⚠️ This forum has been restored as a read-only archive so the knowledge shared by the community over many years remains available. New registrations and posting are disabled.

All times are UTC + 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 360 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 24  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: The Future of our Food
PostPosted: Dec 17th, '08, 12:37 
Legend Member
Legend Member

Joined: Apr 17th, '08, 02:47
Posts: 601
Location: Tulare County, California, U.S.A
Gender: Female
Anybody hungry? I almost gagged when I read this- so I should share.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,353422,00.html
Quote-Science is closer than you may think to some radical solutions, though.

Researchers are hard at work on animal-free meat. Scientists, such as Henk Haagsman, a professor of meat science at Utrecht University in the Netherlands, are growing synthetic meat with the help of animal stem cells.

When fed with glucose, amino acids, minerals and growth factors, the stem cells can grow into muscle tissue, which the researchers say tastes a lot like ground meat.

Though it may sound far-fetched, proponents of so-called cultivated meat say this could be a key to solving world hunger problems. -Unquote


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
    Advertisement
 
PostPosted: Dec 17th, '08, 13:43 
Almost divorced
Almost divorced
User avatar

Joined: Oct 17th, '07, 12:03
Posts: 1495
Location: Sonoma
Gender: Male
Are you human?: Y: I have affadavit
Location: Sonoma, California, USA
Angie,

I think the viceral "YUK factor" is all a matter of what we are used to. I have "issues" when I drive past the Harris Ranch feedlot on I5 (see link below: you can even zoom in to see the beasts somewhat). I go off beef for at least a month whenever we drive that route. I tried to capture the experience of the place, of the first scent striking one ten miles away, of the golden sunset mist of ammonia filling the valley as one descends, of the multitude of cows/steers appearing through the mist, of the seemingly endless parade of feedlots and troughs and animals, and of the final escape to sunshine and clear sky and fresh air, and the feeling that something filthy has stayed with you, but have never been able to do so.

Anyway, if it is identical or better in nutrients and less damaging to the world I would prefer that people eat cultured meat than factory farm critters...can't be worse than what goes into sausages anyway.. On the other hand, I think it would be best for our health, the earth, the critters, and whatever souls we possess to limit our meat consumption to what we are willing to raise, kill, and butcher ourselves. Give those critters that (unwillingly) give their lives to us a little respect and thanks. Not easy to do that when we only meet them as neat anonymous little plastic-wrapped packages.

Sorry if I'm going off topic.... :oops: But an interesting topic with lots of facets..."yuk", nutrition, morality, environmental factors, and probably more.

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&saddr=95476&daddr=%2B36%B0+18%27+20.96%22,+-120%B0+16%27+9.20%22+(36.305823,+-120.269222)&hl=en&geocode=%3BFZ77KQIdWtbU-A&mra=ls&sll=38.383786,-122.816849&sspn=0.045347,0.076561&ie=UTF8&ll=36.300324,-120.271454&spn=0.046623,0.076561&t=h&z=14%3E


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Dec 17th, '08, 14:56 
Legend Member
Legend Member

Joined: Apr 17th, '08, 02:47
Posts: 601
Location: Tulare County, California, U.S.A
Gender: Female
I know what you mean when you say "I have "issues" when I drive past the Harris Ranch feedlot on I5". You forget I live in California too and when traveling that way, you can smell them miles away but unfortunately, I also live right smack in the middle of Dairy Land, U.S.A. Forget Wisconsin- we beat them a long time ago in the volume of dairy cows that live here. Every time I see one of those "Happy Cows" commercials, I want to sue for false advertising. Most dairies smell just like the Harris Ranch feedlot and they are walking in SH*T so deep, they have to walk unnaturally.

http://www.cfra.org/blog/2008/09/03/ins ... airy-style
California has a lot of dairy cows too. According to the California Department of Agriculture, in 2007 there were over 1.8 million dairy cows in 1,960 dairies in California making the Golden State the largest producer of milk in the country. Wisconsin can only boast about 1.25 million dairy cows… on 14,170 farms. Just to help with the math, all this comes to 925 cows per dairy in California and 88 cows per farm in Wisconsin.

http://www.visaliatimesdelta.com/apps/p ... /702120302
In Tulare County, the nation's No. 1 dairy county, there are more than 300 dairies operating. The value of the county's dairy crop in 2005 was a whopping $1.4 billion.

http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/vi ... a7b1b88584
The Environmental Protection Agency says a 1,000-cow dairy generates 120,000 pounds of manure per day, equivalent to the sewage output of a city with a population of 20,000 people.
“These farms often mix manure and irrigated water to fertilize additional crops,” UC Davis hydrology professor Thomas Harter said at last week’s meeting. “We have found that there is a large risk that manure nutrients will exceed what a crop can contain and will seep down into the ground water. Depending on where the ground water flows, this could affect lots of nearby communities."
The California Air Resources Board said more than 1,200 premature deaths each year in the Valley are caused by long-term exposure to gases formed from ammonia. Dairies are cited as emitting 185 million pounds of ammonia each year.

Care for a glass of milk?

This is not including the largest Orange crop- not Florida- and walnuts too. We also have stone fruits, almonds, grapes and a wide variety of other crops, even blueberries- with all the pesticides all summer long, the humidity with 100+ degree weather and the dust when harvesting and the above mentioned aromas. Welcome to Industrial Agriculture on steroids- we aren't the No. 1/No. 2 county in the U.S. for nothing. I've always wanted to farm but seeing what looked like detergent soap bubbles draining from a field (turned out to be excess nitrates-fertilizer), I wanted to do things differently than what I've seen- brought me to here.

Problem is that I see in the not-to-distant future, all of our food will be GM, irradiated and corporate grown here in the U.S. The farm raids mentioned in "Food Grown Underground" forum is just the start. The USDA is pushing for NAIS but the small farmers back lashed because it would push them out of business and it violates our Constitutional right to privacy so they made it "voluntary". Problem is they're dangling $$$ in front of the states and the states are modifing their laws to make NAIS mandatory. If you think this doesn't impact us, think again- farmed fish are also on the later lists.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Dec 17th, '08, 22:14 
Almost divorced
Almost divorced

Joined: Dec 9th, '06, 20:31
Posts: 1079
Location: Drongen, Belgium
Gender: Male
Location: Drongen, Belgium
hydrophilia wrote:
I think it would be best for our health, the earth, the critters, and whatever souls we possess to limit our meat consumption to what we are willing to raise, kill, and butcher ourselves.

+5
that would surely diminish consumption
we are too used to letting others do our "dirty work"

frank


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Dec 17th, '08, 23:45 
Almost divorced
Almost divorced
User avatar

Joined: Apr 6th, '07, 19:29
Posts: 1213
Location: SOUTH AFRICA
Gender: Female
Are you human?: yes
Location: Hartbeespoort. SOUTH AFRICA
Interesting article on Fox News site Angie.

This caught my attention............
Quote:
By breeding staple crops such as wheat, rice, maize, and soy to be more pest- and weed-resistant, more nutrient-rich and high-yielding, they hope to offer more nutrition per acre of farmed land.
Science can also provide new tools to increase crop production, such as an optical sensor to scan crops in order to customize fertilizer to plants' needs.

I think commercial agriculture has quite resoundingly failed to understand the complexity of what makes for true plant health to date. Fertilizing with man-made chemicals is not the way to maximise nutrition.

I watched a very interesting documentary on a local organic farmer here(Hennie).....and have kept the transcript. This part was of particular interest to me....

Quote:
Hennie Ecksteen (Organic farmer): 'The food crisis could be expected because of the high input cost [and] we lost - well the last couple of years, I would say - at least 60 percent of our farmers. It's happening everywhere in the world that the farmers become less and less because of economics, and so [there's] less farmers available - to produce more.'

The problem is compounded by the fact that large tracts of commercial farmland [are] being swallowed up for game farming and bio-fuel production.

Hennie: 'And, on top of that, with the chemicals and the agrochemicals you produce an inferior type of vegetable as well. You know, [there's] figures that fifty years ago you could eat a portion of cabbage. To get the same nutritional value now, you'd have to eat a whole cabbage.'

Experts agree there is forty to eighty percent loss of nutrition in commercially grown crops.

Hennie: 'So it's not just a case of unavailability of vegetables, it's also the nutritional value of the vegetables that is deteriorating.'


For these reasons Hennie has transformed into a crusader for organic farming. He was first introduced to the concept 14 years ago while working as an engineer, designing earthworm bins for waste management. Since then - you might say - he's acquired a taste for them.

Hennie : 'You can't see the dorsal parts, but by that time they've cleaned out all the poison [Hennie on screen eating earthworm], so you can have them.'

Bonita: 'Hennie, doesn't it bother you that you're eating a worm that's just been in cow dung?'

Hennie: 'No, it doesn't at all because they've cleaned out all the pathogens.'

Hennie's right. Earthworms play a vital role in cleansing even the most toxic environments.

Hennie: '[The] starting point for them was Chernobyl, because they [find] after Chernobyl that earthworms can clear up even nuclear waste in farmland.'

With around 8 000 scientists studying earthworms in Russia, Hennie was honoured when he was invited to deliver two papers on earthworm farming.

But earthworms are equally at home in Chernobyl as they are in the glamorous Mount Nelson hotel [in Cape Town]. Last year Mary Murphy introduced us to these unusual hotel guests who devour a tonne of organic waste every month and transform it into liquid gold that keeps the hotel gardens blooming.

[Carte Blanche October 2007] Mary Murphy (Conservationist): 'The earthworms know what the plants need and what they like and they present it in such a way that the plants can take it up ten times more efficiently than any other compost you can think of.'

With our global food catastrophe growing, disease-free crops [aren't] just for farmers. More and more people are being forced to trade-in their flower gardens for vegetable patches.

Hennie: 'Even if they just grow their salad crops. A lettuce - because it needs very little water - grows quite fast; six weeks from transplanting to reaping. So it's quite a quick crop and you have fresh, healthy vegetables all the time.'

Bonita: 'Hennie, would we be able to do any of this without the Vermicomposting?'

Hennie: 'I doubt it very much because the Vermicomposting has two sides: the one is, you get rid of organic waste, you get rid of disease, pathogens, anything in the waste; and on the second thing, you need such a little bit and it reconditions the soil - that's the word - you only need, like, an inoculation in your soil of micro-organisms and from there, by keeping mouths and feeding them, you build up your soil again to a level where it's fertile and you can grow good crops.'

Although earthworms are the backbone of organic farming, Hennie also uses mulching and 'no-till' methods. And he never uses any chemicals on his crops.

Hennie: 'Everybody asks me, 'What do you use for aphids?' 'What do you use for lupin caterpillar?' 'What do you use for white-fly?' And I say, 'I don't know,' 'cos I never have them.'

Bonita: 'You've never used any pesticides?'

Hennie: 'I don't use not even organic pesticides.'


Bonita: 'After farming disease-free crops for 11 years, Hennie knew what was working, but didn't know why - until he came across the researcher, French botanist, Francis Chaboussou.'

Hennie: 'Any plant has the ability to be disease-free, the process is called 'trophobiosis', and what it really means is that for a plant when it's imbalanced - in other words it hasn't got the ability to balance its own nutrients - it wants to destroy itself. And the only way a plant can destroy itself is literally by providing a pest or an insect with the necessary nutrients it needs.'

Bonita: 'So the plant will then almost malfunction?'

Hennie: 'It will malfunction, that's right.'

Francis Chaboussou made some startling findings, which contradict popular thinking on farming. His research uncovered that water-soluble chemicals found in the soil or the plant will ultimately attract disease and insects.

Hennie: 'In a normal plant the process is photosynthesis: carbohydrates or sugars are produced, stored in the root zone as energy, the root zones excrete amino acids and that feeds micro-organisms in the soil.'

Trophobiosis is essentially plant suicide. The toxic cocktail applied to the plant in the form of a water-soluble chemical is absorbed through the root system, and excreted on the leaves as amino acids in a protein form, providing an instant meal for insects.

Hennie: 'A lot of these smaller insects, like your aphids and red spider mites, haven't got enzymes to break down food - they wait for the plant to produce the specific protein for their specific needs.'

Bonita: 'How would the insects know that the plant has excreted these amino acids for it?'

Hennie: 'This we don't know, but it literally attracts [insects] over kilometers.'

Bonita: 'It's been described as a revolution in plant pathology and a mortal blow to the agro-chemistry industry. Francis Chaboussou put it bluntly: the more poisons we apply, the more diseases and pests we get.'

Scientific discoveries like these have certainly inspired conventional farmers to cross over to the organic way of thinking. Henry Milner, a Nelspruit granadilla and macadamia nut farmer, attended one of Hennie's courses.

Henry Milner (Organic farmer): I wasn't very impressed with it because I had already started farming and I have my ways - which my father taught me, and my grandfather taught me. Then I said, 'Well, let's just go. Let's go and take a look'.'

So he decided to put the theories to the test.

Henry: 'I got some worms and started making Vermicompost. So, I decided to take one block of trees and do it organically.'

Bonita: 'Was there anything that really startled you, or was surprising to you, about the macadamia nuts?'

Henry: 'What struck me as different was that the nuts began to bloom very quickly. At a very young stage the trees were healthy, and we were harvesting nuts sooner.'

He's reaped the benefits in his granadilla crop too.

Henry: 'With the granadillas I had a much bigger harvest per hectare. The fruit was much better. My first grades were very, very nice and more plentiful than the conventional chemical farmer.'

Henry harvested the same tonnage of granadillas on six hectares as his neighbour did, using conventional toxic methods, on a staggering 20 hectares. That's three times as much. Organic farming clearly allows farmers to yield more crops on smaller tracts of land. The only negative for established farmers is the cost of switching.

Henry: 'If you start off farming organically from the beginning then it's not expensive, because you build up a good soil structure, and it's much cheaper.'

Bonita: 'So Hennie, if this method is so good, then why are so many conventional farmers still using pesticides?'

Hennie: 'You can't blame them because there is so much money spent by these agro-chemical companies promoting their products.'

Bonita: 'So it's actually just a money trap?'

Hennie: 'It is the money trap. Unfortunately it gets worse and worse [that] you will find also that the chemical people not only stay in chemicals, they go into the seed trade because they want to monopolise the whole agri-trade. So the farmer is caught - he has to depend one hundred percent on them. That trap - they can't get out of it.'

Left in the bit about him eating the earthworm especially for you Angie! :D I will never forget watching him do it!!!! :shock: But he did make his point LOL. I wonder what the protein content of an earthworm is..... :roll: :D

I think we already have the right answers to more nutritional plants.... just how will big business reap the benefits?... short answer.... not at all......So no one hears of Francis Chaboussou and his wonderful research. I tend to see this as where we should be headed.
Quote:
Trophobiosis Theory:
A Pest Starves on a Healthy Plant
By John Paull
Fenner School of Environment & Society, Australian National University, Canberra
Pests shun healthy plants. Pesticides weaken plants. Weakened plants open the door to pests and disease. Hence pesticides precipitate pest attack and disease susceptibility, and thus they induce a cycle of further pesticide use.
This is the essence of Trophobiosis Theory, a thesis presented by Francis Chaboussou, an agronomist of the France’s National Institute of Agricultural Research (INRA), in “Healthy Crops: A New Agricultural Revolution”. After two decades, this important book is finally available in English.


Trophobiosis has been characterised by the former Minister for the Environment in Brazil, Jose Lutzenberger, as: “a pest starves on a healthy plant” (1995). It is “a revolution in plant pathology and is a mortal blow to agrochemistry as commonly practised in modern agriculture” (Lutzenberger, 2000, p. 2). He laments that:“Chaboussou is still unknown to most workers in agriculture, even in organic agriculture” (2000, p. 2). Lutzenberger puts the case bluntly: “the more poisons we apply, the more diseases and pests we get” (p. 3). It is certainly the case that agribusiness continues its focus, not on the health of the crop, but rather on the demise of the pest, and so continues to develop novel pesticides, genetically modified organisms that produce pesticides or can withstand heavy pesticide dosages, and most recently the coupling of nanotechnology and pesticides.

Lutzenberger writes that: “I knew that pests shunned healthy plants, as most observant organic farmers knew. But I didn’t know how and why. Chaboussou was a revelation to me … I dare say that Chaboussou’s work is the most important discovery in agricultural chemistry since Liebig” (p. 5).

If Chaboussou is correct then the premises of the so-called green revolution are false. There is the common experience that pesticides used on crops lose their efficacy after so many applications, the pests return and the pesticide dose, or the frequency of application needs to be stepped up, and/or new pesticides need to be introduced into the spraying regime. The green revolution explanation of this is that the pest develops resistance. Chaboussou’s explanation is that the plants are weakened, and progressively more so, as they are repeatedly assaulted by this chemical warfare. Because they are progressively weakened ever more chemical intervention is required - hence the pesticide treadmill experienced in chemical farming. Chaboussou’s alternative approach is to focus on the health of the crop. According to Chaboussou “we need to overcome the idea of ‘a battle’; that is we must not try to annihilate the parasite with toxins that have been shown to have harmful effects on the plant, yielding the opposite effect to the one desired. We need, instead, to stimulate resistance by dissuading the parasite from attacking. This implies a revolution in attitude, followed by a complete change in the nature of research” (p. 209). ……………

Rest of the pdf here…. : http://orgprints.org/12894/01/12894.pdf


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Dec 18th, '08, 17:40 
Seriously, this cant be healthy.
Seriously, this cant be healthy.
User avatar

Joined: Oct 11th, '07, 19:43
Posts: 6687
Gender: Male
Are you human?: Not at 3 am :(
Location: Kalgoorlie
hygicell wrote:
hydrophilia wrote:
I think it would be best for our health, the earth, the critters, and whatever souls we possess to limit our meat consumption to what we are willing to raise, kill, and butcher ourselves.

+5
that would surely diminish consumption
we are too used to letting others do our "dirty work"

frank


We would all need a couple of acres of land each - thats a lot of forests.

Worms are around 15-20% protein i think :D


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Dec 19th, '08, 22:58 
A posting God
A posting God
User avatar

Joined: Sep 4th, '07, 04:16
Posts: 2475
Location: Texas
Gender: Male
Are you human?: YES
Location: Texas 75703
One small breed calf can be grown in a small pen and fed only hay.

Standard cow breeds can not produce marbled and good tasting meat on grass alone because of the way they have been breed.

Hay cost about $20 a month if you get the cheaper large rolls.

It cost between $200 to $500 to have it slaughtered.

The small breed cow like the dexter will not grow larger than 800 pounds.

You can expect 60% to 65% of the weight to come back as meat.

So hay $340 plus $350 is $690
If you have to buy a registered calf each year it would cost $800 bringing the total to $1490. At a minimum if 400 pounds of meat the cost comes to $3.75 per pound for grass fed beef.

It would require 2 calfs, one each year giving each two years to grow.

Kept in a very small pen, would require poop scooping and deworming. Its doable and quality of meat is so far above store bought meet that its hard to draw a comparison. There is also the added benefit of having lots of cow poo to make compost/Vermicompost for the dirt garden or methane or grow soldier flies.. However, the soldier flies stink when feeding them cow poo only; they do love it though and its easy to produce 14 to 20 pounds of BSF every month using the poo from a single cow.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Dec 20th, '08, 06:50 
A posting God
A posting God
User avatar

Joined: Jul 1st, '08, 11:03
Posts: 3690
Gender: None specified
Location: Australia NSW
2 cow would mean I'd end up with 2 more animals I can't eat. :lol: Like the idea of manure makers for the garden. And the BSF part would be great for the chickens(pets) and the fish(also pets). On a side note. Is being a vegan hard. :mrgreen:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Dec 21st, '08, 09:29 
Almost divorced
Almost divorced
User avatar

Joined: Oct 17th, '07, 12:03
Posts: 1495
Location: Sonoma
Gender: Male
Are you human?: Y: I have affadavit
Location: Sonoma, California, USA
Dufflight wrote:
2 cow would mean I'd end up with 2 more animals I can't eat. :lol: Like the idea of manure makers for the garden. And the BSF part would be great for the chickens(pets) and the fish(also pets). On a side note. Is being a vegan hard. :mrgreen:


"It's not easy being green"? *grin*


OutbackOzzie:
With AP or some more advanced multi-trophic agriculture we might be able to grow all our stuff on a much smaller footprint than 2 acres. Plus, I'm not saying we need to raise all our veges and animal feed, just the critters.

But, having said that, it would be darned good to raise enough plants to use the nitrogen waste from the animals rather than let it end as a pollutant.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Dec 21st, '08, 10:51 
Bordering on Legend
Bordering on Legend
User avatar

Joined: Feb 19th, '08, 14:00
Posts: 409
Location: Wide Bay, QLD
Gender: Male
It is one thing to work out costs on $ you spend, quite another to work on actual costs to the environment etc.

Cows/meat are one of the most inefficient ways we consume protein. The hay the cow eats grows somewhere, that somewhere would be better utilised growing something else...

Fish are much better :cheers:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Dec 21st, '08, 11:46 
Seriously, this cant be healthy.
Seriously, this cant be healthy.
User avatar

Joined: Nov 13th, '07, 06:23
Posts: 5315
Location: Bundoora, Melbourne
Gender: Male
Are you human?: somewhat
Location: Victoria, Australia
But steak is SO much nicer ;-) Yumm
Cows we grow have been bred too big... lower fat:meat yield ration per animal.
Need to go back to the little uns like Dexters or Murray Grays.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Dec 21st, '08, 11:55 
Almost divorced
Almost divorced
User avatar

Joined: Apr 20th, '08, 12:07
Posts: 1409
Location: Baton Rouge Louisiana. USA
Gender: Male
Are you human?: Take me to ya leader
Location: USA, Louisiana, Baton Rouge, Gonzales.
Varity is the spice of life! I have full respect for all the veggie and fishy people but there aren’t many creatures that aren’t good over rice. While all the big city people eat a lot of beef I eat venison. Deer are browsers and choose the finest greens the natural woods have to offer. So many people want to live in big cities and drive whatever and do not even have room for a potted plant or a hamster, But still consume x lbs of beef, dairy, grains, greens, fish, etc. Big cities kind of make those farm factories necessary. And then there is all the waste from the Big cities that get treated with chemicals and dumped into the Oceans along with all the pharmaceuticals that are getting in high enough levels to detect in the oceans fisheries. So then they get vocal (while not actually doing anything that will make much difference themselves) and lobby the governments to set aside forest land. Which then are left unmanaged and burn wild and fill the atmosphere with pollution and co2. It’s not just the cows or the cow farmers that needs to spread out to let nature’s bio workers clean up the waste, it’s the people who do not ever get their hands “dirty that also need to spread out. There were once millions of bison roaming the plains. I would much rather a buffo burger than Petri patties YUK!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Dec 21st, '08, 13:14 
Xtreme Contributor
Xtreme Contributor
User avatar

Joined: Aug 6th, '08, 05:14
Posts: 106
Location: Cantonment, FL
Gender: Male
Are you human?: Partially
Location: USA, Florida, Cantonment
Why all the concentration on cattle? If its meat protien how about rabbits, chickens, goats.

I mean with cattle you get:
Tallow- soap, candles, salves, etc.
Leather- shoes, clothes, etc.
Manure (while alive)- compost, fertilzer, etc.
Milk (if dairy cattle)- Milk,butter, yogert, cheese, etc.
Meat

Pygmie Goats (or other varieties...lower maintenance):
Milk
Leather
Meat
Manure

Rabbits (small, breed rapidly, very high in protien)
Fur (for bikinis of course)
Meat
Manure

Chickens (smaller and fairly easy to care for.):
Eggs
Meat
Feathers (if you're into bolas)
Manure

Pot Bellied Pigs (or other small varieties):
Meat
Hides
Lard

Fish (aquaponics raised):
flesh protien
Omega 3 oil
Nitrate/solids

And of course you get really weird and raise bugs and worms though most often these people wind up in a loony bin... or hosting a Travel Channel show.

Also, if you are going to grocery store (as I do) to buy your processed meats and "vine ripened" veggies then I think we can only complain so much. Stick it to the man and grow your own, as you can of course.

Anyway, as AP people look at AP as a cyclic system, so to fill our basic needs we should look at it the same way (see my diagram). My two cents anyway.

Tony


Attachments:
File comment: Here's a system I've been working on for a few years. I call it intracyclic dynamics.
intra_cyclic_diagram1-medium.JPG
intra_cyclic_diagram1-medium.JPG [ 46.74 KiB | Viewed 4037 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Dec 21st, '08, 17:57 
Almost divorced
Almost divorced

Joined: Dec 9th, '06, 20:31
Posts: 1079
Location: Drongen, Belgium
Gender: Male
Location: Drongen, Belgium
impressive diagram, Tony

«Rien ne se perd, rien ne se crée, tout se transforme » (Anaxagoras of Clazomènes, incorrectly attibuted to Lavoisier).
nothing is lost, nothing is created, everything is transformed

the only inflow from the exterior is the energy of the sun
a huge amount of it is present on earth from previous accumulation, but it is transformed into vegetables, animals, oil ...
... and into humans.

every living species on earth tries to convert this energy into it's own form:
plants into vegetable matter, animals into animal protein, humans into human protein
and here the "survival of the fittest" comes into play:
if we continue the way we do now, eventually all energy on earth will be transformed into human protein
as we humans (so far) are the fittest and, worse, the smartest

and the remaining human protein will be of the worst kind:
the greedy and selfish will survive
those that will not hesitate to eat their fellow men (as that will be the only thing left)
there are already many examples of this in society

and overpopulated islands have been known to turn to cannibalism

as for eating venison: that is a good example:
big cities are not the problem, it is overpopulation (by humans)
spread the population of the big cities over the country, and there will soon be no venison

it is a terrible conclusion:
the only way to control things and reestablish balance is to limit population

some say this will done by nature (and there are some signs -i.e diminishing fertility- that this is correct)
and I believe it will

but still the remainder will be humans of the worst kind
as they will ensure they have access to the best food

I wonder if this is reversible


...hmmm...

maybe a breeding program for altruists? (like me :geek: :geek: :geek: )

frank


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Dec 21st, '08, 22:29 
Xtreme Contributor
Xtreme Contributor
User avatar

Joined: Aug 6th, '08, 05:14
Posts: 106
Location: Cantonment, FL
Gender: Male
Are you human?: Partially
Location: USA, Florida, Cantonment
Frank,
Interesting thoughts.

From another perception, man seems to desire to live as a slave to the rule of entropy, while calling it "advancement" and "progress"... spinning to the positive. Knowledge is the quest but without applying wisdom we are doomed.

Our quest for knowledge, money... power,power over people and things has lead us to creating and moving into large cities which while good for...well, I'm sure they are good for something... convenience maybe, they also breed the kinds of things- and people -that SEEM very concerned about their lifestyle and less concerned about everything outside their city. They buy the meat and vegies from the grocier but care little about how what went into it (nuture, chemicals & carbon foot print) it got there.

Technology has becme a god (the knowledge - wisdom thing) and we bow to it for our success and comfort. For instance, we have so developed our health standards that we have disconnected death from life. Death, though never actually welcomed, was understood to be inextricably linked to life. Now, it is something to run from; to fear, though inevitable.

Some have even segregated "humans" (the human species) from the ecosystem, as though we are some alien race who is not part of the nature of things. We are part but we are crazed, not in our right mind. I believe that God has built in "natural" consequences to an out of control species- we see manmade consequences- sickness, cancers (though not fully manmade), weakening of the species through the onslaught of chemical and radio wave pollution. And the the "natural" consequences of flu, plague, etc.

It occurred to me that I should back up for a second and say that though when use the term "species" I in know way want to come across as considering man as just another animal, I do not. It is special, and more a disappointment to the Father.

Of course the problem is man's heart- the place where greed and such live and breed. Man needs to take responisibility for his actions, unfortunately we all know how that goes. This must be "cured" before other steps will work.

Just my ramblings.

Tony


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 360 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 24  Next

All times are UTC + 8 hours


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Portal by phpBB3 Portal © phpBB Türkiye
[ Time : 0.210s | 16 Queries | GZIP : Off ]