like the farmers (and scientists) who believed NPK was enough...maybe they will supplement 15 different minerals this time but later we'll find out the plants looked fine but something was missing.
-
Solar energy is improving exponentially every year in price, efficiency, and adoption. So you lost that point.
Not really. After all, we have been peddled solar power as THE one power for the consumer since the 1980s, but inherent problems always cropped up which made it a lot less viable than the media claimed.
Since you're too lazy to research hydroponics, I'll summarize my many years of research.
1. It's easy to equal the best soil-grown vegetable quality with hydroponics. Just use the strongest mineral nutrient solution the plant can take, and do a little foliar feeding, and boom! You're done.
2. With fruiting plants it's a little harder, so you have to use more foliar feeding. Otherwise, that's it.
I always remember arguing with my father, with me pointing out the utter uselessness of absorbic acid supplements, and him stating:- " but, look, ascorbic acid is the same chemical compound as vitamin C, so it must be just as healthy. " Never mind the fact that excess vitamin C has not been proven to be healthy for us, but my father had failed to realise that a lot more goes into a substance than just nutrients.
As far as 3rd-world instability goes, that's NOTHING compared to the 1st-world instability we survived in World War II and , to some extent, the Cold War.
I win.
Not really. Most futurians get their predictions wrong in the end, whether pessimistic or optimistic. What I meant was that as human technological complexity increases, our negative impact on the environment will inevitably grow, and multiple disasters will happen in all areas. For example, what good would hydroponics be if drinking water was massively contaminated around the world? Take another example:- earthquakes used to kill very few people around the world, now, with overpopulation, the numbers of casualties are much bigger than before.
Here is an article which point outs how unviable and expensive hydroponics is right now:-
http://modernfarmer.com/2013/06/dirt-free-farming-will-hydroponics-finally-take-off/ (http://modernfarmer.com/2013/06/dirt-free-farming-will-hydroponics-finally-take-off/)
-
Geoff, I would suggest actually researching solar before you laugh it off.
As far as hydroponics causing some secret nutritional deficiencies, that's completely unsupported by any research of ANY type. Anxiety does not equal fact.
-
Your article, Geoff, by the way, completely overlooks the complete automation of farming and the decrease in the cost of green energy. Both of those are going to revolutionize food production within 15 years or so.
Geoff, my advice is to stick to what you know. You're a smart guy, but you simply have not done your research in these areas. Nor will you, because you are so filled with hate for the human race that you refuse to be open to the possibility that things might get better for everyone without some major disaster that kills off most humans. And that, sir, is that.
-
Geoff, I would suggest actually researching solar before you laugh it off.
I have done so, on two different occasions, once in the early 2000s and once a few months ago. I found that it was not only not profitable, but also that all the green incentives re less tax etc. were all now being removed in the UK as they were considered too much of an expense for the government in an age of austerity. GS backs me up on this as regards profitability.
As far as hydroponics causing some secret nutritional deficiencies, that's completely unsupported by any research of ANY type. Anxiety does not equal fact.
Well, OK, then fact is that my past experiments with hydroponically-created sprouts of various kinds were pretty dismal, whereas my experiments with raw wild game a few months later were stupendously beneficial to my health.
-
Your article, Geoff, by the way, completely overlooks the complete automation of farming and the decrease in the cost of green energy. Both of those are going to revolutionize food production within 15 years or so.
They have been talking about the decrease in cost of green energy for decades, but there are many issues with it and the predictions are not met. Wind-farming, for example, kills wild birds in huge numbers, blights the countryside, and isn't really profitable, still.
Geoff, my advice is to stick to what you know. You're a smart guy, but you simply have not done your research in these areas. Nor will you, because you are so filled with hate for the human race that you refuse to be open to the possibility that things might get better for everyone without some major disaster that kills off most humans. And that, sir, is that.
Well, I am actually more of a hopeless romantic. I have seen how even supposedly beneficial(modern) things in my life have turned out to be an indirect problem. Take the Internet, it forces me to sit down in an unnatural way for hours every week. As a result, my levels of exercise are abysmal, and certainly neither natural nor palaeo. I can see you do not have a problem with, say, living, 50 years in the future, in an endless overcrowded urban desert, eating daily some yellow gloopy substance coming from a packet with a label stating "authentic, 100% grassfed meat"). It just reminds me of that book I read as a child by E M Forster, "The Machine Stops". At least when I am tearing a raw wild hare carcass with my teeth or hacking a raw oyster off its shell etc., I feel a bit more human as a result.
-
More "doom and gloom", as CK would say:-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3237229/Air-pollution-kill-6-6-million-year-worldwide-2050-emissions-India-China-largest-impact.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3237229/Air-pollution-kill-6-6-million-year-worldwide-2050-emissions-India-China-largest-impact.html)
-
Hydroponics and lab grown meat will be 100% much more expensive than naturally grown beyond any shadow of a doubt. The only reason you could possibly conceive otherwise is because of inflated property values, failure agricultural models and cheap readily available energy that is causing environmental harm. You still have to mine for and manufacture solar panels. None of this stuff is free. Even if what you say is true it just gives purchase for humans to create even more cities, keep rapidly increasing population and destroying the earth. It's like scientists forgot that perpetual motion machines don't exist and can't exist. Where are all these minerals and nutrients coming from? What form are they in? Are they synthetic or natural?
There is no free lunch.
Humans are never going to be able to beat the food production that nature is capable of, that can sustain us and laboratory technology will never beat natural nutrition without directly exploiting nature. Where do these nutrients come from to grow this meat?
We don't need all of these snake oil technologies, we already have all the answers we need, there are people who are paving the way for a better future right now, it's just not enough people are listening to them. We need to stop trying to be creator. Creation is already here, we need to stop being destroyer and start working with the planet because we are part of the planet. We can redeem ourselves to truly be the higher being on earth we think that we are or could be. We have the knowledge and ability and very simple technology to make the earth yield more than it did before we got here. We can turn the deserts back into grasslands and jungles. We could bring on another ice age if we wanted to. The problem is the vast majority of people are completely ignorant and afraid of what they do not know and the people in power are insane.
-
"We don't need all of these snake oil technologies, we already have all the answers we need, there are people who are paving the way for a better future right now, it's just not enough people are listening to them."
Please provide links. We will listen.
-
My response to the op, the solution is to stop raping the ocean, stop killing large breeding age fish, flip the size limit so you are not permitted to keep big fish, only small fish and make incentives so that eventually most of the fish commercially harvested will be the smallest species so we are eating on the bottom of the foodchain instead of the top. Studies suggest that we can eat massive amounts of krill and baitfish, more than the amount of fish we already eat and with minimal effect on the ocean. We need to be targeting these species that rapidly increase in population. We need to be eating fish with lifespans similar to gerbils and rats instead of fish with lifespans similar to people.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeTQtzkpLQQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeTQtzkpLQQ) Bill Mollison's Global Gardener series episode 1 the tropics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkPtYO27L3Y (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkPtYO27L3Y) Episode 2 Dry lands
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5p4F8tSqiec (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5p4F8tSqiec) Episode 3 Cool climates
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HF9IgvjCv84 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HF9IgvjCv84) Episode 4 Urban
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZDnKwHQBp8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZDnKwHQBp8) This is a video out of a series called "what if we change" with guest Geoff Lawton developed and coined the term "Permaculture with Bill Mollison
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhOJRJAuyEs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhOJRJAuyEs) Larry Korn talks about Fukuoka Sensai
http://www.ted.com/talks/allan_savory_how_to_green_the_world_s_deserts_and_reverse_climate_change?language=en (http://www.ted.com/talks/allan_savory_how_to_green_the_world_s_deserts_and_reverse_climate_change?language=en) Allan Savory talks about how livestock can stop global warming and revitalize landscapes and local economies.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6HGKSvjk5Q (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6HGKSvjk5Q) This is a slide presentation with Greg Judy about actually building soil with cattle while producing superior grass fed beef.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePCqDOLUTvU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePCqDOLUTvU) This is a presentation by Vandana Shiva about "Living as Earth Community"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hftgWcD-1Nw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hftgWcD-1Nw) This is a video of a 2000 year old food forest in Morocco in the middle of the desert with tropical fruit growing in it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaQ3hXkXVjY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaQ3hXkXVjY) This is Joel Salatin he has lots of videos about his innovative grass fed farm in Vermont. He is one of the most profitable farms in Vermont and produces beef of higher quality and cheaper than probably anyone in Vermont.
-
SOUND SCIENCE IS KILLING US an article written by Joel Salatin. http://www.westonaprice.org/health-topics/sound-science-is-killing-us/ (http://www.westonaprice.org/health-topics/sound-science-is-killing-us/)
-
Good science will lead you to the truth. The gold standard of all nutrition technologies is animal/human studies. If several mammal species (like mice/rats/dogs) can eat a specific diet while all still bring healthy/happy and reproducing easily over 5 or 6 generations, then humans will generally be able to as well. This is the crucial point that nearly everyone misses, but that people are slowly waking up to. That's why I do not fear these new technologies. We can legitimately ask for any/all of them to achieve that standard BEFORE we consume them ourselves.
-
Good science will lead you to the truth. The gold standard of all nutrition technologies is animal/human studies. If several mammal species (like mice/rats/dogs) can eat a specific diet while all still bring healthy/happy and reproducing easily over 5 or 6 generations, then humans will generally be able to as well. This is the crucial point that nearly everyone misses, but that people are slowly waking up to. That's why I do not fear these new technologies. We can legitimately ask for any/all of them to achieve that standard BEFORE we consume them ourselves.
This is a very inaccurate observation. We have had numerous cases in the past where animal studies have shown benefits for animals but which have turned out disastrous for humans. That is why, despite scientists being vehemently against vegan-terrorists, have increasingly turned away from animal studies and have started doing studies on isolated human cells. Strictly speaking, studies done on live human subjects should be practised instead, but anyway..... In the case of cooked diets, they do not kill before the animals finish their mating period, so, even though these cooked diets are very unhealthy in the long-term(no doubt causing increases in birth-defects), studies on animals eating cooked diets over 5 generations would mean nothing.
The other obvious point is that humans do not necessarily follow good science, even when faced with it directly. High-quality scientific studies have been suppressed for long periods, and we humans still manage to increase air-pollution etc., even when other less ecologically-destructive alternatives are available. I can cite the Austrian scandal of putting antifreeze into their wine-bottles despite the producers knowing how dangerous they were for consumers, and a myriad, myriad, similiar events.
-
The human brain has shrunk as much as 20% in the past 20'000 years. How can 5 or 6 generations be good measure?
-
The human brain has shrunk as much as 20% in the past 20'000 years. How can 5 or 6 generations be good measure?
10%, and the ENTIRE decrease corresponds to a decrease in body size, as far as I am aware.
I say 5-6 generations because the cats in Dr. Pottenger's experiment took 7 generations to return to normal after being put back on a good diet.
Geoff--If you include several different species, then the odds of human problems go way, way down. In general, if longevity, reproduction, intelligence, social behavior, and mood are unaffected after 5 or 6 generations, any longer-term effects are going to be extremely small, if any.
-
10%, and the ENTIRE decrease corresponds to a decrease in body size, as far as I am aware.
The 10% figure is more or less correct, but the decrease may be more due to human domestication(humans no longer being selected for intelligence any more) rather than a change in diet.
The EQ(brain-size to body ratio) quotient is a fascinating issue. In actual fact, there was a corresponding decrease in height since the palaeolithic era. HOWEVER, in modern times, some ethnic groups in certain countries worldwide(Netherlands etc.) have already gained an average height that is in fact somewhat taller than the average given for palaeolithic-era humans, yet still have average brain-sizes the same as those in neighbouring countries.
I have also read absurd claims that Neanderthals and humans had the same EQ ratio. However, this is simply not true. Neanderthals were indeed stockier and heavier than their palaeo human counterparts but they were also much shorter in stature than Cro-Magnons etc, making them roughly the same body-size as early modern humans, overall. Taking into account the far bigger average brain-size of Neanderthals as well, means that Neanderthals were likely more intelligent than homo sapiens, as they therefore must have had a much higher EQ quotient.
Geoff--If you include several different species, then the odds of human problems go way, way down. In general, if longevity, reproduction, intelligence, social behavior, and mood are unaffected after 5 or 6 generations, any longer-term effects are going to be extremely small, if any.
I'm afraid you are mistaken. Here is a treatise on the Thalidomide case where animals from many different species were used with negligible effects unless dosed at vastly higher levels than humans were, such as 300 times, (and the number of generations was irrelevant as a factor as animals are largely immune to thalidomide overall); however, thalidomide on humans had particularly nasty, far more frequent effects, if only on the first generation:-
http://www.prijatelji-zivotinja.hr/index.en.php?id=582 (http://www.prijatelji-zivotinja.hr/index.en.php?id=582)
-
Thalidomide does not equal hydroponics. Surely you know this.
-
Thalidomide does not equal hydroponics. Surely you know this.
Err, you did not actually counter my point, but never mind.
A quick check online shows that algae are a serious problem for hydroponics systems, as is the lack of soil bacteria and the cost is prohibitive:-
http://www.ehow.com/info_8581948_negative-effects-hydroponics.html (http://www.ehow.com/info_8581948_negative-effects-hydroponics.html)
Lowering the cost will mostly always lead to a reduced quality, judging from many past examples...
Also, the assurance given that hydroponics is the same as regular plant-growth is as misleading as my father's claim that, since ascorbic acid was exactly the same chemically/nutritionally as vitamin C, that it was no different from vitamin C.
-
I see, you're just arguing in circles because of emotional issues. Carry on.
-
I see, you're just arguing in circles because of emotional issues. Carry on.
You haven't bothered even addressing some of the factual points I made, such as, er, that hydroponics has certain drawbacks and is not perfect. Also, your example of science being beyond reproach by citing animal experiments was somewhat effectively debunked by me. Never mind. You have a dreamy-eyed Utopian view of Science while I have a pessimistic, dystopian view of Science given our past life-experiences. Let's just agree that there are both benefits and disadvantages, overall.
-
Geoff, I would suggest actually researching solar before you laugh it off.
As far as hydroponics causing some secret nutritional deficiencies, that's completely unsupported by any research of ANY type. Anxiety does not equal fact.
it just wont be as healthy as what you could grow in the soil. for ex have you seen the free video "Back to Eden"? (the music is real corny lol) i think that guy has the best gardening method. he claims he doesn't even water his plants in the summer time.
i did see some interesting youtube videos on fish + aquaponics and supposedly incredible yields
re solar most of the money has come from govt subsidies etc. and last i heard Germany's solar and wind production was so lousy that they were reliant on cheap nuclear from France. still if i look on Amazon there are solar products that are getting into the range of being worth buying, like fold up solar panels that will charge small power banks over USB - pretty cool
-
You haven't bothered even addressing some of the factual points I made, such as, er, that hydroponics has certain drawbacks and is not perfect. Also, your example of science being beyond reproach by citing animal experiments was somewhat effectively debunked by me. Never mind. You have a dreamy-eyed Utopian view of Science while I have a pessimistic, dystopian view of Science given our past life-experiences. Let's just agree that there are both benefits and disadvantages, overall.
I'm not agreeing to anything, except the fact that you're intellectually dishonest whenever it suits you. Thalidomide hasn't got a thing to do with hydroponics. The ingredients in the nutrient solutions used are all the same as the most strict organic gardener uses on soil-grown plants.
And algae is not a problem as long as you are careful with light control, and use grapefruit seed extract.
-
you guys are smarter than me :(
-
it just wont be as healthy as what you could grow in the soil. for ex have you seen the free video "Back to Eden"? (the music is real corny lol) i think that guy has the best gardening method. he claims he doesn't even water his plants in the summer time.
i did see some interesting youtube videos on fish + aquaponics and supposedly incredible yields
re solar most of the money has come from govt subsidies etc. and last i heard Germany's solar and wind production was so lousy that they were reliant on cheap nuclear from France. still if i look on Amazon there are solar products that are getting into the range of being worth buying, like fold up solar panels that will charge small power banks over USB - pretty cool
What do you offer as proof for your assertions about hydroponics?
The fact is that hydroponics and vat-grown food are the wave of the future. Luddites though many of you are, you will all be singing this tune in 10 or 15 years.
Rex Harrill, the guy who wrote the Brix book, told me he has a friend who grows 16 Brix strawberries in the worst, sandiest soil in Florida. He boosts the Brix through daily foliar feeding. If you can get 16 Brix strawberries from sand, you can get them hydroponically, through foliar feeding. And just so you know, 16 Brix for strawberries is amazing, nutritionally and taste-wise. The best supermarket strawberries get up to 10 or 12, and usually no more than 6 or 8.
-
Get a Brix meter and test them, if you won't believe me. You can get one on eBay for $40.
-
Well, OK, then fact is that my past experiments with hydroponically-created sprouts of various kinds were pretty dismal, whereas my experiments with raw wild game a few months later were stupendously beneficial to my health.
i grew and ate a lot of various alfalfa, radish, clover sprouts last year and didnt see too much if any benefit. was kind of disappointing.
only differences i ever saw so far were better skin from using EVOO regularly - although this might have happened with any good quality oil i guess. also one time i juiced quite a bit celery and the next morning seemed like i could really breathe well. i used to buy 2 x 25 lb bags of carrots a week for juicing but not sure there was much effect.
what benefits did you notice by eating raw wild game?
-
What do you offer as proof for your assertions about hydroponics?
none, just a hunch
The fact is that hydroponics and vat-grown food are the wave of the future.
maybe. so was farming with chemicals 50 years ago
as for vat-food, god i hope not, lol. doesnt sound appetizing although im sure they can make cardboard taste delicious these days with all the natural and atrificial flavors
Rex Harrill, the guy who wrote the Brix book, told me he has a friend who grows 16 Brix strawberries in the worst, sandiest soil in Florida. He boosts the Brix through daily foliar feeding. If you can get 16 Brix strawberries from sand, you can get them hydroponically, through foliar feeding. And just so you know, 16 Brix for strawberries is amazing, nutritionally and taste-wise. The best supermarket strawberries get up to 10 or 12, and usually no more than 6 or 8.
sounds like just another shortcut. the health of the soil is most important in organic gardening farming. i noticed the more compost and wood chips and other amendments i added, the healthier the plants were, fewer pest problems etc.
-
Stop worshipping nature. It's no better a religion than science. Lol
-
That's completely ridiculous. The nutrients you are foliar feeding with have to come from nature. That requires much more labor and energy and destruction of nature to harness these nutrients to foliar feed them every day than it does to you have them in healthy soil. Maybe science would trump nature if there were only a million people to look after, but people are the largest body mass of any single animal species on earth save perhaps a few in the ocean, we need nature to nourish us, science will continue to fail to nourish us.
It really angers me, you tell us to stop worshipping nature, but you are worshipping science which is as of yet unproven. You are putting all your hope in science to help us when it is proven that nature can help us.
Also this article says skulls were 20% bigger. www.dailymail.co.uk/.../article.../Human-brain-shrinking-20-000-years.html? (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/.../article.../Human-brain-shrinking-20-000-years.html?)
-
I'm theoretically fine with using permaculture, etc. to feed people. Certainly I could teach you a few things about it. But that's not the ultimate direction things are going. Face the future. It's coming whether you're OK with it or not. And your ridiculous assertions that Nature will always trump science are just that--ridiculous. You talk about the importance of human brajn size, and then forget what large brains cause. Science! That's what they cause. So get on board, or scream about it online. The result is the same.
You people have no idea the pain and work, years worth I've gone through to study these issues. You argue with me like we're equals. Not a damn one of you can equal my knowledge, or even close. I'm not bothering to cite studies because there are hundreds, and it takes years to understand this stuff. A few studies and 30 minutes of Googling will not give you the ability to teach me anything new. For that matter, even hands-on farming, which I've done plenty of, won't teach you either. You need both, plus an understanding of Moore's Law and related topics, plus years to mull it all over. I do not say any of these things lightly. My usually short posts belie a tremendous wealth of knowledge that none of you who argue with me even really guess at. Perhaps those who sit quietly do indeed guess correctly, but probably not many. It takes a very close reading of my posts to even begin to get an idea, and some things I basically never talk about.
-
Please give up and go back to your science and technology worship.
LOL, what wont hands on farming teach you? I have a hard time thinking of anything that direct contact with nature wont teach you.
also, are you drunk?
-
Please give up and go back to your science and technology worship.
LOL, what wont hands on farming teach you? I have a hard time thinking of anything that direct contact with nature wont teach you.
also, are you drunk?
No, I'm not drunk, I'm just the very lonely voice of truly unbiased intellect on this forum....or heck, the whole species, nearly. People lack the curiosity necessary to deeply research things, and instead come up with "good enougn" rules of thumb that mostly work, until they DON'T work. I have outsized curiosity about human health, especially the future of human health, and I threw away my rules of thumb on my way to where I am on this topic. The rest of you just aren't there yet, apparently, and that's just that.
And Jessica, hands-on farming doesn't teach you about hydroponics, or current research, etc.. What do you think good science is, exactly? It's direct contact with nature, methodical, repetitive, and careful.
Many of the things you know about mycorhizzal fungi, mushrooms in general, and plant health were discovered by very good scientists.
and I don't worship science. That's a fool's religion. Human futures do not involve going "back to the land", though. You can sneer at the city dwellers, but they outnumber the few folks trying to do things the natural way, and that won't change. I realize you think living your way makes you spiritually superior or something, but I've been down that path too, and it is a blind alley. Spiritually advanced people can be found in all environments, shrooms or not, raw foods or not, barefoot in dirt or wearing wingtips on a subway breathing dirty air. I say that with love, respect, and hopefully some patience.
-
I'm not agreeing to anything, except the fact that you're intellectually dishonest whenever it suits you. Thalidomide hasn't got a thing to do with hydroponics.
You were talking about, er, so-called "good science" in general, at first, and then mentioned nutritional studies. OK, so the thalidomide animal experimentation disaster was indeed relevant to Science as a whole, whether good or not, and, as regards nutritional studies, the same sort of thing applies in that what is good for rats to eat does not remotely equate to what is healthy for humans to eat(eg:-
http://healthinsightuk.org/2015/01/05/why-high-fat-diet-studies-on-rats-and-mice-are-not-to-be-trusted/ (http://healthinsightuk.org/2015/01/05/why-high-fat-diet-studies-on-rats-and-mice-are-not-to-be-trusted/)
) It is not a case of me just saying so, it is a fact that more and more scientists are moving steadily away from performing animal-studies as they have come to realise that other technologies are far more effective and reliable as regards results on humans.
And algae is not a problem as long as you are careful with light control, and use grapefruit seed extract.
I suspect that micromanagement on a mass industrial scale would not work well as regards the algae issue. Though, I suppose you believe in a future where every individual grows his own food at home.
Lastly, Moore's law is predicted to fail in 20-40 years time by some sources......
-
Moore's Law only needs to go another 20 years or so for all of this to happen. Once all physical jobs are totally automated, then the economy, and society, will change forever. And another 20 years of Moore's Law will allow automation of all physical work tasks, in my guess...and I'm not the only one guessing that. Ray Kurzweil and a lot of other people in the industry believe the same, and Kurzweil's predictions have a way of coming true. He's right far more often than he's wrong.
-
And Tyler, you know as well as I do that comparing hydroponics to Thalidomide is extremely intellectually dishonest. You're damaging your credibility to try to win an argument. Feel free to do so, but don't expect the consequences of that to be desirable.
-
Moore's Law only needs to go another 20 years or so for all of this to happen. Once all physical jobs are totally automated, then the economy, and society, will change forever. And another 20 years of Moore's Law will allow automation of all physical work tasks, in my guess...and I'm not the only one guessing that. Ray Kurzweil and a lot of other people in the industry believe the same, and Kurzweil's predictions have a way of coming true. He's right far more often than he's wrong.
Kurzweil has been shown to deliberately twist events to make it seem as though his predictions were sound:-
https://pando.com/2014/02/03/the-singularity-is-not-near/ (https://pando.com/2014/02/03/the-singularity-is-not-near/)
http://www.technologyreview.com/view/425733/paul-allen-the-singularity-isnt-near/ (http://www.technologyreview.com/view/425733/paul-allen-the-singularity-isnt-near/)
Also, you have not considered the perils of automation. Rendering most people useless as machines replace them,means only a tiny few will have the creativity to do jobs that machines cannot do.
-
And Tyler, you know as well as I do that comparing hydroponics to Thalidomide is extremely intellectually dishonest. You're damaging your credibility to try to win an argument. Feel free to do so, but don't expect the consequences of that to be desirable.
It was relevant since you were also talking about good science in general and live-animal-studies and the thalidomide disaster thoroughly debunked that point. I anyway did point out, later on, some other data debunking nutritional studies on live animals. More to the point, this thread is now on a wildly different subject. Granted, those who dream of utopian futures where they end up eating manufactured raw fish-meat made from algae or whatever, will not care - but those of us who want to continue eating cheap, natural, raw seafoods in their natural state, will be very concerned, and that is why I posted the article.
-
I'm theoretically fine with using permaculture, etc. to feed people. Certainly I could teach you a few things about it. But that's not the ultimate direction things are going. Face the future. It's coming whether you're OK with it or not. And your ridiculous assertions that Nature will always trump science are just that--ridiculous. You talk about the importance of human brajn size, and then forget what large brains cause. Science! That's what they cause. So get on board, or scream about it online. The result is the same.
You people have no idea the pain and work, years worth I've gone through to study these issues. You argue with me like we're equals. Not a damn one of you can equal my knowledge, or even close. I'm not bothering to cite studies because there are hundreds, and it takes years to understand this stuff. A few studies and 30 minutes of Googling will not give you the ability to teach me anything new. For that matter, even hands-on farming, which I've done plenty of, won't teach you either. You need both, plus an understanding of Moore's Law and related topics, plus years to mull it all over. I do not say any of these things lightly. My usually short posts belie a tremendous wealth of knowledge that none of you who argue with me even really guess at. Perhaps those who sit quietly do indeed guess correctly, but probably not many. It takes a very close reading of my posts to even begin to get an idea, and some things I basically never talk about.
wow, drunk or incredibly arrogant.
You can sneer at the city dwellers, but they outnumber the few folks trying to do things the natural way, and that won't change.
and whats the point - do their numbers make them right?