• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Oil, global warming, time and agriculture

Using Monbiots latest article below as a starting point
Click to expand...

Therein lies your problem. Monbiot is a left wing, ultra green zealot. Not much of a starting point for a rational debate.

ETA, From that starting point, it is no wonder this thread has already thrown up steam power, horse power and scythes.
 
Last edited:
!Kaggen said:
Its a lot more than the emotive labeling in your contribution.
Click to expand...
You can continue to post off topic if you like, but how would you characterise Monbiot and what gives this journalist such an esteemed position? Why are his opinions to be used as a starting point for anything?
 
lionking said:
how would you characterise Monbiot and what gives this journalist such an esteemed position? Why are his opinions to be used as a starting point for anything?
Click to expand...

Because you can agree or disagree with them, I'm guessing. I don't see him being used as an appeal to authority for any particular argument, so your complaint seems petty.
 
cornsail said:
Because you can agree or disagree with them, I'm guessing.
Click to expand...

You can agree or disagree with Krusty the Clown as well, which is the company I would put Monbiot in.

Anyway I have made my point. I believe that he is too far to the left to be credible on this subject.
 
lionking said:
You can agree or disagree with Krusty the Clown as well
Click to expand...
And?

Anyway I have made my point. I believe that he is too far to the left to be credible on this subject.
Click to expand...
Do you think oil supplies are not reducing? Do you think agricultural dependence on oil wont be a problem when oil supplies get too low? Are there any assumptions you think are being made in the thread that rely on Monbiot as a source?

If not then I don't see your point at all.
 
There's been 50 years oil supply for at least the last 50 years, so yes I am skeptical about "peak oil".
 
lionking said:
There's been 50 years oil supply for at least the last 50 years, so yes I am skeptical about "peak oil".
Click to expand...

Sorry, your right-wing views make your "peak oil" "skepticism" irrelevant. ;)

Have you done any research into the subject or is your skepticism just a "gut feeling"? Monbiot, a scientist, was also skeptical about Peak Oil for a long time but facts convinced him otherwise.
 
Last edited:
lionking said:
There's been 50 years oil supply for at least the last 50 years, so yes I am skeptical about "peak oil".
Click to expand...

But would you agree that the planet's supply of oil is finite (and hence decreasing), not assuming any specific timetable?
 
The first sentence of the article says "I don’t know when global oil supplies will start to decline." so I'm still not seeing your point, lionking.
 
PixyMisa said:
I want to go on record that I think steam-powered horses would actually be kind of neat.
Click to expand...

What about steam-powered workers?

rbts6full.jpg
 
!Kaggen said:
No, I think you are ignoring the question.
What specific measures are being researched to reduce agriculture's dependence on oil?
IPM research was not driven by the dependence on fossil fuels.
It was driven by pesticide resistance and non-beneficial non-target effects.
Click to expand...


It is one way towards reducing the use of petro-chemicals in agriculture.

Maybe next time you have a rant, you should state your gaols more clearly. Plus if you send me my script ahead of time, I can feed you the answers you want.

BTW: there is still some foam around your lips. ;)

Most of the people I have heard who talk about reduction of the use of fossil feuls have discussed the role of manufacturing versus transporation and how the role of manufacturing is one to save them for. It is the high energy per volume that makes it beneficial to transport, but transport and electricity generation are the two biggies to target for green house reduction.
 
Dancing David said:
It is one way towards reducing the use of petro-chemicals in agriculture.
Click to expand...

Sorry David but that is just not true.
IPM is just about reducing there use so that they can continue to be used without becoming either ineffective or plan dangerous. It is a way for the petro-chemical industry to increase the economic lifespan of their products.
There is enough knowledge and practical experience to stop using most petro-chemical pesticides altogether.
The will on the other hand.....

A little anecdote:

I had a Congolese friend doing a M.Sc. in Entomology who was trying to breed parasitic wasps for fly control in large scale chicken production. Unfortunately the amount of natural parasitism is so low that he could not collect enough parasitized fly pupae to start a breeding program even after 6 months of collecting. I knew that in the field that if we sprayed a consortium of microbes containing L.acid bacteria, yeasts and phototropic bacteria the fly populations would decrease drastically. I suggest he try adding this consortium to one of his treatments. Within 1 month he had enough parasitized fly pupae to start a breeding program. The parasitism had increased by up to 90 %. So when he presented the results to his Professor, the Professor immediately wanted money from the producers of the consortium for further research. When they declined , the Professor continued with the work using the consortium to collect parasites to breed with, but did not publish anything about the effect of the consortium. This was 10 years ago and now there is a flourishing and frankly a completely ineffective business of breeding and releasing parasites for fly control as well as the continued use of pesticides. Whilst the real control agent lingers in obscurity. Only the other day 6 months after introducing this consortium at a local horse stables and reducing their fly populations to astonishing levels did they tell me they had been spending $100 a month on parasites for years which had not had nearly as drastic an effect.
 
Dancing David said:
Maybe next time you have a rant, you should state your gaols more clearly. Plus if you send me my script ahead of time, I can feed you the answers you want.
Click to expand...
If I point out that your answer is false does that mean I should have given you the right answer beforehand?
I did not realise that a discussion worked that way.
You do surprise me more and more David.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom