I'm sorry, have you seen the vast majority of fart sound apps on the app store, they will go from strength to strength :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Rydra
Printable View
I'm sorry, have you seen the vast majority of fart sound apps on the app store, they will go from strength to strength :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Rydra
He likes talking, he gets to talk twice as much being on the fence. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by witch
I think you're sitting on it wrong ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by witch
Congratulations on your new job at Apple :)Quote:
Originally Posted by j17sparky
So, did anyone see "The Great British Food Revival" last night? ... That piece of Longhorn forerib of beef looked wonderful, must go and get myself a piece of that.
:)
I held a LAN party back in the day.......three Norwegian guys came over, two of them were ex-elk slaughterers, hunters, whatever, and they brought (clandestinely or otherwise, not sure of that) some elk steaks they'd frozen the week before. After they'd been defrosted, marinated for 24 hours, and put on the BBQ, they were the nearest thing to Heaven that I've ever tasted. With the possible exception of chocolate ice-cream.
Apropos of nothing at all, really, the third was a Headteacher.
Hey, Jay-Hawk<TZW>, if you're on this forum, you know who this is :)
Yes, that is very true ... talking about both sides does mean you tend to write longer and more protracted posts, taking a balanced view and being able to point out matching arguments. On the other hand the fact that I have to write twice as much everything, including considering the best ways of preventing getting splinters in my backside ... and there are two thoughts on that matter ... does tend to lead you down the route of insanity.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeBloggs
Which makes it easier ...
I now longer have to think hard about this ... instead it is just a transcript of the discussion of the voices in my head ... and it gets noisy in there.
Reminds me of an article down my way on our local news site. A family were appealing to the District Council to put a new boiler in their council house because the heating was not warming the house up & the "hot" water was not hot. Their youngest had to go to bed wrapped in a blanket, all other family members wore jackets and jumpers to bed, rooms were full of damp and mould etc. It was a really long winded sob story which started to tug on a heart string.
Next to the article was a photo of the family outside their house with "sad" expressions. Every family member was wearing a £60 Superdry hoodie.
Almost every comment under the story was to the effect of "If you can afford expensive, branded clothes, you can buy your own boiler."
I have to agree...
However, they pay their rent and as such are entitled to have the maintenance on such things done by the housing association/council/landlord. I'm sure that if these were private tenants and teh landlord had told them to buy their own boiler, there would be a greater sympathy for them. Regardless of what they choose to wear, they are entitled to a level of service from their landlord.
It depends on access to water (and irrigation), pH, soil depth, slope, access to machinery, and so on.Quote:
Originally Posted by localzuk
I didn't say that. What I said was that your blanket assumption that all land being used for animals could be used for crops was wrong. There's a really good reason why farmers raise livestock on some land and arable on others.Quote:
Well done, you've managed to choose small scale thinking as your method of argument. Those areas of land do not make up the majority of land in use for agriculture. Stop thinking 'this bit of land here is basically sheet rock, it ain't any good for farming' and start thinking that 29% of the planet is land. Sure, a good amount of that is unsuitable for some produce or other, but to say that crop farming is not possible on all that land that is used for animals? That's ridiculous to the extreme.
Nothing trollicious about that statement. You're telling us all here that land management is best understood at a macro level. All well and good, but how does that equate to the micro level which is where the actual farming takes place? Unless your clever men and women with years of experience of university life actually know about farming, all the conferences and pieces of paper in the world won't help them, because they'll get it horribly wrong.Quote:
OK. Now I know you're just being a troll. You do realise that a farmer will have experience of his land, his crops and his animals. So, they are NOT an expert on farming in general. They are not an expert on getting the most out of the world's land. No, people that spend their lives studying worldwide farming techniques, land use and the like are experts on this sort of thing.
No, I'm saying that if you assume that the only people who know anything about farming are researchers with Phds, you are deluded. You remind me of Roderick Spode from Jeeves and Wooster, telling everyone that the whole of Herefordshire would be turned over to the production of beetroot, and that it had all 'been scientifically worked out'. Forgive me if I have more faith in the people who work the land to know what it's capable of.Quote:
Your argument is like saying that because I work on the ground in a school doing IT, I therefore should be in charge of IT globally, and know everything there is to know about IT...
Genuine question - how much time have you spent on farms and around farmers?
Spot on there, geezerQuote:
Originally Posted by stevenewman
Question for you - how do researchers do their work? Do you think they spend their lives sat in offices thinking? No, they speak to farmers, they speak to other experts, they do experiments, they grow crops, they farm etc...Quote:
Originally Posted by Flatpackhamster
My point is quite clear - a single farmer has the experience of a single person. A researcher will gather that knowledge and use it to form their conclusions.
And yes, I grew up in a place where farmers were everywhere, I have lots of farming friends.
Actually, that's only become your point recently. Your early point was that farmers should only farm arable because meat was using up 'too many resources'. We've ended up on this argument because of your relentless refusal to accept that farmers rear livestock on some land because it's no good for crops.Quote:
Originally Posted by localzuk
You don't seem to credit them with much ability to farm.Quote:
And yes, I grew up in a place where farmers were everywhere, I have lots of farming friends.
I missed it last night, unfortunately. The week before was pears and garlic, and the footage shown was filmed in Tonbridge in Kent, which is where I live. The pears and apples here, of course, are the finest in the country. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by stevenewman
No, my point from earlier still stands!Quote:
Originally Posted by Flatpackhamster
They can farm just fine, on the farm they're used to, in the country they're used to. Why don't you understand this? Take a British farmer, someone who has only farmed on British soil, and plonk them in Afghanistan, and tell them to set up a farm there. They wouldn't have a clue. How about if you got a farmer from the paddy fields in China and got him to come over here and farm rapeseed? Not a chance. Which is what I said about your argument like being about an IT person knowing everything about IT simply because he knows his own segment of the market.Quote:
You don't seem to credit them with much ability to farm.