Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 3 votes

How we "love" nature


  • Please log in to reply
70 replies to this topic

Poll: I "love" nature (14 member(s) have cast votes)

Would you leave everything behind to save nature

  1. Yes. I would leave everything (every minute thing that makes my life easier), behind me just to save nature (2 votes [14.29%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 14.29%

  2. Maybe. I would leave some things behind, but not every. (4 votes [28.57%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 28.57%

  3. No. I understand my impact/fault on nature, but I'm trying to minimize adverse effects (not just hot air on the forums). (8 votes [57.14%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 57.14%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1    bmk1245

bmk1245

    puny village idiot

  • Member
  • 4,008 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vilnius, Lithuania

Posted 02 April 2013 - 05:10 PM

This poll may be seen as kidney punch, but its a good reason to look in the mirror.
Not that long ago I visited house of people I barely know. They were bragging about how they love nature, they showed me their apartments, garden (organic). Guess what: there was forest before that; they were growing all sorts of fancy plants not  native to the land (so much for biodiversity preservation); not to mention all high-tech stuff consuming lots of electricity. Do they really care about nature? And, question for all readers: do you really care/love nature, besides emotional proclaims, etc?

My vote is #3, i.e. I'm trying to minimize my impact by many means: no food thrown (doesn't take into account food thrown in the stores), no electricity when unnecessary (moonlight/street light enough to find the stove/closet/bathroom), colder/shorter showers, energy saving lightbulbs (there are issues with those)/LED lights, and using same unwashed plate(s) for few days (wash it with your tongue, for f's sake!; thats for extremers ), etc.

So, lets show how we "love" nature.


Edit: since I can't abolish internet, my vote goes to #2 (instead of #3)

Edited by bmk1245, 02 April 2013 - 05:30 PM.

Arguing with fool is like playing chess with pigeon: he will scatter pieces, peck King's crown, crap on bishop, and fly away bragging how he won the game... (heard once, author unknown).
Zhoom! What was that? That was your life, Mate! Oh, that was quick. Do I get another? Sorry, Mate. That's your lot. Basil Fawlty (John Cleese).

#2    Eldorado

Eldorado

    Unforgiven

  • Member
  • 10,387 posts
  • Joined:29 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland

  • I reckon so.

Posted 02 April 2013 - 05:31 PM

Have you tried not using your computer so much?


#3    bmk1245

bmk1245

    puny village idiot

  • Member
  • 4,008 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vilnius, Lithuania

Posted 02 April 2013 - 05:36 PM

View PostEldorado, on 02 April 2013 - 05:31 PM, said:

Have you tried not using your computer so much?
Yeap, look at my number of posts, and compare to yours... See what I mean?

Arguing with fool is like playing chess with pigeon: he will scatter pieces, peck King's crown, crap on bishop, and fly away bragging how he won the game... (heard once, author unknown).
Zhoom! What was that? That was your life, Mate! Oh, that was quick. Do I get another? Sorry, Mate. That's your lot. Basil Fawlty (John Cleese).

#4    Ashotep

Ashotep

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,401 posts
  • Joined:10 May 2011
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:USA

  • Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway-John Wayne

Posted 02 April 2013 - 06:26 PM

I think there is a lot of things you can do without getting rid of everything.  Like the internet its environment friendly, no paper involved unless you have to print something out.  That saves trees.  Don't use plastic wrap or foil for everything, use reusable containers.  Don't drive if you can walk and don't make needless trips.


#5    Mikko-kun

Mikko-kun

    New life

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,475 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amniotic fluid of consfious life

  • Observation, individual resourcefulness... what would we be without them?

Posted 02 April 2013 - 06:41 PM

I think a situational question would be more appropriate, like would you leave everything behind to save nature if the situation demanded it? It's hard to put to words, but I would at the very least make sure with the best of my capability that the nature stays pure. By relinquishing all technology it's just me, one human less making plastic pollution and whatnot, but still the six billion more who will keep making it. And lets face it, after living the kind of life we do, how many of us would be totally prepared for an all-ascetic life? You'd want at least a roof over your head, not too hard-to-get food, and a comfortable enough lifestyle: sofa, internet, sex, sleep, pursue your interests... What more do you need? I'm actually going to leave all the vain stuff behind and focus on that in much more ecologically-friendly manner, I seen some people say the same. Build a self-sustaining eco-farm of their own, people have done that and I think it's a worthy dream in the kind of world we live in today, not just because of the ecological factor. The problem is money: you dont have it, you dont have land. Either work hard, become a criminal or wait for a heritage if you dont have the money. Those stock market people doing suicides because they lose one million and have a hundred thousand dollars left... I could use that hundred thousand to build a farm in this expensive country... in a 2nd-world or 3rd-world country you could do it with 20k euros or so, not that expensive for a farm like that. But I like this place...

I've been born again 31,8,2014 approximately 21:35 local time. A moment free of clutter in the mind, emancipating myself like an escapist, allowing myself to breathe life in a stronger, less physical level... though it does resonate to physical world. It's the oomph.

#6    Eldorado

Eldorado

    Unforgiven

  • Member
  • 10,387 posts
  • Joined:29 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland

  • I reckon so.

Posted 02 April 2013 - 07:24 PM

View Postbmk1245, on 02 April 2013 - 05:36 PM, said:

Yeap, look at my number of posts, and compare to yours... See what I mean?

Yep, but I'm not an eco warrior.  *puts tumble-dryer on to heat up a pair of socks*


#7    bmk1245

bmk1245

    puny village idiot

  • Member
  • 4,008 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vilnius, Lithuania

Posted 04 April 2013 - 08:32 PM

View PostHilander, on 02 April 2013 - 06:26 PM, said:

I think there is a lot of things you can do without getting rid of everything.  Like the internet its environment friendly, no paper involved unless you have to print something out.  That saves trees. [...]
Only if energy required comes from environment friendly sources. What is the most "environment friendly source" used for electric energy production?


View PostHilander, on 02 April 2013 - 06:26 PM, said:

[...] Don't use plastic wrap or foil for everything, use reusable containers.  Don't drive if you can walk and don't make needless trips.
But you wouldn't give up "needed trips", don't you? "I want to see Acropolis"... Jump on the plane, zhoom to Greece, rent a car, zhoom to Acropolis...

Arguing with fool is like playing chess with pigeon: he will scatter pieces, peck King's crown, crap on bishop, and fly away bragging how he won the game... (heard once, author unknown).
Zhoom! What was that? That was your life, Mate! Oh, that was quick. Do I get another? Sorry, Mate. That's your lot. Basil Fawlty (John Cleese).

#8    bmk1245

bmk1245

    puny village idiot

  • Member
  • 4,008 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vilnius, Lithuania

Posted 04 April 2013 - 09:07 PM

View PostMikko-kun, on 02 April 2013 - 06:41 PM, said:

I think a situational question would be more appropriate, like would you leave everything behind to save nature if the situation demanded it? [...]
Ah, situation demanded, ok.

View PostMikko-kun, on 02 April 2013 - 06:41 PM, said:

[...] It's hard to put to words, but I would at the very least make sure with the best of my capability that the nature stays pure. By relinquishing all technology it's just me, one human less making plastic pollution and whatnot, but still the six billion more who will keep making it. And lets face it, after living the kind of life we do, how many of us would be totally prepared for an all-ascetic life? You'd want at least a roof over your head, not too hard-to-get food, and a comfortable enough lifestyle: sofa, internet, sex, sleep, pursue your interests... What more do you need? [...]
That will not ruin nature, for sure: how many sofas you'd need (sofas don't grow in garden of Eden); internet is nature "friendly", for sure, unless you get electricity from petting a cat very... passionately; sex... well, without destructive production of condoms - more offsprings (well, without damaging pharma, nature would regulate that problem), more stomachs, more land to burn (as our ancestors did), etc, etc

View PostMikko-kun, on 02 April 2013 - 06:41 PM, said:

[...]  The problem is money: you dont have it, you dont have land. Either work hard, become a criminal or wait for a heritage if you dont have the money. Those stock market people doing suicides because they lose one million and have a hundred thousand dollars left... I could use that hundred thousand to build a farm in this expensive country... in a 2nd-world or 3rd-world country you could do it with 20k euros or so, not that expensive for a farm like that. But I like this place...
And in 2nd/3rd world people are just happy to provide us with cheap fruits... Just imagine raw eaters seeing their beloved fruits suddenly jump in price because locals in the 2nd/3rd world say "Wait a sec, I want my $7/per hour".

Anyway, don't take it as offence, I'm just pointing out that many things (even smallest) we are taking for granted have negative impact on nature.

Arguing with fool is like playing chess with pigeon: he will scatter pieces, peck King's crown, crap on bishop, and fly away bragging how he won the game... (heard once, author unknown).
Zhoom! What was that? That was your life, Mate! Oh, that was quick. Do I get another? Sorry, Mate. That's your lot. Basil Fawlty (John Cleese).

#9    Mikko-kun

Mikko-kun

    New life

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,475 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amniotic fluid of consfious life

  • Observation, individual resourcefulness... what would we be without them?

Posted 04 April 2013 - 09:17 PM

Thing with all that is, you dont need so much money for except the property tax and maybe some other compulsory administrative fees if you're practically self-sufficient. The bottom line is, if more people farmed their own food, naturally, you'd save a lot of nature on moving from pesticides and such to organics, and in all kinds of transportation and food-processing pollutions. The oil we use to tractors, food trucks and food refineries alone, as well as to all the electricity required to run the tech isn't a small cut, I remember it being somewhere in 10-20%. For comparison, workplace commuting energy-consumption was 10% or less of the total energy consumption. You could save with those expenses too then. So much crap because of inflexibility.

I've been born again 31,8,2014 approximately 21:35 local time. A moment free of clutter in the mind, emancipating myself like an escapist, allowing myself to breathe life in a stronger, less physical level... though it does resonate to physical world. It's the oomph.

#10    bmk1245

bmk1245

    puny village idiot

  • Member
  • 4,008 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vilnius, Lithuania

Posted 06 April 2013 - 06:58 AM

View PostMikko-kun, on 04 April 2013 - 09:17 PM, said:

Thing with all that is, you dont need so much money for except the property tax and maybe some other compulsory administrative fees if you're practically self-sufficient. The bottom line is, if more people farmed their own food, naturally, you'd save a lot of nature on moving from pesticides and such to organics, and in all kinds of transportation and food-processing pollutions. The oil we use to tractors, food trucks and food refineries alone, as well as to all the electricity required to run the tech isn't a small cut, I remember it being somewhere in 10-20%. For comparison, workplace commuting energy-consumption was 10% or less of the total energy consumption. You could save with those expenses too then. So much crap because of inflexibility.
How much land you need to be self-sufficient (all around the year)?

Arguing with fool is like playing chess with pigeon: he will scatter pieces, peck King's crown, crap on bishop, and fly away bragging how he won the game... (heard once, author unknown).
Zhoom! What was that? That was your life, Mate! Oh, that was quick. Do I get another? Sorry, Mate. That's your lot. Basil Fawlty (John Cleese).

#11    Mikko-kun

Mikko-kun

    New life

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,475 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amniotic fluid of consfious life

  • Observation, individual resourcefulness... what would we be without them?

Posted 06 April 2013 - 10:39 AM

Might depend on several factors: latitude, altitude, climate, how near or far from coast you are. And it can be a four-year process to get things running before you can call yourself more self-sufficient, food-wise. But a core rule seems to be that less land than what is needed to sustain a person with just traditional wheat-farming and the like, because you got trees and all kinds of veggies and herbs in the same areas together, and put plants which support each other through more compatible immunity systems and death-and-rebirth cycles of all kinds, having fitting pest-eater bug combinations and so on... in short you do it in a way which allows the plants to grow more and produce more, in natural means. That why less land is required.

I dont remember how much land you needed exactly, I think it was 2,5 acres per person sustained. The core benefit is that the land will stay in a more natural state, which will allow more steady rain and temperature seasons and smoothens out the climate, animals can live much more freely than if they were in cages and be in a more natural environment, feel more at home as in not having to take a dump where they eat and be allowed to interact with other life, not just with their own species and grass.

If you're going to be self-sufficient all around the year, having a winter greenhouse in colder areas is extremely helpful, not just because of much more diverse fresh winter foods supply, but also because it allows you to heat your house up in winter. This has been experimented extensively by Jerome Ostenkowski (hope I spelled that right) in Rocky Mountains, and in Canada people say they've done it too. I think we have such things here in Finland too, I'm looking forward to building one when the money's there, should be around 100k euros with the whole packet, if you can get the paperwork done. I bet you could get it much cheaper in Russia, at least if you dont get into trouble with authorities.. that's my biggest concern here too, with all the uptight regulations and the people that are known to be inflexible. We'll see.

In any case, in more warmer areas where you already get enough heat and three harvests a year (here we get just one or two at tops with certain species, but they're big fat harvests), in those warmer countries you focus more on getting trees growing and then you can enjoy bigger harvests because trees protect other plants from too much sun and heat and prevent evaporation, store the water without making it stagnant. So in warmer areas, the focus is more on trees and how you handle water flows. Getting trees to grow can take at least those four years, but they can bear nice fruit harvest just by themselves, and still protect the other plants like tomatoes (dont put those near just any tree though, their immunity system or something in their roots doesn't get along with many plants).

So in short, the money issue aside, in colder areas it can be a question of getting all the paperwork right, and in warmer areas it can be an issue of having trees growing and good supportive plant-combinations.

I've been born again 31,8,2014 approximately 21:35 local time. A moment free of clutter in the mind, emancipating myself like an escapist, allowing myself to breathe life in a stronger, less physical level... though it does resonate to physical world. It's the oomph.

#12    bmk1245

bmk1245

    puny village idiot

  • Member
  • 4,008 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vilnius, Lithuania

Posted 06 April 2013 - 08:10 PM

View PostMikko-kun, on 06 April 2013 - 10:39 AM, said:

[...]
I dont remember how much land you needed exactly, I think it was 2,5 acres per person sustained.[...]
Core benefits, etc... Thats nice. But think again, will 2.5 acres sustain your life in the whole year? Don't forget that you'll have to put some land on "relax", i.e. you'll have only half (third, quarter - depends on farming system) land you can expect  yield (in case pests/fungi won't obliterate your land) . And if pests/plant diseases would obliterate your crops (most notorious case - Ireland's Great Famine), whats then? If your neighbours are facing the same - whats then? And neighbours of neighbours...???

Arguing with fool is like playing chess with pigeon: he will scatter pieces, peck King's crown, crap on bishop, and fly away bragging how he won the game... (heard once, author unknown).
Zhoom! What was that? That was your life, Mate! Oh, that was quick. Do I get another? Sorry, Mate. That's your lot. Basil Fawlty (John Cleese).

#13    Mikko-kun

Mikko-kun

    New life

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,475 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amniotic fluid of consfious life

  • Observation, individual resourcefulness... what would we be without them?

Posted 06 April 2013 - 08:46 PM

You're asking about what to do after the damage has happened. Starve or eat what you got in stores or go to a shop, anything really. Why not ask what to do to prevent that happening in the first place? This is the typical mindset you face everywhere, our political leaders as well as people. Go to toilet after you have crapped your pants and the feces start to smell, not when you feel a python coming. If you only deal with consequences, you'll be doomed to repeat things over and over.

The main difference between preventing pests and fungi with organic or artificial/industrial means is that with industrial you usually destroy all the protective life too when you apply the pest-toxins. In the organic way you keep them alive and more diverse and focus more on their observation. Ladybugs, little birds, rodents, hornets, spiders and other stuff for pests and balance. Keep a balance between things and when balance is upset, add something suitable. As for fungi, you are speaking of mold or rot or such? From what I've gathered, much of that stems from water management problems, problems with how you handle the water there. Stagnant and dirty water, waterlogged ground can be a source of them. As for mushrooms, I've not studied the field much, dont remember but maybe the very basics, but there's a book called "Mycelium Running" on the subject, tells about lots of benefits of mushrooms. The main thing is, mushrooms like to grow on a more foresty soil, which is different from grass-soil, so you want a mixture of trees and other plants if you want mushrooms support your colony.

I'm not familiar with what caused the great famine of Ireland, but you must understand that permaculture farming is the kind of farming where you put many different species together, onions, carrots and cabbages together for example one by one, instead of having separate rows for each. When you consider that different species can have different protection which they extend to the plants next to them, protection like certain types of pesticide-eating bugs or such and certain chemicals their roots might excrete to protect themselves, you can boost the natural protection of the plants together threefold. They support each other's protective mechanisms. Protective mechanisms of some plants can be harmful to other plants, but there's been very extensive research done on that subject, so it's easier to avoid the obstacles the more you study and plan beforehand. If you think this kind of farming is the same as the plow-the-field and reap the hay, you're so dead-wrong. It may have it's own problems, but you should try to understand it a bit so you can see them.

I've been born again 31,8,2014 approximately 21:35 local time. A moment free of clutter in the mind, emancipating myself like an escapist, allowing myself to breathe life in a stronger, less physical level... though it does resonate to physical world. It's the oomph.

#14    bmk1245

bmk1245

    puny village idiot

  • Member
  • 4,008 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vilnius, Lithuania

Posted 10 April 2013 - 07:00 PM

View PostMikko-kun, on 06 April 2013 - 08:46 PM, said:

You're asking about what to do after the damage has happened. Starve or eat what you got in stores or go to a shop, anything really. [...]
Nature's schedule is quite unpredictable: you have drought, you have drought next year, you have drought third year. Your move

View PostMikko-kun, on 06 April 2013 - 08:46 PM, said:

[...]
The main difference between preventing pests and fungi with organic or artificial/industrial means is that with industrial you usually destroy all the protective life too when you apply the pest-toxins. In the organic way you keep them alive and more diverse and focus more on their observation. Ladybugs, little birds, rodents, hornets, spiders and other stuff for pests and balance. Keep a balance between things and when balance is upset, add something suitable. As for fungi, you are speaking of mold or rot or such? From what I've gathered, much of that stems from water management problems, problems with how you handle the water there. Stagnant and dirty water, waterlogged ground can be a source of them. As for mushrooms, I've not studied the field much, dont remember but maybe the very basics, but there's a book called "Mycelium Running" on the subject, tells about lots of benefits of mushrooms. The main thing is, mushrooms like to grow on a more foresty soil, which is different from grass-soil, so you want a mixture of trees and other plants if you want mushrooms support your colony.
[...]
Copper sulfate, life protecting?
And mushrooms... be careful what you pick in the forest - death caps are deceitful...

View PostMikko-kun, on 06 April 2013 - 08:46 PM, said:

[...]
I'm not familiar with what caused the great famine of Ireland, but you must understand that permaculture farming is the kind of farming where you put many different species together, onions, carrots and cabbages together for example one by one, i[...]
Heh, but that was "ancient wisdom", just not enough.


View PostMikko-kun, on 06 April 2013 - 08:46 PM, said:

[...]
When you consider that different species can have different protection which they extend to the plants next to them, protection like certain types of pesticide-eating bugs or such and certain chemicals their roots might excrete to protect themselves, you can boost the natural protection of the plants together threefold. They support each other's protective mechanisms. Protective mechanisms of some plants can be harmful to other plants, but there's been very extensive research done on that subject, so it's easier to avoid the obstacles the more you study and plan beforehand. If you think this kind of farming is the same as the plow-the-field and reap the hay, you're so dead-wrong. It may have it's own problems, but you should try to understand it a bit so you can see them.
In the long term protection of the plants against pests/rivals may evolve to the point to be harmful/less/nutritious to humans. Plants don't care about your health, unless you excrete/drop their seeds. Period. Just compare teosinte with modern corn (non-GM).. Try to find similarities/

Edit to add: slash mark

Edited by bmk1245, 10 April 2013 - 07:02 PM.

Arguing with fool is like playing chess with pigeon: he will scatter pieces, peck King's crown, crap on bishop, and fly away bragging how he won the game... (heard once, author unknown).
Zhoom! What was that? That was your life, Mate! Oh, that was quick. Do I get another? Sorry, Mate. That's your lot. Basil Fawlty (John Cleese).

#15    Mikko-kun

Mikko-kun

    New life

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,475 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amniotic fluid of consfious life

  • Observation, individual resourcefulness... what would we be without them?

Posted 10 April 2013 - 08:29 PM

View Postbmk1245, on 10 April 2013 - 07:00 PM, said:

Nature's schedule is quite unpredictable: you have drought, you have drought next year, you have drought third year. Your move

Drought happens when you have less vegetation and no good water storage systems. It's not always an easy thing to get new life grow in the middle of the desert or in dryer places, but you can do that. Playing shade of plants and rocks and whatnot to your advantage is one, building proper channers and using land elevations as a natural way to lead water through channels is another. There's certain plants which can host more water and create more shade, and the more shade you have the more moisture you can store even in the middle of the desert. That's the basic drill.

Quote

Copper sulfate, life protecting?
And mushrooms... be careful what you pick in the forest - death caps are deceitful...

Copper sulfate? Care to explain?

Quote

In the long term protection of the plants against pests/rivals may evolve to the point to be harmful/less/nutritious to humans. Plants don't care about your health, unless you excrete/drop their seeds. Period. Just compare teosinte with modern corn (non-GM).. Try to find similarities/

That's true, chili's capsaisine is a good example of this. However, if humans are the only pests as in eating the plants' babies (fruits, berries etc) and plants themselves, then the plants will know to concentrate their efforts against us, no? More competition, they divert their efforts against other animals and what doesn't kill us can kill other animals.

Nature works in a cycle. The cycle of life and death. It's natural for plants to get eaten and become animal feces and soil for new plants, just as it's natural for us to die and eventually do the same. That's the prime reason why it keeps happening, because it's a mutually supportive relationship. It's a matter of balance. If something in nature gets the upper hand, other forces of nature notice this sooner or later and something changes. For example, if your garden befalls a victim to a great rat colony, sooner or later there will be predatory birds like hawks or eagles and rat-eating mammals too, like snakes. Nature has a way of sorting itself out if we let them, and reminding nature occasionally that we're not it's biggest enemy can actually prevent the thing you brought out in your post. If we're the only enemy of nature, it's far more likely for nature to turn on us more than to others. It's human self-centeredness to think that the only way to deal with things is to have total control over them. You can also control things by directing their flow subtly and behind the scenes but in a very conscious way, let nature take it's course once in a while.

Where can you find modern non-GM corn these days?

I've been born again 31,8,2014 approximately 21:35 local time. A moment free of clutter in the mind, emancipating myself like an escapist, allowing myself to breathe life in a stronger, less physical level... though it does resonate to physical world. It's the oomph.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users