| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Osvald Hotz De Baar
Guest
|
 Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 8:58 pm Post subject: Re: Hunting. |
 |
|
On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 13:25:06 +0000, OZ Oswald Hotz De Baar
Upthorpe Farm
Moreton Road
Aston Tirrold
Didcot
OX11 9EW (Road Map)
Oxfordshire
Tel: 01235 851747
Fax: 01235 850747 farmer and bully <Oz@farmeroz.port995.com> wrote:
[quote]This is bound to get pete et al into a frenzy, no matter.
[/quote]
That>s a bit of a desperate measure by all accounts. Still if that>s
how you want to play it.
[quote]Loaded a lorry just now, a friendly and loquacious southern irish
trukker. After quite a long chat (couldn>t get away) he said that blair
had done the s.irish a real favour and he had just had 30,000 grant to
convert some old buildings to horse stabling. Apparently there are
hoards of people going over to ireland for a days foxhunting and the
demand and price of stabling was astronomic there.
So its an ill wind, I guess.
[/quote]
That>s really something to be proud of but shows just how desperate
you are getting.
Still not going your way is it?
http://www.banfoxhuntingcrueltyireland.com/index.htm
http://www.banbloodsports.com/
http://tinyurl.com/ysrguh
Confirmation that you are a pro hunt bully, as has been claimed all
along is always good to know. It helps explain your vindictive
vendetta here and explains why you prefer going for those who cannot
fight back. Usually the sick and vulnerable of our society which is a
matter of public record.
Still I suppose if it keeps you from complaining about your neighbors
plans that>s something. |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Julie
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 9:54 pm Post subject: Re: Hunting. |
|
|
On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 15:58:25 +0000, Osvald Hotz De Baar
<curtains4U@upthorpe.farm.com> wrote:
[quote]On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 13:25:06 +0000, OZ Oswald Hotz De Baar
Upthorpe Farm
Moreton Road
Aston Tirrold
Didcot
OX11 9EW (Road Map)
Oxfordshire
Tel: 01235 851747
Fax: 01235 850747 farmer and bully <Oz@farmeroz.port995.com> wrote:
This is bound to get pete et al into a frenzy, no matter.
That>s a bit of a desperate measure by all accounts. Still if that>s
how you want to play it.
Loaded a lorry just now, a friendly and loquacious southern irish
trukker. After quite a long chat (couldn>t get away) he said that blair
had done the s.irish a real favour and he had just had 30,000 grant to
convert some old buildings to horse stabling. Apparently there are
hoards of people going over to ireland for a days foxhunting and the
demand and price of stabling was astronomic there.
So its an ill wind, I guess.
That>s really something to be proud of but shows just how desperate
you are getting.
Still not going your way is it?
http://www.banfoxhuntingcrueltyireland.com/index.htm
http://www.banbloodsports.com/
http://tinyurl.com/ysrguh
Confirmation that you are a pro hunt bully, as has been claimed all
along is always good to know. It helps explain your vindictive
vendetta here and explains why you prefer going for those who cannot
fight back. Usually the sick and vulnerable of our society which is a
matter of public record.
Still I suppose if it keeps you from complaining about your neighbors
plans that>s something.
[/quote]
A good tallyho soon flushes the pro hunt nuts out. They cant resist it
lol |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Campaign for Fresh Air
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 6:48 pm Post subject: Re: Wireless CCTV On Farms - The bully we know as "Oz" |
|
|
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 13:29:18 +0000, Campaign for Fresh Air
<letsstandup2bullies@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
[quote]On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 13:19:52 -0000, "Pat Gardiner"
patgardiner@btinternet.com> wrote:
The bully we know as "Oz" <Oz@farmeroz.port995.com
Oswald Hotz De Baar
Upthorpe Farm
Moreton Road
Aston Tirrold
Didcot
OX11 9EW
Oxfordshire
Tel: 01235 851747
Fax: 01235 850747 wrote in message
news:UogKijAQe72HFwnr@farmeroz.port995.com...
AJH <news@sylva.icuklive.co.uk> writes
Not with me for much longer, spammer. I>d have given you the benefit of
doubt for the initial bit of unsolicited commercial posts but you>re
advertising the same thing with no other topical input.
Correct.
A test posting that an real electrical/electronic engineer worth his
salt would have had (quite a few) comments on received content-free
reply.
The man is a salesman of little technical expertise.
I think that>s what the village idiot Oz calls rocket science. He is
quite right of course the guy did come here seeking advice and he told
us he wanted to develop CCTV for farms.
What he got was a whole lot of abuse from a few known wankers who are
desperate to spoil usenet at any cost. Quite ironic really.
I founded two highly successful computer companies, one a Plc. and I>m
virtually computer technically illiterate.
Running even a invocative technically based business does not demand great
technical expertise. Indeed, it can be a disadvantage.
Anyway, why be so rude to him. What has he done to you?
I think they might still be a slight touchy from kick up the arse they
have been getting of late. That sort of behaviour will just ensure it
continues.
He has not been enquiring into your activities in respect of animal health,
like me, has he?
Nobody disputes that you are a technical genius,
I do I think he>s a wanker. The only difference between him and the
other dickheads is he knows he is!
but just look at the mess
you have got yourself into over pigs and MRSA.
Now that is something to be concerned about.[/quote] |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Pat Gardiner
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 7:24 pm Post subject: Re: Wireless CCTV On Farms - The bully we know as "Oz" |
|
|
"Campaign for Fresh Air" <letsstandup2bullies@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:sjknt3dqes210n1nthh3hnk569vt6abr7s@4ax.com...
[quote]On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 13:29:18 +0000, Campaign for Fresh Air
letsstandup2bullies@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 13:19:52 -0000, "Pat Gardiner"
patgardiner@btinternet.com> wrote:
snip
Not with me for much longer, spammer. I>d have given you the benefit of
doubt for the initial bit of unsolicited commercial posts but you>re
advertising the same thing with no other topical input.
Correct.
A test posting that an real electrical/electronic engineer worth his
salt would have had (quite a few) comments on received content-free
reply.
The man is a salesman of little technical expertise.
I think that>s what the village idiot Oz calls rocket science. He is
quite right of course the guy did come here seeking advice and he told
us he wanted to develop CCTV for farms.
What he got was a whole lot of abuse from a few known wankers who are
desperate to spoil usenet at any cost. Quite ironic really.
I founded two highly successful computer companies, one a Plc. and I>m
virtually computer technically illiterate.
Running even a invocative technically based business does not demand
great
technical expertise. Indeed, it can be a disadvantage.
Anyway, why be so rude to him. What has he done to you?
I think they might still be a slight touchy from kick up the arse they
have been getting of late. That sort of behaviour will just ensure it
continues.
He has not been enquiring into your activities in respect of animal
health,
like me, has he?
Nobody disputes that you are a technical genius,
I do I think he>s a wanker. The only difference between him and the
other dickheads is he knows he is!
[/quote]
Actually, you are quite right. I would not know, would I? He probably is
speaking gibberish appreciated only by other members of the Politburo. I
think it might be a Vance cult thing.
Now with Webster, I do know. Obviously, I studied economics, business and
international trade and have been involved in them all my life and therefore
know that he is bluffing. He is a good bluffer, but it is all very
supeficial stuff that he has picked up in second hand bookshops, little more
than gibberish and predudice to an agenda.
On history, which is an interest of mine, he is pretty good. Good enough to
have the detail and to draw some deductions from what he has read, but even
then it is pretty cranky at times and the deductions support his warped view
of the world.
It is actually all pretty Vance - the cult of deception.
I wish he would just answer the question that really unmasks him:
"Do you think the government should order that Defra test Britain>s pigs for
MRSA?"
The fact that the National Livestock Advisor of the Country Land and
Business Association, can>t or won>t answer the question rather tells us
everything.
--
Regards
Pat Gardiner
www.go-self-sufficient.com
[quote]
but just look at the mess
you have got yourself into over pigs and MRSA.
Now that is something to be concerned about.
[/quote] |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Campaign for Fresh Air
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 7:32 pm Post subject: Re: Wireless CCTV On Farms - The bully we know as "Oz" |
|
|
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 14:24:46 -0000, "Pat Gardiner"
<patgardiner@btinternet.com> wrote:
[quote]
"Campaign for Fresh Air" <letsstandup2bullies@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:sjknt3dqes210n1nthh3hnk569vt6abr7s@4ax.com...
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 13:29:18 +0000, Campaign for Fresh Air
letsstandup2bullies@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 13:19:52 -0000, "Pat Gardiner"
patgardiner@btinternet.com> wrote:
snip
Not with me for much longer, spammer. I>d have given you the benefit of
doubt for the initial bit of unsolicited commercial posts but you>re
advertising the same thing with no other topical input.
Correct.
A test posting that an real electrical/electronic engineer worth his
salt would have had (quite a few) comments on received content-free
reply.
The man is a salesman of little technical expertise.
I think that>s what the village idiot Oz calls rocket science. He is
quite right of course the guy did come here seeking advice and he told
us he wanted to develop CCTV for farms.
What he got was a whole lot of abuse from a few known wankers who are
desperate to spoil usenet at any cost. Quite ironic really.
I founded two highly successful computer companies, one a Plc. and I>m
virtually computer technically illiterate.
Running even a invocative technically based business does not demand
great
technical expertise. Indeed, it can be a disadvantage.
Anyway, why be so rude to him. What has he done to you?
I think they might still be a slight touchy from kick up the arse they
have been getting of late. That sort of behaviour will just ensure it
continues.
He has not been enquiring into your activities in respect of animal
health,
like me, has he?
Nobody disputes that you are a technical genius,
I do I think he>s a wanker. The only difference between him and the
other dickheads is he knows he is!
Actually, you are quite right. I would not know, would I? He probably is
speaking gibberish appreciated only by other members of the Politburo. I
think it might be a Vance cult thing.
[/quote]
I think it>s just they don>t have the balls to call him a dick!
[quote]Now with Webster, I do know. Obviously, I studied economics, business and
international trade and have been involved in them all my life and therefore
know that he is bluffing. He is a good bluffer, but it is all very
supeficial stuff that he has picked up in second hand bookshops, little more
than gibberish and predudice to an agenda.
On history, which is an interest of mine, he is pretty good. Good enough to
have the detail and to draw some deductions from what he has read, but even
then it is pretty cranky at times and the deductions support his warped view
of the world.
It is actually all pretty Vance - the cult of deception.
[/quote]
Yes the common denominator is their cult like obsessive behaviour.
Maybe Oz has a cellar big enough to hold their weird meetings, ritual
animal sacrifices and personal abuse.
[quote]I wish he would just answer the question that really unmasks him:
"Do you think the government should order that Defra test Britain>s pigs for
MRSA?"
The fact that the National Livestock Advisor of the Country Land and
Business Association, can>t or won>t answer the question rather tells us
everything.[/quote] |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Campaign for Fresh Air
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2008 1:58 pm Post subject: Re: Wireless CCTV On Farms The bully we know as "Oz" |
|
|
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 23:31:12 +0000, Oz <Oz@farmeroz.port995.com> >>
The bully we know as "Oz" <Oz@farmeroz.port995.com>
Oswald Hotz De Baar
Upthorpe Farm
Moreton Road
Aston Tirrold
Didcot
OX11 9EW
Oxfordshire
Tel: 01235 851747
Fax: 01235 850747 wrote:
[quote]The Farm Electronics Engineer <paulhirons@aol.com> writes
Just for the record I am an experienced Communications Engineer. In fact I
spent the last 8 years doing the CCTV, radio and Information Systems on the
London Underground. Add to that my years installing Communications in the
Channel Tunnel, you ever walked the Channel Tunnel Steve?, Commissioning on
the Trident Project, you ever been near a Subm,arine Base then Steve? and
twelve years Radio & Telecommunications in the Royal Air Force when we had a
cold war, (you ever been on a jet then Steve?) theres not much I don>t know.
With my qualifications stretching to five pages of Educational Certificates
on my CV theres not much a self opinionated bigot can really tell
me..........
1) So how come you can>t manage a basic technical discussion?
2) How come you are reduced to flogging mass produced tv systems to
peasants?
Just keep digging, fine by me.
[/quote]
Now now bully boy try not to revert to type. It>s not like you can do
with the attention your bullying brings you is it
The bully we know as "Oz" <Oz@farmeroz.port995.com>
Oswald Hotz De Baar
Upthorpe Farm
Moreton Road
Aston Tirrold
Didcot
OX11 9EW
Oxfordshire
Tel: 01235 851747
Fax: 01235 850747 |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Reality_Check©
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 12:04 pm Post subject: Re: Why ethanol from cellulose is a hoax! |
|
|
<calderhome@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2a90db01-ab0f-4ee8-a2b8-3a725de62433@u36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
[quote]Why ethanol from cellulose is a hoax!
The biofuel zealots falsely claim that our current disastrous use of
corn for ethanol production is only temporary, and is somehow a
building block or stepping stone for future ethanol production from
switchgrass, crop waste, wood chips, and other sources of cellulose.
The problem is that the equipment (manufacturing plants) used to make
corn vodka (ethanol) are of no use in making ethanol from cellulose,
which is a complex and expensive two stage process requiring new plant
construction and costing millions upon millions of dollars. The
current cost of making ethanol from cellulose is the same as making
gasoline from crude oil that costs $305. a barrel. As ethanol has 30%
less energy than gasoline and thus delivers poor gas mileage, this
product is currently economically dead. If we can improve our methods
and cut the cost in half, that still brings us to an oil equivalent
price of gasoline made from crude oil at about $150 a barrel, plus we
still have the 30% loss in energy per gallon compared to gasoline.
Even if they got the cost down to an oil equivalent of $100. a barrel,
it is still not a good deal because of the 30% energy loss inherent to
ethanol, which cannot be changed unless you make another fuel product
altogether.
As expected, many money hungry companies are making big claims about
having bacteria that can make ethanol from cellulose work, but ask
yourself how and at what price? If they had a bacteria that could do
the job instantly it would be the ultimate anti-human life weapon,
because if it got loose it would eat up the earth>s biosphere and we
would have nothing left but bacteria. Obviously, you can make ethanol
from lots of substances given enough time and money, and "time is
money." It takes time and specific conditions (usually higher
temperatures) to make these bugs work, and the time it takes to rot or
dissolve wood chips and switchgrass into something that can then be
fermented into alcohol is a complex, time consuming, and expensive
process.
A new study from three agricultural economists at Iowa State
University with insider information on the latest biofuel technology
says ethanol made from cellulose will likely NEVER be affordable The
Federal tax credits for ethanol made from cellulose would have to be
raised from the current $.51 to $1.55 per gallon, which will be
unacceptable to Congress and the American public. Switchgrass, crop
waste, and wood chip biofuel schemes are too expensive to ever work!
The newspaper article can be found here -
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2008/3/3/125745/7746
The full study can be found here - pdf 180kb at:
http://www.card.iastate.edu/publications/DBS/PDFFiles/08wp460.pdf
Coming soon after the Princeton study published in SCIENCE showing
that all biofuels are far worse for the environment and global warming
than gasoline leaves the biofuel zealots little cover to hide behind.
SEE - http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/1151861
Another problem with our current corn vodka infrastructure is that it
is located in the wrong areas, and not near the "marginal" prairie
lands" that Bush wants to grow switchgrass on. So the idea that corn
ethanol is a stepping stone to anything but more corn ethanol is a BIG
LIE!
Quoted from my web page.
"The outlook for biofuels is dismal - Growing massive amounts of
switchgrass to produce ethanol from lignocellulose has most of the
same drawbacks as making ethanol from corn. We will use land, water,
fertilizer, farm equipment, and labor to grow switchgrass that will be
diverted from food production, with soaring food prices a result. If
we grow switchgrass on land currently used to graze cattle, we will
reduce beef and milk production. If we grow switchgrass on unused
"marginal" prairie lands, we will soon turn those marginal lands into
a new dust bowl, which they may turn into anyway due to global
warming. Computer models for the progression of global warming show
the America Midwest and Southwest getting hotter and dryer, with much
of our farm and grazing land turning into desert. We know that
biofuel production will speed up global warming, so why are we pinning
so much hope on an environmental battle plan that any fool can see
will blow up in our face over time? We won>t be able to produce
enough biofuels to run our cars, or enough food to fill our
bellies.
The very process of making ethanol from lignocellulose has not
been proven to be economically viable (cellulosic ethanol not
affordable, pdf 180kb), and the Bush energy bill assumes new
scientific breakthroughs that have not occurred. Some new biofuel
crops are toxic weeds which will have a destructive impact on wildlife
and biodiversity around the world. In practical terms, there is not
enough usable land area to grow a sufficient quantity of biofuel
plants to meet the world>s energy demands. Even if the USA dedicated
100% of our corn and soybean production to biofuels, we would only
satisfy 12% of gasoline demand and 6% of diesel demand. To quote
Stuart Staniford, "The biofuel potential of the entire human food
supply is quite a small amount of energy compared to the global oil
supply - somewhere between 15 to 20% on a volumetric basis, so 10 to
15% on an energy basis." Every year the human race burns up the
equivalent of 400 years worth of planetary vegetation in the condensed
form of fossil fuels. How are we going to replace all that
concentrated energy by growing biofuel crops on our desperately
overpopulated, pure water starved little planet?
Growing algae to make biodiesel is being touted as a cure-all for
all our biofuel problems, but we are still stuck with the fact that
algae need solar energy to turn carbon dioxide into fuel. To make
biodiesel, algae are used as organic solar panels which output oil
instead of electricity. Research reports brag that algae can produce
15 times more fuel per acre of land than growing corn for ethanol, but
that still means we would need approximately 30 million acres of
concrete or plastic lined algae ponds to meet 100% of projected US
automotive fuel usage by the year 2022. Those algae schemes that use
less land invariably call for feeding algae sugar. Sugar must be made
from corn, beets, or other crop, so you are simply trading ethanol
potential to make oil instead of vodka. If you grow genetically
engineered super-algae in open-air ponds, the genetically modified
algae will be immediately carried to lakes, reservoirs, and oceans all
over the world in the feathers of migrating birds, with unknown and
possibly catastrophic consequences. Using agricultural waste water
for algae production is a good idea, but algae may be more logically
used for making modest amounts of animal feed, as algae is very costly
to turn into fuel.
Using agricultural "waste" to make biofuels has its own
problems. Removing unused portions of plants that are normally plowed
under increases the need for nitrogen fertilizers, which release the
most potent greenhouse gas of all; nitrous oxide. Much of the
residual crop biomass must be returned to the soil to maintain topsoil
integrity, otherwise the rate of topsoil erosion will increase
dramatically. If we mine our topsoil for energy, we will end up
committing slow agricultural suicide like the Mayan Empire. Without
topsoil, the world starves! Using wood chips to make ethanol sounds
like a good idea until you remember that we currently use wood to make
pellet fuel for stoves, paper, particle board, and a thousand and one
building products. Every part of the trees we cut down for lumber are
used for something, including the bark which is used for garden
mulch. The idea of sending teams of manual laborers into forests to
salvage underbrush for fuel would be prohibitively expensive. Our
forests are already stressed just producing lumber without tasking
them with producing liquid biofuels for automobiles, a scheme which
will inevitably drive up the price of everything made from wood,
creating yet another resource crisis."
------
Please visit my page on biofuels, "The biofuel hoax is causing a world
food crisis!" at:
http://home.att.net/~meditation/bio-fuel-hoax.html
You can find the latest biofuel disaster news at -
http://home.att.net/~meditation/biofuel-news.html
Christopher Calder[/quote] |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Phred
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 3:26 pm Post subject: Re: Free Rice |
|
|
In article <delrv3hg2p6to3n55rg9trlq74cr3f8j41@4ax.com>, Rob Adams <robadams@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
[quote]On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 17:34:47 GMT, "Don H" <donlhumphries@bigpond.com
wrote:
Is this a joke? Not necessarily, what is a joke is - rice growing in
Australia in a Temperate Zone, instead of in the Tropics (usual place). All
those rice paddies with water surface exposed to sun>s rays - and constant
evaporation.
The attempt to grow rice in (or near) Darwin was a failure.
http://nt.gov.au/nreta/publications/media/pdf/2005/09/humptydoo20050921.pdf
[/quote]
The attempt to grow rice in NQ/FNQ was very successful -- until the
industry was killed off by extraneous factors unrelated to agronomy
per se.
Actually, I suspect the real joke is the claim that the "usual place"
to grow rice is in the Tropics.
[Followups set to sci.agriculture]
Cheers, Phred.
--
ppnerkDELETE@THISyahoo.com.INVALID |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
I don't do wombats
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 3:23 am Post subject: Re: Free Rice |
|
|
A charity running the rice business makes me cringe.
First the charity has to make enough money to cover the expenses of the
office, pay all the employees a wage, buy the directors new cars.
Then when they have the money to buy the rice they have to learn logistics
how to ship the rice how to transport it how to pay the suppliers.
Then it gets to the destination and the government takes over the
distribution and steal it all and pocket the money made from the rice.
And stupid western country idiots pays for all this.
"Phred" <ppnerkDELETETHIS@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:66688gF2i8sd4U1@mid.individual.net...
[quote]In article <delrv3hg2p6to3n55rg9trlq74cr3f8j41@4ax.com>, Rob Adams
robadams@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 17:34:47 GMT, "Don H" <donlhumphries@bigpond.com
wrote:
Is this a joke? Not necessarily, what is a joke is - rice growing in
Australia in a Temperate Zone, instead of in the Tropics (usual place).
All
those rice paddies with water surface exposed to sun>s rays - and
constant
evaporation.
The attempt to grow rice in (or near) Darwin was a failure.
http://nt.gov.au/nreta/publications/media/pdf/2005/09/humptydoo20050921.pdf
The attempt to grow rice in NQ/FNQ was very successful -- until the
industry was killed off by extraneous factors unrelated to agronomy
per se.
Actually, I suspect the real joke is the claim that the "usual place"
to grow rice is in the Tropics.
[Followups set to sci.agriculture]
Cheers, Phred.
--
ppnerkDELETE@THISyahoo.com.INVALID
[/quote] |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Phred
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 5:58 pm Post subject: Re: Free Rice |
|
|
In article <47fe9347$0$18355$c30e37c6@pit-reader.telstra.net>, "I don>t do wombats" <bigkev164@hotmail.com> wrote:
[quote]A charity running the rice business makes me cringe.
First the charity has to make enough money to cover the expenses of the
office, pay all the employees a wage, buy the directors new cars.
[/quote]
Sounds like you might have read "Lords of Poverty" like I have. :-)
I am *very* cynical about all the international charities. I suspect
they mostly exist for the benefit of the people who run them.
Then there>s the official aid agencies which often take so long to
decide to buy in that the crisis is over and their "aid" just makes
things worse for the poor bastards trying to recover. For example, by
finally dumping free food just when the local farmers have at last
managed to grow another crop after some disaster.
[quote]Then when they have the money to buy the rice they have to learn logistics
how to ship the rice how to transport it how to pay the suppliers.
Then it gets to the destination and the government takes over the
distribution and steal it all and pocket the money made from the rice.
And stupid western country idiots pays for all this.
"Phred" <ppnerkDELETETHIS@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:66688gF2i8sd4U1@mid.individual.net...
In article <delrv3hg2p6to3n55rg9trlq74cr3f8j41@4ax.com>, Rob Adams
robadams@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 17:34:47 GMT, "Don H" <donlhumphries@bigpond.com
wrote:
Is this a joke? Not necessarily, what is a joke is - rice growing in
Australia in a Temperate Zone, instead of in the Tropics (usual place).
All those rice paddies with water surface exposed to sun>s rays - and
constant evaporation.
The attempt to grow rice in (or near) Darwin was a failure.
http://nt.gov.au/nreta/publications/media/pdf/2005/09/humptydoo20050921.pdf
The attempt to grow rice in NQ/FNQ was very successful -- until the
industry was killed off by extraneous factors unrelated to agronomy
per se.
Actually, I suspect the real joke is the claim that the "usual place"
to grow rice is in the Tropics.
[Followups set to sci.agriculture]
[/quote]
Cheers, Phred.
--
ppnerkDELETE@THISyahoo.com.INVALID |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
veritas
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2008 11:03 am Post subject: Re: Free Rice |
|
|
Phred wrote:
[quote]In article <delrv3hg2p6to3n55rg9trlq74cr3f8j41@4ax.com>, Rob Adams <robadams@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 17:34:47 GMT, "Don H" <donlhumphries@bigpond.com
wrote:
Is this a joke? Not necessarily, what is a joke is - rice growing in
Australia in a Temperate Zone, instead of in the Tropics (usual place). All
those rice paddies with water surface exposed to sun>s rays - and constant
evaporation.
The attempt to grow rice in (or near) Darwin was a failure.
http://nt.gov.au/nreta/publications/media/pdf/2005/09/humptydoo20050921.pdf
The attempt to grow rice in NQ/FNQ was very successful -- until the
industry was killed off by extraneous factors unrelated to agronomy
per se.
Actually, I suspect the real joke is the claim that the "usual place"
to grow rice is in the Tropics.
[/quote]
Rockhampton and north is "in the tropics"......
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Phred
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2008 3:47 pm Post subject: Re: Free Rice |
|
|
In article <1b622$481568bb$4720@news.teranews.com>, veritas <xxx@xxxxx.com> wrote:
[quote]Phred wrote:
In article <delrv3hg2p6to3n55rg9trlq74cr3f8j41@4ax.com>, Rob Adams
robadams@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 17:34:47 GMT, "Don H" <donlhumphries@bigpond.com
wrote:
Is this a joke? Not necessarily, what is a joke is - rice growing in
Australia in a Temperate Zone, instead of in the Tropics (usual place).
All
those rice paddies with water surface exposed to sun>s rays - and constant
evaporation.
The attempt to grow rice in (or near) Darwin was a failure.
http://nt.gov.au/nreta/publications/media/pdf/2005/09/humptydoo20050921.pdf
The attempt to grow rice in NQ/FNQ was very successful -- until the
industry was killed off by extraneous factors unrelated to agronomy
per se.
Actually, I suspect the real joke is the claim that the "usual place"
to grow rice is in the Tropics.
Rockhampton and north is "in the tropics"......
[/quote]
And your point is?
Cheers, Phred.
--
ppnerkDELETE@THISyahoo.com.INVALID |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu May 22, 2008 5:10 pm Post subject: anyone else have a field solid in clover?? Re: a field entir |
|
|
I thought I better post to sci.agriculture for they may know more.
plutonium.archime...@gmail.com wrote:
[quote]This experiment started in 2004 and so it is 4 years old now. I have a
good size field and seeded it
in clover instead in 2004. We had a wet spring one year and I
thought it would kill the clover since it was underwater for about a
month, but it seems to
have recovered. I would say that about 20% of the field is now solid
in clover. It seems to
take over in clumps or patches.
What I am doing is mowing around the patches of solid clover, in hopes
that it will go to seed
and fill in the entire rest of the field. Is that a good idea? Or will
clover spread faster if I mowed
it oblivious to the clover? Sometimes plants lose their vitality once
they gone to seed. Maybe
clover is one of those plants that spreads faster if not gone to seed.
Does anyone have a yard or field that is solid clover? I know farmers
have fields solid in
alfalfa, so why not solid in clover?
I do not know what the artistic value of clover is, but it certainly
seems to be one of the prettiest
green plants, whether it is the dark green or the round shape or the
general form of clover, but
something makes it a pretty green plant.
[/quote]
Perhaps clover is the leaf that has the closest to being a "circle" or
perhaps it
is the darkness of its green leaf with a splotch of white that makes
it pretty.
[quote]
Perhaps (sic) I am the only one striving to have a entire field of clover or does
some gardens in England
or Europe have attained entire fields of clover?
[/quote]
What I like to know is how to make the field overcome in clover,
whether letting it
go to seed favors the clover, or am I best to mow it.
Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu May 22, 2008 9:13 pm Post subject: Re: anyone else have a field solid in clover?? Re: a field e |
|
|
On May 22, 6:10 pm, plutonium.archime...@gmail.com wrote:
[quote]What I like to know is how to make the field overcome in clover,
whether letting it
go to seed favors the clover, or am I best to mow it.
[/quote]
There are different types of clover; however generally speaking,
cutting about 6 inches above the ground favors clover at the
detriment of grass. With an annual clover it is best to stop mowing
once the seed pods start to form so your clover will reseed.
Small grains and even some vegetables can be grown in a
field of clover without ploughing. The grains, barley, wheat, etc.
will just grow through the cover of clover.
Dieter |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 5:47 am Post subject: Re: anyone else have a field solid in clover?? Re: a field e |
|
|
Brand.Die...@gmail.com wrote:
[quote]On May 22, 6:10�pm, plutonium.archime...@gmail.com wrote:
What I like to know is how to make the field overcome in clover,
whether letting it
go to seed favors the clover, or am I best to mow it.
There are different types of clover; however generally speaking,
cutting about 6 inches above the ground favors clover at the
detriment of grass. With an annual clover it is best to stop mowing
once the seed pods start to form so your clover will reseed.
Small grains and even some vegetables can be grown in a
field of clover without ploughing. The grains, barley, wheat, etc.
will just grow through the cover of clover.
Dieter
[/quote]
Thanks for the advice. I never realized that a crop can grow right
through
a clover cover. That sounds like the most perfect form of agriculture
where
the clover stops erosion, stops ploughing and adds fertilizer to the
crop.
Yes, I would think that is the maximum agriculture. To gain a field in
clover
and then plant a crop. Never ploughing and never needing to fertilize.
About the only thing to do is to mow between the crop rows.
I hate to mow through my clover which is almost knee deep.
Dieter, a further question. Can you recommend a species of clover
which is
the most tough and long lasting of the clovers? Is it a white clover?
What is
the most durable clovers? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
