Why do people shit on organic farming? it's good for us, right?

>>1057624
Why don't people use the catalog?
>>1056921

>>1057624
I wouldn't advise shitting in your garden.

Because they are not brainwashed faggots like op

>>1057624
Organic farming basically means now days non-gmo plant species. Nothing else.

I don't use GMO's and don't use chemical fetilizers? I do use hybrid F1 seeds? Does that make me an organic farmer?

I really don't give a fuck.

>>1058454
Organic farming with pesticides? In what country?

Maybe lost in translation but that combo would not fly here. No-one would buy it, pure and simple.

>>1058468
Organic farms use organic pesticides, dipshit. They're not synthetic, but they're still poisons.

>>1058468

>No-one would buy it, pure and simple.

Except sheeple like you. You probably believe in global warming too

Organic farming is stupid. You waste huge areas of Farmland to grow minimal amounts of food and all the cow/horse shit these people use pollutes water sources just as good as any other fertilizer. In a world that is forced to feed drastically increasing numbers of people it is a dumb idea. It's only there for upper middle class scumbag hippies to feel good about themselves.

>>1058486
Cut out the soy and corn subsidies and we have any absolute fuck ton more land to grow food on.

>>1058474
Sure, in large amounts anything is poison. Dunno how it is done elsewhere, but at least in the EU with organic certified farming the intent is to minimally use a very limited set of allowed pesticides. If you look at the list in annex II of (EC) No 889/2008, it is kind of benign stuff.

>>1058478
> global warming
Why "believe" in it, I can observe climate change just peering through my window and checking photographs from 40-50 years ago.

>>1058486
Starving people is not a food production problem, it is a food distribution problem. We produce more than enough food for everyone. I want to eat good quality food. Others feel free to eat whatever chlorine chicken they want.

>>1058478
> reading comprehension
mfw

>>1057624
It's just another way people get you to buy more shit.

>>1058507
That's not an argument for wasting land on "organic" food production

>>1058510
>I can observe "global warming" from my bedroom

>>1058521
We produce already a large surplus, most of which is wasted and thrown away. Governments pay farmers to not produce too much. Using this land to improve quality is a good idea.

>>1058521
No but it is wasting huge ammounts of land to sell watered down (((ethanol))) petrol.

>>1058522
Yes, for non-local view, I can view a huge mountain of evidence from all over the planet, via the internet.

>>1058457
>I really don't give a fuck.
If you don't care why are you asking?

>>1058541
Another thing that we shouldn't be wasting ag land on.

File: 1494935001758.gif (107KB, 737x776px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 737x776px

>>1058542
Evidence like the 1995 iapcc report which details how we're coming out of a mini ice age, or evidence like pic related.

>>1058709
Oops, I meant the IPCC, but you already knew that, and that doesn't alter my point.

>>1058510
>Why "believe" in it, I can observe climate change just peering through my window and checking photographs from 40-50 years ago.

We're currently in an inter-glacial period during an ice age. Of course the amount of ice and snow is decreasing.

>>1058508

Benign like copper sulfate, which cause Alzheimers and several types of cancer at low exposure? Fuck out of here. The whole POINT of synthetic pesticides is that they're less harmfull and you can use less of them.

>>1058709
The clip you show is not evidence of any kind. In case you don't know why, it is not peer reviewed research but simply some cold war era feel good shit.

>>1060758
You get Alzheimer's more likely from aluminium in deodorants.

Less harmful?
Remember when DDT was so safe you could lace your drink with this safe wonder chemical. People did and it was in the propaganda films of the time.

>be farmer
>only put water and compost on the land
>organic certified (fuck that process)
>some fidget spinner faggot comes up and starts telling me organic is still bad for your health

Sure thing, kid.

>>1060782
Peer reviewed science is just a way to make sure real science is hidden from the public. Bribes, fraud, murder etc to keep the people down with phoney science

>>1060834
Proofs?

>>1060836
The proof is you believe in global warming based on zero evidence

>>1057624
I just call it regular farming.
Anyone criticising it must not grow his own produce, I suppose.

>>1060857
Hardly zero. Pro tip: Huffington Post and Drudge Report are not peer reviewed publications.

Globally rising average temperature due to climate change can mean local variations down too so don't get so stuck on "global warming" unless you intend to use it as a strawman.

File: MWE-LIA.gif (16KB, 417x203px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 417x203px

>>1060782
But the 1995 IPCC report is peer reviewed, and describes how we're coming out of a little ice age.

>>1060782

This peer reviewed research shows that global warming is a fraud

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-15/research-team-slams-global-warming-data-new-report-not-reality-totally-inconsistent-

>>1061949
So, if we are coming out of an ice age, the temperaturea must be rising. Do you refute this or not?

If yes, you contradict yourself.

If not, then accept climate warming, and is your question really whether the warming is made by humans or not?

Either the climate is getting warmer or it is not, it cannot be both ways.

>>1061952
> peer reviewed
> report made by US climate change deniers
> emeritus, former, former, retired
> add alzheimers and dementia too
> author of "Environmentalism gone mad"
> self-published
> link at ZeroHedge, notorious for all sorts of "hoard gold omfg euro crashing" crackpots and Russian shills
> no respectable journal gave a shit
> peer reviewed
> PEER REVIEWED
mfw

>>1061968
>Let's ignore the phoney data because we are brainwashed warmists

>>1058510
read some of david pratt's stuff about climate change anon, then come back

>>1058794
this
all you have to do is look at cyclostratigraphy
this is what all the evidence shows

>>1060834
holy shit this guy really gets it

dick hole? (im starting to think i know you...)

>>1062022
I did. He is a crackpot. And yes, reading is better than simply watching Youtube videos of idiots but neither is not an alternative to thinking for yourself.

I think organic farming is good because when i buy organic vegetables at the grocery store it tastes a lot better than the regular vegetables.

This has inspired me to begin growing my own food :)

>>1062046
Do you have any thoughts or do you just parrot climate scientists Al Gore and John Oliver?

>>1062195
Yes and no, no clue who John Oliver even is.

>>1060758
Copper sulfate is used by everyone, so why blaming organic farmers only?
Plus if used in the right way (that is not spraying it on fruits/edible parts and 15 days before harvest), you shouldn't find any in your food.

>>1061965
>So, if we are coming out of an ice age, the temperaturea must be rising. Do you refute this or not?
You imbicile, when people use the buzzwords "climate change" and "global warming," they're not just taking about a natural temperature increase. This whole constant debate over climate change began when the so-called hockey stick graph came out. And "climate change deniers" aren't people who think that the temperature outside never changes, they're people who think that the data that the hockey stick graph is based on is manipulated, and people who don't think that mankind is the driving force behind global temperature changes. You know that, right?

The climate is literally changing, just like it literally always has and literally always will. But the term "climate change" in the modern lexicon refers to anthropogenic climate change, as you well know.

>>1062249
>Copper sulfate is used by everyone, so why blaming organic farmers only?
That poster was clearly just trying to point out that just because something is "organic" doesn't mean it hasn't been treated with toxic and carcinogenic compounds.

>>1062430
Yes, I know this. But the clean coal lobby kool aid posse is not consistent with their denial, and it triggers me.

That guy first said no warming happens, then said we are coming out of an Ice Age, implying warming taking place - so which is it? Warming or not warming.

My point was: he was clueless.

Climate is changing yes, it is dynamic, and now mankind is boosting it. The problem is mankind's contribution is overloading the capacity and we get unintended climate effects which we cannot soon control. Enjoy planet Venus.

>>1062521
>That guy first said no warming happens, then said we are coming out of an Ice Age
I just looked back up the thread, and I don't see anyone saying that no warming happens. I only see posts which say that looking out your window isn't a valid peeve of evidence in support of your beloved in anthropogenic climate change, and posts which say we're coming out of an ice age.

For the record, I know that humans have an effect on the world around us, including its climate, but I certainly don't believe that we're overloading the Earth's capacity to right itself.

>>1062594
*piece of
*belief in

>>1062521
>0.6 degrees in 80 years
>Enjoy planet Venus

>>1062521
>which we cannot soon control
We never had control over the global climate, nor will we ever have control over it. Nor should we ever have control over it. I'm perfectly happy having nature take its course; it's done a good job so far.

>>1058457
"Non GMO" allows for a 2.7% genetic variance from norms established after centuries of stock breeding.

Modern soybean plants are part jellyfish, and labelled (legally) non gmo,.

Organic farming allows for use of unregulated chemicals based on source and little else.

It is considerably more harmful to the environment and us than standard farming.

File: 2.jpg (709KB, 1288x2080px) Image search: [Google]

709KB, 1288x2080px

Hi. I know nothing of the subject at hand, and I'm going to project my liberal views on how the State is the way to freedom.

File: DA0rTBIUMAAKYrW.jpg (44KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 960x960px

>>1062227
To my knowledge John Oliver is a tv show host. Of course amerifags cite them instead of rational science, ffs, they have voted a tv show host to be president AND they defend his stupidity left and right.

At this point you can make your own experiments to see that CO2 is changing climate.

Ice ages and warm periods come and go in milennia, not 50 years.

As for organic farming, you will like it once you have land of your own. And european style organic farming is completely different to US style.

>>1057624
it's largely a meme so i can mark up my prices selling to hipsters

>>1063184
Doesn't organic farming imply no use of chemicals?

>>1063379
No, just different ones.

>>1063423
So waht would farming without any chemicals be called then?

>>1063434
The problem here is that the word "chemical" has two distinct definitions to two different groups of people.

Scientifically speaking just about everything on earth is made of "chemicals."

Chemical - (noun) A chemical compound is an entity consisting of two or more atoms, at least two from different chemical elements, which associate via chemical bonds.

Table salt (the kind you put on your food) is sodium chloride, a chemical compound with the formula NaCl. It is made of two elements, sodium and chloride, held together in an ionic bond.

In this sense it is impossible to "farm without any chemicals."

Chemical in lay person terminology means a generally unpronounceable string of pseudo-latin words produced/processed/purified by man. An item that can only be obtained via a factory or laboratory, one not easily created by things found in the wild.

It's an incredibly vague definition/category that relies mostly on familiarity.

Here is what I mean by familiarity. Water is a chemical composed of oxygen and hydrogen held together by covalent bonds. The scientific name is dihydrogen monoxide. If I went to the store and asked for a bottle of dihydrogen monoxide the clerk would probably point me to their cleaner and solvent section... despite me asking for a bottle of water. Because the scientific name sounds "like a chemical."

(cont.)

>>1063434
>>1063452
(cont.)

In organic farming a fantastically effective pesticide can be created by steeping tobacco leaves in water and then spraying the solution on the buggy plants. The organic farmer has simply extracted and concentrated the nicotine from the tobacco leaves into an extremely toxic to drink solution. Nicotine is also known as 3-(1-methylpyrrolidin-2-yl)pyridine. If you drank that shit straight you would die.

The question is really “are synthetic chemicals more harmful than those naturally occurring… and what constitutes a synthetic chemical?”

I do think that plants and animals have trouble processing synthetic chemicals like Round-up and so I choose not to utilize them. I also use manure, compost, and fish guts to fertilize my plants instead of Miracle-Gro because I believe that the synthetic version lacks critical elements provided by decomposed natural matter. I believe that many of the industrial products have not had long enough trials to fully log the effects or lack thereof on plants, animals, and the dirt. There simply is not enough data. But that is just me. If someone wishes to use Spectracide or whatever, power to them! It is their food, they can do as they please. Just leave mine alone in return.

>>1063453
Obviously, I meant the synthetic stuff. We use manure, compost and ash, too. I thought that's what organic farming meant.

>>1063456
Asbestos is a naturally occurring substance and non synthetic thus well suited all around the organic farm

>>1063467
Forbidden in EU, not on the list of allowed pesticides. But thanks for trying. You tried so hard. Good work!

>>1063471
He was being cheeky

>>1063471
Asbestos is forbidden in the eu?

How did you dispose of your asbestos mines? Blast them into space?

>>1063434
I'll always remember that one chemistry 'sperg on my horticulture course that used to point out to my teacher everytime that water cannot be used in organic gardening as it is inorganic ^_^

>>1057624
It is good to shit in your field for fertilization, yes.

It's associated with leftists and everything they believe is a lie

>>1063456
But other non-synthetic (but very toxic) compounds are allowable for use in organic farming, like copper sulfate. Just because a pesticide or herbicide isn't synthetic doesn't mean it isn't toxic, carcinogenic, or anything else, even in small quantities.

File: Cbbmba0UkAEG32K.png (349KB, 600x356px) Image search: [Google]

349KB, 600x356px

Seems like organic is held in pretty universal contempt by people who don't eat organic.

>>1063575
I don't know about any of that because as I've said, we don't use stuff like that here. I always thought organic farming was the "old school" kind of farming that didn't involve any harmful materials.

>>1063585

>we don't use stuff like that here.

Topkek

>>1063501
It is forbidden to douse your organic farmed plants with asbestos, which is what the parent implied with the silly hyperbole.

There's a whitelist of substances you can use while farming organically. Otherwise you are not certified organic farming, can't call yourself that, can't have the logo, and you'll have to be very creative with your marketing to be able to trick people at all.

I don't know how they handle the mines. Close them up for good, I don't know what else?

>>1063585
>we don't use stuff like that here.
Maybe you don't, but it's more common than you might think.

>>1063583
I eat organic about 50%-75% of the time. Most of the organic stuff I buy is from local farms that I actually know personally. I have no delusions about the fact that the pretty label on the box doesn't mean much of anything on its own - it's only when I know the practices of the individual farm that I feel that growing organic makes a difference.

>>1063602
Well unless someone jumped the fence to get to my family's field and sprayed it with pesticide, there's nothing.

>>1063650
There are some standards farmers have to abide to but sure, you can't know for sure. That's why it's best to grow your own and buy produce from other locals.

>>1063679
>That's why it's best to grow your own and buy produce from other locals.
100%

>>1063583
Same goes for salad dodgers and vegetables.

you guys are aware we are running out of phosphorous right?
we need to use organic methods

>>1063699
I feel like organic and non-GMO means smaller yields and more waste. That translates to more fertilizer usage, organic =/= no fertilizer

>>1057624
Farming is a shit practice period. Tilling, fertilizing, weeding, growing monocultures, pesticides, irrigating, etc all lead to desertification. Not to mention the pollution from shipping foods all over the world and from grazing animals. It voids YOU of the issues of pesticides and chemicals but it leaves less and less fertile land for your children and so on. Just grow your own food and stop wasting money on foreign produce.

File: 1453208255993.png (464KB, 440x592px) Image search: [Google]

464KB, 440x592px

>>1063741
>Farming is a shit practice period. Tilling, fertilizing, weeding, growing monocultures, pesticides, irrigating, etc all lead to desertification.
>Just grow your own food

organic farming is a monumental waste of land. there's no excuse for supporting it

>>1063699
How about we stop sending food aid to Africa instead. The more we send the more they breed ad nauseum