Agricultural Commodities

Fun with supply and demand.
Tom Palven
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5499
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Agricultural Commodities

Post by Tom Palven » Tue Jan 16, 2018 8:46 am

Jim Rogers is investing in agricultural commodities.
https://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/ ... jim-rogers

Seems he's right in line with a recent TED talk on NPR that predicts imminent huge food shortages, and investment in agriculture is much needed.
Last edited by Tom Palven on Tue Jan 16, 2018 8:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9833
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by TJrandom » Tue Jan 16, 2018 8:48 am

The advice to grow your own isn`t just for weed...

By the way, I don`t buy it. Automation will replace farmers faster than they die off naturally. Why, there is even talk of giving agricultural robots the right to vote. :roll:

Tom Palven
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5499
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by Tom Palven » Tue Jan 16, 2018 4:55 pm

TJrandom wrote:
By the way, I don`t buy it. Automation will replace farmers faster than they die off naturally.
I agree.

The TED talk claims that an extraordinary crisis looms, and the only thing that can stop it is if governments "do something" and do it fast.
https://www.ted.com/talks/sara_menker_a ... ecade_away

My nightmare is the creation of huge government-subsidized and controlled farm collectives, the kind that destroyed Soviet agriculture and millions of lives, and also destroyed Chinese agriculture during The Great Leap Forward.

Meanwhile, Rogers and others already see the situation and are investing in agriculture WITH THEIR OWN MONEY; Smith's "invisible hand" of the market at work.
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14850
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Jan 16, 2018 5:32 pm

TP: Everything is robots, AI, automation, genetic engineering etc...IE: THE FUTURE. Stumps me why your worry would be about the past.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

ahhell
Poster
Posts: 89
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2016 7:43 pm

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by ahhell » Tue Jan 16, 2018 6:59 pm

Reminds me of Paul Ehrlich, the Club of Rome et al. They predicted the same thing would happen 40 years ago. That is, 50 years ago they predicted we all die 10 years after that.

Paul Ehrlich still thinks he was right.

Tom Palven
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5499
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by Tom Palven » Tue Jan 16, 2018 10:10 pm

ahhell wrote:Reminds me of Paul Ehrlich, the Club of Rome et al. They predicted the same thing would happen 40 years ago. That is, 50 years ago they predicted we all die 10 years after that.

Paul Ehrlich still thinks he was right.
I like Paul Ehrlich and his efforts to halt population growth. We may not run out of food, but we are likely to run out of habitats in the African, South American, and Indonesian rain forests for all the Great Apes and many other endangered species.

But yes, Malthus and Ehrlich were wrong about the food, and others were wrong when they claimed that oil reseserves were alomst depleted.

Who knows. Maybe this will really be the Apocalypse and it's just that the doomsayers have cried wolf once too often, but it seems very doubtful.
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14850
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Jan 17, 2018 4:17 am

What makes its doubtful in your mind?

How is this doubt different than the other examples?

YES....if A and B continue on their projected curves, and nothing else intervenes, total catastrophe will result. Then...something intervenes BECAUSE THE CATASTROPHE MOTIVATES THE CHANGE.

Will this happen "every" time? Probably not. But no one can tell when snake eyes will appear.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9833
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by TJrandom » Wed Jan 17, 2018 7:04 am

Usually it is the risk of catastrophe, or the big bucks that can be earned from either aversion or mop-up, that motivates change.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4353
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by ElectricMonk » Wed Jan 17, 2018 10:33 am

Capitalism functions best during anticipated crises: possible loss will always trump steady gain in the minds of investors. Even the belief in an upcoming problem will attract money to hedge against future problems .

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 11692
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by Lance Kennedy » Sun Jan 28, 2018 1:30 am

Population growth is an obsolete bogeyman. Global fertility has reduced and continues to fall. Those who think it is still a great threat are like Paul Ehrlich, and are living in the past.

There has now been considerable progress in synthetic foods. Meat is now being produced by tissue culture. Fish is being researched, to develop this ability. Milk is being produced from yeast culture. There are even people working on producing wine without using grapes or fruit. Wine entirely from a factory.

According to my reading, the current tissue culture meat output is equal to 0.25% of farm meat production. But the people working on it claim there will be a "Moore's Law" at work. That is, production will double every two years. If so, all meat, fish, milk and wine production will go bankrupt within 20 years. Of course, there is still a lot that can go wrong, and slow all this down.

Tom Palven
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5499
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by Tom Palven » Sun Jan 28, 2018 8:05 am

You are correct that the world population growth rate has slowed dramatically and is less of a problem than once projected, but the world would be better off without any increase in population.

If population growth stabilized to a replacement rate little new infrastructure would be needed and people could essentially move into the homes of their parents. Fewer new roads, bridges, and shopping centers would be needed leaving more money available to repair existing infrastructure and to enjoy a better quality of life.

Draconian laws like the Chinese one child per family policy are not needed. Vigorous promotion of equal rights for women might do the trick. Where women have rights equal to men, as in developed Western countries, Australia, and New Zealand, and religions don't preach "Be fruitful and multiply and subdue the Earth" populations have stabilized, with some in Scandinavia actually diminishing.
http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14850
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Jan 28, 2018 1:41 pm

with a lot of energy and investment, one can wander very far out on thin ice, but when it cracks........all is lost. How many of what species that live in the jungle and the oceans do we need to support hoomans without our recognizing it, until it is too late?

To date: the biosphere has prospered because of many species competing with one another, filling every niche. I think hoomans have passed the tipping point and at current numbers we are destroying this diversity to provide the minimum standards of life that we do. 7 Billion now and we have accepted that 11 Billion is "ok" and leveling off????

I don't think so. Until the jungles and oceans are "healthy" as that may be defined........we are not healthy.

What are you: a short sighted speciest?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Tom Palven
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5499
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by Tom Palven » Sun Jan 28, 2018 2:26 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:with a lot of energy and investment, one can wander very far out on thin ice, but when it cracks........all is lost. How many of what species that live in the jungle and the oceans do we need to support hoomans without our recognizing it, until it is too late?

To date: the biosphere has prospered because of many species competing with one another, filling every niche. I think hoomans have passed the tipping point and at current numbers we are destroying this diversity to provide the minimum standards of life that we do. 7 Billion now and we have accepted that 11 Billion is "ok" and leveling off????

I don't think so. Until the jungles and oceans are "healthy" as that may be defined........we are not healthy.

What are you: a short sighted speciest?
Not sure if the above was addressed to me. It probably looks like I am inconsistent at best.

It seems that Lance is right, that we are not likely to run out commodities like food and oil, but that you are correct in that there are other important considerations.
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14850
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Jan 28, 2018 2:36 pm

TP: mine most often are general comments. Shoes are worn only when they fit.

I think it is "unavoidable" we will run out of food.........aka.....our entire food chain collapses because as you note, growing food involves a whole lot more than just growing food. Its what a "biosphere" is all about.

My always favorite analogy/application: wine making. Yeast turns sugar into alcohol not by design but as a waste product. When the yeast creates an environment that is made up of 12% of its waste product: it dies. Organisms cannot live in too much of their own waste products. For yeast and alcohol its 12%. For humans and co2, it might be 800 ppm (whatever!)....but its the same process. For human and variety of other species (different issues but an overlap in conceptualization) it might be a level we need to pay more attention to. and its not that there aren't technical solutions as those are all over the place. Rather, its the TIME it takes to substitute the tech. Take bees. We can live without pollinated foods.........but it would take time to make the switch.......time Billions might not have.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 11692
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by Lance Kennedy » Sun Jan 28, 2018 6:54 pm

Bobbo is the forum resident pessimist. "We are all gonna die !"

In this he is wrong. Bobbo also works on the assumption that humanity follows the same laws of biology as every other species. Also wrong. We have been breaking those laws for centuries and prospering.

For example, other species are restricted by Liebig's Law of the Minimum, which means they are kept limited by whatever resource is in least supply. Not humans. When one resource gets limited, we search and find an alternative, and keep right on prospering.

I well remember the article in Scientific American which predicted peak oil in 2011, and said that world economies would crash soon after. Duh ! New methods of extracting more oil took over and there is now more resource available than any time in history. There are researchers working now on microwave liquefaction of oil deposits, which will double the reserve again without even needing any new fields to be discovered.

Beyond fossil fuels, there are numerous new energy sources being developed.

Bobbo is not alone. Paul Ehrlich was mentioned, and there are more doomsday predictors out there, writing death and destruction ever year for at least the last millennium. They all have one thing in common . They were all wrong. But humans are slow learners and plenty of people, like Bobbo, continue to make the same mistake.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14850
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Jan 28, 2018 8:04 pm

Lance! The (if => then) dialectic has been accurately and repeatedly predicted BUT THEN motivated by the predictions reset by the intervention of new technology and the constant destruction of the biosphere for the purpose of maintaining our species in the way we choose to behave. MY POINT: the tech may well be there to continue the curve, but the biosphere is not.

But you can evaluate the odds as well. If something "can" happen, then given enough monkeys typing away, it will happen. Is it your position Lance that it is impossible for the food chain that supports hoomans to collapse? Unlike Erhlich and bros, I give no time frame........just "eventually."
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 11692
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by Lance Kennedy » Sun Jan 28, 2018 10:01 pm

Bobbo

The saying is that prediction is difficult especially about the future.

What I am saying is that there is a long history of negative predictions failing. Based on that history, then the probability is that any extra negative predictions will also fail.

Food for humans will never be a problem if people plan rationally. We already have the technology to feed 20 billion people, if the effort and money is put in. Feeding people does not require nicely balanced 'natural' ecosystems. It can be done using totally "unnatural" methods like hydroponics.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14850
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Jan 29, 2018 4:07 am

Prediction is exactly what you are doing Lance. Comical you contradict your very point by what you say. No insight at all. No subtlety. As always: fixated on what you first think/say/post.

You follow the formula: if => then. AS STATED: the well grounded conditional statements where all correct. It was BECAUSE THEY WERE CORRECT, that the stated conditions were CHANGED by new technologies applied.

So...our point of disagreement whether you can recognize it or not, is that you say we can continue on without a nicely balanced natural ecosystem for instance by using unnatural hydroponics. I agree warehouse farming is a tech that will continue to provide food .... so humans can transition to an entirely plant based diet....the rich can have fish and meat proteins substitutes from petri dishes. ........now, what happens when some War of the Worlds virus gets a hold of the plants in use? ...............a collapse. The more artificial an environment is, the more likely some collapse. You can be quite skilled but the more balls you juggle, the harder the task. Its simple. Does it absolutely have to happen?==>No. But my real point is that over time, what "can" happen usually does.

Being a pessimist is the best mind set to avoid the calamity.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 11692
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by Lance Kennedy » Mon Jan 29, 2018 7:24 am

Being a pessimist is the best way to be wrong. This is not a prediction, since I am looking back. Pessimistic prophets have always been so, so common. And always wrong, as history shows.

And again looking back. Humans have been slowly developing a way of life that is less and less "natural". As they do so, they become more and more prosperous. This has been the pattern ever since the first farmers about 10,000 years ago. This makes me really, really skeptical about those people who claim our prosperity depends on being one with nature. It was not the case in the past. What are the odds it will not be true in the future either ?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14850
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Jan 29, 2018 7:28 am

1. Stuck on your first idea/post.
2. Looking backwards.
3. conclusionary.
4. Hooman time frame, ie: very short. Like when you first throw yeast into the bucket.....everything is ducky.
5. No one has said be at one with nature.

Have it your own way Lance.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 11692
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by Lance Kennedy » Mon Jan 29, 2018 6:10 pm

Bobbo.
You were the person who thought humans needed to be with nature, though you worded it as "a nicely balanced natural ecosystem".

The thing you need to realise (actually, lots of people need to realise this), is that humans cheat. We cheat our way around the need to operate within nature's laws. We find alternatives. Humans are smart, sneaky, and innovative.

There are people now working on ideas for a self sustaining colony on Mars, and such a thing might one day be achieved. There are no ecosystems on Mars. My personal speculation is that humans should one day have self sustaining colonies in space. My vision is a giant rotating cylinder containing a nuclear fusion plant for energy and mining asteroids for water, minerals, and other resources. Growing food under special LED lights inside the space city.

Humans have proven they do not need to be a functioning part of a natural ecosystem. We can prosper by controlling an artificial ecosystem.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14850
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:58 am

there is the hubrus of man on full display: we live outside of Nature and Cartman's Voice=> "do what we want to." Highlighted by the notion that we can go to Mars. How "grounded" (yes....down to Earth) is this fanciful substitution for thought?

Rotating in his own world, Lance wrong on every point says:

1. You were the person who thought humans needed to be with nature, though you worded it as "a nicely balanced natural ecosystem". //// The terminology doesn't sound like me, unless I'm quoting someone else? My word search on (balance) shows YOU are the first person to use this term. But yes.....I think we cannot avoid nature. Its what we live in. We can bend it to our will, but it tends to snap back. "Eco-Systems."

2. The thing you need to realise (actually, lots of people need to realise this), is that humans cheat. We cheat our way around the need to operate within nature's laws. We find alternatives. Humans are smart, sneaky, and innovative. /// Like I said: hubris. but phrased in such a childish naive way as to represent something beyond hubris. Perhaps: psychotic.

3. There are people now working on ideas for a self sustaining colony on Mars, //// being high on MJ and mescaline is not "working" ......on anything.

4. and such a thing might one day be achieved. ///// Saying what about life on Earth? Seems entirely irrelevant.

5. There are no ecosystems on Mars. /// We don't know that. could well be some microbe in the ice buried in the sand. I know facts don't matter that much to you Lance.....but c'mon. I suppose you mean no "robust" ecosystem, or "evident from Earth" or "Earth like abundant ecosystem" or what words that are accurate and not at all what you think with.

6. My personal speculation is that humans should one day have self sustaining colonies in space. My vision is a giant rotating cylinder containing a nuclear fusion plant for energy and mining asteroids for water, minerals, and other resources. Growing food under special LED lights inside the space city. /// And that is relevant to what? My personal speculation is that by the end of this year......I will make a non-poisonous prison hooch. ............. And the crowd ROARS BACK: who cares!!!!!

7. Humans have proven they do not need to be a functioning part of a natural ecosystem. We can prosper by controlling an artificial ecosystem. //// Yep........... psychotic. Lance: answer one direct question per post. This time: your proof we are not fully immersed in our natural ecosystem is what?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 11692
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by Lance Kennedy » Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:13 pm

Bobbo

The point is that humans do not live subject to the laws of ecology. Thus, quoting those laws is not a basis for predicting human future.

We have spent a lot of time on this forum discussing global population growth. That is an excellent example. Other species that have limitations removed, such as killing off their predators, go into massive population growth till they use up their food supply, and their population collapses catastrophically. But humans invent contraceptives, and there is no catastrophe. Humans do not follow the same patterns that other species do, and any suggestion of that is misleading.

We do not need to be part of a healthy ecosystem to thrive. Not that I am suggesting we should kill off such ecosystems. There are many reasons why keeping them is a great thing. But humans are not vulnerable in the way that other species are.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14850
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Jan 30, 2018 8:08 pm

Lance: its all in the definitions of the terms used, where the emPHAsis is placed, time frames proposed, etc. Since hoomans can so greatly modify their own biology and their environment so as to seemingly escape "the laws of ecology"==lets suppose 11 Billion people being fed by hydroponics and some modified protein meant to make the plants more productive goes the other way and all hydroponics are lost and the hooman population does crash back to One Billion.

Is that an ecological/nature out of balance crash, or not?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 11692
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by Lance Kennedy » Tue Jan 30, 2018 8:44 pm

Such a crash is seriously unlikely.

In ecology, systems become more stable, and less .likely to crash where complexity is high. E.g. a tropical rain forest is very complex and changes little over time, in the absence of any outside force. An Arctic ecosystem is much simpler, and population numbers can go up and down quite dramatically.

There is an equivalent in economics. If your system is complex, involving many products, many suppliers, many buyers, many nations trading with each other, etc., the system is more stable and less prone to catastrophic crashes. A future society using hydroponics (and many other systems) to provide for its people, is likely to be complex and stable.

Your suggestion of one protein causing disaster is seriously improbable when there are hundreds of different plant crops, and dozens of factories churning out different food materials.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14850
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Jan 30, 2018 9:22 pm

Lance: I really must "insist" you answer the simple fair reasonable question I put to you.

You know: actual engagement.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 11692
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by Lance Kennedy » Wed Jan 31, 2018 1:35 am

It was a silly question, Bobbo, with no rational and reasonable answer possible. I have no interest in answering silly stuff.

Massively unlikely hypothetical situations do not need discussing. You might as well ask if I am still beating up my unicorn.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9833
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by TJrandom » Wed Jan 31, 2018 2:04 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:... You might as well ask if I am still beating up my unicorn.
No need to ask that Lance - we KNOW you are! :lol:

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14850
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Jan 31, 2018 2:40 am

Well Lance, YOU are disappointing. As stated, the question was entirely reasonable and would have helped any discussion by defining a major term.

but you won't.

I'm afraid if you can't tell {!#%@} from shinola.......you really have nothing to contribute.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 11692
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by Lance Kennedy » Wed Jan 31, 2018 3:11 am

Bobbo

It would help if I knew what you were on about. Mostly I do not.

TJ

I deserved that for posting potentially phallic images.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14850
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Jan 31, 2018 10:13 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:Bobbo

It would help if I knew what you were on about. Mostly I do not.
Really disingenuous. you know EXACTLY what I'm on about: the hypothetical you refuse to answer. You won't engage anything except your own conclusions and will not even deign to demonstrate what you think to get there.

take another honest try. If you can't understand the hypothetical, ask questions to clarify it. Its amusing. "In this case"...I don't even have my own position to advance. I "was" curious as to how you would answer it. But, you refuse to engage, to answer direct questions, to consider any opinion but your own.

We are at impasse until you step up.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 11692
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by Lance Kennedy » Wed Jan 31, 2018 7:10 pm

Bobbo

You asked me if a weird and totally hypothetical and very, very unlikely disaster was nature out of balance. The answer is no. But I am unsure as to what you REALLY were asking. So often, a question merely covers up something else that the questioner is after. And frankly, I do not want to play those silly games.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14850
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Jan 31, 2018 9:23 pm

What was weird?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 11692
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by Lance Kennedy » Wed Jan 31, 2018 9:52 pm

I had a real problem understanding, not the basic question, but why you were asking it, since it seemed to have nothing to do with the topic. WTF.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14850
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Jan 31, 2018 10:15 pm

Well Lance, your inflexibility, totally self involved mindset continues to reveal itself. The hypothetical was very realistically based: hoomans totally living outside the laws of nature by living off of hydroponics..........and then, "something" goes wrong with the hydroponics system. Similar issue happened in Biosphere Two project in Arizona. So far, our best experiment at living outside of nature.

Seems so directly one every relevant point there is that your hysterical reaction points to a basic reality orientation issue.

Know what I mean?........................................ and I know that you don't. Not that you don't understand the problem, you just don't know why.

Heh, heh. Sure.........Lance. So defensive. You aren't alone though, lots of people are afraid of answers their own intellect will provide them..............so they divert.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 11692
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by Lance Kennedy » Wed Jan 31, 2018 10:42 pm

Bobbo

The Biosphere experiment was interesting. I read an interesting explanation of what went wrong. There was too little CO2 to support plant growth, but there should have been enough. Where did it go. The author of this explanation said that the mistake was in using concrete. Concrete absorbs CO2 on a continuous basis, and apparently this was not taken into account.

Life is about learning, and I hope there is another biosphere experiment, this time without concrete, so that we can see if the idea works.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14850
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Feb 01, 2018 10:31 am

Yep........now imagine that is what its going to take to survive on Mars.........or rotating in space. Theoretically/imaginatively it can be done, but to use it as a substitute for pessimism (sic) about our kicking Mother Nature in the nads, is not reassuring.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22149
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by Gawdzilla Sama » Thu Feb 01, 2018 10:39 am

TJrandom wrote:
Lance Kennedy wrote:... You might as well ask if I am still beating up my unicorn.
No need to ask that Lance - we KNOW you are! :lol:
That scene from "Deadpool" is stuck in my head.

NSFW
Spoiler:
Image
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"
WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14850
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: Agricultural Commodities

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Feb 01, 2018 2:00 pm

Gawd: well done. I'm so happy I watch those flicks in "half attention" mode. don't recall THAT scene. but to be fair to Lance: deadpool is kissing his unicorn and beating his...............what........chicken? No, thats not right....slapping his monkey???? Noticeable how poor innocent animals get pulled into hooman needs, wants, and desires.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?