4 ms·

Really. Don't let the marketing of large chemical manufactures fool you. The UN has a report that small scale, distributed farming is more efficient & yields m

Really. Don't let the marketing of large chemical manufactures fool you. The UN has a report that small scale, distributed farming is more efficient & yields more food than large monoculture farms. It's been measured. http://www.technologywater.com/post/69995394390/un-report-says-small-scale-organic-farming-only http://www.technologywater.com/post/69995394390/un-report-sa... The only "disadvantage" is more people will be required to grow food. However, given the amount of people who are out of work & economically displaced, this would be a good thing. These people will be given autonomy & food sovereignty. There is historical evidence that monoculture, petrol farming does not work. Look at the "green revolution" in India. India is moving back toward natural farming techniques because they work.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
Turing_Machine 12y ago
"These people will be given autonomy & food sovereignty." You're kidding, right? Small-scale peasant farmers have historically been the most downtrodden and oppressed group. Serfdom or outright slavery is the norm. "There is historical evidence that monoculture, petrol farming does not work." No, there is historical evidence that it does work. China hasn't had a major famine in close to fifty years, and India hasn't had one since the 1940s. Yes, there are still hungry people there, but you don't see the kind of mass die-offs that were common under the "natural farming techniques". "The only "disadvantage" is more people will be required to grow food." Cool. You get to go first.
- Turing_Machine 12y ago
  Historical corn yield in Missouri: http://crops.missouri.edu/audit/images/CornYields_MO.jpg http://crops.missouri.edu/audit/images/CornYields_MO.jpg What was that you were saying about "does not work"? Note that even in a horrible year, the yield is still about 3x what they were getting in the early 1900s. In a good year it's 7x-8x.
  - briantakita 12y ago
    > What was that you were saying about "does not work"? Things that do not work: the overuse of till farming, soil erosion, drought, loss of habitat of wildlife, water pollution, inefficient water usage, desertification, famine, uneven food distribution, the reduction of nutrients in food, the obesity epidemic of the consumers of monoculture petrol agriculture, methane pollution from concentrated livestock, to name a few... Note that the graph you present is a myopic & reductionistic lens on the system's performance. It is also based on the evolution of the tradition of monoculture till farming, which can work (in an unoptimal way) in forgiving (even rainfall through the year) climates, but devastates the ecosystem in brittle (uneven rainfall through the year) climates. > No, there is historical evidence that it does work. China hasn't had a major famine in close to fifty years, and India hasn't had one since the 1940s. Yes, look at the "fertile crecent", that is Iraq, Iran, etc. It was once a lush paradise that has been till farmed to desert. Look at the farmers in India who are going back to natural methods because they are going into debt due to chemical agriculture's exploitative & inefficient practices. In China, look at the Loess Plateau being transformormed from desert into green land with Natural & Permaculture methods. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBLZmwlPa8A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBLZmwlPa8A And famines happen all over the world. Centralized food production results in unequal food distribution. Re: traditional agriculture, we have been improving on a fundamentally broken tradition for thousands of years; We & Earth's ecosystems have suffered. It's time to go back to basics & work with, not against, nature. Reductionistic policy creates many externalized consequences, because we optimize for the things that we measure. In a monoculture mindset, we optimize for one crop. In a systemic mindset, we optimize for the entire system. Polyculture farms grow food by acre than monoculture farms. The many plants interact with each other to form a symbiotic food web, having introduce chemicals. Natural farming techniques, such as no till farming, have been shown to consistently out perform chemical monoculture agriculture. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yPjoh9YJMk&feature=youtu.be https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yPjoh9YJMk&feature=youtu.be and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masanobu_Fukuoka http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masanobu_Fukuoka One "challenge" is the diversity of the ecosystems on Earth call for a diversity in natural growing methods. There are many bioregions. The natural farmer needs to be in tune with the land & the ecosystem. On a side note, we have an epidemic of overly reductionistic thinking, which tends to blind us from the bigger picture. > Cool. You get to go first. I am. I'm taking part in the solutions to humanity's biggest issues. You are invited to as well.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

Turing_Machine 12y ago

"These people will be given autonomy & food sovereignty." You're kidding, right? Small-scale peasant farmers have historically been the most downtrodden and oppressed group. Serfdom or outright slavery is the norm. "There is historical evidence that monoculture, petrol farming does not work." No, there is historical evidence that it does work. China hasn't had a major famine in close to fifty years, and India hasn't had one since the 1940s. Yes, there are still hungry people there, but you don't see the kind of mass die-offs that were common under the "natural farming techniques". "The only "disadvantage" is more people will be required to grow food." Cool. You get to go first.

Turing_Machine 12y ago
Historical corn yield in Missouri: http://crops.missouri.edu/audit/images/CornYields_MO.jpg http://crops.missouri.edu/audit/images/CornYields_MO.jpg What was that you were saying about "does not work"? Note that even in a horrible year, the yield is still about 3x what they were getting in the early 1900s. In a good year it's 7x-8x.
- briantakita 12y ago
  > What was that you were saying about "does not work"? Things that do not work: the overuse of till farming, soil erosion, drought, loss of habitat of wildlife, water pollution, inefficient water usage, desertification, famine, uneven food distribution, the reduction of nutrients in food, the obesity epidemic of the consumers of monoculture petrol agriculture, methane pollution from concentrated livestock, to name a few... Note that the graph you present is a myopic & reductionistic lens on the system's performance. It is also based on the evolution of the tradition of monoculture till farming, which can work (in an unoptimal way) in forgiving (even rainfall through the year) climates, but devastates the ecosystem in brittle (uneven rainfall through the year) climates. > No, there is historical evidence that it does work. China hasn't had a major famine in close to fifty years, and India hasn't had one since the 1940s. Yes, look at the "fertile crecent", that is Iraq, Iran, etc. It was once a lush paradise that has been till farmed to desert. Look at the farmers in India who are going back to natural methods because they are going into debt due to chemical agriculture's exploitative & inefficient practices. In China, look at the Loess Plateau being transformormed from desert into green land with Natural & Permaculture methods. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBLZmwlPa8A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBLZmwlPa8A And famines happen all over the world. Centralized food production results in unequal food distribution. Re: traditional agriculture, we have been improving on a fundamentally broken tradition for thousands of years; We & Earth's ecosystems have suffered. It's time to go back to basics & work with, not against, nature. Reductionistic policy creates many externalized consequences, because we optimize for the things that we measure. In a monoculture mindset, we optimize for one crop. In a systemic mindset, we optimize for the entire system. Polyculture farms grow food by acre than monoculture farms. The many plants interact with each other to form a symbiotic food web, having introduce chemicals. Natural farming techniques, such as no till farming, have been shown to consistently out perform chemical monoculture agriculture. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yPjoh9YJMk&feature=youtu.be https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yPjoh9YJMk&feature=youtu.be and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masanobu_Fukuoka http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masanobu_Fukuoka One "challenge" is the diversity of the ecosystems on Earth call for a diversity in natural growing methods. There are many bioregions. The natural farmer needs to be in tune with the land & the ecosystem. On a side note, we have an epidemic of overly reductionistic thinking, which tends to blind us from the bigger picture. > Cool. You get to go first. I am. I'm taking part in the solutions to humanity's biggest issues. You are invited to as well.