Blow against bio-dynamics

Agriculture and soil. Pollution control, soil remediation, humus and new agricultural techniques.
Moindreffor
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5830
Registration: 27/05/17, 22:20
Location: boundary between North and Aisne
x 957

Return to posts index Reply Like • Re: Biting Against Biodynamics




by Moindreffor » 08/09/21, 12:03

GuyGadeboisLeRetour wrote:
Did67 wrote:If I wondered why in quotes, it is worse, it seems to me !!! Does that mean he doesn't even think ??? That he "thinks" ???

No, that means that for me, his thinking doesn't make sense. Consider that the delay, let's say the stagnation of conventional agriculture in an "all chemical" model, would be due to (how did he write that, already?) To "organic fundamentalism, the unique thinking of organic, - all or nothing - organic - "seems to me to be totally unwelcome, to remain polite, given that the two types of agriculture are (so far) impervious to the arguments of each other, and that the supporters of the intensive have always considered organic practitioners to be dangerous extremists (at worst) or merry-goers (at best) who could be laughed at. Fortunately this is changing.
It is clearer ?

yes and the "organic" have always treated the conventional polluters, destroyers ... and there you have it, whose fault is it?

when I speak of fundamentalism, it is because the basis of "organic" is the rejection of the sciences and in particular of chemistry, and therefore of synthetic products by ideology and not by awareness of dangers that were not still known, it is not necessary to repeat the history, one sees today the limits of it since in order to be able to develop the "organic" the specifications become lighter, the Bordeaux mixture although synthetic is authorized

on the ground, we see indications arriving, "without nitrates", "without pesticides" reasoned agriculture progresses but in silence since not yet really "labeled" and yes the "organic" was a brake, but this one begins to be up and that's good
0 x
"Those with the biggest ears are not the ones who hear the best"
(of me)
User avatar
GuyGadeboisTheBack
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 14831
Registration: 10/12/20, 20:52
Location: 04
x 4305

Return to posts index Reply Like • Re: Biting Against Biodynamics




by GuyGadeboisTheBack » 08/09/21, 12:19

No. You reverse the problem. And indeed, one only has to look at the quality of the water and the landscapes in certain regions to realize that intensive agriculture and animal husbandry have polluted and destroyed.
1 x
Moindreffor
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5830
Registration: 27/05/17, 22:20
Location: boundary between North and Aisne
x 957

Return to posts index Reply Like • Re: Biting Against Biodynamics




by Moindreffor » 08/09/21, 13:08

GuyGadeboisLeRetour wrote:No. You reverse the problem. And indeed, one only has to look at the quality of the water and the landscapes in certain regions to realize that intensive agriculture and animal husbandry have polluted and destroyed.

yes, but this was not yet the case at the time of the arbitration carried out by the "organic", therefore the "organic" is indeed an ideology against scientific progress, the desertification of the countryside, the abandonment of land, with few means the precursors of "organic" we do "without" by obligation or conviction, by ideology

the current "organic" is not the same thing, the conventional farmer who converts to "organic" does so for an economic model opening up better margins, on his own land, with agricultural equipment, he converts his farm , it does not create a community : Mrgreen:

apply the current criteria of "organic" to that of the beginnings is what I call remaking history, we romance a little, a lot, passionately for some
1 x
"Those with the biggest ears are not the ones who hear the best"
(of me)
User avatar
GuyGadeboisTheBack
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 14831
Registration: 10/12/20, 20:52
Location: 04
x 4305

Return to posts index Reply Like • Re: Biting Against Biodynamics




by GuyGadeboisTheBack » 08/09/21, 13:11

It's all well and good, but before intensive practices, the territory was well meshed, mainly only short circuits existed and chemistry-free was the rule. Everything was shattered for the benefit of "who we know" and to the detriment of all the rest and there was the rural exodus, catastrophic.
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Return to posts index Reply Like • Re: Biting Against Biodynamics




by Janic » 08/09/21, 14:43

smart thinking effort
yes and the "organic" have always treated the conventional polluters, destroyers ... and there you have it, whose fault is it?
and the ignoramus of service who adds and superimposes his bullshit and lies.
The conventional ones in question are not the farmers themselves, casualties of the marketing of poison merchants when the only conventional one happens to be the one that has existed and been passed down from generation to generation for millennia.
when I speak of fundamentalism it is good because the foundation of "organic" is the rejection of science
what an idiot to tell such bullshit. AB is as scientific as the rest with its agricultural engineers or else agronomy is not scientific, it's up to you!
and in particular chemistry, and therefore synthetic products by ideology
Always so false, it is once again the fact of all these ignorant people who have not been "informed" THAT by agrochemicals and its lies, by paying handsomely to spread all these lies.
and not out of awareness of dangers that were not yet known,
what a pathological fool! The use of chemicals existed long before organic farming and their questioning did not come from non-peasant intellectuals, but from farmers and breeders themselves, with no other knowledge than the observation of its effects on the flora. and wildlife, as well as on themselves.
we must not redo history,
Yet this is what you are trying to do as a hypocrite! You don't know anything about it and you do like the other bozo, just as ignorant as you, by acting as if!
we can see the limits today since in order to be able to develop "organic" specifications are lighter, Bordeaux mixture although synthetic is authorized
precisely the narrow-minded minds like you, who parachute with their grave ignorance and who pretend to know! The simplification of the specifications is not due to the will of the BS, but of the authorities to minimize the role of the BS by reducing the quality requirements, to make the official BS of second choice. better for those who got started despite everything and especially who persevered)
on the ground, we see indications arriving, "without nitrates", "without pesticides" reasoned agriculture progresses but in silence since not yet really "labeled" and yes the "organic" was a brake, but this one begins to be lifted and that's good.
and yet customers want organic, not synthetic chemicals.
Yeah by continuing to make the heyday of agrochemicals who alone sings its praises by not completely losing her clients and she has enough cash to be able to do so.
Only farmers, as usual, find themselves stuck between anvil and a hammer. But knowing that the majority of people who supply themselves at low prices and who don't care about quality remain their target, they have a bright future ahead of them and BAC is rubbing their hands. Except that the population, it does not work in their scheme and calls for organic, not half cabbage, half goat, which themselves after their parents and grandparents had to suffer for their health!

GuyGadeboisLeRetour wrote:
No. You reverse the problem. And indeed, one only has to look at the quality of the water and the landscapes in certain regions to realize that intensive agriculture and animal husbandry have polluted and destroyed.
yes, but this was not yet the case at the time of the arbitration carried out by the "organic", therefore the "organic" is indeed an ideology against scientific progress, the desertification of the countryside, the abandonment of land, with few means the precursors of "organic" we do "without" by obligation or conviction, by ideology
And the imbecile who recites by heart and in loop speeches of LAC. There was no arbitration carried out by organic, because real organic refused to do so and as this term is not protected, anyone can appropriate it and recommend it.
The fool of service also ignores the fact that organic farming is well and truly taught in conventional agricultural schools in the same way as for agrochemistry and by "scientists" graduates at all levels from CAP to agronomic engineer at cutting edge agricultural knowledge. Unless for you, agricultural engineer, it is not scientific and answer it, without scrolling like el bozo!
the current "organic" is not the same thing, the conventional farmer who converts to "organic" does so for an economic model opening up better margins, on his own land, with agricultural equipment, he converts his farm , it does not create a community
and he says that with aplomb that of ignorance:
Another major imbecility! Where, when, how, does he convert? Like that with a snap of your fingers? and to whom does it sell its products if not to communities of which it is therefore entirely a part.
Otherwise it's like saying that a sporting goods merchant is not part of the sporting community; he holds a layer of it the bozo bis or ter. For the margins if the ABC paid them better, at their fair price, the margins would be the same, you guy andouille!
apply the current criteria of "organic" to that of the beginnings is what I call remaking history, we romance a little, a lot, passionately for some
If the criteria of the pioneers continued to be applied to this organic farming, less than organic, official therefore second choice, ALL, farmers and consumers would benefit in terms of health and general quality of life.

It goes the spokesperson for agrochemicals, you brought it to those who prefer to eat shit at the lowest possible price (probably few here) at the cost of your usual lies and untruths.
Say thank you to your boss! : Evil:
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
Moindreffor
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5830
Registration: 27/05/17, 22:20
Location: boundary between North and Aisne
x 957

Return to posts index Reply Like • Re: Biting Against Biodynamics




by Moindreffor » 08/09/21, 15:29

GuyGadeboisLeRetour wrote:It's all well and good, but before intensive practices, the territory was well meshed, mainly only short circuits existed and chemistry-free was the rule. Everything was shattered for the benefit of "who we know" and to the detriment of all the rest and there was the rural exodus, catastrophic.

you just forget one thing is that between the two there was an industrial revolution and two world conflicts, then the oil crises which really change things ... with in addition a demographic explosion

and if you talk with those who were active in the 60s and 70s, you will see that they really remember a good time, when all the problems you are talking about did not exist, there was full employment, of good wages, a high purchasing power, and nobody spoke of dangers for the planet and it is well at this time that Janic places the beginning of "organic", therefore not at all the ecological awareness that one wants currently serve us

the rural exodus, was caused by mechanization, and the abandonment of infertile land, as in Ardèche, where precisely the system of mechanized large-scale cultivation and use of chemicals could not apply, hence the collapse of income small farmers in these regions you speak of
1 x
"Those with the biggest ears are not the ones who hear the best"
(of me)
User avatar
GuyGadeboisTheBack
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 14831
Registration: 10/12/20, 20:52
Location: 04
x 4305

Return to posts index Reply Like • Re: Biting Against Biodynamics




by GuyGadeboisTheBack » 08/09/21, 15:57

These farmers sacrificed on the altar of modernity and replanting "fashionable" cereals (spelled, small spelled), who today themselves transform their products which they sell on local markets and who earn more proportionately. than the "big" debtors up to their necks, prisoners of a system that puts them under a drip from the CAP (which costs us more than 110 euros per year to produce shit of which we balance almost 40%)? Yes, your system is beautiful indeed.
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Return to posts index Reply Like • Re: Biting Against Biodynamics




by Janic » 08/09/21, 16:34

Lesser reflection »08/09/21, 15:29
GuyGadeboisLeRetour wrote: It's all very nice, but before intensive practices, the territory was well meshed, mainly only short circuits existed and chemistry-free was the rule. Everything was shattered for the benefit of "who we know" and to the detriment of all the rest and there was the rural exodus, catastrophic.
you just forget one thing is that between the two there was an industrial revolution and two world conflicts, then the oil crises which really change things ... with in addition a demographic explosion

pure and hard fantasy! what has been called the demographic explosion was only the reaction to the war where, as with all wars, parents hesitate or refuse to have children during this period. So you have to carefully compare different situations!
Same thing if there was an industrial revolution, of reconstruction, it is due to the accentuated phenomenon of excessive motorization accelerating production until then limited by the available energy which was water or coal Large production, for the most part, reserved for the well-to-do classes as usual
and if you talk to those who were active in the 60s and 70s, you will see that they really remember a good time, when all the problems you are talking about did not exist,
it was my case, in a professional sector with high demand. But you are in the cultural fantasy. Only a few layers of the population benefited from it, but it didn't last!
there was full employment, good wages, high purchasing power, and no one spoke of dangers to the planet

absolutely wrong! The little listened to whistleblowers date from the end of the 19+ century when the beginnings of what we are seeing today were already appearing. The media and governments in full post-war euphoria should not be confused with the already global situation of industrial and social pollution. Ahmed masters these aspects better than the law.
The 60s / 70s are also those of May 68, expressing already a fed up with never kept promises and an authoritarian state, which cost de Gaulle dearly! And contrary to what is said, the difficulties of finding a job had already started, except in a few sectors, and to find a job (and I was in the Paris region, the high place of employment), and we had to look to find who was willing to employ and not at miraculous salaries, even if above current ones
it's good at that time that Janic places the beginning of "bio", therefore not at all the ecological awareness that we currently want to serve
Absolutely not, organic is booming (limited to those who understood its meaning and urgency) in the 1920s / 30s to say the least,
From 1924 to 1930-35: rapid development of biodynamic agriculture on large estates in Germany, then in Switzerland. The term “Bio-Dynamic” (Agriculture) was created from “Biologique-Dynamique”.
or:
Let us mention among others the work on biodynamic agriculture of Steiner (Germany), that of Howard on organic agriculture (Great Britain) and that of Rusch on organic agriculture (Switzerland).
After developing in Austria, Germany, Switzerland and England from the 20s, organic farming made its appearance in France in the early 50s.

in reality it already exists, but in an unorganized way, among farmers and breeders.
while the 70s only saw more and more points of sale set up, from the countryside to the cities.
the rural exodus, was caused by mechanization, and the abandonment of infertile land, as in Ardèche, where precisely the system of mechanized large-scale cultivation and use of chemicals could not apply, hence the collapse of income small farmers in these regions you speak of
Fun ! it is especially due to a plan "marchal" intended to make disappear the very small farmers of fertile regions and to tear up the hedges limiting the plots in favor of an excessive mechanization, where the big owners monopolized the small plots to arrive at monsters like the plains of Beauce and Brie, the new “American” deserts of France!
About 15 million hectares have been regrouped to date; these successive regroupings affected above all the openfield landscapes and, secondly, the grove landscapes, removing nearly 750 km of hedges. The regions on which land consolidation took place on a large scale were the regions the less rugged as in the north of France or in Brittany. In these areas, the removal of physical obstacles (hedges, ditches, paths) made it possible to make the most of the mechanization of farms.

hence the so-called ecological awareness as in America with the publication of Rachel Carson's Silent Spring

In this shocking book, the renowned biologist denounced the terrible effects of the reckless use of pesticides and other chemicals! This is an investigation of more than twenty years led by Rachel Carson and supported by numerous reports and studies by scientists, a cry of alarm that this woman, already known for her works on the marine world and environmental pollution, decided to launch in due time. Faced with it, the agribusiness lobbies and scientists caught up in this science of chemistry reacted with violence ....
Last edited by Janic the 08 / 09 / 21, 16: 38, 1 edited once.
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
Moindreffor
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5830
Registration: 27/05/17, 22:20
Location: boundary between North and Aisne
x 957

Return to posts index Reply Like • Re: Biting Against Biodynamics




by Moindreffor » 08/09/21, 16:34

GuyGadeboisLeRetour wrote:These farmers sacrificed on the altar of modernity and replanting "fashionable" cereals (spelled, small spelled), who today themselves transform their products which they sell on local markets and who earn more proportionately. than the "big" debtors up to their necks, prisoners of a system that puts them under a drip from the CAP (which costs us more than 110 euros per year to produce shit of which we balance almost 40%)? Yes, your system is beautiful indeed.

it is not my system and I do not defend it, I am only analyzing it, except that in the one that you recommend, you still forget one thing, what feeds humans are not vegetables, but well the cereals you're talking about and that without exchanges between regions, between countries, it no longer works because of demography, the Causse granier à wheat, exports for centuries to other regions, look at the tradition of the 13 desserts, and their composition and look at the desserts of the North, the South is not famous for its cereal crops, so yes we can produce good cereals on small farms on condition of selling it much more expensive and therefore in short circuits by creating a niche economic

for me to replace a system where everything grows under infusion of synthetic fertilizers by a synthesis where everything grows under infusion of natural fertilizers, this is not revolutionary, it is to hide the face

after some producers let themselves be locked away by stupidity or by fantasy of profits, it is their problems, but if I look in my town, an operator installed 600m2 solar panels on his barns, another is content to work as his father did, no change, the problem is that currently with the soaring price of cereals, the one who does better lives very well, but the one who does not does nothing, which does not evolve, which remains in the pure and hard conventional, lives without problem, so why change ... why would you want a guy to break his ass to work more? to save the planet? let me laugh

if everyone had an ecological conscience, trains would be crowded and roads deserted, town centers would be pedestrianized and we would only sell "bio", we would all buy our electricity 30% more expensive to turn our backs on nuclear power

I too would like a healthier planet, and for me 6,5% of "organic" is too little, even negligible, I would prefer 80% of reasoned, except that for the moment we want "organic", "organic" and more "organic", Janic tells us that it takes time, but do we still have time to wait after the "organic", shouldn't we finally understand better than we can do if not better, less worse by being less fundamentalist
0 x
"Those with the biggest ears are not the ones who hear the best"
(of me)
User avatar
GuyGadeboisTheBack
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 14831
Registration: 10/12/20, 20:52
Location: 04
x 4305

Return to posts index Reply Like • Re: Biting Against Biodynamics




by GuyGadeboisTheBack » 08/09/21, 16:49

Moindreffor wrote:for me to replace a system where everything grows under infusion of synthetic fertilizers by a synthesis where everything grows under infusion of natural fertilizers, this is not revolutionary, it is to hide the face

: Shock: :?: :?: :?:
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Agriculture: problems and pollution, new techniques and solutions"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 328 guests