Ok thanks. I have enough TV shows to watch as is, that's why I like being able to see stuff online.
For those unfamiliar or who did not follow from the beginning, Dr Joe Schwarz is a noted professor that tries to make science more fun and understandable for the average person. He has a large following in Canada, and is well respected in Montreal. He's a little like Jerry Baker in terms of what he preaches. Some people swear by their methods, others feel they are quacks. Many say Dr. Joe is too liberal and accepting of chemicals in his day to day suggestions.
formatting link
've listened to Dr. Joe on CJAD radio Canada and what he says seems to make pretty good sense in most cases, although I certainly would not try to dissuade anyone who prefers an "all-organic" approach to gardening. His topics are not exclusive to gardening, but offers advice on various issues, including nutritional info, dieting, etc.
formatting link
the way, the quoted letter from Sherwin is very similar to how the doctor actually speaks on his show, so it is very likely to be genuine. You can certainly call the show and debate his objectivity on air. It would actually be interesting to hear. ;-)
Tough talk for someone who won't identify themselves. Be quiet and hide in the shadow and we won't laugh too much at you.
Must be "Open Gate Day" at the funny farm. You are obviously not a scientist, for scientists justify their words, and I doubt your education has anything to do with your lack of popularity.
It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. Albert Einstein
A question that sometimes drives me hazy: am I or are the others crazy? Albert Einstein
Any man who can drive safely while kissing a pretty girl is simply not giving the kiss the attention it deserves. Albert Einstein
You go on to mention how people have never bothered to learn to think and yet you conclude that I have never talked to a scientist. That is really funny.
I would have thought that anyone who claims to be such a superior being that they have not only learned to think, and possesses such an arrogance that they choose to laugh at others as often as they can would have wondered how it is that a poster, who has not otherwise engaged in this skirmish, would have chosen to mention peer reviews.
I would have expected such a superior being to have hit on the implications of "peer reviews" and wonder why it is that a poster who has otherwise not engaged in the conversation until this time would have even known about peer reviews.
A person who had learned to think should then have wondered, or perhaps even asked, why the casual poster knew of peer reviews. You didn't.
A person who could think would came to a different conclusion than you did.
I doubt your claims to being a scientist. Or, at the very best, it must be years since you had anything to do with academic research.
We come in all
Yes. I too have such a disdain. You claim to think but your conclusions are erroneous. That says you have limited capacity to think and reach a logical conclusion.
I wouldn't find Dr Schwarz's reply unusual between intimates either, but I do find his reply to be extremely odd when used, as claimed, in response to an email from an unknown contact.
But then given that he is also a 'TV personality' then it is perhaps possible that like others of that sort of person in north America then he panders to the lowest common denominator in the interest of ratings because it impacts on his earnings. Perhaps he is as intemperate and lacking in concern for his professional reputation as you seem to think he is.
I expected push back, but the profound dismissal, the outright disdain, of organic is remarkable even for one funded by the chemical industry. The disinformation, (for example ignoring the advancement in organic agriculture and instead suggesting that it's 100 years behind) is truly amazing. Obviously he has never heard of a little company named Earthbound. In one article he states that organic foods are only "marginally" more nutritious, in the next article he sites a 40% gain in antioxidants. "Pesticides and nitrates from fertilizer enter ground water with potential environmental and health consequences". Potential?! Doesn't McGill have internet service? Hasn't he ever looked at the Gulf of Mexico from above? Amazing. I think he's "marginally" pro-agrochemical.
I'd disagree. He certainly wasn't as dismissive of organics as one would expect from his knee jerk reaction to Sherwin would have suggested.
In fact from what I have read so far, (and so far that reading on my part hsas not been anything more than a quick skim as I'm short of time) he even has some good things to say about organics.
His point of view is from the perspective of farmed produce but from the point of view of those of us who post here, we aren't farming for production. In our case, what he has to say about organics does in fact support the use of organics in a home enviroment - better taste, kinder to the soil and because plants respond to threat, better produce for a number of reasons.
The disinformation, (for example ignoring the advancement in
Yes, I did think that too and I do know of initiatives that he seems to have either glossed over or not known of.
Yeah, I know, he didn't talk about the soil web of life and soil erosion. He seemed happy to get his lycopene from tasteless, long shelf-life price/benefit tomatoes, but we just got these papers and I'm sure that we will have a lot of fun with them. In any event, they don't address his dismissal of these "organic" people.
" Thanks for forwarding me that nonsense. Nobody funds me....except McGill University . I do know where the CBI stuff comes from....a while ago CBI funded some summer scholarships for McGill students, a couple of whom ended up working in our office. That had nothing to do with anything....certainly not with my book. These "organic" people are paranoid and if a view doesn't fit into their "world view" they think that some conspiracy is afoot. They generally have a very poor scientific background and have no understanding of chemistry. They could use a little oil for their mental machinery. Organic oil if they so wish." regards Dr. Joe Schwarcz This should be very informative for us.
I probably shouldn't but I can't resist. I'm responding to your post, Steve, but this is more for Mr. Rose.
I read some of Dr. S's response. He's got some valid points, imo. Organic is expensive, if you aren't growing your own. I'm organic as I think I can be, with the financial situation I have at this point. Organic manure, compost etc cost more than non-organic. Free range organic eggs cost over $4 a dozen where I live. I've been a vegetarian for 40 years (lol - damn - 40 years) and it's not as easy and it costs more, ime, to dine out, to live organically. To purchase the food that meets my morals, as it were. Whatever - my choice.
I used to make donations to PETA. I don't anymore. While I imagine there's a need for extremists, I wish there wasn't. I don't benefit from from being haraunged (pretty sure that's spelled wrong - sorry) and I hope that most people, gardeners especially can learn and evolve with kindness and good intentions, not by being badgered.
Mother Teresa said something to the effect of - Don't invite me to an anti-war rally. Invite me to a peace rally.
IMO, in your zeal, Mr. Rose, you are turning more people away from the very thing you want. You can't force people to see what you see - you can be a wonderful example. When you send out negative energy, more than just one person is affected.
Organic gardening, to me, is treating the earth and its inhabitants as I want to be treated. I won't curse the rabbits that are eating my zinnia seedlings. I will cut away the insect damage from the comfrey leaves I needed today for a dog with healing stitches. It's been awfully damp this Spring and many plants are showing the same damage.
Ah, but the blooms. And yes, I forgot the parlsey. I have in my scrambled egg most days. I need to learn how to make tabouli - I've got a thick 10 ft row of parsley. What a blessing, huh?
I suspect we gardeners have a lot in common. Do we really want to pick this newsgroup to engage in negativity? Make love not war?
Billy, you can sell your Stinging Nettle. I pay maybe $10 a lb? I really have no idea but it's probably no more than $20 a lb . It's good for the kidneys and incredibly nutritive. I give it to my elderly dog in tea form and add it to my tea as well.
Please consider, you wonderful organic proponents, to make our cause a noble one, a wonderful and joyous one.
My beer can is empty. I have finished my enhanced post. Good night and good gardening to you all.
And to you, Kate. Extremists of almost any ilk can be counterproductive. I hope I'm not one of those, and I will remember your post as I proselytize.
That said, I _will_ speak out against extremists of the agro-chemical cabal without remorse and with little restraint. Disinformation is not in any of our best interest.
The last sentence reminded me of a phrase, think Mark Twain is the source, and it was something along the lines of "The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers".
I wasn't planning to get embroiled in this, but I was in such serious disbelief that someone would think that scientists would have no standards for making conclusions that I had to say that I think someone needs to start watching CSI...specifically CSI Miami cause it has bright colors and lots of movement...and remember if you make conclusions without verifying/explaining the facts that led to your conclusion it's just an OPINION.
You seem to dismiss all the comments about Dr. Schwarcz and my reply from him as 'made up' stuff. Why should anyone on this forum believe all the drivel that you and your crew post? None of you have probably read Dr. Schwarcz's books, especially the one 'An Apple a Day' where he gives his views on pesticides. You simply want to dismiss him out of hand and pretend he doesn't exist, or I was not in email contact with him, or the 'not' poster is not a scientist, or on and on. You have presented no arguements that refute what Dr Schwarcz says in his book, but I hope the other folks on this forum get a hold of it and see what he has to say. Then there is Lilah who's only connection with the outer world is via the web. She should try picking up a book, once in a while.
Kate, I think the quote that you are looking for is, "If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain
Either that or it was the quote from the documentary "Corporation", People who don't watch television are better informed than those who watch Fox News."
You call it extremism to refute lies and products that steal and kill. I call it necessity. I guess most advertising lies about it's products, but chemical fertilizers kill the very top soil that they need in order to function. The less top soil, the more chemical fertilizers are needed. They find their way to water ways and end up as dead zones off the coast where free protein used to be found as fish and shell fish. Chemical pesticides make food less nutritious by reducing flavonoids, poisoning embryos and young children, killing beneficial insects, and adding to the body burden of chemicals. Finally, chemical herbicides attack both embryos and young children, and encourage monocultures where even more pesticides are needed. When you deal with fools like Doo-Doo, it is like talking to a fog horn. There is no rationale. There is no thought. There is no empathy. And when you talk to the producers of these poisons, there is only greed. The truth is that they haven't erred. The truth is that they lied. If it is bad form to call a liar a liar, then I have bad form indeed.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.