The Business of Innovation

[Farfromgeneva]

I would encourage folks to check in general chatter about the 3D printed house. This technology, 3D printing, has the potential to be a Kondriatiev wave level innovation for all of society IMO.

Conceptually similar innovation, this may bleed into other thread topics, but what is the argument against GMOs? Particularly when I've read we can create superfoods such as tomatoes which provide a full days nutrients for a person. If it's the "unkown" of science, that doesn't seem very "progressive" to me. Strikes me, raw meat for the hardcore right, that it's an anachronistic concept on the left which has some abtract devotion to food coming from the ground regardless of net contribution to humankind. But there's a few scientists poking around here, so maybe they can enlighten me on some risk or downside I am not aware of.

Biggest issues of GMOs seem to be (from the perspective of family farms):

Concentration of corporate power - rapid consolidation of seed industry for crops, in particular.

Contamination of non-GMO crops (pollination from GMO crops modifying non-GMO crops
(this also leads to inability of those farms to export to places that ban GMO crops).

Evolution of superweeds/superpests that are resistant to control measures.

Lowering of biodiversity (endangering crops by making them more susceptible to above).

Patents lead to large licensing costs - making seeds much more expensive.

I see issues #3 (evolution of superweeds/superpests resistant to existing mitigation techniques) and #4 as the most real. 1 & 2 are entirely manageable, #3 seems anti science in a sense (we created a super food, but can't figure out how to handle a superweed that we don't know whether it will actually materialize or not). #4 is speculative too but one I'd be worried about as a non-scientist, but we've altered biodiversity a million ways and continue to do so, aren't "we" (humans) part of this ecosystem and our behavior part of this dynamic model? If so, then not an issue that should stop feeding poor people throughout the world. #5 is very manageable.

Appreciate it, have seen some of these arguments. But do they outweight the ability to, for example, extend the average age in Ghana by 10 years or reduce the infant mortality rate by some meaningful % across the LDC universe? This may be one of those "check our morality at the border" issues like human rights globally but we need to reduce trade and keep jobs here no matter what.

[RedFromMI]

I would encourage folks to check in general chatter about the 3D printed house. This technology, 3D printing, has the potential to be a Kondriatiev wave level innovation for all of society IMO.

Conceptually similar innovation, this may bleed into other thread topics, but what is the argument against GMOs? Particularly when I've read we can create superfoods such as tomatoes which provide a full days nutrients for a person. If it's the "unkown" of science, that doesn't seem very "progressive" to me. Strikes me, raw meat for the hardcore right, that it's an anachronistic concept on the left which has some abtract devotion to food coming from the ground regardless of net contribution to humankind. But there's a few scientists poking around here, so maybe they can enlighten me on some risk or downside I am not aware of.

Biggest issues of GMOs seem to be (from the perspective of family farms):

Concentration of corporate power - rapid consolidation of seed industry for crops, in particular.

Contamination of non-GMO crops (pollination from GMO crops modifying non-GMO crops
(this also leads to inability of those farms to export to places that ban GMO crops).

Evolution of superweeds/superpests that are resistant to control measures.

Lowering of biodiversity (endangering crops by making them more susceptible to above).

Patents lead to large licensing costs - making seeds much more expensive.

I see issues #3 (evolution of superweeds/superpests resistant to existing mitigation techniques) and #4 as the most real. 1 & 2 are entirely manageable, #3 seems anti science in a sense (we created a super food, but can't figure out how to handle a superweed that we don't know whether it will actually materialize or not). #4 is speculative too but one I'd be worried about as a non-scientist, but we've altered biodiversity a million ways and continue to do so, aren't "we" (humans) part of this ecosystem and our behavior part of this dynamic model? If so, then not an issue that should stop feeding poor people throughout the world. #5 is very manageable.

Appreciate it, have seen some of these arguments. But do they outweight the ability to, for example, extend the average age in Ghana by 10 years or reduce the infant mortality rate by some meaningful % across the LDC universe? This may be one of those "check our morality at the border" issues like human rights globally but we need to reduce trade and keep jobs here no matter what.

Superweeds at least already exist from use of GMO crops, if I remember correctly. So it is not speculative.

#4 is a huge problem that already exists within farm crops - we engineer for highest yield, and lose some of the more important traits concerning resistance and survivalibility. That is why you have the seed vault above the Arctic Circle. Some of the more recent crop research has been to breed back into certain crops some of the resistance lost in the original yield revolution to make some of the more important food crops better able to handle the evolution of pests/weeds.

I like to compare the importance of biodiversity to the reason why you should not discriminate in education and hiring by race, religion, etc. If you have more options to use, you are better off...

[Farfromgeneva]

I need to learn a little more on the topic. Still think if we can feed a whole country this way we should be doing it but maybe I don’t understand the costs well enough.

Remember reading an interesting book by a guy named Alfred Crosby, maybe a 200-300 level history class, that discusses how we altered North American disease, crops and everything else by simply walking with boots that had been on European soil and brining those farm animals over.

-Just looked it up, called Ecological Imperialism. If you are into this topic perhaps it would be a good read for you.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecologi ... ism_(book)

[youthathletics]

I like to compare the importance of biodiversity to the reason why you should not discriminate in education and hiring by race, religion, etc. If you have more options to use, you are better off...

What a great quote Red....tip of the cap on that one.

[foreverlax]

I need to learn a little more on the topic. Still think if we can feed a whole country this way we should be doing it but maybe I don’t understand the costs well enough.

Remember reading an interesting book by a guy named Alfred Crosby, maybe a 200-300 level history class, that discusses how we altered North American disease, crops and everything else by simply walking with boots that had been on European soil and brining those farm animals over.

-Just looked it up, called Ecological Imperialism. If you are into this topic perhaps it would be a good read for you.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecologi ... ism_(book)

Great documentary Biggest Little Farm....all about creating a sustainable farm from a pile of dirt.

[Farfromgeneva]

I like to compare the importance of biodiversity to the reason why you should not discriminate in education and hiring by race, religion, etc. If you have more options to use, you are better off...

What a great quote Red....tip of the cap on that one.

Life is all about collecting as many free and cheap options as possible. The payoff skew (-100% vs. infinity upside) is worth it, not just in finance but softer, life terms as well.

[Farfromgeneva]

I need to learn a little more on the topic. Still think if we can feed a whole country this way we should be doing it but maybe I don’t understand the costs well enough.

Remember reading an interesting book by a guy named Alfred Crosby, maybe a 200-300 level history class, that discusses how we altered North American disease, crops and everything else by simply walking with boots that had been on European soil and brining those farm animals over.

-Just looked it up, called Ecological Imperialism. If you are into this topic perhaps it would be a good read for you.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecologi ... ism_(book)

Great documentary Biggest Little Farm....all about creating a sustainable farm from a pile of dirt.

There's this lady out in Berkeley, went to her restaurant twice, I guess she runs Oakland school food now, Alice Waters (I think), joint was called Chez Panisse. Guess this woman has been at the front of sustainable and farm to table movement since before it was a movement. Food was good, priced such that I'm not going if I can't expense it, but good.

[foreverlax]

I am amazed at how much packaging has changed -

We have gotten recently gotten some assemble_yourself items - chest of drawers, shelving....the technology applied in, not only the design, but the packaging was mind blowing.

No clue how it's done, but it's mind blowing to me how advanced the manufactoring and shipping processes has become.

[DMac]

I like to compare the importance of biodiversity to the reason why you should not discriminate in education and hiring by race, religion, etc. If you have more options to use, you are better off...

What a great quote Red....tip of the cap on that one.

Life is all about collecting as many free and cheap options as possible. The payoff skew (-100% vs. infinity upside) is worth it, not just in finance but softer, life terms as well.

You betchya, brotha.

[youthathletics]

I like to compare the importance of biodiversity to the reason why you should not discriminate in education and hiring by race, religion, etc. If you have more options to use, you are better off...

What a great quote Red....tip of the cap on that one.

Life is all about collecting as many free and cheap options as possible. The payoff skew (-100% vs. infinity upside) is worth it, not just in finance but softer, life terms as well.

You betchya, brotha.

Stop it, you are making TLD cringe.

[PizzaSnake]

I would encourage folks to check in general chatter about the 3D printed house. This technology, 3D printing, has the potential to be a Kondriatiev wave level innovation for all of society IMO.

Conceptually similar innovation, this may bleed into other thread topics, but what is the argument against GMOs? Particularly when I've read we can create superfoods such as tomatoes which provide a full days nutrients for a person. If it's the "unkown" of science, that doesn't seem very "progressive" to me. Strikes me, raw meat for the hardcore right, that it's an anachronistic concept on the left which has some abtract devotion to food coming from the ground regardless of net contribution to humankind. But there's a few scientists poking around here, so maybe they can enlighten me on some risk or downside I am not aware of.

Biggest issues of GMOs seem to be (from the perspective of family farms):

Concentration of corporate power - rapid consolidation of seed industry for crops, in particular.

Contamination of non-GMO crops (pollination from GMO crops modifying non-GMO crops
(this also leads to inability of those farms to export to places that ban GMO crops).

Evolution of superweeds/superpests that are resistant to control measures.

Lowering of biodiversity (endangering crops by making them more susceptible to above).

Patents lead to large licensing costs - making seeds much more expensive.

I see issues #3 (evolution of superweeds/superpests resistant to existing mitigation techniques) and #4 as the most real. 1 & 2 are entirely manageable, #3 seems anti science in a sense (we created a super food, but can't figure out how to handle a superweed that we don't know whether it will actually materialize or not). #4 is speculative too but one I'd be worried about as a non-scientist, but we've altered biodiversity a million ways and continue to do so, aren't "we" (humans) part of this ecosystem and our behavior part of this dynamic model? If so, then not an issue that should stop feeding poor people throughout the world. #5 is very manageable.

Appreciate it, have seen some of these arguments. But do they outweight the ability to, for example, extend the average age in Ghana by 10 years or reduce the infant mortality rate by some meaningful % across the LDC universe? This may be one of those "check our morality at the border" issues like human rights globally but we need to reduce trade and keep jobs here no matter what.

The real issues with GMOs are that they employ a “natural” process, genetic variation, but at unprecedented speed and breadth of adoption. The risks of unintended consequences are high because no business model allows for sufficient consideration of distal outcomes.

You can win “fast and big”, but you can also lose the same way (see ubiquitous environmental contamination of PFOAs).

Or, too put it simply, people are too venal and stupid to consider the downside risks. GMOs are like driving a car at 300 mph —great idea until something goes awry,

[youthathletics]

I would encourage folks to check in general chatter about the 3D printed house. This technology, 3D printing, has the potential to be a Kondriatiev wave level innovation for all of society IMO.

Conceptually similar innovation, this may bleed into other thread topics, but what is the argument against GMOs? Particularly when I've read we can create superfoods such as tomatoes which provide a full days nutrients for a person. If it's the "unkown" of science, that doesn't seem very "progressive" to me. Strikes me, raw meat for the hardcore right, that it's an anachronistic concept on the left which has some abtract devotion to food coming from the ground regardless of net contribution to humankind. But there's a few scientists poking around here, so maybe they can enlighten me on some risk or downside I am not aware of.

Biggest issues of GMOs seem to be (from the perspective of family farms):

Concentration of corporate power - rapid consolidation of seed industry for crops, in particular.

Contamination of non-GMO crops (pollination from GMO crops modifying non-GMO crops
(this also leads to inability of those farms to export to places that ban GMO crops).

Evolution of superweeds/superpests that are resistant to control measures.

Lowering of biodiversity (endangering crops by making them more susceptible to above).

Patents lead to large licensing costs - making seeds much more expensive.

I see issues #3 (evolution of superweeds/superpests resistant to existing mitigation techniques) and #4 as the most real. 1 & 2 are entirely manageable, #3 seems anti science in a sense (we created a super food, but can't figure out how to handle a superweed that we don't know whether it will actually materialize or not). #4 is speculative too but one I'd be worried about as a non-scientist, but we've altered biodiversity a million ways and continue to do so, aren't "we" (humans) part of this ecosystem and our behavior part of this dynamic model? If so, then not an issue that should stop feeding poor people throughout the world. #5 is very manageable.

Appreciate it, have seen some of these arguments. But do they outweight the ability to, for example, extend the average age in Ghana by 10 years or reduce the infant mortality rate by some meaningful % across the LDC universe? This may be one of those "check our morality at the border" issues like human rights globally but we need to reduce trade and keep jobs here no matter what.

The real issues with GMOs are that they employ a “natural” process, genetic variation, but at unprecedented speed and breadth of adoption. The risks of unintended consequences are high because no business model allows for sufficient consideration of distal outcomes.

You can win “fast and big”, but you can also lose the same way (see ubiquitous environmental contamination of PFOAs).

Or, too put it simply, people are too venal and stupid to consider the downside risks. GMOs are like driving a car at 300 mph —great idea until something goes awry,

And this is why it is hard leave this place.....nuggets like this conversation.

[Typical Lax Dad]

I would encourage folks to check in general chatter about the 3D printed house. This technology, 3D printing, has the potential to be a Kondriatiev wave level innovation for all of society IMO.

Conceptually similar innovation, this may bleed into other thread topics, but what is the argument against GMOs? Particularly when I've read we can create superfoods such as tomatoes which provide a full days nutrients for a person. If it's the "unkown" of science, that doesn't seem very "progressive" to me. Strikes me, raw meat for the hardcore right, that it's an anachronistic concept on the left which has some abtract devotion to food coming from the ground regardless of net contribution to humankind. But there's a few scientists poking around here, so maybe they can enlighten me on some risk or downside I am not aware of.

Biggest issues of GMOs seem to be (from the perspective of family farms):

Concentration of corporate power - rapid consolidation of seed industry for crops, in particular.

Contamination of non-GMO crops (pollination from GMO crops modifying non-GMO crops
(this also leads to inability of those farms to export to places that ban GMO crops).

Evolution of superweeds/superpests that are resistant to control measures.

Lowering of biodiversity (endangering crops by making them more susceptible to above).

Patents lead to large licensing costs - making seeds much more expensive.

I see issues #3 (evolution of superweeds/superpests resistant to existing mitigation techniques) and #4 as the most real. 1 & 2 are entirely manageable, #3 seems anti science in a sense (we created a super food, but can't figure out how to handle a superweed that we don't know whether it will actually materialize or not). #4 is speculative too but one I'd be worried about as a non-scientist, but we've altered biodiversity a million ways and continue to do so, aren't "we" (humans) part of this ecosystem and our behavior part of this dynamic model? If so, then not an issue that should stop feeding poor people throughout the world. #5 is very manageable.

Appreciate it, have seen some of these arguments. But do they outweight the ability to, for example, extend the average age in Ghana by 10 years or reduce the infant mortality rate by some meaningful % across the LDC universe? This may be one of those "check our morality at the border" issues like human rights globally but we need to reduce trade and keep jobs here no matter what.

The real issues with GMOs are that they employ a “natural” process, genetic variation, but at unprecedented speed and breadth of adoption. The risks of unintended consequences are high because no business model allows for sufficient consideration of distal outcomes.

You can win “fast and big”, but you can also lose the same way (see ubiquitous environmental contamination of PFOAs).

Or, too put it simply, people are too venal and stupid to consider the downside risks. GMOs are like driving a car at 300 mph —great idea until something goes awry,

https://www.hindawi.com/journals/isrn/2011/369573/

I am still reading the sixth extinction. We can be very cavalier about plants and the role they play in nature. Unintended consequences is a very big risk. A lot of things dying at what is believed to be an unprecedented rate.

[Farfromgeneva]

I would encourage folks to check in general chatter about the 3D printed house. This technology, 3D printing, has the potential to be a Kondriatiev wave level innovation for all of society IMO.

Conceptually similar innovation, this may bleed into other thread topics, but what is the argument against GMOs? Particularly when I've read we can create superfoods such as tomatoes which provide a full days nutrients for a person. If it's the "unkown" of science, that doesn't seem very "progressive" to me. Strikes me, raw meat for the hardcore right, that it's an anachronistic concept on the left which has some abtract devotion to food coming from the ground regardless of net contribution to humankind. But there's a few scientists poking around here, so maybe they can enlighten me on some risk or downside I am not aware of.

Biggest issues of GMOs seem to be (from the perspective of family farms):

Concentration of corporate power - rapid consolidation of seed industry for crops, in particular.

Contamination of non-GMO crops (pollination from GMO crops modifying non-GMO crops
(this also leads to inability of those farms to export to places that ban GMO crops).

Evolution of superweeds/superpests that are resistant to control measures.

Lowering of biodiversity (endangering crops by making them more susceptible to above).

Patents lead to large licensing costs - making seeds much more expensive.

I see issues #3 (evolution of superweeds/superpests resistant to existing mitigation techniques) and #4 as the most real. 1 & 2 are entirely manageable, #3 seems anti science in a sense (we created a super food, but can't figure out how to handle a superweed that we don't know whether it will actually materialize or not). #4 is speculative too but one I'd be worried about as a non-scientist, but we've altered biodiversity a million ways and continue to do so, aren't "we" (humans) part of this ecosystem and our behavior part of this dynamic model? If so, then not an issue that should stop feeding poor people throughout the world. #5 is very manageable.

Appreciate it, have seen some of these arguments. But do they outweight the ability to, for example, extend the average age in Ghana by 10 years or reduce the infant mortality rate by some meaningful % across the LDC universe? This may be one of those "check our morality at the border" issues like human rights globally but we need to reduce trade and keep jobs here no matter what.

The real issues with GMOs are that they employ a “natural” process, genetic variation, but at unprecedented speed and breadth of adoption. The risks of unintended consequences are high because no business model allows for sufficient consideration of distal outcomes.

You can win “fast and big”, but you can also lose the same way (see ubiquitous environmental contamination of PFOAs).

Or, too put it simply, people are too venal and stupid to consider the downside risks. GMOs are like driving a car at 300 mph —great idea until something goes awry,

Thanks this is a helpful answer for me (to a degree at least being a non scientific mind). But this answer has me wondering why we don’t apply similar train of thought in other aspects.

But I do understand, if only because I’ve been slightly obsessed w Nassim Taleb for like 15yrs and via his book Antifragile that there are limitations to hormesis at the point of long term damage idle destruction, whether in an individual or society (should be able to gather by now that I believer stressors to any organism or system is a critical component which drives my antipathy for folks not honestly sharing the potential downside costs for various actions within a social construct like a society or government).

[Farfromgeneva]

I would encourage folks to check in general chatter about the 3D printed house. This technology, 3D printing, has the potential to be a Kondriatiev wave level innovation for all of society IMO.

Conceptually similar innovation, this may bleed into other thread topics, but what is the argument against GMOs? Particularly when I've read we can create superfoods such as tomatoes which provide a full days nutrients for a person. If it's the "unkown" of science, that doesn't seem very "progressive" to me. Strikes me, raw meat for the hardcore right, that it's an anachronistic concept on the left which has some abtract devotion to food coming from the ground regardless of net contribution to humankind. But there's a few scientists poking around here, so maybe they can enlighten me on some risk or downside I am not aware of.

Biggest issues of GMOs seem to be (from the perspective of family farms):

Concentration of corporate power - rapid consolidation of seed industry for crops, in particular.

Contamination of non-GMO crops (pollination from GMO crops modifying non-GMO crops
(this also leads to inability of those farms to export to places that ban GMO crops).

Evolution of superweeds/superpests that are resistant to control measures.

Lowering of biodiversity (endangering crops by making them more susceptible to above).

Patents lead to large licensing costs - making seeds much more expensive.

I see issues #3 (evolution of superweeds/superpests resistant to existing mitigation techniques) and #4 as the most real. 1 & 2 are entirely manageable, #3 seems anti science in a sense (we created a super food, but can't figure out how to handle a superweed that we don't know whether it will actually materialize or not). #4 is speculative too but one I'd be worried about as a non-scientist, but we've altered biodiversity a million ways and continue to do so, aren't "we" (humans) part of this ecosystem and our behavior part of this dynamic model? If so, then not an issue that should stop feeding poor people throughout the world. #5 is very manageable.

Appreciate it, have seen some of these arguments. But do they outweight the ability to, for example, extend the average age in Ghana by 10 years or reduce the infant mortality rate by some meaningful % across the LDC universe? This may be one of those "check our morality at the border" issues like human rights globally but we need to reduce trade and keep jobs here no matter what.

The real issues with GMOs are that they employ a “natural” process, genetic variation, but at unprecedented speed and breadth of adoption. The risks of unintended consequences are high because no business model allows for sufficient consideration of distal outcomes.

You can win “fast and big”, but you can also lose the same way (see ubiquitous environmental contamination of PFOAs).

Or, too put it simply, people are too venal and stupid to consider the downside risks. GMOs are like driving a car at 300 mph —great idea until something goes awry,

This entire section could be applied to the venture capital universe these days as well...

[tech37]

I need to learn a little more on the topic. Still think if we can feed a whole country this way we should be doing it but maybe I don’t understand the costs well enough.

Remember reading an interesting book by a guy named Alfred Crosby, maybe a 200-300 level history class, that discusses how we altered North American disease, crops and everything else by simply walking with boots that had been on European soil and brining those farm animals over.

-Just looked it up, called Ecological Imperialism. If you are into this topic perhaps it would be a good read for you.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecologi ... ism_(book)

Great documentary Biggest Little Farm....all about creating a sustainable farm from a pile of dirt.

Indeed, it is a great little documentary

[cradleandshoot]

I need to learn a little more on the topic. Still think if we can feed a whole country this way we should be doing it but maybe I don’t understand the costs well enough.

Remember reading an interesting book by a guy named Alfred Crosby, maybe a 200-300 level history class, that discusses how we altered North American disease, crops and everything else by simply walking with boots that had been on European soil and brining those farm animals over.

-Just looked it up, called Ecological Imperialism. If you are into this topic perhaps it would be a good read for you.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecologi ... ism_(book)

Great documentary Biggest Little Farm....all about creating a sustainable farm from a pile of dirt.

Indeed, it is a great little documentary

You give me a pile of dirt and I will give you a bushel basket of tomatoes.

[tech37]

I need to learn a little more on the topic. Still think if we can feed a whole country this way we should be doing it but maybe I don’t understand the costs well enough.

Remember reading an interesting book by a guy named Alfred Crosby, maybe a 200-300 level history class, that discusses how we altered North American disease, crops and everything else by simply walking with boots that had been on European soil and brining those farm animals over.

-Just looked it up, called Ecological Imperialism. If you are into this topic perhaps it would be a good read for you.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecologi ... ism_(book)

Great documentary Biggest Little Farm....all about creating a sustainable farm from a pile of dirt.

Indeed, it is a great little documentary

You give me a pile of dirt and I will give you a bushel basket of tomatoes.

Right. If you haven't seen it, I'd recommend. You of all people on here would appreciate it.

[runrussellrun]

I need to learn a little more on the topic. Still think if we can feed a whole country this way we should be doing it but maybe I don’t understand the costs well enough.

Remember reading an interesting book by a guy named Alfred Crosby, maybe a 200-300 level history class, that discusses how we altered North American disease, crops and everything else by simply walking with boots that had been on European soil and brining those farm animals over.

-Just looked it up, called Ecological Imperialism. If you are into this topic perhaps it would be a good read for you.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecologi ... ism_(book)

Great documentary Biggest Little Farm....all about creating a sustainable farm from a pile of dirt.

Indeed, it is a great little documentary

You give me a pile of dirt and I will give you a bushel basket of tomatoes.

tomatoes.....nerd

100 sq. feet usually yields about 10 pounds

(my list of learned is to find out how the SOIL in the Amazon basen was made. terra preta
talk about innovation. monsanto squashes it

GOT THaT GREEN ON yet !!.......Chatham Bars is have an all day buffet Cod n Cabbage. Happy St. Paddys day.

https://bigbudsmag.com/supporting-plant ... a-gardens/

[cradleandshoot]

I need to learn a little more on the topic. Still think if we can feed a whole country this way we should be doing it but maybe I don’t understand the costs well enough.

Remember reading an interesting book by a guy named Alfred Crosby, maybe a 200-300 level history class, that discusses how we altered North American disease, crops and everything else by simply walking with boots that had been on European soil and brining those farm animals over.

-Just looked it up, called Ecological Imperialism. If you are into this topic perhaps it would be a good read for you.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecologi ... ism_(book)

Great documentary Biggest Little Farm....all about creating a sustainable farm from a pile of dirt.

Indeed, it is a great little documentary

You give me a pile of dirt and I will give you a bushel basket of tomatoes.

tomatoes.....nerd

100 sq. feet usually yields about 10 pounds

(my list of learned is to find out how the SOIL in the Amazon basen was made. terra preta
talk about innovation. monsanto squashes it

GOT THaT GREEN ON yet !!.......Chatham Bars is have an all day buffet Cod n Cabbage. Happy St. Paddys day.

https://bigbudsmag.com/supporting-plant ... a-gardens/

Nobody clarified how big the pile of soil was. Dumbass that you are. Why don't you go smoke a blunt?