Biodynamics is a Hoax

[Joel Stewart]

originally posted by SFJoe: It's much harder to colonize an occupied territory.

Yes, that much I followed from your original post. Correct me if I misunderstood, but I took your post as to mean that "occupied territory" meant established microbes different from those populations in the horn mix, more numerous and stronger, the home turf defenders.

My thought was that, of all the microbes already present in the soil, there might be enough overlap with what's in the horn mix to allow assimilation, if even applied in dilute amounts, over years. I'm not privy to the amounts we're talking about, but seems, from Bruce G's posts, that even dilute amounts adding something over time to a soil already well prepped might be plausible.

Thanks for the Silvertown tip...sounds like a good read.

 

[SFJoe]

The thing about the horn mix is that it is my understanding that they dilute it out and then spray. There isn't that much in the horn to start with, and the vineyard is large and already occupied, microbiologically.

This has to limit the ability to colonize. If you set Peter Stuyvesant ashore on Manhattan by himself, he has a different interaction with the indigenous folks than if he brings 300 of his best armed buds with him.

 

[Thor]

The secret to biodynamie is heavy weaponry!

 

[Joel Stewart]

originally posted by SFJoe:
The thing about the horn mix is that it is my understanding that they dilute it out and then spray. There isn't that much in the horn to start with, and the vineyard is large and already occupied, microbiologically.

This has to limit the ability to colonize. If you set Peter Stuyvesant ashore on Manhattan by himself, he has a different interaction with the indigenous folks than if he brings 300 of his best armed buds with him.

Sorry if I'm being obtuse (it's just my ignorance shining through)...my point is (well now it's becoming a question) aren't the microbes in the horn mix the very same as at least some of the indigenous microbes already occupying the soil? If yes, then it would seem to not be quite the same as your Stuyvesant analogy suggests. (And again, I have no idea how different microbes coexist, if they even do...the nyt article talked about different colonies existing on different sides of people's teeth, for cryin' out loud....so, yeah, it probably is a micro-battlefield out there in the vineyards.)

But yet, if support troops are dropped in from the air to join those already on the ground?

 

[David M. Bueker]

originally posted by John DeFiore:

originally posted by Bruce G.:

If engineers suddenly started using BD to design and maintain commercial fleets of airplanes I'd find some other form of transportation.

Cheers,

Maybe instead of maintaining the engines they can bury a Sears Craftsman wrench under the plane during a full moon and that will get the job done.

The plane will still work fine. For a while. Anyone want to test it out?

Based on field service reports and part returns, I would guess that a number of African and Eastern European airlines are already using that method. It has dramatically improved our monetary yields from the aftermarket business.

 

[Hank Beckmeyer]

It is generally considered in biodynamics that the point of the horn manure is not to add microbes to the soil. Rather, the horn is a collector of cosmic forces, and the manure in it merely a collection medium. The manure is considered "transformed" after being in the soil for a time. The spraying of the highly dilute manure is thought to spread these cosmic forces throughout the field, encouraging the local microbial populations.

that's the short explanation.

 

[SFJoe]

originally posted by Joel Stewart:

Sorry if I'm being obtuse (it's just my ignorance shining through)...my point is (well now it's becoming a question) aren't the microbes in the horn mix the very same as at least some of the indigenous microbes already occupying the soil?

I would think that cow innards and soil might have pretty different populations. But there will be hundreds of species in each, so maybe some overlap?

And what Hank said.

 

[John Ritchie]

If Steiner were around today, I wonder what his thoughts would be on the ability of solar panels to collect "cosmic forces."

 

[Jeff Grossman]

Thanks for the article, Joel. It reminds me of a friend who, many years ago, had unrelenting gut distress and was cured by a naturopathic regimen that restored his gut flora to a normal state.

 

[Joel Stewart]

originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
Thanks for the article, Joel. It reminds me of a friend who, many years ago, had unrelenting gut distress and was cured by a naturopathic regimen that restored his gut flora to a normal state.

It is an interesting article indeed...for that enlightening bit as well as for pointing out how little we know about all those different microbes existing all over the place.

Plus the applications for replacing one's own flora with the cosmic stuff are mind boggling.

 

[Joel Stewart]

originally posted by SFJoe:

originally posted by Joel Stewart:

Sorry if I'm being obtuse (it's just my ignorance shining through)...my point is (well now it's becoming a question) aren't the microbes in the horn mix the very same as at least some of the indigenous microbes already occupying the soil?

I would think that cow innards and soil might have pretty different populations. But there will be hundreds of species in each, so maybe some overlap?

And what Hank said.

Gotcha...after all this, I realized I don't have a clue as to what actually makes up the prep. I had thought it was a mixture of manure, compost, plus maybe some other microbe growing substances.

 

[Bruce G.]

originally posted by Hank Beckmeyer:
It is generally considered in biodynamics that the point of the horn manure is not to add microbes to the soil. Rather, the horn is a collector of cosmic forces, and the manure in it merely a collection medium. The manure is considered "transformed" after being in the soil for a time. The spraying of the highly dilute manure is thought to spread these cosmic forces throughout the field, encouraging the local microbial populations.

that's the short explanation.

Hank:

My input into the discussion was an attempt to offer a scientifically plausible (given the current level of scientific understanding of how things work) mechanism for the efficacy of horn manure.
The "collector of cosmic forces" explanation does little to satisfy hard-core scientifically inclined sceptics, relying as it does on principles that don't at present rise above the level of "hypothetical" (and some scientists would consider even that characterization too kind).
Since lots of good people report positive results with the horn manure, though, I thought it fun to consider possible explanations that might not seem so.... out there.
Until the details of fermentations in wine were worked out, vignerons thought that the renewed effervescence in barreled wine each spring was some sort of empathetic response with vines undergoing budbreak. Other, more mundane, phenomena now exist to explain what had been observed for a good long time. Maybe something similar is at work with parts of BD?

 

[Bruce G.]

originally posted by SFJoe:I would think that cow innards and soil might have pretty different populations. But there will be hundreds of species in each, so maybe some overlap?

And what Hank said.

There's probably some over-lap since: cow shit usually contains a high portion of undigested organic matter and, collection of same usually means a good bit of dirt gets mixed in.
If the cow is raised on the same farm, there might be a good bit of over-lap.

Don't know of any surveys done, though must be many.... cows are good money.

 

[Jeff Grossman]

Biodynamics does not appear on the chart. I suppose it belongs in "Pseudoscience" somewhere near Dowsing but I could be convinced that it really belongs in the "Traditional Bollocks" series right after Homeopathy.

 

[Sharon Bowman]

More from the homeopathy wars.

 

[Jeff Grossman]

Thanks, Sharon. The article reminded me that homeopathy was invented during a period when the Scientific wasy involved leeches and an ignorance of sepsis. Wonder what today's blood-letting techniques are?

 

[Hank Beckmeyer]

originally posted by Bruce G.:

originally posted by Hank Beckmeyer:
It is generally considered in biodynamics that the point of the horn manure is not to add microbes to the soil. Rather, the horn is a collector of cosmic forces, and the manure in it merely a collection medium. The manure is considered "transformed" after being in the soil for a time. The spraying of the highly dilute manure is thought to spread these cosmic forces throughout the field, encouraging the local microbial populations.

that's the short explanation.

Hank:

My input into the discussion was an attempt to offer a scientifically plausible (given the current level of scientific understanding of how things work) mechanism for the efficacy of horn manure.
The "collector of cosmic forces" explanation does little to satisfy hard-core scientifically inclined sceptics, relying as it does on principles that don't at present rise above the level of "hypothetical" (and some scientists would consider even that characterization too kind).
Since lots of good people report positive results with the horn manure, though, I thought it fun to consider possible explanations that might not seem so.... out there.
Until the details of fermentations in wine were worked out, vignerons thought that the renewed effervescence in barreled wine each spring was some sort of empathetic response with vines undergoing budbreak. Other, more mundane, phenomena now exist to explain what had been observed for a good long time. Maybe something similar is at work with parts of BD?

Oh I completely agree with you - I just wanted to post the BD take on it "for the record". There is something to it, on a physical level (the level we have the easiest time dealing with and interacting with). I have always suspected the real key to biodynamic success was in extensive use of compost, which IS a soil catalyst.

 

[Cory Cartwright]

originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
Thanks, Sharon. The article reminded me that homeopathy was invented during a period when the Scientific wasy involved leeches and an ignorance of sepsis. Wonder what today's blood-letting techniques are?

Wasn't there someone a few years ago who was shut down for bringing back bloodletting? I'll try and find a link.

 

[Claude Kolm]

Clive Coates says on his website that 1600 ha, or 5.3% of the surface area of Burgundy, is now being cultivated biodynamically. This would be 5.3% of all of Burgundy, including Chablis, Auxerrois, Cte Chalonnaise, Hautes Ctes de Beaune and Nuits, Mconnais, etc., not just the Cte d'Or.

I do not know the source of Clive's 1600 ha number, but if true, it is really amazing. Given the higher cost of biodynamic agriculture, we can assume that the percentage of grand cru and top premier cru vineyards in biodynamie is substantially higher than 5.3%, and indeed higher than I think any of us previously had suspected.

 

[Joel Stewart]

originally posted by Bruce G.:

originally posted by SFJoe:I would think that cow innards and soil might have pretty different populations. But there will be hundreds of species in each, so maybe some overlap?

And what Hank said.

There's probably some over-lap since: cow shit usually contains a high portion of undigested organic matter and, collection of same usually means a good bit of dirt gets mixed in.
If the cow is raised on the same farm, there might be a good bit of over-lap.

Don't know of any surveys done, though must be many.... cows are good money.

That's kind of what I was thinking, Bruce...esp. as you point out, if the cow was raised on the same farm, or near enough by.