Register free!
Search
 
     

Click for Weather
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old 05-07-2009, 08:37 PM
rcreech's Avatar
rcreech rcreech is online now
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: OHIO
Posts: 5,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by NattyLawn View Post
Thanks Rod...Strap broke, right?
Yep...sure did, but looks like a new one now! Just a $250 deductable so not too bad!


Speaking of straps breaking....how is your strap on?

Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 05-07-2009, 09:42 PM
LushGreenLawn's Avatar
LushGreenLawn LushGreenLawn is offline
LawnSite Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Dover, DE
Posts: 2,123
Krill,
I posted a simple response to your question about how organics can be as harmful to the environment as synthetics. I expected you to quote me and rip it apart, however, I got nothing. I have to admit, I am a little disappointed.

Did you miss it, or was I right?
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 05-07-2009, 10:22 PM
lilmarvin4064's Avatar
lilmarvin4064 lilmarvin4064 is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: transition-zone
Posts: 746
wow, this has gotten a little out of hand.

sorry, I didn't relpy sooner. I didn't know I had to respond immediately. Some of us have better things to do than answer your demanding quesions that you could easily find yourself. I can only assume you did not know the answers.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiril View Post
So does hot water, a rock flung from an edger, a finger. I am curious though, what concentration specifically will cause blindness?
ok, but you're probably not trying to kill weeds with "a rock flung from an edger". what's your point? Taken directly from the MSDS on vinegar...

"SKIN CONTACT: Contact may cause mild injury and burns from vinegars of 11% acetic acid and
greater. Dilute solutions may cause dermatitis in some individuals.
EYE CONTACT: May cause severe burns and permanent corneal injury from concentrated vinegars.
May be followed by blindness. High vapor concentrations may result in conjunctivitis."

I assume they mean somewhere between 11 and 30%.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiril View Post
If you state research, then please present it. With respect to leaves ... not relevant to the discussion, unless you want to rid the earth of plants.
"Off-site movement of phosphorus
Phosphates, P combined with oxygen, are removed from the soil solution and immobilized in the soil. Consequently, phosphates are not prone to leaching and pose little or no threat to groundwater resources.

Phosphorus can also be part of organic material such as manures, composts, various natural fertilizers, grass clippings, or tree leaves. In the soil solution, these organic forms of P may not be bound tightly to soil particles. Thus, they are more prone to leaching or runoff than the phosphates."
-university of minnesota

just one of many resources...

if I had more time i'd go farther...

it's not the plant's fault, just the perception of certain people that all the blame lies with synthetic fertilizers.

my point being, don't blame just the synthetics. People need to be aware of best cultural practices with organics and synthetics, and not place the blame on just one side of the table.

and the last question... my point was... if there exists a synthetic (or synthetically altered or extracted natural compound) that will produce the same or better result than using a "natural" product) then why would you not want to use it? Do you disregard science? Do you not see the economical reasons for using this compound? Should we just pander to the people that disregard science and want to use nothing but "organic" methods, even if they don't really work?

extracted and modified natural compounds are quickly replacing older pesticides and are classified as reduced risk. so why not embrace these advances instead of ignoring them in ignorance?

I am not into fads, clever marketing, loopholes, and pandering.

more too come...

give me some time please
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 05-08-2009, 12:43 AM
ted putnam's Avatar
ted putnam ted putnam is online now
LawnSite Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 4,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ric View Post
Real Green

You got to admit Kiril is always on the offensive and never defends any thing in his own words. Instead he will occasionally post a website claiming it has all the answers as to why we are wrong. Of course you can find anything on the net and that doesn't mean it is correct.

Now My opinion of Kiril is, he is nothing more than a troller who likes to stir the pot. It is a sad to think this person has no real life and must post over 7575 posts on this forum in less than 2 years. BTW most of Kirils posts are in fact antagonistic. Now at an average of over 11 posts a day and the fact he post all times of the day, I am even wondering if he ever leaves his room in what might be a institution of some kind. Sorry but I actually feel sorry for this miserable life form.
WTF!!!!

Ric, I thought we cleared all of this up a couple of months ago in the 65+ page "Battle Royale". There is an extensive reference library and Mom's got plenty plenty of PB&J's and Grape Kool Aid stashed in that hole in the base of that big tree...
__________________
"The Poor Fish" circa 1930's: The Poor Fish wouldn't have been caught if he'd known enough to keep his fool mouth shut.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 05-08-2009, 09:02 AM
Kiril Kiril is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: District 9 CA
Posts: 18,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ric View Post
You got to admit Kiril is always on the offensive and never defends any thing in his own words.
1) That would be because I am always getting attacked here

2) You or anyone show me even ONE post where I have cut and paste without a giving credit.

3) You continue to dodge the question (AKA. I don't know, or I am wrong)

Really Ric, I am surprised that you would go out on a limb like you did. Normally you have better sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ric View Post
Now My opinion of Kiril is, he is nothing more than a troller who likes to stir the pot.
Really Ric. You, more than anyone, attack me the moment I post anything in this forum. Rod is next in line to follow with the insults. You like to put blame on other people don't you.

As usual when you guys get called out to defend your statements, you can't, then you go to the childish insults. Bravo for acting like men.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Real Green View Post
I agree whole heartedly Ric! I couldn't more with you on this one.
See above.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 05-08-2009, 09:27 AM
Ric's Avatar
Ric Ric is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: S W Florida
Posts: 11,101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiril View Post
See above.
Kiril

Yes we all have seen the above and maybe that is why we are on the offensive now. You have a knack of irritating people to that point. Like Ted said we thought the Battle Royal had finally locked you in your locker, but some how you found how to open it from the inside and come out for some more wedgies. Oh Well! I guess Bad attention is better than no attention in your mind. May I suggest you spend more time at the Comic Book Store. The nerds tell me the new Hellboy issue beats all the Spider man and Superman episodes put together.
__________________
.

"TG doesn't give a rats ass about being "Responsible" as long as sales/production quotas are met. That's it in a nutshell. A recipe for disaster IMO." Ted Putnam 2/28/14

You can lead a Donkey to water but you can't make the Jackass Drink

"As Americans you have the right to be stupid." John Kerry

"Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid.” John Wayne.
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 05-08-2009, 09:31 AM
Kiril Kiril is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: District 9 CA
Posts: 18,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by LushGreenLawn View Post
Krill,
I posted a simple response to your question about how organics can be as harmful to the environment as synthetics. I expected you to quote me and rip it apart, however, I got nothing. I have to admit, I am a little disappointed.

Did you miss it, or was I right?
Do you mean this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by LushGreenLawn View Post
If you apply too much of any nutrient, synthetic or organic, it will leach into waterways. In that regard, organics can be just as bad as synthetics.
Yes, it is correct. I have said many times before, and will say it again. Anything in solution has the potential to leach.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 05-08-2009, 09:59 AM
Kiril Kiril is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: District 9 CA
Posts: 18,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ric View Post
Yes we all have seen the above and maybe that is why we are on the offensive now.
Ric, you are so full of yourself it is not funny anymore.

FYI, my first (undeleted) post in this topic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiril View Post
No argument here, but would you care to go into detail concerning this "dilemma" and these other "quite toxic" organics?
Yup, I am trolling. I simply asked for someone to back up their comment. You however, have done nothing more than throw insults and personal attacks in my direct ... no?

Here is your first post. Red is what started this compost discussion, bold is your typical attempt to poke and prod. Who is the troll here Ric?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ric View Post
Kiril

Don't be so sure. Compost can be very Hydrophobic and can kill field capacity. The quality of your amendment is very important. Humus Peat is hydrophilic and can be a better choice in many conditions.

Bridging between Orgasmic and Synthetic can give the best of both worlds if done correctly. This is the 21th Century, learn to use what modern technology has given us.

BTW I am Semi Retired and only work part time. Do you have a real job, or is Lawnsite paying you to be on here 24/7.

And then you continue in your next post to insult, poke and prod without provocation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ric View Post
You are a poor over educated Fool with no common sense.
In fact, in almost every post you have made, you managed to say something insulting about or towards me. And you call me a troll.

I have now asked you REPEATEDLY to answer the question, yet you refuse to. I don't care how you answer it, just answer it.

And once again, here you go talking more shiit without backing up your information.
If you are so knowledgeable on these subjects Ric, my questions should be easily answered by you ... no?

How about these questions? You are the one who made the statement about glass beads ... no?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiril View Post
Got some CEC numbers (referenced) on those glass beads?
And while your at it, how about some numbers on the CEC of organic matter?

(Note: provide CEC numbers in mmol/kg)

How about a product link for these beads with costs?

How about some viewable samples or studies showing its use in landscapes as a soil amendment?

What I can't seem to understand is why you would want to increase hydraulic conductivity in your sandy soils?

Are you going to answer the question and demonstrate you actually do know what you are talking about, or as usual, are you just going to resort to insults to avoid answering the questions? Once again, I don't care how it gets answered, credible links, or a logical argument with verifiable data, just answer the damn questions!

The whole point of all this is people here attack anyone who uses alternative methods. They then make incorrect statements about organics, but when asked to present information to substantiate their statements, they can't! If you want to call that trolling, attacking, blah, blah, blah, so be it. But believe you me, if anyone makes a statement about a synthetic here you know to be wrong, you and all your buddies will be all over them like stink on shiit. Am I wrong Ric?
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 05-08-2009, 10:24 AM
Ric's Avatar
Ric Ric is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: S W Florida
Posts: 11,101
Kiril

I really feel sorry for you because you can't seem to get the point here. "It is not what you say, But how you say it." You need to work on your communication skills. Most people reading here get the perception you are a total dork.

Quit while you are behind instead of a complete loser.
__________________
.

"TG doesn't give a rats ass about being "Responsible" as long as sales/production quotas are met. That's it in a nutshell. A recipe for disaster IMO." Ted Putnam 2/28/14

You can lead a Donkey to water but you can't make the Jackass Drink

"As Americans you have the right to be stupid." John Kerry

"Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid.” John Wayne.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 05-08-2009, 10:29 AM
Kiril Kiril is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: District 9 CA
Posts: 18,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilmarvin4064 View Post
ok, but you're probably not trying to kill weeds with "a rock flung from an edger". what's your point?
You don't use an edger/weed wacker to control weeds. Hmmm, interesting.

My point is, even the most innocuous item can be harmful to you personally. I specifically asked for examples of environmental damage, so what does that have to do with vinegar and your eyes? Do you want me to pull up some MSDS sheets on the chems you guys typically apply? ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by lilmarvin4064 View Post
"Off-site movement of phosphorus
Phosphates, P combined with oxygen, are removed from the soil solution and immobilized in the soil. Consequently, phosphates are not prone to leaching and pose little or no threat to groundwater resources.

Phosphorus can also be part of organic material such as manures, composts, various natural fertilizers, grass clippings, or tree leaves. In the soil solution, these organic forms of P may not be bound tightly to soil particles. Thus, they are more prone to leaching or runoff than the phosphates."
-university of minnesota
First .... please link the source, don't just cut and paste.

Second, that document is not quite right. P can and does leach.



Quote:
Originally Posted by lilmarvin4064 View Post
and the last question... my point was... if there exists a synthetic (or synthetically altered or extracted natural compound) that will produce the same or better result than using a "natural" product) then why would you not want to use it?
Because of that little thing we like to call sustainability, natural balance, protecting natural resources, etc....

Quote:
Originally Posted by lilmarvin4064 View Post
Do you disregard science?
No I do not. These products have trickled down from Ag into landscapes. Are you saying we need/should manage our landscapes like Agricultural crops? And if you do believe that, please explain why. Can you give me a valid reason why landscapes can not be managed with little or no chems?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lilmarvin4064 View Post
Do you not see the economical reasons for using this compound?
No, not really. Please explain it to me. How is it economical to maintain high input landscapes as opposed to low input landscapes?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lilmarvin4064 View Post
Should we just pander to the people that disregard science and want to use nothing but "organic" methods, even if they don't really work?
Once again, a BS statement with regard to organics and science.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lilmarvin4064 View Post
extracted and modified natural compounds are quickly replacing older pesticides and are classified as reduced risk.
I wonder why this is happening? Perhaps because of environmental damage and a need to preserve our resources? Perhaps because of pest resistance and adaptation? Perhaps all of the above?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
fertilizer , granular , herbicide , liquid , weed and feed

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1998 - 2012, LawnSite.com™ - Moose River Media
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:44 PM.

Page generated in 0.14431 seconds with 7 queries