search results matching tag: Seeds
» channel: learn
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds
Videos (256) | Sift Talk (8) | Blogs (18) | Comments (735) |
Videos (256) | Sift Talk (8) | Blogs (18) | Comments (735) |
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
Life As A Rare Fruit Collector
I'm sure in many instances you're correct about his garden. It can be incredibly hard to grow things outside their native areas/environment. I try to do it myself, and it does take longer and more work to get them to fruit (I have some loquats and Asian pears growing here in N Cali, outside their preferred zones. The loquats fruited for the first time this year, after 8-10 years in the ground. The Asian pears are even older, and have yet to bloom. I hope I have better luck with my new nectarine tree.)
I just thought that finding out about these odd plants, finding where they might be, and collecting the seeds would be incredibly difficult for him, even with help. Also, he seemed to have quite a collection of seeds, I'm guessing some of them haven't been planted yet.
True for many simple domestic species, but exotic gardening of foreign trees until they reach the point where they are bearing fruit takes a lot of knowledge on top of sourcing the seeds. How much water? What's the pollination process? Soil chemistry? Fertilization and nutrients? Diseases and pests to manage?
There are a lot of failed gardens out there.
Life As A Rare Fruit Collector
True for many simple domestic species, but exotic gardening of foreign trees until they reach the point where they are bearing fruit takes a lot of knowledge on top of sourcing the seeds. How much water? What's the pollination process? Soil chemistry? Fertilization and nutrients? Diseases and pests to manage?
There are a lot of failed gardens out there.
Not in my eyes, he has to collect them before he can even attempt to grow them...that can be a LOT harder, especially when it's hard for you to walk and talk.
Plants/fruits grow on their own, mostly.
Life As A Rare Fruit Collector
Inspirational.
The guy didn't just overcame his physical challenges to accomplish something. He awesomely blew them completely away.
I bet he's gonna get a bajillion different seeds in the mail now.
P.S. Pause at 04:06 to see the raw intelligence and passion in his eyes. That's a guy who's found himself.
Monsanto man claims it's safe to drink, refuses a glass.
My family owns and operates a farm, wheat and corn, in Kansas. We use Roundup herbicides sometimes.
Specifically, there is a GMO variant of field corn called "Roundup Ready" where the corn is genetically resistant to the herbicide. Plant a field of that corn, then after it emerges but well before harvesting (obviously) spray it with Roundup, diluted to an appropriate level. All of the pest plants in the field die. The corn looks a little wilted / harried for a few days after spraying, but bounces back and grows out just fine.
We use that specific kind (Roundup Ready) about 1 year out of every 4 or 5, only when pest plants are starting to become an issue. They'd love to sell it to farmers every year, but most only rotate it in when necessary, just like us, and use a small amount of normal seed (not GMO, just some of the normal corn we harvest) held in reserve from previous year(s) in the other years.
Before Roundup (and other major herbicides and pesticides), pest plants could be a major problem. From what my family says, corn can cross-pollinate or do some kind of hybridization with other crops like milo or sorghum or something, which results in a sterile cane-stalk plant like corn that produces no actual grain. Back 20+ years ago, that was a fairly major problem ... but it is very easily controlled nowadays with herbicides, and Roundup in particular.
Pure, concentrated Roundup is pretty nasty stuff. Then again, farmers still use or have used a lot of much nastier stuff during normal farm operations, like Malathion being sprinkled into grain bins to kill off insects and other small pests. I wouldn't want to chug down a glass full of any of that crap, BUT on the other hand I think we're way better as the human race off WITH all these things being used to control what can be or have been significantly damaging pests than how things would be WITHOUT them. Not to mention that all of these things are used in very very trace amounts compared to the actual amount of food produced itself, and usually a *really* long time before it becomes food. I think you'd be pretty hard pressed to detect any of them in the parts-per-multi-multi-billion scale by them time we eat them.
...That being said, the dude walked right in to this one. If his message was "this stuff is 100% safe and beneficial if used properly", I'd actually 100% agree with him. But when he's trying to oversell it by saying that it is perfectly safe to drink a glass of it ... of course somebody is going to call his bluff. Duh.
Baffled by Stupidity: Richard Dawkins
See now I can tell you really know nothing about it, since you do not need to be a chemist. You could grab yopo seeds and just smoke those (they were found in a 3,000 year old bowl in Costa Rica - people have known about it for a long time, then for some reason it became a secret - I think Christianity stepped in to get rid of the knowledge of it), it's found throughout nature - you could grab some acacia bark, boil it and drink. It is safe and it is not dangerous. It's been studied many times and is still being studied for how it affects the brain & as well for it's natural therapeutic effects. It is believed to be endogenous - that is it already exists within your being (it's in many plants and animals, recently found produced in an animal's pineal gland). Not a huge Tool fan but they often allude to this substance, the pineal gland, Alex Grey's artwork - pretty sure they know full well of what it is.
Anyway, I totally did derail the comments and I do apologize for that, but you guys were calling me "religious" and downvoting me so I took offense. I derailed mostly to post the link about Dawkins having a profound experience that humbles his approach, it was a joke - but really I think all of us that have experienced the wonders would love people like Dawkins to spend the 5-10 minutes to experience it and then hear what he has to say about it.
*promote
What @eric3579 said.
Not the first time you have hijacked a thread to espouse the wonders of DMT. Are you a chemist that makes the stuff or what? It is not a 'safe' drug in any way.
If it's not about being a 'religious experience', your interjection of it here is out of place and odd.
The Oath of Fëanor
When Morgoth in that day of doom
had slain the trees and filled with gloom
the shining land of Valinor,
there Fëanor and his sons then swore
the mighty oath upon the hill
of tower-crownéd Tún, that still
wrought wars and sorrow in the world.
From darkling seas the fogs unfurled
their blinding shadows grey and cold
where Glingal once had bloomed with gold
and Belthil bore its silver flowers.
The mists were mantled round the towers
of the Elves' white city by the sea.
There countless torches fitfully
did start and twinkle, as the Gnomes
were gathered to their fading homes,
and thronged the long and winding stair
that led to the wide echoing square.
There Fëanor mourned his jewels divine
the Silmarils he made. Like wine
his wild and potent words them fill;
a great host harkens deathly still.
But all he said both wild and wise,
half truth and half the fruit of lies
that Morgoth sowed in Valinor,
in other songs and other lore
recorded is. He bade them flee
from lands divine, to cross the sea,
the pathless plains, the perilous shores
where ice-infested water roars;
to follow Morgoth to the unlit earth
leaving their dwellings and olden mirth;
to go back to the Outer Lands
to wars and weeping. There their hands
they joined in vows, those kinsmen seven,
swearing beneath the stars of Heaven,
by Varda the Holy that them wrought
and bore them each with radiance fraught
and set them in the deeps to flame.
Timbrenting's holy height they name,
whereon are built the timeless halls
of Manwë Lord of Gods. Who calls
these names in witness may not break
his oath, though earth and heaven shake.
Curufin, and Celegorm the fair,
Damrod and Díriel were there,
and Cranthir dark, and Maidros tall
(whom after torment should befall),
and Maglor the mighty who like the sea
with deep voice sings yet mournfully.
'Be he friend or foe, or seed defiled
of Morgoth Bauglir, or mortal child
that in after days on earth shall dwell,
no law, nor love, nor league of hell,
nor might of Gods, nor moveless fate
shall defend him from wrath and hate
of Fëanor's sons, who takes and steals
or finding keeps the Silmarils,
the thrice-enchanted globes of light
that shine until the final night.'
How fracking works
I rather feel that that puts the argument in a skewed light. Essentially, we are either in full awareness of the facts and long term results of fracking or we are not. If we are not yet, why on earth would we pursue it now? We have alternative forms of energy production, it's just a whole bunch of very rich people aren't quite done selling us oil yet.
The shale will still be there, and we may have developed more efficient and safer means of extracting it. And we will have to deal without oil eventually, what better time to begin, whilst we still have some that we can get if we utterly must? We are not yet in crisis but they want to take a risk, that's got to make you ask a few questions. I don't have a detailed scientific knowledge of the subject, but i would know if it was proven safe, and it isn't yet.
Incidentally or otherwise, the first earthquake that i've ever felt in my life happened very shortly after they began a new testing site for fracking nearby - one of two earthquakes that happened in short succession after the first wave of tests. I live in the north of england.. they never happen. It's worth looking into before we start doing it.. the last person i'm going to trust with the future of this planet is an oil baron.
@BoneRemake - let me know which bit of my horseshit you want me to look past and i'll attempt to look past it and see what you describe. Or was it an empty sound-bite? My criticism was valid - newt said everything that needed to be said on that subject, and yes i can in retrospect see the value of the video as a demonstration of the fracking process. But you don't have to be a hippy to try and see positive and informed decisions made in the world, but if it makes me one then i'm glad to be one. What does that make you? No need for name calling, it generally means you've not got an argument.
I'd just like to mention that it really, really suits the pro-fracking lobbyists to try and ridicule people and try to conjure mental images of the long-haired flower-child hugging trees and not showering and wearing tinfoil hats. It turns real, intelligent, professional people who care about what happens around them into caricatures, and it belittles their reasoned and sensible argument without even addressing it. It is a tactic as old as the hills.. i'm sure you're not a lobbyist, but i can't help think they're smiling knowing that the old seeds they scattered around took root somewhere..!
*controversy
Unfortunately fracking has become politicized and so there are no longer any sources of information that can be expected to be honest. It is now just another dichotomy: A completely safe method of resource collection, or a WMD disguised as such.
Playing Quake on an Oscilloscope
You can really hear the seeds of Trent's current success with movie soundtracks here.
I never really played the game with the soundtrack in, but I used to throw it in the stereo and play it out the windows on Halloween to scare the shit out of the trick-or-treaters.
Doubt - How Deniers Win
We, meaning people, but yes, I did really mean America, the most prolific space fairing nation in the past. The Chinese may go there again soon, but not yet. I'll reserve my opinion about their ability until I see their manned rocket land there and return.
Florida is thousands of times the size of Kiribati and probably tens of thousands of times the population...and is FAR from the only place in jeopardy. I was not ignoring Kiribati, or the dozens of other island nations, or Venice, or Alaska, or, well, any place with a coast line, I was giving one example. It's a little funny that you decided to say 'Florida?!? It's far worse over in Kiribati' while you're trying also to say 'Don't panic, it's not bad'. WHAT?!? I think the people of Kiribati would disagree that it's not time to panic! ;-)
That's not the data I've seen. What I've read (from numerous sources) said the rate of rise is accelerating, not a steady rate over the last 100+ years, and it is expected to continue accelerating. When you say they can "cope" with it, what do you mean, because even the little amount of rise we've seen so far has already displaced tens of thousands of people, and very few have just adapted to the new situation? What evidence have you that there's a solution to the loss of useable land?
Oh, from your volcano example, I see that by "cope" you mean "die". That's not how I intend to "cope", thanks. ;-)
Kiribati has seen tsunamis, and survived them. Being in open ocean, most are barely perceptible. There's no continental shelf to make them 'grow'. That said, 1 foot of sea rise puts a large portion of the island underwater and makes the rest FAR more susceptible to damage from even a small tsunami.
Really? That's not what I've been reading for decades. California alone, which produces over 1/4 of America's food, is in the worst drought ever recorded due to climate change, and production is falling like a stone there. They are not alone by any means. Africa, Australia, etc have the same issues. It's not mainly an issue of violence world wide, it's an issue of lack of water. The violence is often CAUSED by the lack of food, making the 'men with guns' have a reason to steal and control food sources. If food were plentiful, it would be impossible for them to do so. Africa did have the means to grow their own food, before they stopped getting enough water. That's the biggest road block, the seed can be donated and fertilizer only increases yields, it's not needed in most cases to sustain crops.
Because some war torn countries have issues with roving gangs of gun toting thugs does not make gun toting thugs the reason Africa is food poor. The thugs SELL that food, so it doesn't just disappear, it still gets eaten, and there's still a huge famine, so.....
Yes, adopting new tech, even quick adoption, absolutely CAN be an economic boon, just not for the oil companies in this instance. Just consider the adoption of the automobile, it was fast, and great for the economy in numerous ways.
EDIT:And I have said clearly that I don't think anything done today will effect 2100. The greenhouse gasses stay in the atmosphere that long or longer, so today's change in emissions will only equate to a change in the climate after 2115, so we can't avoid 1 foot of sea level rise. We can, however, stop increasing the rate of change (the system reacts to greenhouse gas addition right away, but takes 100+ years to react to reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, so we can make it worse, but not better than that prediction...and that's the road we're on, making it worse daily).
Yes, changing the resolution changed the measurements ON THAT ONE OUTLYING GLACIER ONLY. It explained why it alone wasn't following the models, which was because a large portion of it was incredibly high up, making it colder, but on average it was below the 'melt line', skewing the data.
78% less glacier (your figures) still mean more than 78% less runoff, so >78% less water....in areas that are already completely dependent on glacial water to support humans and already have water supply issues today. Even the low 65% number is disastrous.
The glaciers do not need to be gone in order to be useless as sources of fresh water. I did not say all glaciers would be 'gone' I said they would no longer supply the demand, and there's no known tech in the pipeline that can.
So, in short, please stop twisting and exaggerating what I write to create strawman arguments to shoot down. It gets old fast.
^
Doubt - How Deniers Win
I didn't say any such thing.
A large percentage of farm land is going to be lost by displaced people and lack of water.
A large percentage of people, those who live less than 1 foot above sea level will be displaced.
Just wow, you think we can build dykes around Florida? New Orleans is not the only low lying city in the world, you know.
We would have to start from scratch. The tech is abandoned, there's not a concord to get on no matter how much you pay, nor is there a rocket that can make it to the moon, no matter how much funding you throw at NASA, just plain old gone. We would have to start from scratch again. We're trying to use 40+ year old Russian rockets just to go to the space station, we can't even get there on our own, how do you assume we can just go back to the moon?
Food production where it's needed is the issue. The men with guns are also an issue, but even without them there's simply not enough food where people are starving. I'm not talking about instances where dictators starved their people intentionally, I'm talking about the billions of people who are lacking food because of either economic or climate pressures, or often both. If people in Africa could grow their own food, the men with guns could not stop them from eating, but no water, no fertilizer, and no seed make that impossible. We do NOT have 'more than enough food', we may have near exactly enough food if it were perfectly distributed throughout the world (accounting for spoilage, probably not though). Perfect distribution is impossible, so there's not enough food. Period.
Another reason Africa has massive crop failures is lack of water. It's a much larger reason than displacement, not smaller.
CO2 emission restrictions do not equate to global economic downturn, they could just as easily mean global economic upturn as new tech is adopted and implemented. If you implement enough new tech to reduce emissions, the new industry will be more productive, create more jobs, and be better for the economy than 'staying the course' and giving it all to Texaco.
My point. No matter what we do, we are likely going to see the same climate changes through the next 100 years, it takes at least that long for the gasses to be absorbed.
Dude, did you read the link you posted? It said one glacier is stable, the rest are melting FAST. One glacier will not keep India, Tibet, Bhutan, Pakistan, etc wet, nor will it supply any other area that survives on glacier water. They showed that only one odd, incredibly high glacier was stable(they mentioned it's on K2, the highest mountain in the world, so don't even try to say there are lots more stable glaciers around the world, from what they said it's only this ONE mountain range, in the tippy top of the Himalayas, that's high enough and in the right weather pattern to be stable.)
Then slow down with theories of our impending demise, the IPCC doesn't support it. You want to talk about not denying the science, then you don't get to preach gloom and doom. Don't claim a large percentage of farmland is going to be lost to sea level rise by 2100. Don't claim coastlines are going to be pushed back 10 miles by a worst case 1 foot rise of sea level by 2100.
We are talking about advancements solving problems like a maximum sea level rise of a foot in the next 100 years, with best guesses being lower than that. I think it's modest to suggest our children's children will have figured out how to raise the dikes around places like New Orleans by a foot in the next 100 years.
The concord and moon trips are no longer happening because they are expensive. We can do them if we needed to, and more easily than the first time around. Finding out people aren't willing to pay the premium to shave an hour off their flight doesn't mean the technology no longer exists. Just because America no longer needs to prove they can lift massive quantities of nuclear warheads into orbit doesn't mean we couldn't still go to the moon again if it was needed. There's just no reason to do it, the tech exists still none the less.
Yes, there are social problems that confound the use of new technology. You fail to notice that is also the problem with feeding everybody. Food production isn't the problem, but rather the men with guns that control distribution. Stalin's mass starvation of millions was a social problem, not climate change or technology. Mao's was the same. North Koreas the same. All over Africa is the same. We have more than enough food, and plenty of charities work hard to send food over to places like Africa. Once the food gets there though the men with guns take most of it and people still starve. The reason Africa has so many crop failures is the violent displacement of the farmers. Exactly the same problem that saw millions starve in Russia, China and North Korea.
You are right that a changing climate could compound Africa's ag industry a bit, but it's a small hit compared to the violent displacement problem. Also, don't neglect to consider to impact of meaningful CO2 emission restrictions around the globe. A large scale global economic downturn probably means a lot more war, bloodshed, and starvation. If you do not reduce emissions enough to trigger that downturn and instead just 'marginally', you get stuck with both because Africa is still going to see virtually the same climate changes through the next hundred years.
And if you are worried about losing the glaciers in the Himalayas by 2100 there is very good reason to believe that's gonna be alright:
http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S41/39/84Q12/index.xml?section=topstories
Your Tax Dollars (Hard) At Work.
MUSKEGON COUNTY, Mich. — A Norton Shores man was arrested Sunday after leading police on a chase on his moped.
Norton Shores Police were dispatched to a home on Reneer Avenue west of Leon Street after Richard Shear, 28, allegedly threatened his mother and girlfriend with a sledgehammer and a knife and tried to set the house on fire.
Sources tell FOX 17 that the suspect’s mother called police after he threatened her with the weapons.
He`s accused of threatening his girlfriend too, but she told FOX 17 that never happened.
Sources also tell FOX 17 Shears attempted to light the house on fire by pouring gasoline on his landscaping then throwing a candle.
They say he also slashed an SUV’s tire before hopping on the moped and fleeing.
As FOX 17 took a closer look at the incident, we learned Shear has a history of drunk driving arrests, but we’re told he is also seeking help for mental health issues.
We’re told Shear, just like many other servicemen and women, suffers from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), a result of his time spent serving overseas in Iraq during his eight years in the Marines.
Those close to him tell us he has been struggling with PTSD, abusing alcohol to prevent dealing with the deep seeded issues and hitting rock bottom on Sunday.
Police say the chase ended back at Shear’s home when he tried running back inside but was arrested by police.
His bond has been set at $100,000.
http://fox17online.com/2014/10/27/man-on-moped-leads-muskegon-co-law-enforcement-on-low-speed-chase/
how every debate i have had with a libertarian looks like
It's true that free markets have enabled innovation over the past two centuries since the adoption of capitalistish models by most of the world.
The issue I see the interviewer struggling with, and Hedges not really getting across to him, is that the free market run amok has led a perversion of capitalism. This perversion, however you wish to describe it (corpratism?/neo-feutilism?) has created ultra-wealthy elite who are able to impose vast influence over society, like princes and kings before the Storming of the Bastille.
Hedges is warning that revolution will may be the only option left if the present shift in power continues on it's present path unchecked. (I do not see such upheaval as possible at the present time---though I don't dispute that the seeds are there. Revolutions are often preceded by disaster or famine.)
The interviewer seemed more interested in making his own points and arguing with Hedges rather than trying to help Hedges to draw out and refine his main point into a digestible thesis.
Where the Wild Roses Grow- Nick Cave, Kylie Minogue
Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds - Where The Wild Roses Grow (Live) has been added as a related post - related requested by Zawash.
Added alternate embed code for this video - backup requested by Zawash.
Where the Wild Roses Grow- Nick Cave, Kylie Minogue
*backup=[...snipped...]
*related=http://videosift.com/video/Nick-Cave-The-Bad-Seeds-Where-The-Wild-Roses-Grow-Live
How I Met Your Mother - Official Alternate Ending
I'm not sure if this is what you're saying (I might not be reading this correctly), but the ending they had from the start is the one where the mother dies, not this happy one. This was a backup ending that they filmed just in case they chickened out.
The problem with the real ending, for me, is twofold:
1) It didn't take into account how great Cristin Milioti was as the mother, and how much chemistry she had with Josh Radnor, which made her death an even bigger bummer. The original plan was going to be for us to only meet her very briefly, which would have made that ending sting a lot less.
2) I didn't take into account that the show was going to run for as long as it did. If the show had run for say, four or five seasons, the whole "Ted is still in love with Robin" thing would have seemed way less creepy and strung along. As it was, because the writers had to continually plant the seeds of Robin and Ted still being in love with each other throughout the show's nine years to make their ending still make sense, it made their relationship seem unhealthy and toxic. The finale comes off as weird and sad instead of romantic.
But yeah, I'll agree with everyone else that the last few seasons of the show were pretty weak. That fart of an ending was just the final insult.
The funny thing is that had they did this ending from the start. I would have thought something was missing. It's too perfect/happy. So I sorta understand why they did what they did originally. Still, like Yogi said, the show went on way too long. They never have the good sense to end it when it should and they keep dragging it out for money's sake for way too long until it sucks and we're sick of it.
Also what sucks is that we really don't get to know the mother much. Sure, getting to that point was great. but its still lackluster when they try to cram an entire relationship and a whole personality into one season.