Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Large scale permaculture
"len gardener" wrote in message
as humasn we need to get aways from the broadacre export farmer mentality, the cost to habitat destruction is huge, and it also impacts on our weather ie.,. reducing our chances of rain in the droughts that are part of earths cycle. the b/a farmers here decimate vast aeas of habitat on somewaht merginal ground, and after around 7 +- years they simply move on and leave the newly created desert behind there is no requirement as there is with mining to rehabilitate the area as they further encroach. Any cites to support that claim of moving on after 7 years? I've not seen any such suggestion anywhere even though I do know that Queensland has a reputation for being full of knuckledraggers. our farmers need to be in our communities where on small holdings maybe up to 40 acres +- they produce in season staples for those communities and supplied from farmer to consumer no middle man, the farmer then gets to share the common wealth of his community, instead of the way they now do it through a series of middle men who onsell not so fresh food at prices people can barely afford and not representative of what the farmers meager offering was. Unfortunately that thought now lives with the Ark. The best land near the cities has all gone under revolting McMansions and people actually choose those things over living in high rises or older smaller houses. My Grandfather used to run a market garden in Botany in NSW. Every time I drive anywhere near Sydney Airport, I think of those market gardens and how fertile that land would have been given what is growing in the area round there now. Mind you if it had come down the line of inheritance, my bloody cousin would also have sold it off to developers as he has done with the farm that he inherited as the eldest male. So poof, there goes a farm of 5 generations on land that was first selected and cleared by the first ancestor who came to this country. No sentiment for the fact that it was the only farm left in the district which was still entire and as selected and which was the only one still in original hands after 150 years. And because he likes money. And he really IS a good farmer. like that adelaide hills thing that land should basically be returned to habitat is has always been very marginal land (why do people think the farmers walked away from it after they ahd milked it for waht they could?), anyone living there should alocate enough land use for their own personnal food needs, as any commercial venture sooner or later is driven by the need for more and more turn over. people can grow enough of the non staples their family needs in a very small space, we had this type of system back in the late 40's and into the 50's+, fresh in season food was affordable for all families, and the food miles was very low so another positive factor, the farmer casme around a couple or so times a week selling fresh produce, or we went to the farm. eggs were right there as fresh as the day from the farm, and fresh unadulterated milk was delivered intoi 1 gallon stainless billy at our front door not sure may have been each second day?? homes should be modest enough and land sufficient enough for families to grow some of their own. Have you looked over the back fences in your area? What you say is all fine in theory, but I know from living in the country where there is lots of land, and even in the drought we still had enough water to grow veggies round here, how few people actually grow anything edible. Not even a herb patch! They'll go and spend 2 bucks buying a plastic packed bunch of miserable coriander rather than spending a few minutes putting in a few seeds and doing a bit of watering now and then. A whole seasons worht of coriander could be had for the 2 bucks they spend, but they'd rather buy it than put in a small effort. And if you've taken notice of some of the questions that appear here time and time again, it is obvious how out of touch with the soil most people are, and this is supposed to be a gardening group! No-one with even a modicum of observational skills and who has grubbed about in soil for more than a few years would use a raft of chemicals on plants or would fail to understand the importance of insects in having a balance in the garden. But the basic questions keep coming... "how do I kill....", "how do I improve...." I often wonder whether people have heard of the library/google or know the role of the earthworm, or understand the most simple things about the soil, like microflora etc. Most people seem to see their garden environment as a place that they treat like they are doing some form of extension of their home decorating. " A row of Mop Top Robonia and on the other side some standard roses" type thinking. That is all quite nice to achieve, but first principles of soil and it's management and how everything else relies on it seems to be almost an afterthought. You and I both know that plants and gardens aren't home decorating, but we actually grub in the soil. Too many people seem to get wacky ideas from those ghastly TV/magazines on gardens rather than getting out there and learning by doing. And there really is no better teacher than time and experience. so to me the permaculture sustainable farmer is the one who is moving closer to his consumers, not lauding themselves growing stuff on denuded dry habitat land. Given that people now have to live in that denuded dry habitat land (and increasinlgy will have to do so in the future) I see no problem with trying to learn to use it and rehabilitate it. mollison uses those asian communities in asia where the farmer is a neighbour and produces all the staples for that neighbourhood, makes a lot of sense and no good putting it in the too hard basket because if the oil crisis is as bad as what is indicated then our broadacre farmers are going to have huge problems getting their produce to market at an affordable profit making price. They already DO have that problem. But given that consumers don't bloody care how many food miles their food has done, just so long as they can eat what they want, when they want, it is consumers who will get hit time and time again till they get a bit smarter and start to shop smarter. I cannot believe that any Australian would buy oranges produced in California, but the shops are full of them and they sell. I won't buy them but I certainklys ee many shoppers who will buy them without even checking the little sticky label on them. need to think outside the square, the answers will come and the sooner the better. No it won't. It will just continue with consumers telling the government to DO something. They are too lazy to do anything themselves like dig a veggie patch or even grow a few herbs. I despair of humanity. A good dose of plague might not be such a bad thing. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Large scale permaculture
"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
... I agree about the mindset. But we are embedded in a largely free enterprise society in which you have to be commercially viable to keep going. Mollison's philosophy is such that he would remake much of society, its values and motives not merely how we get our food. but wouldn't most of us, if we could? :-) in reality of course, societies remake themselves as they go (seeing as how benign dictators are so very thin on the ground ;-) Although he does give a nod to "legality, people, culture, trade and commerce" as a component in creating a design. So perhaps he does accept that commerce and making a dollar is not altogether evil. The question is how do you do it in a society whose agriculture is based on permaculture? well, i'm fabulously iffy about permaculture - not because of the permaculture itself, which is fine, but because of all the dippy twits who do everything badly & then walk away because it hasn't worked. also, it's quite a quiet movement (like organics in general, biodynamics, etc) so i believe you would find there's a great deal more going on than you immediately realise. and yes, making a dollar isn't inherently evil whatsoever. most of us cannot (for example) make shoes - we need money for that. true self-sufficiency by one person or family is impossible. it becomes possible within communities, though. permaculture farms most likely just carry on in obscurity, we don't know that they are there, really, even if we buy their products we can't see the farm & probably don't think about it much. I know of small scale operations where on a few acres a family is growing enough to mainly feed themselves and sell some to make a dollar to buy what they cannot grow. This makes that family very happy, they have the ability to live in the way that they see it is proper to live. see, i believe that sort of thing is really much more common than we think. much of it can't be measured via "market forces" & other foolishness, so it's not. things that can't be measured via capitalist economics tends not to be counted statistically, so we cannot officially "know" about them. (sigh). However Mollison puts forward the idea that permaculture could/should replace broadacre farming altogether. This leads me to a problem. I cannot see how every family can have a few acres nor the will/ability to farm it. I cannot see how we can get away from at least some specialists who use their skill to get food from the land efficiently on a scale that permits the feeding of the non-farmers who produce other things. In the long run the choice is to do it sustainably or to starve when we have mined out the soil. So what replaces broadacre? \ truthfully, i'm not sure anything does "replace" it. you'll have noticed that broadacre farming is changing itself, though. like you said, the choices are rapidly becoming to either do it sustainably, or starve. perhaps movements such as the permaculture movement have an obligation to cease being slightly obscure & to get out there more, i'm not sure; but when you consider things such as how mainstream organics has become (despite how quiet it is), how the most ossified farming brains are coming to use nature belts & windbreaks & things like that as part of their practice, i suppose that broadacre (for grains, etc) will carry on, just a bit differently than in the past. you are dead right in that not everyone can have a bit of land, & truthfully i doubt that everyone should (imagine if everyone had to travel the distances many countryfolk do! it would be unsustainable). yet things such as the current tendency for completely mainstream gardening magazines & newspaper columns to encourage people to grow what they can in their yards or balconies, etc, is a taste of where this is all going (in my hopelessly optimistic view). sadly, the pace of progressive change can be positively glacial, it seems to me. one last tiny rant: one thing i would love to see, which i can't see happening yet (but is probably going to have to happen very soon) is that governments need to put their foot down re overconsumption. according to statistics (tee hee) something like a third of westerners have an anti-consumerist mentality & tend not to participate in rabid consumption. governments think this is Bad & want people to consume until they drop (then consume something else to get them back up again). the day that govts get the brainwave that overconsumption itself is what is bad, things are going to change very much for the better, for everyone, because they have the power to legislate and we do not. in the meantime it is up to individuals to buy local, to limit consumption of stuff they don't need, etc; but people who do so find a lot of support with like minds (of which there are actually many). all these things are interrelated. thank you for reading my rant! :-) kylie |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Large scale permaculture
"len gardener" wrote in message
On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 14:41:57 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: snipped How do you make this system work for Los Angeles or Mexico City or Bombay? If the largest city you've seen is Sydney you don't really understand the problem. -- maybe john just maybe it is you who have no understanding of "the problem"?? once you take the liberty to pidgeon hole what is current then you take away any thinking outside the square. all tall buildings have rooves? there are balconies? most cities have large parklands? melbourne is noted for it's culturaly diversified gardens shared by occupants who live in medium to high rise tennaments. and back in the 40's and 50's over here what produce the market farmers had left they took into the general market situated in the city proper where all could access it by various public transport, now the markets are so situated it is a hectic drive to even attempt to get there. and people lived in suburbs and business was in the city. and in your scenerio or the current scenerio food is going to become very very expensive to buy i the cities, and much can happen to stop the harvest or the harvest being distributed, you may be affluent enough right now? but very many aren't and everyone could be in their shoes at any time. in the US of A some of the so called fresh food can be in transit for up to 2 weeks from what i have read at various times? i never said it was going to be easy, but when do we start? when it is way too late maybe? Well "the when it's too late" scenario seemed to be what got the Cubans working on the problem so I wouldn't be surprised if it takes the same thing to get the first world doing the same thing. In Australia, given our problems, I don't think it will be too long before we are faced with the need to "do something" but for the US, I think it will take longer. There are many Americans who still don't believe in climate cahnage but I don't think there would be many Australians who don't believe in it. Till there is a shift in attitude in the majority of the popultion, no change happens as there is no pressure to do so. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Large scale permaculture
J. Clarke wrote:
How do you make this system work for Los Angeles or Mexico City or Bombay? If the largest city you've seen is Sydney you don't really understand the problem. Who cares. Megatropoliss are not that great for the planet anyway and there is really no modern reason for them. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Large scale permaculture
In article
, "FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote: "len gardener" wrote in message On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 14:41:57 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: snipped How do you make this system work for Los Angeles or Mexico City or Bombay? If the largest city you've seen is Sydney you don't really understand the problem. -- maybe john just maybe it is you who have no understanding of "the problem"?? once you take the liberty to pidgeon hole what is current then you take away any thinking outside the square. all tall buildings have rooves? there are balconies? most cities have large parklands? melbourne is noted for it's culturaly diversified gardens shared by occupants who live in medium to high rise tennaments. and back in the 40's and 50's over here what produce the market farmers had left they took into the general market situated in the city proper where all could access it by various public transport, now the markets are so situated it is a hectic drive to even attempt to get there. and people lived in suburbs and business was in the city. and in your scenerio or the current scenerio food is going to become very very expensive to buy i the cities, and much can happen to stop the harvest or the harvest being distributed, you may be affluent enough right now? but very many aren't and everyone could be in their shoes at any time. in the US of A some of the so called fresh food can be in transit for up to 2 weeks from what i have read at various times? i never said it was going to be easy, but when do we start? when it is way too late maybe? Well "the when it's too late" scenario seemed to be what got the Cubans working on the problem so I wouldn't be surprised if it takes the same thing to get the first world doing the same thing. In Australia, given our problems, I don't think it will be too long before we are faced with the need to "do something" but for the US, I think it will take longer. There are many Americans who still don't believe in climate cahnage but I don't think there would be many Australians who don't believe in it. Till there is a shift in attitude in the majority of the popultion, no change happens as there is no pressure to do so. Take a look at http://www.adn.com/matsu/story/365375.html/ . Politics stymied the truth about global warming in America because the corporations will have to spend money to ameliorate their carbon emissions. The result was that the corporate line was paid for in Congress and sponsored by that right-wing nut case, Rupert Murdoch. Murdoch's Fox News is the only news cast in America where faithfully watching it, will leave you more ignorant than if you had done nothing.The corporations are on board now, more or less, like New Orleans, I think now they see it as an opportunity. If you read the "uh-oh thread", it might occur to you that a perfect storm is brewing. Some countries are starting to withhold export crops, in order to feed their own citizens. That will never happen in America. Others, like Australia, have had crop problems (drought) and have no export crop. Other countries are having food riots. In any event, whether it was the bio-fuel scam, a conspiracy by the oil companies, or the government encouragement you own your own home at any cost, the American economy is set to tank. Asian banks don't want our money anymore. Our top 1% will get more stinking rich while the rest of us get acquainted with the way the rest of the world lives. Problem is that crazed American consumers was the market of choice for most of the world. No society will escape the personal need to grow more food. Not just for sensory satisfaction, but for survival. -- Billy Impeach Pelosi, Bush & Cheney to the Hague http://angryarab.blogspot.com/ http://rachelcorriefoundation.org/ |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Large scale permaculture
"len gardener" wrote in message ... On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 14:41:57 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: snipped How do you make this system work for Los Angeles or Mexico City or Bombay? If the largest city you've seen is Sydney you don't really understand the problem. -- maybe john just maybe it is you who have no understanding of "the problem"?? Len I agree with your sentiments that we need to change our way of thinking but it will take more than that. once you take the liberty to pidgeon hole what is current then you take away any thinking outside the square. all tall buildings have rooves? there are balconies? Very harsh environments for growing, with much effort you could get some boutique crops but not enough to really matter. It would be very inefficient. most cities have large parklands? Yes but the people need them. Sure strolling through a nice vege garden is relaxing but what of those who want to play sport etc? melbourne is noted for it's culturaly diversified gardens shared by occupants who live in medium to high rise tennaments. Melbourne is quite low density compared to the mega cities. The Aussie 1/4 acre block is very uncommon in many places. We have no experience of what really high density housing is like. and back in the 40's and 50's over here what produce the market farmers had left they took into the general market situated in the city proper where all could access it by various public transport, now the markets are so situated it is a hectic drive to even attempt to get there. And those market gardens have been swallowed up by housing developments that can hardly be torn down now. The population is 3 times what it was then. The institutions and organisation of 60 years ago will not serve for the next 60. and people lived in suburbs and business was in the city. and in your scenerio or the current scenerio food is going to become very very expensive to buy i the cities, and much can happen to stop the harvest or the harvest being distributed, you may be affluent enough right now? but very many aren't and everyone could be in their shoes at any time. in the US of A some of the so called fresh food can be in transit for up to 2 weeks from what i have read at various times? i never said it was going to be easy, but when do we start? when it is way too late maybe? outside the square and the comfort zone. With peace and brightest of blessings, I support your philosophy that major change in how we deal with the world is essential. And backyard and inner city growing plots would certainly be a step in the right direction. But this will never be more than a minor part of the calories required to feed a big city. Look at the people who are doing this on a small scale (ie one or a few families). They need acres to do it. Evan if yields could be increased many times (doubtful, especially in Oz) those acres just aren't available in or near big cities, nor are the numbers of skilled people prepared to lovingly tend them. It is this very problem of the efficiency of scale that made me ask the question in the first place. David |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Large scale permaculture
"Terryc" wrote in message ... J. Clarke wrote: How do you make this system work for Los Angeles or Mexico City or Bombay? If the largest city you've seen is Sydney you don't really understand the problem. Who cares. Megatropoliss are not that great for the planet anyway and there is really no modern reason for them. How do we prevent them forming? How do take down the ones that are there? David |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Large scale permaculture
"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote in message ... need to think outside the square, the answers will come and the sooner the better. No it won't. It will just continue with consumers telling the government to DO something. They are too lazy to do anything themselves like dig a veggie patch or even grow a few herbs. I despair of humanity. A good dose of plague might not be such a bad thing. Well it would rip right through those mega cities. A nice virulent avian flu that is human transmitted would do the trick, coming soon to your neighbourhood? I hope not. There is absolutely no doubt that in the end climate change, overpopulation, land degradation, water pollution, peak oil and daytime soap operas WILL be dealt with. The challenge is to do it without allowing the four horsemen to cause untold misery to billions along the way. David |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Large scale permaculture
len gardener wrote:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 14:41:57 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: snipped How do you make this system work for Los Angeles or Mexico City or Bombay? If the largest city you've seen is Sydney you don't really understand the problem. -- maybe john just maybe it is you who have no understanding of "the problem"?? once you take the liberty to pidgeon hole what is current then you take away any thinking outside the square. all tall buildings have rooves? there are balconies? most cities have large parklands? melbourne is noted for it's culturaly diversified gardens shared by occupants who live in medium to high rise tennaments. and back in the 40's and 50's over here what produce the market farmers had left they took into the general market situated in the city proper where all could access it by various public transport, now the markets are so situated it is a hectic drive to even attempt to get there. and people lived in suburbs and business was in the city. and in your scenerio or the current scenerio food is going to become very very expensive to buy i the cities, and much can happen to stop the harvest or the harvest being distributed, you may be affluent enough right now? but very many aren't and everyone could be in their shoes at any time. in the US of A some of the so called fresh food can be in transit for up to 2 weeks from what i have read at various times? i never said it was going to be easy, but when do we start? when it is way too late maybe? Demonstrate that you can feed half the population of Australia on 150 square miles of land. There is no "my scenario". We feed the populations of those cities now. The methods used may offend your sensibilities but they work. You are the one proposing pie in the sky without running the numbers and showing that they can work. -- -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Large scale permaculture
Terryc wrote:
J. Clarke wrote: How do you make this system work for Los Angeles or Mexico City or Bombay? If the largest city you've seen is Sydney you don't really understand the problem. Who cares. Megatropoliss are not that great for the planet anyway and there is really no modern reason for them. Whether they are "great for the planet" or not is irrelevant. It can be argued that 6 billion humans are not good for the planet. So what would you do about either? -- -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Large scale permaculture
"0tterbot" wrote in message ... one last tiny rant: one thing i would love to see, which i can't see happening yet (but is probably going to have to happen very soon) is that governments need to put their foot down re overconsumption. according to statistics (tee hee) something like a third of westerners have an anti-consumerist mentality & tend not to participate in rabid consumption. governments think this is Bad & want people to consume until they drop (then consume something else to get them back up again). the day that govts get the brainwave that overconsumption itself is what is bad, things are going to change very much for the better, for everyone, because they have the power to legislate and we do not. in the meantime it is up to individuals to buy local, to limit consumption of stuff they don't need, etc; but people who do so find a lot of support with like minds (of which there are actually many). all these things are interrelated. thank you for reading my rant! :-) kylie Current economic dogma says you must have growth around 3% per year for a healthy economy. Nobody knows how to do it with much less without having unacceptable unemployment. Thus the current model condemns us to be constantly expanding: population, energy use, mineral use, land use, must all grow indefinitely. Except that obviously in the real world they cannot. Political systems around the world that reward short term popularity and punish long term planning don't help. David |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Large scale permaculture
"Billy" wrote in message
"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote: "len gardener" wrote in message (snip) i never said it was going to be easy, but when do we start? when it is way too late maybe? Well "the when it's too late" scenario seemed to be what got the Cubans working on the problem so I wouldn't be surprised if it takes the same thing to get the first world doing the same thing. In Australia, given our problems, I don't think it will be too long before we are faced with the need to "do something" but for the US, I think it will take longer. There are many Americans who still don't believe in climate cahnage but I don't think there would be many Australians who don't believe in it. Till there is a shift in attitude in the majority of the popultion, no change happens as there is no pressure to do so. Take a look at http://www.adn.com/matsu/story/365375.html/ . Did that. He sums up some of the problems quite well. Thanks. Politics stymied the truth about global warming in America because the corporations will have to spend money to ameliorate their carbon emissions. The result was that the corporate line was paid for in Congress and sponsored by that right-wing nut case, Rupert Murdoch. Murdoch's Fox News is the only news cast in America where faithfully watching it, will leave you more ignorant than if you had done nothing.The corporations are on board now, more or less, like New Orleans, I think now they see it as an opportunity. If you read the "uh-oh thread", it might occur to you that a perfect storm is brewing. Some countries are starting to withhold export crops, in order to feed their own citizens. That will never happen in America. Others, like Australia, have had crop problems (drought) and have no export crop. Other countries are having food riots. In any event, whether it was the bio-fuel scam, a conspiracy by the oil companies, or the government encouragement you own your own home at any cost, the American economy is set to tank. Asian banks don't want our money anymore. Our top 1% will get more stinking rich while the rest of us get acquainted with the way the rest of the world lives. Problem is that crazed American consumers was the market of choice for most of the world. No society will escape the personal need to grow more food. Not just for sensory satisfaction, but for survival. That time will come although I'm not convinced that we are there just yet. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Large scale permaculture
"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote in message No it won't. It will just continue with consumers telling the government to DO something. They are too lazy to do anything themselves like dig a veggie patch or even grow a few herbs. I despair of humanity. A good dose of plague might not be such a bad thing. Well it would rip right through those mega cities. A nice virulent avian flu that is human transmitted would do the trick, coming soon to your neighbourhood? I hope not. So do I (when I'm not feeling particularly negative), but I would be surprised if we don't get another major pestilence of some sort. There is absolutely no doubt that in the end climate change, overpopulation, land degradation, water pollution, peak oil and daytime soap operas WILL be dealt with. The challenge is to do it without allowing the four horsemen to cause untold misery to billions along the way. At least 3 of those horsemen are already raging through the world in Iraq, Africa and each winter as Flu carts off a huge number of people. I can't quite see why the fourth wouldn't raise it's ugly head in due time too, but I do agree with the sentiment that we shouldn't wish for it. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Large scale permaculture
In article ,
"J. Clarke" wrote: len gardener wrote: On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 14:41:57 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: snipped How do you make this system work for Los Angeles or Mexico City or Bombay? If the largest city you've seen is Sydney you don't really understand the problem. -- maybe john just maybe it is you who have no understanding of "the problem"?? once you take the liberty to pidgeon hole what is current then you take away any thinking outside the square. all tall buildings have rooves? there are balconies? most cities have large parklands? melbourne is noted for it's culturaly diversified gardens shared by occupants who live in medium to high rise tennaments. and back in the 40's and 50's over here what produce the market farmers had left they took into the general market situated in the city proper where all could access it by various public transport, now the markets are so situated it is a hectic drive to even attempt to get there. and people lived in suburbs and business was in the city. and in your scenerio or the current scenerio food is going to become very very expensive to buy i the cities, and much can happen to stop the harvest or the harvest being distributed, you may be affluent enough right now? but very many aren't and everyone could be in their shoes at any time. in the US of A some of the so called fresh food can be in transit for up to 2 weeks from what i have read at various times? i never said it was going to be easy, but when do we start? when it is way too late maybe? Demonstrate that you can feed half the population of Australia on 150 square miles of land. There is no "my scenario". We feed the populations of those cities now. The methods used may offend your sensibilities but they work. You are the one proposing pie in the sky without running the numbers and showing that they can work. -- No one ever said that you would make money with the "Cuban Solution". you'd just get fed. If you want capitalism, you'll need to go elsewhere. -- Billy Impeach Pelosi, Bush & Cheney to the Hague http://angryarab.blogspot.com/ http://rachelcorriefoundation.org/ |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Large scale permaculture
In article ,
"David Hare-Scott" wrote: "FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote in message ... need to think outside the square, the answers will come and the sooner the better. No it won't. It will just continue with consumers telling the government to DO something. They are too lazy to do anything themselves like dig a veggie patch or even grow a few herbs. I despair of humanity. A good dose of plague might not be such a bad thing. Well it would rip right through those mega cities. A nice virulent avian flu that is human transmitted would do the trick, coming soon to your neighbourhood? I hope not. There is absolutely no doubt that in the end climate change, overpopulation, land degradation, water pollution, peak oil and daytime soap operas WILL be dealt with. The challenge is to do it without allowing the four horsemen to cause untold misery to billions along the way. David If it is you and yours' then maybe Farml is right. If it is me and mine, I'd like a second opinion. -- Billy Impeach Pelosi, Bush & Cheney to the Hague http://angryarab.blogspot.com/ http://rachelcorriefoundation.org/ |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Large scale permaculture | Edible Gardening | |||
culitvating moss on a large scale | Bonsai | |||
The Definitive Chord & Scale Bible - Literally EVERY chord and scale! | Freshwater Aquaria Plants | |||
Suggestions on large-scale compost-making??? | United Kingdom | |||
Suggestions on large-scale compost-making??? | Gardening |