Old Ma Nature

[sw363535]

I'll take one.  Lake mead levels are recorded and measured.  That is scientific data.  An annual moisture gauge for a very large area of drainage.

What is not science but certainly is part of the regions history is the assigning of responsibility for low levels.  Unless you consider "political science" to be a "science", when in reality it is the theft and misuse of a term to legitimize a criminal activity.  The assignment of low levels to the political theory popular at the time for example "climate change", or alien abduction, etc. is just a irresponsible dodge for mismanagement of resources.  "The boogy man did it" and then taxing the public for boogy man control, while we live the fat life of urban sprawl without responsibility for over taxing a natural resource.

When in reality the reservoir could be managed by allocation of excessive levels while maintaining reserve  instead of using up the reserve on glory holes like Vegas, LA, and Pheonix and trying to farm the desert.

We are not the first civilization to over populate the desert and use up the timber and water resources.  We will end the same way.  But the question is what is science and what is the misuse of the term "Science"?  What is not involved in this great resource experiment is the responsible use of natural resources..... We are just using it up, irresponsibly becoming another footnote in "History" like it or not and hiding behind the term "science" just as much as any DC "switchgrass "politician.  Dodging responsibility for our indulgences

Usda is not a good example of scientific anything.  So much good data available and they couldn't find a POA in a file stack.  And so many good employees working until retirement just to be the blame for what the new manager Wont take time to learn.  Asked to retire and escorted to the door to be the "resource" burned by egocentric bureaucracy.

Egocentric is not a scientific term, but far to often the main ingredient in the federal management recipe.

All the baby boomer generation has accomplished is the rape and mismanagement of terms.

[k-289]

Preferred  Stock  Options ,  aren't  the  genius  of  the  Baby Boomers  generation  - ? 

The  confidentiality , of  my  E L D  or  yield  monitor ,  is  whose  shoulders ,  the  seed  germ  patent  patrol  - maybe ?

The  irrigated alfalfa  acres  in  Arizona ,  receive  muted  discussion , on  the  export  destination  of  the  harvest - ?       

[ddtfarm1]

What we (majority science accepters) conclude is that Earth over its 4+ billion years has experienced multiple periods of life extinction. Modern civilized man has been around for around 6000 years or maybe 2 - 300,000 years for our first ancestors. That's a scientific guess, not a well defined Biblical fact. 🙂  Whatever you believe, human time on Earth has existed in a relatively stable climate (temperature +/-)  for the planet within a paper thin gaseous atmosphere that is the cocoon that supports life as we know it.  That cocoon has not always been the case and it will change to kill us all off again someday. We can and will have influence on when our atmosphere becomes uninhabitable.  You don't have to believe me, but 90+ % of the scientific community (grown up kids we paid to educate) are convinced current and former human activity will influence the length of human life here.  My question is, if you insist that a scientific education is not creditable, why do you insist I pay taxes to "educate" your family?  Do it on your own dime.

[sw363535]

ddt ---- I think we are there......   All those who have the option and can afford it at this time will be attending private schools.... or the alternative, are so remotely located and minute that locals are retaking their school system to demand better education standards.... we see that locally. small community schools are certainly fairing better than the large public systems at controlling curriculum and teaching standards.

The majority..... if they are acceptors of every prop man who claims Science proves their claim--- ie cdc or their big brother who which means the same as WHO.

The age of the earth......... so you're a carbon dating believer.  That's a "scientifically proven" claim that certainly struggles  for accuracy because it depends on assumptions historically...... but for the most part struggles for relevance.  A Russian scientist was questioning those "assumptions" a few years back.   Why is the age of the earth relevant.... and the assumption of fragile existence.... seems that if earth is that old and life seems to be visible with every dig of the earth, and every meandering glacier melt.......... doesn't all that seem to prove the system is not that fragile.

I'm not wanting to attack anything..... but just asking ...... How often should we be asking ourselves "is that statement or claim actually true or just an assumption of how it might have been?"  Isn't Science a large group of studies on things that we know to be true or can prove through scientific experimentation.  Not a clever hypothesis of "science fiction".

Fauci is the proponent of following the science, and claiming we will know the answers in a few weeks of months.  Maybe in a few years if we follow this experiment to its absolute finding and can check out the death data with a historic perspective, but we all know how much the data has been tampered with already.  There is no assumption on my part that cdc is running any fully controlled scientific studies.... but are using the science term to gain credibility and to keep the most virus hosts involved in the .....  ...... crowd control....... process.

I agree with you ddt.  The system we live in handles problems in many ways including virus and bacteria when things get over crowded..... like coyote and deer populations.  Human history does not say that a gun is the biggest threat to human life, despite some prominent wars.  viruses and disease are our biggest causes of death.... historically for the years we have recorded history.  And we are right to project things into the future as long as we define it as an assumption of a historic continuation of circumstances.  Accuracy of the meaning of words is my issue....... true science is not guess work.   One prominent scientist of our time used to say "billions and billions" of stars without ever having a credible count...... Imo he was not a scientist, just an entertainer, at best an education promoter......  

I am a Big Bang theory fan for a variety of reasons but one is their accuracy with terminology.    I would love to hear Fauci begin a sentence with "Our theory is".  instead of "the science says"--- A clue.......   "Its a clue".   :). (a movie reference noting the research of journalists)

the world.  is prominently on the surface......... water.    and is a mass of extremely hot core we see as lava occasionally.

We assume that water and gravity support our protective atmosphere --- It might be an assumption to assume it to be a fragile system.

[k-289]

A  P  I    Oil  weekly  numbers  published  today , presenting  creditable  science  or  - ?     

[sw363535]

Does opec present credible "science" on oil supply or trade.  obviously NO.

Only a bureaucrat or a soccer mom congressman would expect objective information from API or OPEC.

Yet most all the research the feds rely on is bought from the ones with the most profits at stake.

Was Monsanto the most credible source to base future production trends in agriculture on.   Absolutely not.

In most cases the federal agencies that oversee commerce are supposed to generate that information........ yet we are so lazy we buy the information from the ones we are supposed to regulate.

was that your point?

[sw363535]

Lets take this back into the realm of markets and usda....... this statement is found in an article in todays SF.

ROUGHLY 3 OF EVERY 10 ACRES OF U.S. FARMLAND IN THE LOWER 48, AROUND 268 MILLION ACRES, IS RENTED TO TENANTS BY AN OWNER NOT ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN FARMING.

That statement is not supported by FSA or usda who classify absentee owners as "active farmers" yet it was probably sourced from usda data,       (which drags us into a discussion of large farmers vs small farmers = pitting operators against their own landowners).   I was on a local board when that was discussed nearly 25 years ago.  When statements are made like this you have to wonder who did the research and what it was based on........ the concern of fsa at the time was not wanting to look like there are too few farmers to the point that 2/3 of "farmers" do not work on a farm, plant a crop, or harvest one. (which makes it impossible to get surveys filled out.). etc etc etc

, "they are all dependent on usda support so a food stamp recipient could also be classified a farmer"-- this statement was made as a joke in one meeting but taken very seriously by federal employees present.

Just another example of how federal bureaucracy distorts and changes data over time, by redefining terms and accepting or rejecting real data they possess.  Not a Scientific study or activity.

[ddtfarm1]

SW... Sounds like you need a little surety in your life and it just isn't coming these days from your sources. You mentioned earlier that you had wasted your advanced education and that science doesn't provide you a rock solid base to stand on, well, maybe education is not for everybody, and we should be a little more selective about whom we try it on. Save some money on big brick buildings and giant athletic facilities at taxpayer expense as a bonus. If science doesn't do it for you, there is always religion and guns and Q. Oh, better not say that, it got someone into big trouble a couple years back.!

USDA reports come from several inputs I understand. In our area right now the farmers are all sold out an corn and beans and the trucks parked, but the buyers and shippers still have piles outside that are untouched. I'm guessing somebody is making an educated decision and someone else is betting on faith. How do think the USDA would report this?

[sw363535]

They will lie and call it "science based data".,.....    but once it is sold it is gone.  (in the pipeline is not part of carry(available to the market))  But usda does that religiously.  Count that corn as available bushels until the boat is empty in China(or even used from Chinese reserves).  Ground piles in this corridor are the same.  They are committed to a feeding entity or an ethanol plant and often priced and paid for up front (ownership is not tracked by usda--they avoid the details when playing their simple farming game). 

The drive by farmers, usda, and urban non farmer farmers see it and think there it is for sale, .......... available like a mirage.  ( actually usda does contact the ground pile manager for inventory data.  But never sort out the contracts.)

Same issue in Brazil.  If Harvard's mega farm uses China funds to buy all the inputs and contracts the crop to be delivered to Chinese buyers, is that crop ever available to the open market after the contract is signed?  No. IMO

So we guess at the worlds production, it is really the best we can do.  And we use terminology that sounds authoritative and demands respect.  Its all very sudo scientific.