"songbird" wrote in message
...
Billy wrote:
songbird wrote:
Gunner wrote:
...
Oh here ya go on that Biochar thingie for you and your little eco
group
here. You boys can surely twist this one as you like. Your good at
pseudo
science.

"Ad hominem" is Gunny's middle name. Is English your second language?
YOU'RE not very good at it. What is this pseudo science of which you
speak, or do you even know?

Your fascination with "escape from nature" hydroponics seems to have
blinded you to the eco-system in which your organism lives, just as
surely as your lack of attention must be responsible for your not
recognizing that songbird is of the feminine persuasion.

while i am in tune with my self and have no
specific concerns about which gender i appear
to be on-line i do find it amusing how people
pigeon hole me based upon a name. remember
your biological facts and you won't be wrong
in guessing.


http://www.re-char.com/2011/07/19/se...on-biochar-aga
in/

reads like a lightweight blog post but it
fairly reflects what i've seen elsewhere.

You are far too generous, songbird, to refer to this blog as lightweight.
Obviously Gunny isn't literate, or he would have noticed that the
article claims bio-char is good. The only real question posed in it is
how good.

i wasn't going to critique... not enough time
or energy at the moment.


Then the article wanders-off looking for a straw man to bash, and comes
up with the red herring of the "emission-free" biomass stove, which
should appeal to Gunny, because it is a no-brainer. What isn't addressed
is the fact that whatever emissions a biomass stove makes is small in
comparison to the amount of carbon sequestered in the char. That the
char from a millennia ago can still be found in the Amazon region (where
decomposition rates for organic materials is very high) seems to have
completely escaped Gunny's fallible powers of observation in his
egregiously weak, partisan attack on "organic" farming/gardening (which
is the motivating force behind most of his posts).

i have no idea what a biomass stove
is... i haven't looked it up.

as for sequestering carbon, at this
stage i'm glad for any help in getting
it done easily at low cost and with as
few emissions as possible.


Lastly, the article that Gunny presents rails against the exploitation
of "cap and trade" in carbon credits. Beyond this exploitation is the
question of why these CO2 pollution credits are given freely, instead of
being sold, to polluters. That money could be used for off-sets, instead
of just lining polluters pockets.

you'd hear "the end of the earth is coming!"
rhetoric if the USoA ever actually had a carbon
cap and trade system. the USoA has made a lot
of progress even without it in the past 20
years. i hope that progress continues.


frauds and scammers galore, the buyer should
always educate themself.

Hopefully, the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau established by
Elizabeth Warren will help (until corporations co-opt it), but the first
line of defense always needs to be self-defense. Caveat emptor.

we shall see. i suspect it will be quickly
defanged (if it has any teeth to begin with).


songbird

As in, only the males birds sing.