Re: [compost_tea] Re: RE: SUMMER, 2004- Reprinted from Journal of Biodynamics Vol.2:36-45

From: L Blair <rlbct_at_clear.net.nz>
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 11:30:52 +1300
I've just had a look at the document (and I'm not a qualified scientist).
The best part of it for me is the picture of a vortex as you might see it
stirring a BD preparation.  You can see the cord-like nature of the water in
the center, twisting on itself.

Ignoring all the "N/A"s (as pointed out by Kirk) - and I don't see how its
worth publishing a document with this much unassessed information - the
tables where the same inputs were used show enormous discrepancies in the
"hour zero" rows.  Such that I cannot trust the measuring method used.
This helps to discredit any findings.  To me that report is worthless,
except as an example of extremely poor science.

But I do like the picture...

Lynton

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kirk Leonard" <kirkleon_at_open.org>
To: "Compost Tea Group" <compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, December 27, 2004 8:36 AM
Subject: [compost_tea] Re: RE: SUMMER, 2004- Reprinted from Journal of
Biodynamics Vol.2:36-45


>
> Tom - Thanks for posting this.  Definitely good food for thought, though
> there is an agenda there, too.  As a "populist" I especially liked the
> closing admonition...  Well written, good short read, though.
>
> I'm referring to Tom J's 12/21 pointer, which I too had to try a couple
> times.
> http://www.woodsend.org/pdf-files/compost-tea-BD04R.pdf
>
> As a non-scientist, I have to have fun differently, and I like talking
about
> tea machines (and have made stirred teas for a lot more years, too).
> Anybody got a guess which machines he used?  I think it does make a
> difference.
>
> From the report, the "aeration" machines, s1 and s2, were described
thusly:
>
> "Both units are designed to provide constant bubbling
> aeration for up to twenty-four hours, employing differing
> modes of action. One unit sucks air from the top and
> expresses it into the solution through a central rapidwhirling
> mixer; the other unit forces air to the bottom of
> the unit and bubbles it upward via holes in a circular ring."
>
> My guess is s1 is a SoilSoup bioblender and s2 a little KIS.  If so, the
> good doc needs to learn more about these new-fangled "high tech" machines.
> The bioiblender doesn't aerate, it pumps water, which does cause an air
> release and exchange, but it's not even close to the same as what the KIS
> does.  Interesting that s1 ended with less fungi than it started, s2
> opposite, which is what we've been thinking and seeing for quite a while.
> The recommended, small KIS brewing period is also 12 hours, which he
didn't
> seem to use, but maybe I missed it.
>
> The 72 to 120 hour "settling" (my word) observations are really
interesting
> and I have to say the anaerobic reflections seem sound.  I'm willing to
> believe healthy water will keep itself aerated, and anaerobes at bay.
>
> Anybody else want to talk about this?  What do all those numbers really
> mean?  I think of the difference between E + 02 and E + 12 as pretty huge
> (isn't that 10 orders of magnitude?).
>
> The trending also doesn't make a lot of sense and I don't understand all
the
> "NA" cells.  Not applicable?  Not assessed?  Huh?  Why not?  Not actually
> done at the same time?  Not enough room in the incubator?
>
> Kirk
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
click here


Yahoo! Groups Links

Received on Sun Dec 26 2004 - 19:00:41 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Feb 07 2012 - 14:15:40 EST