Strange times

Actually, I said use google to search for peer reviewed journal articles.* I also said it would take seconds for you to do your own search and become modestly informed on a topic you purport to know so much about, stating as your main case that you don't want to spend the money on it.* That's not an argument about the cause/effect of conventional practices.

What I did not say, but you apparently assumed, is that organic farming is the solution for feeding the world's population.* Instead, I implied that the practices are less harmful to soil and groundwater.* Again, if you take the time to do the research, you'll be able to prove it to yourself, rather than having me hold your hand.* You've already proven you know how to find an article you think is reputable.

Oh, and I didn't ask you to believe in climate change either.* Actually, I never mentioned it.* Diversion is also not a compelling argument for your case.* Like you have been stating, just because you know how to read a journal article in one field,
doesn't necessarily mean you know the facts about this one.

I also don't think this argument is making distinction between crop farming and raising animals. As far as all organic agriculture goes, maybe its not the answer. Yes it uses forms of pesticides. I think IPM (integrated pest management) agriculture is more of the way to go than totally organic or totally reliant on pesticides.

I think raising animals, cattle in particular has more of an environmental impact. Large cattle feedlots or CAFO (concentrated animal feeding operations) can pollute local waterways and a lot of other localized pollution. CAFOs are not necessary to feeding the population of America or the world. Cheap meat originating from these factor farms has led to the proliferation of meat in the American diet. Don't get me wrong. I love burgers, bacon and any other meat product you can think of. I think the idea that meat must be a part of every single meal is wrong. Its not until very recently that this was even possible.

You missed one huge point I was trying to make "abazin". I don't care about organics. I even said so right off the bat. If they are cheaper than regular, I'll buy. I was only trying to make others defend their holier than thou stance with actual facts. I don't pretend to be an expert on the subject, yet I have provided more evidence that my stance is correct than the prophets of organic on here.

Also, I couldn't help but notice you still didn't post any sources. Like I said before, "Google it" doesn't count. I am not pushing my religion on others. I only ask that folks that do provide some sort of evidence, especially giving medical advice. In other words, prove it or leave us low class, regular food eating people alone.

It is painfully obvious by some of the posters in this thread that they are highly emotionally attached to the subject at hand. Also, like religion. That is the only reason for such hostility I can think of. Also the only case in which the words "prove it" can cause such a response that I know of.

I think Pappers is the most correct on here when he says "in my opinion" (yes, I am taking him out of context). It seems that is all this subject is about. If the organic people would just use those words in front of everything they said, I would have no argument. "In my opinion organics have more nutrients". There is no evidence to back up the claim, but you would be correct to say "in my opinion".

You said you didn't care about organics? I thought you said this:

I think the "organic" movement is hilarious though.

Click to expand...

And if you want to be left alone by the "prophets of organic" I suggest you not jump into a debate with a contrary opinion. You got into this all on your own, so don't blame the people here for debating your opinion.

I'm pretty sure I was clear on why I didn't post sources, but since you can't seem to find any, here you go:

http://caliber.ucpress.net/doi/abs/10.1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0573:EEAECO]2.0.CO;2

abazin said:

You said you didn't care about organics? I thought you said this:



And if you want to be left alone by the "prophets of organic" I suggest you not jump into a debate with a contrary opinion. You got into this all on your own, so don't blame the people here for debating your opinion.

I'm pretty sure I was clear on why I didn't post sources, but since you can't seem to find any, here you go:

http://caliber.ucpress.net/doi/abs/10.1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0573:EEAECO]2.0.CO;2

Click to expand...

I do find it hilarious. How is that caring about organics? I find clowns funny, but have no love for clowns. Well, except Krusty in old episodes of The Simpsons. The new ones just aren't the same... I digress...

Uh, your source is just the abstract. How am I to critique work if I don't have the actual article? Do you really think just an abstract is sufficient? What are his metrics? How was the work compiled? What data was analyzed? What were his conclusions? How were they arrived at? Did you actually read the article or did you just hit the "I feel lucky" button on google? I would actually like to read the article. From the abstract, he sounds like he is saying that organic farming can be more economical than regular. I would like to learn how, considering money is the big evil farming corporations motivation right? Of course, it could be a number pulled from his backside like the one in the first paragraph. I am sure his source is an interesting one for $12B every year... oh wait, he sourced himself. I'll save judgement for when you school me on it, since I am sure your read the article in it's entirety.

I was actually referring to folks outside this forum. Relax buddy. I have no emotional attachment to the topic at hand, but just find it funny that people so blindly follow something. I just feel as though people owe it to themselves to be educated on what they are doing, not because a guy who wants to sell a book told them to do it. I actually enjoy poking holes in arguments, just as I like having people poke holes in my arguments (defending a stance can be fun and educational too). I did not put myself in the defensive position, that was the "believers". I simply said, "prove it". That is when a lot of unexpected emotions began pouring out, but still no proof.

Regardless, enjoy your weekend! Hope it's a good one. Brew day for me tomorrow!

I'm still staying out of this (following Grandma's advice about arguing), but let me just say this- I have read and researched more than you can imagine. I work in the medical profession, and have for over 30 years.

I don't feel the "need" to go dig up my old JAMAs and other things because you ask for my sources. But let's turn it around- YOU cite your sources saying that your position is correct. Let's have it- cite the sources saying that industrialized food is nutritionally superior (or at least the same) as local food. Same with adding chemical nitrogen to soils, the water supplies, etc.

Whatever it is that you're arguing about (I'm no longer reading your posts), cite your own sources. You're just babbling here now.

What about the huge oxygen depleted "cloud" of water in the Gulf from all the pesticide use in farming that has washed into those troubled waters?

The days of thinking that the world is so huge and bountiful that we can never make enough trash or pollution to phuck it up are over.

People who say "Mother earth can fix any wrong. In 200 years there won't be any trace of oil spill" don't realize that we ourselves are a fungus on the surface of this rock. Mess it up enough, and earth will be as clean and shiny as the other planets floating around out there, having cured it's bad case of humans.

Yooper_Brew said:

I'm still staying out of this (following Grandma's advice about arguing), but let me just say this- I have read and researched more than you can imagine. I work in the medical profession, and have for over 30 years.

I don't feel the "need" to go dig up my old JAMAs and other things because you ask for my sources. But let's turn it around- YOU cite your sources saying that your position is correct. Let's have it- cite the sources saying that industrialized food is nutritionally superior (or at least the same) as local food. Same with adding chemical nitrogen to soils, the water supplies, etc.

Whatever it is that you're arguing about (I'm no longer reading your posts), cite your own sources. You're just babbling here now.

Click to expand...

Um Yoop?,,,,I think you missed Grandmas point.

ndsgr said:

Uh, your source is just the abstract. How am I to critique work if I don't have the actual article? Do you really think just an abstract is sufficient?

Click to expand...

I gave you a source, as requested. If you want to read the full article, I expect you to pay for it like everyone who wants to read journal articles. Again, I'm not here to do your homework for you. There is a link to the full article on that page. I also find this abstract infinitely more credible than a few uncited, unreferenced paragraphs on scribd written by a consultant who formerly worked for Dupont and Mycogen.

I'm glad you told me to relax. I've admittedly been giving you a lot of attitude; about the same as what I think you've given to others of this forum. You would do well to remember that a lot of us are scientists, engineers, medical professionals, and technical specialists and we don't need you to tell us what credible information is. Especially if you are going to turn around and provide a half-a$$ed example. You want people to prove their sources and then you spout off about how it's all been debunked and throw out some misdirection about climate change as evidence. Let's see a credible source from your side. Being skeptical doesn't make you any more correct than being a supporter.

Damn, I need a beer. What's on the brew agenda? I'm making a trippel for this winter.

I am more concerned about genetically modified than organic.

cheezydemon3 said:

I am more concerned about genetically modified than organic.

Click to expand...

+1 I totally agree.

Wow after nine pages this is all I have to say...

I am not presenting a stance, so why would I need a source? I am in the position to say prove it. Ex: you say Elvis is alive and living as a mennonite. I shouldn't have to present evidence to the contrary, I just say prove it. An internet religious debate is not worth the price of buying a paper (the link isn't free btw). I was hoping you actually read your source and could fill me in. I was wrong and am disappointed. However; I have no interest in making enemies, especially in this hobby. So, I'll just concede.

Organic foods are not based on faith. There are numerous sources that prove they have more nutrients, are better for the environment, and are just generally groovy.

Hopefully that means we can all be friends again. I respect yooper for the advice she provides to the board. Sorry to have caused you to be upset. Pappers too. I only intended to bring about an alternate view point; no worries, lesson learned.