[compost_tea] Re: chemical based -> biological approach

From: chriscreid <reidchris_at_earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 14:08:49 -0000

--- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, "kevin john richardon"
<kmagic_at_b...> wrote:
> seems significant that in the transition from chemically supported
growing practices to a biological approach,
>
> in which the chemical practices have been discontinued, the soil
food web analyzed and the twelve step program implemented (Bacteria,
Bacterial Foods, Fungi, Fungal Fooods, Myco F, Protazoa
<Flagellates, Amoebae, Ciliates>, Nematodes <Bacterial Feeding,
Fungal Feeding & Predatory>, Earthworms & Microarthropods) to bring
the system into appropriate balance
>
> that in cases not seeing remarkable improvements in growth
>
> the status quo is being maintained?
>
> the system is not getting worse from lack of chem inputs?
>
> seems that this alone points to the fact that the bio approach is
working, in its ability to sustain the system with only biological
inputs & microbial foods.
>
Kevin and all,

I think the responsible thing to do is not to speculate. Phil Ochs
wrote a song once and said, "if I listen long enough to you, I'll
find a way to believe that it's all true..." Selective ways of
seeing in order to believe what we want to believe is not science.

Please hear me out. I am not suggesting that nothing is happening
on such sites. I am saying that it is helpful to DEMONSTRATE that
on that particular site, where no AACT was used and previous land
management practices means were discontinued, the AACT portion
was/was not responding differently than the discontinued practices
area. And of course, it would be useful to control for the OTHER
practices (ferts, amendments, pest control, biostimulants, mulching,
breaking up compaction, etc.) that were being used, and make sure
that any differences there were noted, as well. To single out the
difference of AACT vs. non-AACT, the other practices should be
identical, and the site conditions as close as possible to the same.

When we put ourselves in a position to convince ourselves of
something by reaching at data and interpreting it in a way that
suits our explanation, we cease to see what is there and start to
see what we want to see to reach the conclusions we want to reach.
This is perhaps more obvious to us when we're critiquing some method
that seems to be more based on hocus pocus than science, and noting
the practitioners doing this.

And then we're not doing science, we're doing a belief system around
AACT. It will not move AACT ahead or our understanding of what's
happening ahead to do that.

My two cents,

Chris Reid


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/0PSxlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
compost_tea-unsubscribe_at_yahoogroups.com

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




Received on Fri Nov 21 2003 - 12:13:01 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Feb 07 2012 - 14:14:52 EST