Any experiences. My near neighbour swears by them and his lawn is in
a far better state than mine. But I'm wary of franchise operations
but presumably they have access to better
chemicals/fertilisers/weedkillers than the rubbish I seem to get - or
they are better at applying it.

greenthumb.co.uk

--
AnthonyL

Why do scientists need to BELIEVE in anything?

On 15/07/2020 16:45, AnthonyL wrote:
Any experiences. My near neighbour swears by them and his lawn is in
a far better state than mine. But I'm wary of franchise operations
but presumably they have access to better
chemicals/fertilisers/weedkillers than the rubbish I seem to get - or
they are better at applying it.

greenthumb.co.uk

They sound to me a bit like the US ChemLawn franchise which does what it
says on the tin but with a more UK friendly eco greenwashed name.

If you like your lawns to be a featureless green monoculture desert of
grass with absolutely nothing else left alive and obtained at any cost
to the environment then it is for you.

I prefer my lawn with some small wild flowers in it and only really
persecute dandelions, ground elder and buttercups. Clover is in flower
right now. One application of weed and feed in the spring and a couple
of spot weeding sessions with a broadleaf specific weedkiller combined
with regular cutting is plenty good enough. It looks much more
interesting with some smaller wild flowers left in it.

I buy my spring weed and feed in the Autumn get rid quick sale when they
are making room for Dracula's Cave/Santa's Grotto. The trick to applying
it is to spread it evenly over the whole area. It can burn the grass if
applied incorrectly or not watered in within a couple of days.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On Sat, 18 Jul 2020 16:35:33 +0100, Martin Brown
wrote:

They sound to me a bit like the US ChemLawn franchise which does what it
says on the tin but with a more UK friendly eco greenwashed name.

Chemlawn changed its name a few years ago to "Trugreen!"

We live in a rural area of "upstate" New York, and I adhere to the "as
long as it's green" school of lawn. Originally planted with Timothy,
since there are nearby hayfields of that. A little coarser than
putting green stuff, but very hardy and carefree. And the lovely
aroma when I mow the patch where wild thyme has settled in.

--
Gary Woods O- K2AHC Public keys at home.earthlink.net/~garygarlic, or get 0x1D64A93D via keyserver
fingerprint = E2 6F 50 93 7B C7 F3 CA 1F 8B 3C C0 B0 28 68

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On Sat, 18 Jul 2020 16:35:33 +0100, Martin Brown
wrote:

On 15/07/2020 16:45, AnthonyL wrote:
Any experiences. My near neighbour swears by them and his lawn is in
a far better state than mine. But I'm wary of franchise operations
but presumably they have access to better
chemicals/fertilisers/weedkillers than the rubbish I seem to get - or
they are better at applying it.

greenthumb.co.uk

They sound to me a bit like the US ChemLawn franchise which does what it
says on the tin but with a more UK friendly eco greenwashed name.

If you like your lawns to be a featureless green monoculture desert of
grass with absolutely nothing else left alive and obtained at any cost
to the environment then it is for you.


It's not my choice

When I'm not looking SWMBO gets the mower out on its lowest settings
just as a dry spell is about to arrive and the lawn has less cover
than my head. I'm sorely tempted to put a locking bolt through the
mechanism.

I prefer my lawn with some small wild flowers in it and only really
persecute dandelions, ground elder and buttercups. Clover is in flower
right now. One application of weed and feed in the spring and a couple
of spot weeding sessions with a broadleaf specific weedkiller combined
with regular cutting is plenty good enough. It looks much more
interesting with some smaller wild flowers left in it.


However there are now large patches of no grass rather than grass
interspersed with a few daisies.

I buy my spring weed and feed in the Autumn get rid quick sale when they
are making room for Dracula's Cave/Santa's Grotto. The trick to applying
it is to spread it evenly over the whole area. It can burn the grass if
applied incorrectly or not watered in within a couple of days.


Thanks for the "heads up".

--
AnthonyL

Why do scientists need to BELIEVE in anything?

On 19/07/2020 12:52, AnthonyL wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jul 2020 16:35:33 +0100, Martin Brown
wrote:

On 15/07/2020 16:45, AnthonyL wrote:
Any experiences. My near neighbour swears by them and his lawn is in
a far better state than mine. But I'm wary of franchise operations
but presumably they have access to better
chemicals/fertilisers/weedkillers than the rubbish I seem to get - or
they are better at applying it.

greenthumb.co.uk

They sound to me a bit like the US ChemLawn franchise which does what it
says on the tin but with a more UK friendly eco greenwashed name.

If you like your lawns to be a featureless green monoculture desert of
grass with absolutely nothing else left alive and obtained at any cost
to the environment then it is for you.


It's not my choice

When I'm not looking SWMBO gets the mower out on its lowest settings
just as a dry spell is about to arrive and the lawn has less cover
than my head. I'm sorely tempted to put a locking bolt through the
mechanism.

I prefer my lawn with some small wild flowers in it and only really
persecute dandelions, ground elder and buttercups. Clover is in flower
right now. One application of weed and feed in the spring and a couple
of spot weeding sessions with a broadleaf specific weedkiller combined
with regular cutting is plenty good enough. It looks much more
interesting with some smaller wild flowers left in it.


However there are now large patches of no grass rather than grass
interspersed with a few daisies.

I buy my spring weed and feed in the Autumn get rid quick sale when they
are making room for Dracula's Cave/Santa's Grotto. The trick to applying
it is to spread it evenly over the whole area. It can burn the grass if
applied incorrectly or not watered in within a couple of days.


Thanks for the "heads up".

Yes it does burn but the grass comes back fine

Use it with plenty of water - natural or otherwise - to get it soaked in



--
No Apple devices were knowingly used in the preparation of this post.

On 19/07/2020 12:52, AnthonyL wrote:
It's not my choice

When I'm not looking SWMBO gets the mower out on its lowest settings
just as a dry spell is about to arrive and the lawn has less cover
than my head. I'm sorely tempted to put a locking bolt through the
mechanism.

My SWMBO has been convinced by the bee orchids that we should have at
least one part not mown at all. Neither of us want to put any kind of
weedkiller on it at all.

(Though mowing around them _is_ a PITA!)

Andy

On Sun, 19 Jul 2020 21:52:56 +0100, Vir Campestris
wrote:

On 19/07/2020 12:52, AnthonyL wrote:
It's not my choice

When I'm not looking SWMBO gets the mower out on its lowest settings
just as a dry spell is about to arrive and the lawn has less cover
than my head. I'm sorely tempted to put a locking bolt through the
mechanism.

My SWMBO has been convinced by the bee orchids that we should have at
least one part not mown at all. Neither of us want to put any kind of
weedkiller on it at all.

(Though mowing around them _is_ a PITA!)


Oh we have plenty of nature garden. It's the front lawn that is the
issue here.

--
AnthonyL

Why do scientists need to BELIEVE in anything?

On 20/07/2020 12:36, AnthonyL wrote:
AnthonyL

Why do scientists need to BELIEVE in anything?

Very interesting question: the short answer is they don't, except they
need to at least sort of believe the 'evidence of their senses', and the
basic structure they impose on the Universe -
space-time/matter/energy/causality etc are all useful *assumptions*, but
are metaphysical - unprovable - in nature.

--
"When one man dies it's a tragedy. When thousands die it's statistics."

Josef Stalin

On 20/07/2020 12:36, AnthonyL wrote:
Oh we have plenty of nature garden. It's the front lawn that is the
issue here.

I leave a foot-wide strip against the front hedge for quite a while in
late spring to give the primroses and cowslips a chance. She does moan
about that I admit

My argument is you can't really see it from the road.

Andy

On Mon, 20 Jul 2020 17:27:28 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 20/07/2020 12:36, AnthonyL wrote:
AnthonyL

Why do scientists need to BELIEVE in anything?

Very interesting question: the short answer is they don't, except they
need to at least sort of believe the 'evidence of their senses', and the
basic structure they impose on the Universe -
space-time/matter/energy/causality etc are all useful *assumptions*, but
are metaphysical - unprovable - in nature.



When I hear them arguing and disagreeing with eachother the thought
that immediately comes to me is "You are scientists. If there is not
a proof there that satisfies all then shut up and go seek it".

It somewhat reminds me of what I learnt as an engineer "Safety factor
is simply ignorance factor".

My lawn is looking better for simply allowing it to grow beyond
baldness. Clover is doing well too.

--
AnthonyL

Why do scientists need to BELIEVE in anything?

On 21/07/2020 12:49, AnthonyL wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jul 2020 17:27:28 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 20/07/2020 12:36, AnthonyL wrote:
AnthonyL

Why do scientists need to BELIEVE in anything?

Very interesting question: the short answer is they don't, except they
need to at least sort of believe the 'evidence of their senses', and the
basic structure they impose on the Universe -
space-time/matter/energy/causality etc are all useful *assumptions*, but
are metaphysical - unprovable - in nature.



When I hear them arguing and disagreeing with eachother the thought
that immediately comes to me is "You are scientists. If there is not
a proof there that satisfies all then shut up and go seek it".

Actually the main problem is that there is no proof of anything
available, and that's why the philosophy of science is so important. It
stops people looking for 'scientific proof' because it *cannot* exist.
Science consist of a suite of hypothetical entities whose existence
predicts some stuff that seems to happen. That doesn't mean that those
entities are the only, or the correct, explanation, or that they have
any reality outside the human mind.


It somewhat reminds me of what I learnt as an engineer "Safety factor
is simply ignorance factor".

Sounds ******** to me. Safety factor is the margin to known problems.
Says nothing about unknown problems, but how could it?


My lawn is looking better for simply allowing it to grow beyond
baldness. Clover is doing well too.

same here, except I am trying to knock out the clover. I've got a
wildflower meadow down the bottom: what I want is a LAWN



--
"Strange as it seems, no amount of learning can cure stupidity, and
higher education positively fortifies it."

- Stephen Vizinczey

In article ,
AnthonyL wrote:

When I hear them arguing and disagreeing with eachother the thought
that immediately comes to me is "You are scientists. If there is not
a proof there that satisfies all then shut up and go seek it".

It somewhat reminds me of what I learnt as an engineer "Safety factor
is simply ignorance factor".

The former shows your misunderstanding of complex issues - why do you
think there IS a single, explicable, complete answer? There very
often isn't - and, in some cases, there are questions that are quite
simply unanswerable in such terms.

And the second is effectively ********. You cannot design for all
possible events - ships are designed only against (say) 'once in
a millennium' storms, not the worst possible storm, let alone such
things as Cumbre Viejo or the Storegga shelf collapsing.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

AnthonyL wrote:

You are scientists. If there is not
a proof there that satisfies all then shut up and go seek it

Try telling a mixed crowd of Christians/Jews/Muslims/WHY to go off and
find a "religious string theory" ...

On 21/07/2020 19:07, Andy Burns wrote:
AnthonyL wrote:

You are scientists.Â* If there is not
a proof there that satisfies all then shut up and go seek it

Try telling a mixed crowd of Christians/Jews/Muslims/WHY to go off and
find a "religious string theory" ...

How many angels will fir on the head of a pin?

New name, old concept.

--
“it should be clear by now to everyone that activist environmentalism
(or environmental activism) is becoming a general ideology about humans,
about their freedom, about the relationship between the individual and
the state, and about the manipulation of people under the guise of a
'noble' idea. It is not an honest pursuit of 'sustainable development,'
a matter of elementary environmental protection, or a search for
rational mechanisms designed to achieve a healthy environment. Yet
things do occur that make you shake your head and remind yourself that
you live neither in Joseph Stalin’s Communist era, nor in the Orwellian
utopia of 1984.�

Vaclav Klaus

On 21/07/2020 19:20, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
How many angels will fir on the head of a pin?

Which debate sounds less silly when you find out that the debate was not
over 10 or 100 or some such, but over finite vs infinite.

Andy