[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
logo
stuffwehate

Return ]

Posting mode: Reply
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 14654)
Message
File  []
close
image.jpg
146541465414654
>> No. 14654 Anonymous
4th May 2014
Sunday 6:45 pm
14654 Rapeseed and other hayfever-inducing crops
Just fucking stop it, you're making my life hell. Smokers get taxed through the nose in part for second hand smoke (which may not even cause harm) but these fucking farmers ruin spring, summer and autumn for millions of people every year and face no punishment for it.

Grow livestock, like they do in Mudchute - a sensible farm that does not cause harm. Or even vegetables, just not fucking rapeseed that is only good for cooking oil. We don't even need the sodding stuff when we've got sunflower oil, olive oil, coconut oil, any other type of oil. Fucks sake.

Manure too. Ruins the countryside for everyone else.

I'd get done for spraying feces or anthrax into a farmer's house. Double standards or what?

I'm so angry right now.
Expand all images.
>> No. 14655 Anonymous
4th May 2014
Sunday 7:18 pm
14655 spacer
>>14654
I live about half a mile away from a few fields and some cunt of a farmer has left a few big heaps of pigshit on the edge of the field for the past 3 or 4 weeks. Yesterday the wind was blowing it perfectly in my direction and even leaving a window open a crack was borderline nauseating.
>> No. 14656 Anonymous
4th May 2014
Sunday 7:37 pm
14656 spacer
>>14654
Fuck of cityboy, you neglect rural England to the maximum and then have the gall to complain when it's not what you expect. I'm still using copper wire Internet!
>> No. 14657 Anonymous
4th May 2014
Sunday 7:45 pm
14657 spacer
>>14654

It's almost as if you don't understand anything!

What the hell do you think biofuels are made from? Or, for that matter, what fertilises crops?
>> No. 14658 Anonymous
4th May 2014
Sunday 7:48 pm
14658 spacer
>>14657
The bodies of darkies.

One day, lad.
>> No. 14659 Anonymous
4th May 2014
Sunday 7:49 pm
14659 spacer
>>14657
We don't need biofuels.

Bees fertilize crops. Motherfucking bees.
>> No. 14660 Anonymous
4th May 2014
Sunday 7:51 pm
14660 spacer
>>14659
These two comments are entirely unrelated.

Even if they weren't, you neglect the fact that we do need biofuels and there are a lot less bees than there once were.
>> No. 14661 Anonymous
4th May 2014
Sunday 7:58 pm
14661 spacer
>>14659

Bees pollenate you gibbering moron. Plants need nitrates that well farmed soil is depleted of, hence manure.

Christ, they teach this shit to GCSE students lad!
>> No. 14662 Anonymous
4th May 2014
Sunday 8:04 pm
14662 spacer
>>14657
>>14661
He's just pulling your leg. I doubt anyone can be that stupid.
>> No. 14663 Anonymous
4th May 2014
Sunday 8:17 pm
14663 spacer

whiteley.jpg
146631466314663
Well didn't that turn into a shit thread.
>> No. 14665 Anonymous
5th May 2014
Monday 12:39 pm
14665 spacer
>>14660
Biofuels are shit. It's orders of magnitude more efficient to use the same land for solar or wind farms.
>> No. 14666 Anonymous
5th May 2014
Monday 12:43 pm
14666 spacer
>>14665
They aren't used for the same thing though.
>> No. 14672 Anonymous
6th May 2014
Tuesday 11:27 am
14672 spacer
I live near loads of rape and it doesn't cause me a problem, I am sure that lime trees are to blame for my annual facial streaming and months-long irritation.

Ever tried using local honey in your teaa to mitigate the effects? It works a bit.

*Pollinate
>> No. 14674 Anonymous
6th May 2014
Tuesday 12:00 pm
14674 spacer
>>14666
Depends on the case. You do increasingly see them being used for electricity generation and heating, which comes under my heading of intensely silly (or woefully short-sighted, at least). There are special cases in which I'm more tolerant, for example it's quite a good idea where there's a waste stream to be exploited, and algal fuels which can be cultivated without displacing food production could be quite interesting, but today's biofuels are never going to be more than a stop-gap of dubious merit on the path to wherever we're headed, even in their natural domain of transport.
>> No. 14677 Anonymous
6th May 2014
Tuesday 1:13 pm
14677 spacer
>>14674

Bees still don't fertilise crops, lad.
>> No. 14678 Anonymous
6th May 2014
Tuesday 3:46 pm
14678 Anti-biofuels lad
>>14677
That wasn't me. I'm hurt that you'd even suggest such a thing.
>> No. 15404 Anonymous
6th June 2014
Friday 7:17 pm
15404 spacer
I have fields near me where rape has been grown 3 years consecutively. Farmers know this is generally bad for the land in the long run but they all owe so much money to the banks anyway. So they grow what is profitable in the short term to make ends meet.

>Grow livestock, like they do in Mudchute - a sensible farm that does not cause harm. Or even vegetables, just not fucking rapeseed that is only good for cooking oil.

I don't know what Mudchute do but keep in mind that rapeseed can be used to feed livestock. Several hundred thousand tonnes of the stuff goes to animal feed each year. Granted animal feed is likely to come from something else.

>>14674

Yeah. Apparently a few years ago we were importing palm oil from deforested rainforest to meet the biofuel & renewable quota's.
>> No. 15409 Anonymous
7th June 2014
Saturday 12:33 am
15409 spacer
>>14654
>second hand smoke (which may not even cause harm)
Oh, you.

>>14672
>Ever tried using local honey in your teaa to mitigate the effects? It works a bit.

This is a complete myth which is backed up by absolutely no emperical evidence whatsoever.
>> No. 15411 Anonymous
7th June 2014
Saturday 8:50 am
15411 spacer
>>15409

Science doesn't know everything. There was still no consensus on what women squirt when they squirt or even where it comes from. Some scientists flatly deny it happens at all.

There has been evidence that exposure to limited quantities of allergens decreases sensitivity, so it makes sense, it could work.
>> No. 15412 Anonymous
7th June 2014
Saturday 9:20 am
15412 spacer
>>15411
I've heard a lot of people say "It's just piss", but I used to know a bird who was a squirter and it most definitely was not piss.
>> No. 15417 Anonymous
7th June 2014
Saturday 11:59 am
15417 spacer
>>15411
>Science doesn't know everything.
Stop that shit right now. "Science doesn't know everything" is not a justification for unscientific bollocks.
>> No. 15418 Anonymous
7th June 2014
Saturday 12:24 pm
15418 spacer
>>15417

I don't know much about the actual subject but there's a difference between going against clear scientific evidence and conjecturing in the absence of evidence. If you can point to a study that says there is no link between honey and reactions etc then of course the guy you're quoting would be engaging in unscientific bollocks. If however it's just that nobody in the scientific community has never looked in to it then he has every right to resort to old wives tails, because there is often a grain of truth in them and it's better than starting from square one.
>> No. 15419 Anonymous
7th June 2014
Saturday 12:30 pm
15419 spacer
>>15418

No. To quote Dara O'Brien, possibly not Verbatim, for a second "Science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it would stop. However, that doesn't give you carte blanche to fill in the gaps with which ever fairytale best appeals to you."

It really feel like what you are expressing with that sentiment is, for example, because I'm an Aires and and I've never had a good relationship with a Libra that I should entertain Astrologists. Which is, of course, a load of bollocks.
>> No. 15420 Anonymous
7th June 2014
Saturday 12:38 pm
15420 spacer
>>15418
>If you can point to a study that says there is no link between honey and reactions etc then of course the guy you're quoting would be engaging in unscientific bollocks.
There's this: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11868925

>If however it's just that nobody in the scientific community has never looked in to it then he has every right to resort to old wives tails,
However, you have no right to justify this by brandishing "science doesn't know everything".
>> No. 15421 Anonymous
7th June 2014
Saturday 12:40 pm
15421 spacer
>>15419

So what you're saying is that nobody can have an opinion on anything until someone who may or may not be smarter than them tells them what to think about said thing? Sage for absolutely anti scientific bollocks.
>> No. 15423 Anonymous
7th June 2014
Saturday 12:44 pm
15423 spacer
>>15421
>So what you're saying is that nobody can have an opinion on anything until someone who may or may not be smarter than them tells them what to think about said thing?
No, that's not what he's saying, you daft cunt.
>> No. 15424 Anonymous
7th June 2014
Saturday 12:48 pm
15424 spacer

lab-rat-200x300.jpg
154241542415424
>>15417

Not the other poster, but I'd argue that it can be worth personally investigating something anecdotal, even if it hasn't been proved scientifically yet (if the potential benefits outweigh the risks).

For example, if you're interested in fitness you're often wading through medical studies that aren't perfectly representative of a certain phenomena or the effect you're trying to achieve (e.g. they've been conducted on rats or on people in very specific physical states), but you can still experiment with principles derived from it just to see if it works for you. A controlled study would be nice, yes, but the worst thing that can happen for that poster is that they go outside a bit more and learn to moderate their own exposure to allergens.

Maybe you're right to be skeptical, especially with the amount of false information published about health in mass media which usually takes some study wildly out of context, but I'm not sure it's necessary here.
>> No. 15425 Anonymous
7th June 2014
Saturday 1:13 pm
15425 spacer
>>15424
My objection isn't to people trying unproven stuff, it's to people responding to criticism with B-B-BUT SCIENCE DUN NO EVERYFINK DO.
>> No. 15426 Anonymous
7th June 2014
Saturday 1:28 pm
15426 spacer
>>15425

Fair. I've also just thought over your astrology example, which could also be considered as 'trying unproven stuff', and am forced to amend my own opinion a bit. I think there's something to be said for making a personal decision about what unproven ideas you wish to pursue if they're based on a good knowledge about the quality of evidence and an honest appraisal of possible benefits against risks. Astrology could be ruled out on that basis, I think.

I do agree that 'science doesn't know everything' is a poor reason to justify any old experiment. You could justify virtually anything that way. I'm now wondering if it might be productive to search for any evidence, anecdotal or not, of the allergen thing working for someone.
>> No. 15436 Anonymous
8th June 2014
Sunday 5:17 am
15436 spacer
>>15412

I have an afternoon of cleaning the bedsheets again due to banging my missus up the arse. I don;t mention this to brag, but to confirm that it is definitely not piss.

Return ]
whiteline

Delete Post []
Password