The good life tv comedy programme could this be done today

COOLTRIKERCHICK

cootambear, you have just contradidcted yuorself..

quote' if they hike prices then farmers will go back to growing local varieties'

but they were doing this in the first place:rotfl:

i bet deep down you are a closet lover of the goode life, and this style of living, but just keep on fighting it......lol... its ok you are amoungst friends here, you can admit to it.....

cootambear

COOLTRIKERCHICK wrote: »

cootambear. i bet they love you on the green and ethical board:rotfl:

They won`t like my next post titled `Lets get to Mars in 10 years and start terraforming it`*
They would accuse me of raping whatever the martian equvalent of gaia is, and harming a pristine wilderness. Apologies for this diversion, we havent found any greenfingered Martians yet.

*An 18 month stay on Mars is actually feasible using NASA`s annual budget for the next 10 years. If youre interested, google Mars Direct.

the long and short of it is..... reardless of what mumbo-jumbo you come up with... at the end of the day... the world WILL run out of oil....so if we can slow down the rate that its happening by growing without oil based fertilizers, and use less throw-away packaging, buy local, and grow our own...this will cut down on oil used for transportation... big agricultrial machinery...electric for those huge greenhouses in holland that supply tomatoes and cucumbers all year round etc.... plus we will actually be supporting local people... get to know our neighbours when we exchange surplus produce.... and basically have a better quality of life...

wether it will be 50 years or 250 years....... the world Will run out of oil......


there is a lot of people would love to have, or be able to afford to have the life style Tom and Barbara had in the tv series... hence the high prices of any property with land... plus in the recession and the house price slump, havent been effected....

..............................................................

shebrett

Lotus-eater wrote: »

The way we are farming today isn't sustainable, vitamins and minerals in vegetables and meat have plummetted in the last decades, as we take from the soil and don't put back. That's probably the most important reason to grow your own.

I've seen stuff on this too, for example to match the vitamins from the average tomato grown in the 1940's you would need to have 10 of today's tomatoes, there were other common examples, but that one stuck in my head. Probably explains why all the older relatives tell me that fruit etc isn't as sweet anymore.

Anyone know if it's possible to get seed from fruit/veg that hasn't been altered for today's market?

mardatha

Maybe Realseeds.co.uk ? Is that not what they have ?

cootambear

COOLTRIKERCHICK wrote: »

cootambear, you have just contradidcted yuorself..

quote' if they hike prices then farmers will go back to growing local varieties'

I dont see how this is a contradiction? Lets say you use brand X of soap power, and a new brand called Y comes along at the same price, and you say `I`ll give that Y try`.

Y gives lets say 25% better results, so you decide to swap brands. Then brand Y doubles its price. Then rationally you would say, `brand Y is better, but not better enough to justify twice the price`, and go back to brand X

but they were doing this in the first place:rotfl:

i bet deep down you are a closet lover of the goode life, and this style of living, but just keep on fighting it......lol... its ok you are amoungst friends here, you can admit to it.....

I like to have my cake and eat it if I can, and whats the point of having a cake if you don`t eat it?

shebrett

mardatha wrote: »

Maybe Realseeds.co.uk ? Is that not what they have ?

good site, thanks!

cootambear

Lotus-eater wrote: »

Warped is a strange word, we need food to survive, our bodies need it, oil we use to feed the lifestyle and food need our planet wants, not needs.

Did you mean to say; we use oil to feed the lifestyle and food we want, not what the planet needs`?. Or the other way round?

Any road, I would say that the earth, the sun, the milky way and the universe is blindly indifferent to us. It neither loves nor hates us, makes no judgements on what we do because it does not know we exist because it has no brain.

The Sun is indifferent to the earth, it will destroy the earth in a few billion years by expanding and swallowing it up.

If we hadn't had oil, our population wouldn't be as high as it is,

Thats the wrong way round. If our population wasnt as high as it is, we would be unable to generate the wealth and technology that allows us to extract and use oil with the efficiency we do today.
As ever, peeps focus on `limits` and ignore that infinite resource, human creativity.


therefore we are dependant on oil. If we didn't have it (tomorrow), a lot of the population of the world would die, pretty much a fact.

Well it will be there tomorrow, I as I have argued previously, new techniques and resources will be developed to harness energy. I don`t now what they will be, I`m not gypsy rose lee. If you like you can scorn this as `faith`. But it is a `faith` based on a rational appraisal of the astonishing advances we have made and can make when we commit resources to it. From orville and wright to men on the moon in, I dont know 50-60 years. Marie Curies discovery of radium to nuclear power in what, 40 years? A kettle on a stove to a steam engine 10 years? Magnetism to electric power - 20 years? (these figures are off the top of my head, I havent used the internet)
The current trend towards risk aversion, dismissal of progress, hostility to technology, will be the biggest hurdle to overcome, not the science.

Addiction, not too strong a word for the way the world uses oil, needs oil, desires oil and will use oil until it runs out, that my friend is what partly we are trying to make you understand, when it goes, we are in deep stumm unless some technology comes along to take over.

Addiction/dependence on drugs is invariably harmful. Use of oil is not addiction, it is utilisation.

No one here has posted about being for stopping the use of oil based fertilisers overnight

You are correct, I`ve looked through the posts and can`t find it, my mistake.

, (so tbh you've pretty much argued with yourself)


On the above point, not everything else, surely?

what we want is for us (in person) not to use them and for agriculture to move towards a more sustainable method of farming.
Using oil based fertilisers is not a sustainable method of farming.

Again you are stuck in the language of limits, `sustainablity`. As if there is some Iron Law that says `you can go so far, but no more, prideful man`
Time and again for millenia people have argued that the planet cannot sustain more people. And every time every prediction has been proved wrong. Its the worst theory ever!

As recently as fifties people were predicting imminent starvation, ignoring continuing developments in crop yields. Developments are taking place now to begin to replace oil based herbicides and pesticides. (Similar developments in GM I`ve repeated ad nauseum).

They wont be ready tommorow just as oil won`t run out tommorow. I suspect that economics will be the driving force, development will go into full swing if oil prices are sufficiently prohibitive. But I have to say that I am sceptical oil supplies will significantly dwindle anytime soon. The oil companies have plenty of potential sources of oil that they in in the process of developing techniques to tap which they can not do presently. And we were told that oil would run out 35 years ago

Despite what you think, food grown in these deserts (I mean the UK deserts of farmland, not the actual deserts you were thinking about) does have a lower nutritional value,

I was replying to a poster who raised concerns that `we basically are growing cops in deserts with artificial fertilisers`. I could only answer based on what I and I`m gussing most people thought of when they hear the word `desert` eg the sahara.

also it has to do with shorter growing times, the type of seed chosen and I don't think I need to remind anyone of the unknown effects of the multitude of sprays used on them.

But do you believe we can survive on organics alone? I would have thought everyone would be in favour of usuing the least spraying possible. Anyway, GM crops reduce spraying.

The results are all around the world, of agriculture taking from the soil and not putting back, big business might take it up another notch now and again, and find another method to keep production higher than it should be,

Theres that should word again. Who decides what it should be? Gaia? Give me her phone number I want a chat. I`m imagining that she looks a bit like Felicity Kendall.

but eventually it all catches up with us.

Sinners all we be. The End is Nigh, repent or ye shall be cast into the endless fire.


Oh sure, in your Utopia, we can continue to find another GM crop or miracle pesticide/herbicide that will give us another 10 years of higher than normal production.

GM pest control its not a 10 year chemical trick. Its done by splicing a gene from a disease or pest resistant vegetable/grain etc, into a strain that is not resistant.
The genes for pest and disease resistance are splices from varieties that have evolved these defence strategies for many many thousands of years. Why would they suddendly fail in 10 years?

But in the end nature always catches up.

Sinners etc

Isn't it better to find a way that works with her, rather than fight against her?

Absolutely. The most succesful technologies will be the ones that work successfully in the real world, ie nature. And its nature, not her.

Well obviously in your case, you think no, man will triumph over all and all that.

Yes.

But I think that food grown in this way isn't food as we know it, it doesn't have the same nutrients in it as food used to.

Yes it does. Its interesting that the pro organic lobby persistently pursue this myth. Its as if theyve done their little rite of bonding with gaia, observed all the rituals, and therefore they will be rewarded with veg full to the brimful with goody nutrients. When the evidence contradicts this they refuse to believe it because `it against their religion`.


I would however argue that the fruit and veg in the supermarkets doesnt taste as good as it used to because supermarkets stock strains that favour a long shelf life, and more often than not sacrifice flavour. Thats one of the reasons I grow my own.

Incidently its totally organic - apart from the odd slug pellet, tomato feed, and a neighbours ferocious cat who culls unwary birds (I cant blame him, its his nature).

I am also organic because I`m a tightarse who would rather let predatory insects and cats do the the job for free rather than spend money. And I would rather sit in the garden than spend time spraying under every leaf, I`m lazy like that.

You seem to regard this as a straight fight between organic and non organic, well to start with, almost all the non organic foods results from tests show nothing of the important link between food from, say the 40's and 50's and the food grown today.

You are really saying that there are no important links between say the carrots (pick any veg) of the 40`s and today?

I`ve just read Dawkins latest book on evolution (I`m not trying to show off, just to indicate that I read), and I can assure you that a carrot of the 40`s will share 99.999% of the genes of a carrot of today. So it seems we just disagree by 0.001%, and thats nothing between friends.

This is not a straight organic, non organic fight, this is lots of different things, so I'm afraid your std web answers won't work here

Well the internet is a good tool and a bad master. There is a ton of irrational opiniated crap out there to sift through, ironically a lot of it is on green websites.

Where I have quoted opinions they are stated as opinions, where I have quoted research it has been of peer reviewed multiple studies (OK I did get these research papers off the internet, I`m sure theyre not a hoax, but I`m not going to traipse down to a medical library to prove it).



and you need to do some more reading to discover what you are trying to answer.

I read widely. I`ve just finished goldilocks and the three bears and am about to start a book about a wonderful earth spirit called gaia (though oddly theres a picture of felicity kendal on the front).

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Davesnave

shebrett wrote: »

good site, thanks!

They are good, but you have to remember that with many plants that cross, it isn't easy to keep a strain of seeds going.

For example, I'm trying to keep a variety of cucumber, but this means mine should be 1/4 mile from any other kind, or sealed in an insect-proof cage.

As for brassicas, they are so promiscuous, it's a nightmare!

cootambear

OK chums, I have to call a temporary halt to my contributions (don`t all cheer). Much as I`ve enjoyed it, it has been a bit time consuming and its become an excuse to put off chores. So I wont be posting for another week (if this thread is still alive, that is).

May you have a fruitful harvest. May your apples be as rosy as felicity kendals bum cheeks.

ginnyknit

Am hoping Maplins have a website? Im going to have a look at that solar kit for a tenner and see what i can use it for, maybe the animals shed then for the caravan that i long for at the seaside!!! Thanks cooltrikerchick, see I did read ALL the thread!

As for the Good Life, i still love it but have always seen the problems that we would have trying to do it and I used up the spare coppers in the phone box ages ago and tho i did find 2 quid down the side of the couch the other day. You would need a lot more animals too if you were going to eat them - alway remember the scene where they slaughtered the pigs and carried the carcasses home - they were frozen!