From: de5@ORNL.GOV (Dave Sill)
Subject: Re: GP wants you, was Re: government organic food purchas
Organization: Oak Ridge National Lab, Oak Ridge, TN
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 18:49:09 GMT

In article <-1363838459snx@Gilsys.DIALix.oz.au>, gil@Gilsys.DIALix.oz.au (Gil Hardwick) writes:
>
>Dave, the attacks made here have been specifically by those promoting
>organic growing against those they perceive to be fighting to retain
>the capitalist monoculture designed by evil chemical corporations
>and bankers to exploit farmers and pollute the world to their own
>neferious ends.

There's nothing nefarious about maximizing the bottom line.  Whether or not
an active conspiracy is in place or it's merely coincidental, proponents of
organic/sustainable techniques do have to fight the mechanisms in place that
favor the currently accepted practices.

>There is no such conspiracy, and perhaps such wholly
>paranoid promoters of singular alternatives might just relax a little
>so we can all begin working together to sort out some of the problems
>involved with feeding people.

There is nothing "singular" about organic farming.  It's a compilation of
mostly commonsense practices--not magic, not rocket science.

>I too am here for the duration. If I have a comment to make, I will
>make it without anticipating that some hysteric will want to be
>attacking me and bogging the discussion down in political hype and
>semantics.

Good for you.  I certainly wouldn't want to exclude folks simply because they
don't agree with me.  People who want to can easily ignore those they would
banish.

> > >I admit, organic is one of those ways, but it doesn't even come close to
> > >meeting the requirement of a hungry world.
> >  
> > Why not?
>
>The question is not concerned with *why*, but *how*. Perhaps you can
>enlighten us a little on what you have to say on the matter instead of
>carrying on with this crap.

There's really no need to be rude.  When someone makes a sweeping
generalization like "X won't work", the burden of proof is on them if they want
to convince people they're right.  It's not my job to prove or disprove every
assertion that someone makes.

I honestly believe organic practices are widely applicable today, and could
eventually totally replace the current methods.  But that's just my belief. 
I'm not stating it as a fact, and I'm not prepared to "prove" it.  I don't even
suggest that people take my word for it.  Read up on and experiment with
organic techniques and compare them with the agrichemical method and decide for
yourself.

> > I have concerns about genetic engineering, reliance upon hybrids, and the use
> > of monocultures, but that's a can of worms of another color.
>
>Is it indeed?

Yes, it's a different topic that I'll be happy to discuss in another thread. 
For now, we're talking about organic farming.

>Perhaps here again you can edify us with some reliable
>information we can independently and impartially assess for ourselves.

I doubt it.  I said I have concerns, not facts, research, or proof.

> > Perhaps because they're unproven, unsustainable, or contrary to our beliefs.
>
>Well yes; "contrary to your beliefs" sounds much closer to what you are
>grinding your molars over than any sort of reality.

It's amazing that you can speak for me like that, considering how little you
know about me.  But I was trying to explain why others familiar with those
techniques might not have brought them up, not why *I* didn't bring them up.

>The problem is in supplying sufficient energy and nutrients to those
>crops that they will produce food in sufficient abundance to feed the
>massive plague of *homo sapiens sapiens* (some irony!) now on the face
>of the earth, yes?

With the caveat of sustainability, yes.

> > >Perhaps it's because you didn't know about them...
> >  
> > Maybe, maybe not.
>
>Do you, or do you not?

I assumed the "you" to whom Don was referring was the person whose article he
was following up--not me.  I can't speak for the entire readership of this
group, but I think it's entirely possible that there are people here who don't
know about all of these techniques, or who do but don't consider them
appropriate for one reason or another.  That's all I'm trying to say.

To answer your question, I'm aware of these methods, more or less, and consider
them either already part of the organic bag of tricks or not appropriate/
sustainable.

>Please do offer whatever material you do have
>to the forum, so we can assess it for ourselves. Or are you in fact
>merely another programmer with access to a specialist forum solely
>through your assignment to maintaining computer workstations linked to
>the Internet, with nothing much worth our wasting time and energy over
>anyway?

How totally offensive to characterize another person as a waste of time simply
because they don't have adequate credentials.  I encourage you to consider what
people say and evaluate it on its merits rather than ignoring them because of
their lack of formal training on a particular topic.

>Please do offer some other reason. Please respect our intelligence and
>show us what you have to offer which might be implemented in practice.

How dare you request that I respect your intelligence when I have consistently
done so in the face of ad hominem attacks by you and your friend Don?

Read anything by Eliot Coleman, for example, to see how organic farming can be
implemented in practice.  I don't have time to teach you, teach yourself.

-- 
Dave Sill (de5@ornl.gov)                 Computers should work the way beginners
Martin Marietta Energy Systems           expect them to, and one day they will.
Workstation Support                                                -- Ted Nelson