[maryjohn]

As for the pesticide thing, it's like putting the club on your steering wheel. The aphids could break in, but they move on to an easier target.

bugs can spot an unhealthy plant and so can we.

[Bass Akwards]

Originally Posted by Microbeman

For example; You say you are using kitchen compost. What does this mean? Is it actually composted? Are there still chunks of stuff in it? If it is compost it should be a brown to black substance with an earthy odor and have no recognizable components.

In this case, kitchen compost means the material we removed from the bottom of a vertical composting bin this Spring, and the ten years previous. The contents are dosed with composting microbes from time to time, and the result is a moist, black, granular, substance with a rich, earthy, aroma.

Microbeman makes a good point that I don't think we emphasize enough.....Compost tea is a tool, like a rake or shovel, that is beneficial in organic gardening. It's not a magic bullet by any means, but an excellent way of restoring microbial populations to the soil or leaf surface.

[Bass Akwards]

Originally Posted by CT Guy

Microbeman makes a good point that I don't think we emphasize enough.....Compost tea is a tool, like a rake or shovel, that is beneficial in organic gardening. It's not a magic bullet by any means, but an excellent way of restoring microbial populations to the soil or leaf surface.

"Keep It Short & Simple" ... was that so hard?

That short statement was all that really needed to be said.

All the hullabaloo on the first page was, for want of a better word, "padding".

But ... then again, even that brief note managed to leave me skeptical.

When is the leaf surface of Any plant Ever without a microbe/fungal population? Maybe if you're growing in an autoclave, but otherwise, no. In the absence of herbicides or pesticides, what can kill off so much of the existing bacteria that it needs to be "restored"? A hard rain? Hot sun? Very doubtful. It's a tad presumptuous for any gardener to think they know better than "the locals" what kind of flora and fauna their garden should host above ground level. As the old song says, "might as well try to catch the wind". ( In a greenhouse, or basement, or closet, ... unnatural situations to begin with ... it's another story. All Manner of things can get out of whack, and stay that way, from the air on down. )

Foliar feeding is one thing, spraying protozoa & fungus ( without expectation of NPK benefit ) is quite another. After all, the subject at hand is growing cannabis, and if showers of bacteria don't make a significant difference in such a quick-growing plant, where's the benefit? ( except to one's sense of ecological correctness ... or whatever. )

If that "specially grown" population of bacteria and fungus can whip spider mites, there might be a case. Until then, and unless there's much better documentation of reduction in the incidence of PM, it all claims for benefits of foliar ACT remain anecdotal.

I'll back up now, & consider the previous posts.

If nothing else, it'll fit with the nickname.

[Bass Akwards]

Originally Posted by Microbeman

Bass Akwards,Most of what you dispute is related to compost tea (CT) as a pesticide. Only people who really don't know what they are talking about, claim CT to be a pesticide.

Well, unfortunately, that's what CT posted on the first page. Glad that we're in agreement on that point.

Originally Posted by Microbeman

Why would something which promotes life, kill?

Darned if I know!

Originally Posted by Microbeman

It is quite common knowledge in the soil science community that there are microbial populations in the rhizosphere which protect the roots of plants from pathogenic microbes and that there are microbes which protect/help microbes which protect roots and deliver nutrients to roots. If you email me through my page I'll send you some citations on this.

Thanks for the offer. I do have a slight problem with branding microbes as "pathogens", or "protectors" because it verges on anthropomorphism. They either suit our purposes, or they don't. It's what they do, because it's all they can do, and ever will do, to stay alive and reproduce their kind.

Originally Posted by Microbeman

It is true that there are very few controlled field studies showing the results of disease control utilizing CT, however I have witnessed this employed by farmers whose very living depends on it.

I appreciate those stories very much. Real world stuff. The picayune complaints of adolescents, ( and permanent adolescents ), on this and other grow sites are a constant irritation.

Originally Posted by Microbeman

Because he stopped using chemicals, all sorts of life abounded so when two spotted mites showed up, they were gobbled by other good bugs ...

Have you considered writing a children's gardening book? ; )

More later.

Time for dinner.

Ciao.

[Microbeman]

quote=Microbeman;2445409]Bass Akwards,
Most of what you dispute is related to compost tea (CT) as a pesticide. Only people who really don't know what they are talking about, claim CT to be a pesticide.[/QUOTE

Well, unfortunately, that's what CT posted on the first page. Glad that we're in agreement on that point.

I don't think he did. I could not see it. Can you kindly point this out without using the information concerning microbial anti-pathogens being considered pesticides presented by the blithering idiot from the EPA whose lot I oft eat for breakfast, intellectually speaking. Hmmm... children's books ..... rad.

[Bass Akwards]

Originally Posted by Microbeman

We have a 1500 square foot greenhouse on our farm and prior to starting to use CT we had heavy pressure from powdery mildew (PM), especially if we applied fertilizer high in P. Believe me, we went through the whole gambit, ... ... It was only when we started using CT that we got results.

It's refreshing to hear it from a large scale operator. We both know that "modern" greenhouse growing is an unbalanced system, if only because the bacteria and fungus from rain water are eliminated from the start. Everything is geared to Mass Quantities at the Lowest Cost. Eventually, the short-cuts backfire, and increasing the numbers of chemical treatments only make it worse. Glad you found a way off that treadmill.

Originally Posted by Microbeman

Regarding Linda Chalker-Scott; Once when she asked for input concerning CT, I responded to her briefly stating that I was dubious about the pesticidal claims of CT and she practically gushed all over me. She asked me to report my experiences with CT. When she got my report and saw there was mostly a positive side to it, she never used it, nor contacted me again.

Don't have a dog in the fight. I'll only say that academic infighting is as old as time, and those bouts tend to drag on, and on.

Originally Posted by Microbeman

You are right that 'natural' is an overused term and all that is natural is not safe in all applications.

Thank you.

Originally Posted by Microbeman

The criteria for healthy plants: look good, taste good, relatively free of disease, grow fast.

Thanks again. That's fairly simple, straightforward, and it isn't laden with unnecessary qualifiers.

Originally Posted by Microbeman

You say Mr Broccoli stick out your tongue. Does this mean human health can be determined by the appearance of the tongue?

Actually, to a greater or lesser extent, the answer is yes. Ask your dentist about it.

Originally Posted by Microbeman

I do not think CT necessarily has effect on toxins on the surface of plants (although I have noticed healthy shiney leaves from CT use) but that soil microbes break down toxins in soil is quite common knowledge and is used widely for environmental clean up.

Aside from cleaning up the Exxon-Valdez, what are the specific "toxins" you refer to in the soil? Herbicide and pesticide residues, or other naturally occurring soil constituents that are branded as "toxins"?

Originally Posted by Microbeman

When applied to the soil, if the environment is conducive and/or if their services are required certain of these microbes will continue to flourish, while others will go dormant, to come back to life when called upon.

Again, the shadow of anthropomorphism rears it's ugly head. Neither plants, nor humans, can "call upon" microbes. Either conditions exist for them to grow, and reproduce, or they don't. Period.

Originally Posted by Microbeman

I guess, this is where your 'Results may vary' come in. Of course if you do not use actual compost or not enough air or brew for too long or too short you may get crap rather than a microbial consortia.

Quite true. Compost tea recipes remind me of Gumbo or Bouillabaisse recipes ... everyone has their own take on it.

Speaking of crap, just out of curiosity, do you have any idea what procedures the Chinese use to produce the "night soil" that grows most of their crops? That's the straight shit, it's been going on for millennia, and they've never heard of "bathroom tissue".

Originally Posted by Microbeman

CT is not magic and CT Guy has not stated it to be so. Many people wish it to be magic and perpetuate myths concerning its efficacy.

CT Guy did everything but claim that CT cured cancer. His long list of "benefits" was, and is, absurd. All the sanctimonious malarky pushed by the "Organicrats" offends my knowledge of science ( limited though it may be ). "Superstitious nonsense" is a personal grudge I'm not likely to give up anytime soon.

Originally Posted by Microbeman

It is a huge tool in a natural growing system, especially when transitioning from traditional growing techniques.

I'm sure you mean "traditional" in terms of the last 100 years of agrochemicals and mechanized machinery, rather than the practices of our ancestors ( inefficient though they might have been ).

Originally Posted by Microbeman

There are a lot of powerful companies who have an interest in seeing CT fail and unfortunately they also fund university research.

It would be to their advantage, but they have better things to do than actively lobby against the use of CT. Their thinking isn't hard to understand. They're heavily invested in very expensive technology, and must make that investment pay off, or eat it raw.

Originally Posted by Microbeman

I'm building and selling affordable microscopes with a minimal mark up compared to the industry so I might encourage it's use as a horticultural tool.

That's all well and good for professional farmers, but for reefer growers itching to jump on every new gimmick that comes along, using a microscope to gauge the contents of their compost tea borders on obsessive-compulsive disorder. ( Have I just stumbled on the real reason behind the absurd appeal of hydroponics? )

Originally Posted by Microbeman

Your implication that it is all about business is misplaced in this case.

I'll take your word for it. Don't doubt your motivation one bit.

( Better end it now, while I can still resist the temptation to paraphrase Vince Lombardi. ) ; )

[Bass Akwards]

Originally Posted by Microbeman

I don't think he did. I could not see it. Can you kindly point this out ...

Here's his quote from the first page:

"Reduces or eliminates the need for chemical pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers."

The herbicide claim is also from nut-bar land, but why drag it out any more?

I'll go back up again later, or tomorrow.

Better things to do right now.

Ciao.

[maryjohn]

Sorry, but you are wrong.

"Reducing the need" is not the same thing as "being" an herbicide (pulling weeds reduces the need for herbicide too), and in that respect your claim is bogus. Nothing in the original post claims ACT is an herbicide, insecticide, or that it kills anything at all. The way your own post points out that you've been extremely creative with semantics in support of some perceived common sense ethos is kinda silly. Let me remind you that putting words in someone's mouth for the sake of convenience is pretty low class. I hope you didn't mean it.

Nobody called compost tea fool proof or a panacea. But it is a technology worth promoting because it is so effective and in the long run, cheap. Everything has downsides, but you've greatly oversimplified things.

[Microbeman]

Neither plants, nor humans, can "call upon" microbes.

Dead wrong on this one. Read the paper on my page and follow up with the citations. If you have trouble finding them shoot me an email (not PM). Mary John took the words from my mouth regarding the pesticide thing.

You are now taking on the tone of one of those we run into who could be called a desperate arguer, so in a sweat to prove some lame point they think they made that they lose track of what is real. Mix into that the need to impress linguistically and you have what adds up to me wasting my time on an Internet queen.