THCFarmer.com
121,276 Members Log In Register
Log In Register

Biochar addition to soil, anybody?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JamesVJ
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

Biochar addition to soil, anybody?

JamesVJ 113 Replies 8,140 Views
Page 3 of 6 · Replies 41–60 of 114
#41
Jimmie said:
I’m going to make some also. I guy I know is into biodynamic farming. He told me to charge it with my kelp that I make. Instead of fresh water he said use ocean water, seems sketchy with the salt.
Click to expand...
Last fall I picked up 2,00# of seaweed that was washed ashore after the hurricane.
I rinsed it 3 times over a week. Threw it on the garden and it is now at work.
Pretty cool!
 
#42
Yes, there are patents related to atmospheric injection of aerosols, particularly focusing on methods for mitigating climate change through stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), such as US20100127224A1 for seeding the stratosphere with reflective particles. [1, 2, 3]
Here's a more detailed explanation: [2]
US20100127224A1:
This patent, titled "Atmospheric injection of reflective aerosol for mitigating global warming," discusses a method of depositing fine particles in the stratosphere to reduce global temperatures. [2]
Methods for SAI:
The patent describes seeding the stratosphere with particles that have low emissivity in the near-infrared spectrum and high emissivity in the far-infrared and visible spectrums. [2]
Other related patents:
Other patents exist related to aerosol delivery systems and methods for inducing cloud properties, such as US2756097A "Process for weather control". [1, 3, 4]
Stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) is a proposed geoengineering technique that aims to mimic the effects of volcanic eruptions by injecting aerosols into the stratosphere to reflect sunlight. [3, 5, 6, 7]

Sulphate aerosols are a primary type of aerosol that could be used in SAI, reflecting sunlight back into space and potentially mitigating global warming. [5, 8]


Generative AI is experimental.
[1] https://patents.google.com/patent/US20100071771A1/en
[2] https://patents.google.com/patent/US20100127224A1/en
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratospheric_aerosol_injection
[4] https://patents.google.com/patent/US2756097A/en
[5] https://csl.noaa.gov/news/2023/390_1107.html
[6] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34233386/
[7] https://www.gatech.edu/news/2024/01/30/can-solar-geoengineering-save-world
[8] https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1000289
 
#43
JamesVJ said:
Yes!
I had started mix of leaves grass green stuff and cow donkey chicken goose poo in a drum.
Nasty smelling but it will charge it really well.
I've got it drying so I can crush it.
It was 47 F here this morning.
Brr....
I have no viking left in me....
Click to expand...
That is perfect! And I hear you, I am hoping for 40 F this afternoon. Getting old makes the cold hurt too much for me lol
 
#45
LoveGrowingIt said:
In that case, every one of us will need to reinvent the wheel so we can know for certain it rolls. Until then, it's only a belief.
Click to expand...
We have access to wheels, so it doesn't need to be re-invented. But yes, we can use that as an example. If one has never seen a wheel roll, perhaps a child, and the child has been told in words it does roll, then to the child it is only a theory that a wheel rolls. When the child sees the wheel rolling, then it becomes truth in the child. Whatever example, rolling wheels or something else, theory, hypothesis, is not truth. We see how belief blocks truth from this. It ends the inquiry into what is.
 
Last edited:
#49
JamesVJ said:
Yes, there are patents related to atmospheric injection of aerosols, particularly focusing on methods for mitigating climate change through stratospheric aerosol injection
Click to expand...
No doubt. The process of cloud seeding has been around since the 40’s. This doesn’t give any credence to the idea that NASA & NOAA are doing geoengineering.
 
#50
mancorn said:
Are you going to drop a feather and a hammer on the moon? Do gene splicing? Build a quantum computer? Cut open your stomach and check if there’s microorganisms in there? If you had to do an experiment before you believe anything you’d be as dumb as a rock.
Click to expand...
I did play doctor with girls when I was a kid. That count?
 
#51
mancorn said:
Are you going to drop a feather and a hammer on the moon? Do gene splicing? Build a quantum computer? Cut open your stomach and check if there’s microorganisms in there? If you had to do an experiment before you believe anything you’d be as dumb as a rock.
Click to expand...
I don't have any interest in doing any of that. I dont care if i find microorganisms in or outside my guts, or not. I don't care about feathers or hammers on the moon. You keep using the word believe. I'm not a man of belief. Try to be more conscious of the words you are using. If I do a valid test, I know. There is nothing about belief in it. You can believe all the second hand information you want. I continue to question, to doubt. Because I know knowledge is limited, just like the human brain is limited, the mind is as well. Man can barely understand anything. Your insults and name calling are just a reflection of you. I don't have to accept your garbage. Its optional. Keep it for your friends and family that have to suffer your problems.

It used to be medical science that it was necessary to use leeches or blood letting devices to remove demons from the blood that were causing sickness and disease. People believed it. Somewhere, sometime, someone questioned that, doubted it.
DWcjDPoXcAAfkeD
 
Last edited:
#54
mancorn said:
Check your ego, I haven’t insulted or name called anyone.
Click to expand...
mancorn said:
If you had to do an experiment before you believe anything you’d be as dumb as a rock.
Click to expand...

False.

Experiments lead to knowing, not believing. That's the point of an experiment, is the non-belief. So let's examine the confused word choice and move on.

You are saying that people that do experiments, before **believing** anything, are dumb as rocks. So you are saying believers are dumb as rocks. As far as saying those that do experiments are dumb as rocks, you did not exactly say it.

Which would include you as a believer, which would be "dumb as a rock" by your own statement.
(Was it twice now I explained the fact that belief is not truth? Somebody isn't paying attention.)


So let's try and make your statement more logical and perhaps you meant to say, anyone that does experiments before they accept anything as truth, is dumb as a rock.


Is this what you were trying to say? Which group are you calling "dumb as rocks"? The truth seekers, or the believers? Because it would be insulting to both parties.

Or did you want to call both sides a name (dumb)? Because you aren't being clear. Or are you just using words unconsciously and we can expect more of the same?
 
Last edited:
#55
JamesVJ said:
Yes, there are patents related to atmospheric injection of aerosols, particularly focusing on methods for mitigating climate change through stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), such as US20100127224A1 for seeding the stratosphere with reflective particles. [1, 2, 3]
Here's a more detailed explanation: [2]
US20100127224A1:
This patent, titled "Atmospheric injection of reflective aerosol for mitigating global warming," discusses a method of depositing fine particles in the stratosphere to reduce global temperatures. [2]
Methods for SAI:
The patent describes seeding the stratosphere with particles that have low emissivity in the near-infrared spectrum and high emissivity in the far-infrared and visible spectrums. [2]
Other related patents:
Other patents exist related to aerosol delivery systems and methods for inducing cloud properties, such as US2756097A "Process for weather control". [1, 3, 4]
Stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) is a proposed geoengineering technique that aims to mimic the effects of volcanic eruptions by injecting aerosols into the stratosphere to reflect sunlight. [3, 5, 6, 7]

Sulphate aerosols are a primary type of aerosol that could be used in SAI, reflecting sunlight back into space and potentially mitigating global warming. [5, 8]


Generative AI is experimental.
[1] https://patents.google.com/patent/US20100071771A1/en
[2] https://patents.google.com/patent/US20100127224A1/en
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratospheric_aerosol_injection
[4] https://patents.google.com/patent/US2756097A/en
[5] https://csl.noaa.gov/news/2023/390_1107.html
[6] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34233386/
[7] https://www.gatech.edu/news/2024/01/30/can-solar-geoengineering-save-world
[8] https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1000
Click to expand...
 
#56
RegularRebel said:
False.

Experiments lead to knowing, not believing. That's the point of an experiment, is the non-belief. So let's examine the confused word choice and move on.

You are saying that people that do experiments, before **believing** anything, are dumb as rocks. So you are saying believers are dumb as rocks. As far as saying those that do experiments are dumb as rocks, you did not exactly say it.

So let's try and make your statement more logical and perhaps you meant to say, anyone that does experiments before they accept anything as truth, is dumb as a rock.


Is this what you were trying to say? Which group are you calling "dumb as rocks"? The truth seekers, or the believers? Because it would be insulting to both parties.

Or did you want to call both sides a name (dumb)? Because you aren't being clear. Or are you just using words unconsciously and we can expect more of the same?
Click to expand...
Belief is based on acceptance. I have no personal knowledge that there are organisms living in my gut. But I do believe that there are, because I can read. Clearly almost all your “knowledge” is based on belief, as it would be impossible for anyone to personally validate these ideas.
 
Last edited:
#57
mancorn said:
Belief is based on acceptance. I have no personal knowledge that there are organisms living in my gut. But I do believe that there are, because I can read. Clearly almost all your “knowledge” is based on belief, as it would be impossible for anyone to personally validate these ideas.
Click to expand...
Thank you for illustrating my point.
 
#59
mancorn said:
You might want to think before posting. You wrote “If you are not doing the tests yourself, then all you have is belief.”
Click to expand...
You have quoted my true statement. Thanks for illustrating my point yet again. But let's get back to biochar.
 
Last edited:
#60
RegularRebel said:
You have quoted my true statement. Thanks for illustrating my point yet again.
Click to expand...
You’re free to play rubber/glue meme science all day and I’ll post what ever I want. That way we’ll both be happy.
 
Page 3 of 6 · Replies 41–60 of 114
Back
Top Bottom