pls look closer at the christmas tree farms and ask about the wild forest that used to be there. and if you are not convinced that the beingness of the forest is worth preserving for its own sake, then how about this: a living interdependent forest is actually potential worth far more than the christmas tree farm - the forest is more valuable than lumber. ask about the wild forest conditions that allow the christmas tree farms to grow in soil has not not been exhausted by our agricultural methods. any culture that stops rotating crops and letting the fields lie fallow is too desperate for cash to see the damage that our techniques to do the thick rich soil natural conditions left for us to exploit. to continue w/ the forest - what gave the europeans who come to the Americas the impression that the rich forests and bays full of life 'just happened?' to acknowledge the native land management practices dismisses the illusion that the land is not being used and there for there for the taking of the industrious European, whose homeland had lain fallow during the dark age and recovered enough to feed the population explosion that continues to this day. shut the fuck up whitey, i know the poor master race is not exploding as fast as the poor races of the southern hemisphere, and all over europe white people seem disinclined to bring a child into this world. America and nature were based on a set of deceptions concerning the nature of nature, and the rôle traditional cutltures play in nurturing usefull plants, guiding variation that produce for instance over 200 varieties of potatoes, each attuned to a particular microclimate.
the christmas tree farms will fail w/out inputs because growing christmas trees as a crop does not replenish the soil, which in the meantime is also eroding away faster. since to get the most out of the crop the farmer cannot allow forest conditions to emerge naturally - a natural catastrophe like a forest fire and clear cutting have similarities and glaring differences. both result in a period of the prevalence of weeds. define weeds as quick growing plant that creates conditions in the soil ideal for its rapid propagation and the elimination of competitors. agriculture has increasing depended on an ecocatastrophe to clear the way for profits over sustainability.
and there's the difference between a tree farm and extracting value from a living forest. the tree farm requires a modicum of work relative to the potentially size-able return in large cold hard beautifull cash, if you are savvy and work the system, and even the less venial farmers can make a good quick buck, compared to a sustainable enterprise utilizing the forest - to maintain balance and guarantee the greatest return from managing a forest in the old way requires most of having an intimate relationship to the forest. the single greatest value of the forest: it's biodiversity, is where the fortune is to be made - or are you unaware that you cannot patent the whole plant but do get an patent when you isolate the 'active' ingredient. a plant like chocolate has hundreds of chemicals and scientists have studied the effects of many of them but not all and don't have the financial nor theoreticall resources to investigate the interactions of several chemicals at once. if substances are banal as epson salts turn to an unpleasant goop in the bath if you add olive oil soap before the epson salts have disolved. i have no indication of either epson salt or Dr. Bronners behaviour independently that mixed together under certain replicable that a weird and rather gross mixing results. that is a demonstration of many thing you can try the next time you take a bath. one demonstration concerns starting conditions. if the salts are dissolved enough the goop will not happen when you add the soap. those conditions rely on varients as simple as how hot you run your bath..
No comments:
Post a Comment