View Single Post
  #63  
Old 09-06-2012, 09:54 AM
Skipster Skipster is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 677
Quote:
Originally Posted by NattyLawn View Post
I think you're the one being naive here. You can't continue to mine the soil without putting anything back and continue to get the same results. Conventional products don't build the soil!!!!! Farmers have to increase fertilizer use for the same or less yield, increased disease pressure (buy more fungicides!) and insect pressure that's getting worse as well (buy more insecticides!). The soil being out of whack causes everything else to be out of whack and you buy more fert, more insecticides, more fungicides. Who makes money off of that? Monsanto, Dow, Syngenta, etc.

Dr Zuberer works for TEXAS A&M!!!!! Who do you thinks funds a lot of his research? I'll give you a hint. It's not the makers of Sumagreen, Nutrients Plus, or any other organic product producing company. Sorry, I don't trust university studies. Most don't have any knowledge of organic products.

You call me naive, then spew junk about "building the soil"?! You're showing your lack of plant and soils knowledge with your uninformed claims about fertilizers and yields. Then, you try to use agricultural examples (incorrectly, BTW) to convince me that a lawn is analagous to annual grain or legume crops! This is EXACTLY what the microbial people want you to do -- confuse the issue and cloud the information with useless non-related bunk! Perennial crops grown for performance and aesthetics (lawns) behave MUCH differently than annual crops grown for yield. And, if you've followed agricultural production over the last 50 yrs, you would notice that fertilizer and pesticide use is a fraction of what it was just 20 yrs ago and that yields are much higher. 2 billion more people are fed using 60% less land. Doesn't sound like lower yields to me ....

Your funding claims are also way off base. The Bio Soil Enhancer people told me that they don't like university turf research becuase it doesn't give them the results they want. They know they can't pass scientific muster, so they would rather not even try to have it tested. They don't want you to know that the product doesn't perform as advertised. They did a couple of things at MSU years ago on crops (not lawns), but I notice that you don't dismiss those claims sipmly b/c BSE paid for them. Double standard?

Phasthound is correct that we are all entitled to our own opinions, but we are not all entitled to our own facts. The facts have been presented and are before us. Ignore them all you want. Just understand that science doesn't change because you want very badly ot believe in a product.
Reply With Quote
 
Page generated in 0.04303 seconds with 7 queries