Charlie, you go boy. Seeing the post through your eyes, I'm outraged all
over again.
In article , Charlie wrote:
On Sun, 5 Apr 2009 09:40:15 -0700 (PDT), gardengal
wrote:
Sometimes it's just not worth it to respond :-)
Then don't, instead of leading people astray.
Put simply, poison bad.
Unless, you KNOW that there is no down side, consider all chemicals
poison. Chemical that isn't poison? There's water, sulfur, charcoal,
lime, and stuff like that.
Your ambiguous, mealy-mouthed reply lacks any
conviction.....lukewarm, it is.....patooie! Take a stand. Population
control may not be pleasant, but nature is effective.
The chemical solution is going to result in population control also,
but with more severe results, from which we likely will have a much
harder time recovering. Oh wait.....'tweenst that and several other
big events on the horizon....life is becoming very difficult. "Organic
gardening" may be a practice that preserves some folks.
But hey, whaddo I know, my edumcation list is even shorter than my
willy, so, I'll just jab at all you bigwillys from my assigned place
at the bottom. 'Bout all the good it seems to do anywhoo.
I am an organic gardener myself, meaning I avoid chemical pesticides
and fertilizers whenever possible -
Nope. That is not the definition and principle of "organic
agriculture". Give the OP the full story. You seem to be more intent
upon castigating Billy and presentations than helping the OP.
Man, I totally missed that. Next thing she'll be sayin',"I'm a pacifist,
except for when I'm killing people". I expect we'll soon be hearing the
praise of 10-10-10.
Poseur.
I tend to avoid even organic pest
controls as well, as many times they are just as harmful (if not more
so) to the you and environment as those synthesized in a lab. But the
organic Nazis,
Mein Gott, she ist on to us. We have to get some "Blackwater" disguises.
You noticed that she is leaving room between herself and organics. I
wonder if she follows the reduced bioflavonoids and chemical residues up
the food chain.
Of course here we were talking keelematt in the UK, where it doesn't
rain all the time, sometimes it's foggy ;O) There the run-off is
assured. He obviously doesn't know or care about dead zones in the sea
caused by chemfert run-off and the poisoning of the local water supply
that will affect children the most, or the impact of pesticides and
herbicides on other species like frogs. Frogs be the canaries of the
waterways. When the frogs stop croakin', you can expect to be next.
sigh....anyone heard of Godwin's Law.....guess not. I are guilty
also, me guesses.
such as Billy appears to be,
sigh......why does Billy always get to be the.....never mind.
are detrimental to the
cause as are any type of ideologues and tend to put people off the
program rather than encouraging them. There are pros and cons to every
approach and chemical methods are not inheritantly bad and organic
ones inheritantly good. Chemical controls have reduced many disease
and insect problems over the years that would have otherwise
devastated farming and cropping and we wouldn't have fed a 10th of the
population we managed to provide for since WWII had not chemical
fertilizers been invented.
You know, Charlie there have been many book written on this subject as
well as the previous one. To be expected to give the lie to it in a
newsgroup post is overwhelming. But be assured dear readers, they are
lies.
And this is a good thing....why?
BTW......you've neglected one of the basic tenets of "organic"
gardening. Know what it is?
It's simply a matter of educating one's
self and others on the drawbacks of either approach and to remember to
use moderation in everything. Including how one presents their
personal point of view or gardening philosophy.
Hmmmm.......careful now, the OP takes offense at any hint of lack of
education.
There is nothing wrong with having and maintaining a lawn if that is
your desire and it is quite possible to have a thick and lush lawn
WITHOUT the use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. It just takes
some research into the techniques and materials and a bit of work
initially.
Torching the weeds is a very viable approach. And it too produces very
fast, efficient results. I'd consider it a definite option.
Torching dangerous ideas and practices is viable and efficient also.
Just another option to try and help people remove their heads from
their arses.
Charlie
Gotta' run. My squirrel is outside demanding his snack.
--
- Billy
"For the first time in the history of the world, every human being
is now subjected to contact with dangerous chemicals, from the
moment of conception until death." - Rachel Carson
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WI29wVQN8Go
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1072040.html