[Terrapreta] charcoal & wisdom

[dyarrow at nycap.rr.com]

amen, lou.  the traditional indigenous mind was far different than
anything we like our current western mind.  there is a technology of
consciousness which is nearly lost amid western materialism and
left-brain science.  indigenous people understood how to not only
percieve nature in greater depth and clarity than modern humans, they
could actually communicate with nature.  they knew nature wasn't just
"stuff" -- physical, chemical, material matter.  they knew nature is a
conscious, living, intelligent, sentient spirit.  they knew the physical
form and substance was just a final expression of a hidden intelligent
spiritual consciousness, and they had evolved a metaphysical technology
to engage with that intelligence directly, inwardly, intuitively.

i'm on webmail and on the road on someone else's computer with missing
keyboard keys, so that's all i will type about such an outrageous,
ovver-the-edge and out-of-the-box reality.  i'll end by saying that in
15 minutes i can teach most people that they can detect water flowing
deep underground out of sight, sound and ordinary sense.  such an
intuitive "sixth sense" ability is just a gateway to entering what i
labeled above "indigenous mind."

david

----- Original Message -----
From: lou gold <lou.gold at gmail.com>
Date: Sunday, November 25, 2007 10:23 am
Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] compost and charcoal
To: Kevin Chisholm <kchisholm at ca.inter.net>
Cc: dyarrow at nycap.rr.com, terrapreta preta <terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>

> I love it David.
> 
> And it would suggest an answer to the question that has vexed the 
> modernmind -- how did the ancient indians figure all this out? The 
> answer might
> that they used the ancient wisdom and not the modern mind.
> 
> They didn't take things apart and analyze the pieces. Instead they 
> relied on
> a cummulative oral history that reported many stories about nature, 
> it'schanges, and what worked or did not work for the ancestors of 
> the place.
> 
> In other words, nature conducted the experiment and human beings 
> carriedaround the results.Today, we've lost that history, that long-
> term connection
> to place. There's not much that we can do other than try to figure 
> it out in
> the lab.
> 
> But, wait --
> 
> Isn't that what the gardeners are doing (sort of) with all that TP 
> pottingsoil?
> 
> And, might it be useful to try build a little more local history 
> into our
> modern laboratory approach?
> 
> OK, just doing a bit of mental meandering.
> 
> lou
> 
> On Nov 25, 2007 12:14 PM, Kevin Chisholm <kchisholm at ca.inter.net> 
> wrote:
> > Dear David
> >
> > I think you are "bang on" with your emphasis of the importance of
> > microbial action in soils. I think that their importance is grossly
> > under-appreciated. Additionally, fungus is very important, 
> particularly> in assisting phosphorous uptake by plants.
> >
> >  From what I can see, the "chemical agriculture" and "organic
> > agriculture" people are trying to impose their thoughts on the "soil
> > mechanics" who actually get the job done. Mother Nature has her 
> way of
> > doing things, and our best strategy is to be supportive of Her 
> way of
> > doing things.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> >
> > Kevin
> >
> > dyarrow at nycap.rr.com wrote:
> > > when the research is all done and written, i expect the 
> judgment will be
> > > that it is not char that reduces NOx emissions, but microbials. 
> char
> > > provides habitat and housing for microbes that process and 
> stabilize> > soil N into non-volatile forms, and char is mostly 
> passive in this
> > > process.  complex, interactive communities of microbes proliferate
> > > within the char's spongy matrix, and this explosion of living 
> biomass is
> > > where the real action is.  char's main contribution to this NOx 
> emission> > reduction is to absorb and hold the various N ions in 
> the C matrix
> > > rather than allowing the N compounds to dissolve and leach away.
> > >
> > > david
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Kevin Chisholm <kchisholm at ca.inter.net>
> > > Date: Sunday, November 25, 2007 0:50 am
> > > Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] compost and charcoal
> > > To: Gerald Van Koeverden <vnkvrdn at yahoo.ca>
> > >
> > >> Dear Gerrit
> > >>
> > >> This sounds to me like a great idea, with no downside.
> > >>
> > >> I have seen references to the fact that char reduces soil NO2
> > >> emissions.
> > >> It might do this by adsorption of teh NO2, or it might help 
> create> >> different "soil mechanics" that result in retention of 
> the NO2 as NO4.
> > >>
> > >> Additionally, there might be a significant absorption of what 
> would> >> otherwise be "manure tea", that might leach away.
> > >>
> > >> Please keep us posted on anything else you might find.
> > >>
> > >> Best wishes,
> > >>
> > >> Kevin
> > >>
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Terrapreta mailing list
> > > Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
> > > 
>
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/>
> http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org
> > > http://info.bioenergylists.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Terrapreta mailing list
> > Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
> > 
>
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/>
http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org
> > http://info.bioenergylists.org
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> http://lougold.blogspot.com/
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/visionshare/sets/
>