"Annual agriculture is all about living through our concepts... our idea we've imposed on reality & when reality doesn't behave according to our idea, what do we do? We input... we can never input enough to make our false concept correct." @RestorationAgD http://bit.ly/1GnbtAA
The appendix is where all the backup biotics for the gut are stored. Not sure we want to be nuking it with antibiotics nor removing it because the surgeon is late for his tee time.
It doesn't hurt to be nice and civil, but it also seems like Torvalds caved into Guilt By Association and Equivocation fallacies. If someone confuses Torvalds with "white cis male privilege" nationalist nazi, then it says more about that someone than about Torvalds.
Wittgenstein’s Ruler (@joyousandswift’s Maxim): "Most of the time, people’s observations about something else reveal more about the observer than what’s being observed." http://bit.ly/2KYABXT
"Name one ecosystem that is better off for having agriculture moved into it?" Toby Hemenway http://bit.ly/1pnapoW
"[Civilization] is all about living through our concepts... our idea we've imposed on reality & when reality doesn't behave according to our idea, what do we do? We input... we can never input enough to make our false concept correct." http://bit.ly/1GnbtAA
"Fat: people do not get fat by eating it, they get fat by not being able to burn it. And, that is 100% controlled by hormones, leptin & insulin." @DrRosedale http://bit.ly/2h0Xmg1
"...the mobilization of fat from adipose tissue is inhibited by numerous stimuli. The most significant inhibition is that exerted upon adenylate cyclase by insulin." @medicalbiochem http://bit.ly/2LiPkNE
"The underlying theme of the glucose-fatty acid cycle is that the utilization of one nutrient (e.g. glucose) directly inhibits the use of the other (in this case fatty acids) without hormonal mediation." @medicalbiochem http://bit.ly/2v2lq54
No desserts. No sweets. No potatoes. No rice. No bread. No pasta. âoeWhen I say âno,â(TM) I mean âno, or not much,â(TM)â she notes... Kenyon, professor of biochemistry and biophysics at the UCSF, has been on her diet for two-and-a-half years. âoeI did it because we fed our worms glucose and it shortened their lifespan.â
Of course. It's much easier to mislead the ignorant with flummery.
The ignorant can assess that on their own, can't they? If you're advocating for faith based propositions, you should consider the ones that have stood the test of time.
I couldn't have said it better. Plants/trees are the thing that do it so well and have other benefits. Still, any hope for a useful tool is a good thing.
Yeah, no need to outsmart Nature.
"Ecology... Nature is only model we have that has survived climate change with sheer, total, utter neglect..." @RestorationAgD http://bit.ly/1ohVqpE
The only way to use trees is to cut them and store them underground...
The "only" way? Not creative nor thinker, huh?
Abundance of Ohio River Valley during Jefferson administration http://bit.ly/1cbC2uU
"Annual agriculture is all about living through our concepts... our idea we've imposed on reality & when reality doesn't behave according to our idea, what do we do? We input... we can never input enough to make our false concept correct." http://bit.ly/1GnbtAA
I don't think so. When a tree dies, even if it doesn't burn, it releases just about all of the carbon it had trapped as it decomposes. The micro-organisms that effectively eat it as it's rotting put out a lot of CO2. Even untouched forests have a life cycle of trees and other plants growing and dying (due to natural causes like changes in rainfall/temp, insects, disease, competition from other plants, etc.), putting an effective upper limit on how much carbon a forest can keep trapped. Sure some tiny amount will end up trapped in the dirt, but that mechanism happens way too slowly.
The upper limit on how quickly we can dig carbon out of the ground and burn it is astronomically higher. When we burn through millions of years of hydrocarbons in a hundred years, it is impossible to plant enough trees to offset even a tiny fraction of that. I'm not saying that planting trees wouldn't help at all, just that it would be an insignificant amount as long as we keep digging it up and burning it.
My third reply with the same question: which of your comment is an observation and which is your concept?
Speaking of insignificant amounts, what is the % is CO2 of total atmospheric gases by volume? How much has that changed over time? What is the correct amount of change?
"Techno Salvation" isn't a faith based proposition. It's a last-ditch effort the rational members of any species would attempt in the face of impending catastrophe and intractable public behavior.
In other words, there's no reason anyone has to believe it will work to try it... just the chance that it might and the lack of confidence in other recourses is enough.
Lots of ifs & buts there... what are the externalities and unintended consequences?
"Annual agriculture is all about living through our concepts... our idea we've imposed on reality & when reality doesn't behave according to our idea, what do we do? We input... we can never input enough to make our false concept correct." @RestorationAgD http://bit.ly/1GnbtAA
It's happening automatically. The more man tries to "control" what he doesn't understand (let alone has the power and ability to significantly influence), the more we waste what resources we have.
Precisely...
"Annual agriculture is all about living through our concepts... our idea we've imposed on reality & when reality doesn't behave according to our idea, what do we do? We input... we can never input enough to make our false concept correct." @RestorationAgD http://bit.ly/1GnbtAA
Trees are very inefficient. Photosynthesis only captures a few percent of the Sun's energy. Trees also require space, decent soil, and water, so they compete with agriculture. And unless you bury the trees, that carbon will be released again.
Mineral capture could be used in deserts and other useless areas.
Which part of your comment is an observation and which part is your concept? Observation vs Concept @RestorationAgD http://bit.ly/1lM3PFS
Slashdot Mirror
"Annual agriculture is all about living through our concepts... our idea we've imposed on reality & when reality doesn't behave according to our idea, what do we do? We input... we can never input enough to make our false concept correct." @RestorationAgD http://bit.ly/1GnbtAA
Joel Salatin: "Nature's P&L statement day of reckoning..." http://bit.ly/1frMP4H
Compressed Earth Blocks: Why and How, Here and There https://youtu.be/IuQB3x4ZNeA
The appendix is where all the backup biotics for the gut are stored. Not sure we want to be nuking it with antibiotics nor removing it because the surgeon is late for his tee time.
Wittgenstein’s Ruler (@joyousandswift’s Maxim): "Most of the time, people’s observations about something else reveal more about the observer than what’s being observed." http://bit.ly/2KYABXT
Is a faith based proposition. "nothing can possibli go wrong" https://youtu.be/7trn91xkJ0w
The Precautionary Principle (with Application to the Genetic Modification of Organisms)
"Name one ecosystem that is better off for having agriculture moved into it?" Toby Hemenway http://bit.ly/1pnapoW
"[Civilization] is all about living through our concepts... our idea we've imposed on reality & when reality doesn't behave according to our idea, what do we do? We input... we can never input enough to make our false concept correct." http://bit.ly/1GnbtAA
What are the long term health effects of LED light exposure? Why are bureaucrats dictating what light bulbs can be used?
"Fat: people do not get fat by eating it, they get fat by not being able to burn it. And, that is 100% controlled by hormones, leptin & insulin." @DrRosedale http://bit.ly/2h0Xmg1
"...the mobilization of fat from adipose tissue is inhibited by numerous stimuli. The most significant inhibition is that exerted upon adenylate cyclase by insulin." @medicalbiochem http://bit.ly/2LiPkNE
"The underlying theme of the glucose-fatty acid cycle is that the utilization of one nutrient (e.g. glucose) directly inhibits the use of the other (in this case fatty acids) without hormonal mediation." @medicalbiochem http://bit.ly/2v2lq54
No desserts. No sweets. No potatoes. No rice. No bread. No pasta. âoeWhen I say âno,â(TM) I mean âno, or not much,â(TM)â she notes... Kenyon, professor of biochemistry and biophysics at the UCSF, has been on her diet for two-and-a-half years. âoeI did it because we fed our worms glucose and it shortened their lifespan.â
The only thing I'm advocating is the downmodding of vacuous morons who spam the comments section with useless links.
Stop clicking on the links?
Of course. It's much easier to mislead the ignorant with flummery.
The ignorant can assess that on their own, can't they? If you're advocating for faith based propositions, you should consider the ones that have stood the test of time.
I couldn't have said it better. Plants/trees are the thing that do it so well and have other benefits. Still, any hope for a useful tool is a good thing.
Yeah, no need to outsmart Nature.
"Ecology... Nature is only model we have that has survived climate change with sheer, total, utter neglect..." @RestorationAgD http://bit.ly/1ohVqpE
Do you really think that spamming the same retarded links over and over is going to change anyone's mind about anything?
The info is for the innocent bystanders who may be interested, not the evangelical zealots of techno salvation.
The only way to use trees is to cut them and store them underground ...
The "only" way? Not creative nor thinker, huh?
Abundance of Ohio River Valley during Jefferson administration http://bit.ly/1cbC2uU
"Annual agriculture is all about living through our concepts... our idea we've imposed on reality & when reality doesn't behave according to our idea, what do we do? We input... we can never input enough to make our false concept correct." http://bit.ly/1GnbtAA
Trees die ...
Trees collapse ...
Dead trees rott ...
Guess what happens when dead trees rott, moron ...
Trees can live for thousands of years. Guess what happens when you till the soil every year? Moron, indeed.
"Name one ecosystem that is better off for having agriculture moved into it?" Toby Hemenway http://bit.ly/1pnapoW
I don't think so. When a tree dies, even if it doesn't burn, it releases just about all of the carbon it had trapped as it decomposes. The micro-organisms that effectively eat it as it's rotting put out a lot of CO2. Even untouched forests have a life cycle of trees and other plants growing and dying (due to natural causes like changes in rainfall/temp, insects, disease, competition from other plants, etc.), putting an effective upper limit on how much carbon a forest can keep trapped. Sure some tiny amount will end up trapped in the dirt, but that mechanism happens way too slowly.
The upper limit on how quickly we can dig carbon out of the ground and burn it is astronomically higher. When we burn through millions of years of hydrocarbons in a hundred years, it is impossible to plant enough trees to offset even a tiny fraction of that. I'm not saying that planting trees wouldn't help at all, just that it would be an insignificant amount as long as we keep digging it up and burning it.
My third reply with the same question: which of your comment is an observation and which is your concept?
Observation vs Concept @RestorationAgD http://bit.ly/1lM3PFS
Speaking of insignificant amounts, what is the % is CO2 of total atmospheric gases by volume? How much has that changed over time? What is the correct amount of change?
"Techno Salvation" isn't a faith based proposition. It's a last-ditch effort the rational members of any species would attempt in the face of impending catastrophe and intractable public behavior.
In other words, there's no reason anyone has to believe it will work to try it... just the chance that it might and the lack of confidence in other recourses is enough.
Lots of ifs & buts there... what are the externalities and unintended consequences?
"Annual agriculture is all about living through our concepts... our idea we've imposed on reality & when reality doesn't behave according to our idea, what do we do? We input... we can never input enough to make our false concept correct." @RestorationAgD http://bit.ly/1GnbtAA
It's happening automatically. The more man tries to "control" what he doesn't understand (let alone has the power and ability to significantly influence), the more we waste what resources we have.
Precisely...
"Annual agriculture is all about living through our concepts... our idea we've imposed on reality & when reality doesn't behave according to our idea, what do we do? We input... we can never input enough to make our false concept correct." @RestorationAgD http://bit.ly/1GnbtAA
Trees are very inefficient. Photosynthesis only captures a few percent of the Sun's energy. Trees also require space, decent soil, and water, so they compete with agriculture. And unless you bury the trees, that carbon will be released again.
Mineral capture could be used in deserts and other useless areas.
Which part of your comment is an observation and which part is your concept? Observation vs Concept @RestorationAgD http://bit.ly/1lM3PFS