A rant (was Re: [compost_tea] Re: 131 degrees Farenheit heated compost for 3 days

From: Ted Peterson <ted.peterson_at_tcsn.net>
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 17:51:14 -0800

  I hate to say this but I was skeptical about the pathogen "problem" from =
the beginning. I did some sampling work for the Morro Bay National Estuary=
 Program because we were being told that our bay and drinking water are ful=
l of human pathogens. I volunteered for the MBNEP so I could use their tes=
ting facilities. This occurred before I got involved with compost tea. Yo=
u know, no matter how much I tried, I just couldn't get the same results th=
e other testers were getting with every sample they took. I finally asked =
one of the supervisors to walk me through the testing procedure step by ste=
p.

  Well, dumb me. I didn't realize that the whole testing program was set u=
p to "find" e coli, any e coli and the way they were doing the test used a =
contaminated known sample mixed with a new sample. Then the difference bet=
ween the known and the new would show the level of NEW CONTAMINATION. In a=
ll the tests I conducted, I forgot to put in the "control" as they called i=
t. So each test showed at least some contamination except min which often =
showed ND with the equipment they were using. (It was there but insignifica=
nt for all practical purposes.)

  The estuary is a bird sanctuary and I am sure you know that bird poop has=
 a couple of pathogens mixed in that stuff you scrape off your windshield. =
 In fact, during the migration season, the "human" e coli rises in exact pr=
oportion to the density of the bird population. Curious. (Why didn't some=
body point this out before? Well, it had been noted and promptly ignored.)=
  This could be clearly seen through testing that did not use the "control"=
 sample but couldn't be seen using the control. I was never sure if it was=
 the equipment or ??? I just didn't know enough at the time. However, the=
y pissed me off so much that I ran for office here to try and throw the dat=
a out.

  Not surprisingly, I lost. (One of my opponents kept picking up the bogus =
report -- generated from estuary testing -- and waving it in front of the c=
amera stated: "We have proof of contamination.") I answered him in my typi=
cally gentle manner which, I have found, is a sure way to win friends: "Bul=
lshit. Your report is based on faulty testing."

  In my politically niave way, I did state the truth but found that the exp=
letive was the only think people heard.

  Anyway, I kind of learned a lesson about presentation. One of these days=
, it will kick in. I'm not holding my breath though.

  We are having the same problem with a guy named David Broadwater. He has=
 become a self-proclaimed "expert" in sludge/biosolids and all the wonderfu=
lness that is a waste water treatment plant. He has caused us nothing but =
problems because he has spread the fear of rampant e coli raging up and dow=
n the streets of San Luis Obispo, getting drunk during Mardi Gras, getting =
into children's food ("Won't sombody think of the children?) taking over ou=
r sports fields, ruining our lovely life here. He argues in total contradi=
ction to "facts" presented by Earth-Wise, John Wallace (One of the biggest =
"green" environmental planners in the state.), the Waste Treatment district=
s here (four of them) and a plethra of experts from Cal Poly. You know wha=
t? He is winning. He is winning because people are scared of everything t=
hat doesn't come in an irridiated package or isn't sprayed with every known=
 antibacterial/antifungal monstronsity known to man. People care less abou=
t MAD cow or chemicalized veggies because BIG AG tells them that it's OK. =
And people believe BIG AG because "don't we have the most and the bestest f=
ood in the world?"

  Check out that Clopyralid or Plicotin. Cancer causing and sperm reductio=
n/birth defects at 1PPB. (Yes Martha, that's one part per billion.) You w=
ould think people would be screaming about that. The only thing they care =
about is if the stuff containing it will get the Dandelions out of their Be=
rmuda grass.

  Fear mongers work on two fronts: First they scare you about anything nat=
ural. Second, they distort anything reliable to build confusion. If you w=
ant a good read, I recommend "The Sceptical Enrironmentalist" by Bjorn Lund=
berg. He points out how both sides of every important environment issue us=
e scare tactics and often ignore or distort the real issue. Talk about sca=
re, that book will scare the pants off you. Here's the problem, even knowl=
edgeable people are caught in the mess because stentorian know-everythings =
have the public ear and eye. Speak up too much in opposition and you are l=
abled some kind of radical. And always underlying the scare is: "We don't =
know everything. Do You? Can you assure me 100% that there is NO possibil=
ity of <fill in your favorite disaster here>? It's better to err on the si=
de of caution." Of course, one soon realizes that caution must only be exe=
rcised on anything that challenges BIG AG and the totally out of control ch=
emical industry.

  I'll tell you something else. I'm a Libertarian (card carrying) but I kn=
ow when I am being had by institutionalized modes of thought that have, as =
the sole purpose, destruction of the planet through ignorance.

  Ted Peterson
  Earth-Wise/Spirit of the Earth



Received on Mon Mar 01 2004 - 23:49:01 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Feb 07 2012 - 14:15:05 EST