Originally Posted by Skipster
I understand that funding is scarce, but you made it sound like this was already a scientific trial. Several claims were made and I would like to see the methodology and the statistical analysis behind the claims. How was the trial laid out? What was the experimental design? How was the data collected? How was the data analyzed? Without this analysis, we can't say if the treatments caused any of the things he saw or if it was random variation.
How was the determination made that topdressing + compost tea homogenized the topdressing/soil interface? Has this phenomenon been reported anywhere else?
To get the initial data on something like this doesn't require funding and university help. You can do this yourself -- but it needs to be done properly. You could probably ask someone like Jim Murphy to design a trial for you and it would cost little more than taking him to lunch. Then, after a couple of years of data and fund raising, this could be taken to a university for additional work.
Do you see what I'm trying to get at here? Sottilo is asking us to take him at his word that all these good things are happening. If he follows the scientific method, it puts a lot more power and rigor behind the assertion. At that point, its not a matter of taking his word. Then, its a matter of numbers.
All valid concerns. I've spoken with Dr. Murphy in the past about donating products for trials at Rutgers, but obviously more funds are required. I do like your idea of asking him to design some trial for others to perform. I'll see what he has to say about that.