NSW Bushfires

News just in says a water bombing plane has crashed in the Snowies with 3 people on board...lets all hope they are alive .  Terrible news if right.

Second Chance wrote: Hey Doc, does your foot hurt and do you have a licence for that pistol?

Would he even know he shot himself in the foot? He presents himself as an expert on photosynthesis yet has no idea what N, P or K stand for.

acacia alba wrote: News just in says a water bombing plane has crashed in the Snowies with 3 people on board...lets all hope they are alive .  Terrible news if right.

This is terrible, fingers crossed.

Oh, so one of the rentals?  However the same questions about age and Scomo's refusal to purchase off the assembly line remain.

acacia alba wrote: Plane Canadian owned ?  OMG thats tragic.  3 blokes came all the way over here to help us and now going home to their families in coffins.   So so sad.

Afros wrote: Dr E wrote: Afros wrote: Dr E wrote: Afros wrote: Shouty, you clearly have little idea on this and are just shouting from an anti-climate change point of view, try sticking to something you know. P.S. yes we all know about the greenhouse effect and how plants use CO2 however your assertion that continually increasing CO2 levels and temperatures will see continually increasing yields is simply not true. You are not serious are you grumpy? You have not read anything on this have you? It doesn't take a lot of research to confirm that most plant life on the planet will continue to benefit and increase yields to optimum levels at CO2 levels more than double the current ... so beneficial warming is GOOD. You don't know that, you say it's untrue based on nothing, and that just makes you an ignorant blinkered indoctrinated science "denier". Stick to the cricket. Shouty, try to be factual. Mu initial post was making the point that if climate chane occurs as predicted, vast areas of land traditionally suitable for farmimg would at the very least have reduced production capacity. ... some English would be helpful  You then go on one of your rants about how increased temperature and CO2 levels have increased yields. ... I love your description of facts as "rants" I respond that improved irrigation techniques, fertilising, improved propagation methods and even genetic modification have also played a part in this. ... Thank you Captain Obvious - I already covered and acknowledged that you know what everyone else knows - well done! You respond with the claim nobody is denying these play a part, despite this quote Do you understand that the temperature has risen 0.9 degrees in 140 years ... crop yields have increased FIVE FOLD since 1940 ... due to a combination of slight warming and increased CO2 - PLANT FOOD DUMMY!  ... all facts. No mention of the other factors I mention there shouty? Almost reads like your trying desperately to claim that increased CO2 alone led to increased yields... just trying to help you learn something You then claim again that I've 'not read up on this' and start banging on about how good increased CO2 levels will be for crop yields, why do you continue to bang on about this, despite the fact I haven't denied the importance of CO2 for plants once? ... excellent, now you just need to acknowledge it! Hey shouty, question for you to finish, if we double the CO2 levels but have no n, p or k available amymore, will we still see increased yields? ... Great question ... what the fcuk does it even mean??? ... you are talking a lot, but you keep saying nothing sneezy ... and you seem to be drunk. I love this method of arguing, where you claim to have said something despite posts actually showing you didn't, that takes special talent. Also shouty, since your such a fan of google, try using it to search for Nitrogen (N), Phosphorus (P), Potassium (K), it may help you get a better grasp of things. Also if you have a bag of fertiliser for your tomato, lemon and lime plants I mentioned earlier, check it out, chances are it'll have an NPK blend in it

Gee shouty, you really have no idea about this do you?

Fertiliser = plant food. Since you've been banging on about CO2 being a plant food I figured you may have a grasp of the other requirements for plants but apparantly not.

I know where your trying to go with this, you know you've made yourself look like a fool so you slip into true character and try belittle me rather than be a man and admit you were wrong, if that makes you fell better to yourself all power to you mate.   

Second Chance wrote: Hey Doc, does your foot hurt and do you have a licence for that pistol?

Softy wrote: Dr E wrote: It really is entertaining watching softy "help" Afros ... it's like watching Bill "help" Albo! Not as entertaining as watching a moron at work. At least now you’ll be able to offer the gardeners some useful advice at the facility Doc, well done

I'll keep it simple for you shouty, Nitrogen, Potassium and Phosphorus are known as the big three in terms of plant growth, no NPK, no plant growth. You really are making yourself look like a fool here all because your ego doesn't allow you to admit your wrong.

Afros wrote: I'll keep it simple for you shouty, Nitrogen, Potassium and Phosphorus are known as the big three in terms of plant growth, no NPK, no plant growth. You really are making yourself look like a fool here all because your ego doesn't allow you to admit your wrong.

Dr E wrote: Afros wrote: I'll keep it simple for you shouty, Nitrogen, Potassium and Phosphorus are known as the big three in terms of plant growth, no NPK, no plant growth. You really are making yourself look like a fool here all because your ego doesn't allow you to admit your wrong. So just to be clear, your contention is; People who grow plants in controlled conditions in Greenhouses and report the effects of higher CO2 levels that result in exponential improvements in yields and growth rates - that's just a load of "fertiliser". .... and you are saying that farmers have only discovered cow manure and chook poo in the past few years. OK ... that's enough Disney Channel for you!

No, I have not said that. Don't try manipulate what I've said.

You have maintained this line that increased levels of CO2 lead to increased yields, I said that improved irrigation techniques, fertilising and propagation methods all have played a part as well.

Yes manure is used as a fertiliser that contains many trace elements including NPK as well as many others plants require, we get that I'm just saying that so you know we get your 'fertiliser' joke.

Commercially produced products are also available that allow more certainty that the plants are getting what is required, soil and leaf analysis can also be done so that a fertilising program can be targetted to what is needed.

Your really should give this one up shouty, you clearly have no idea and are just regurgitating the why should we worry about CO2 levels it'll help plants line you saw on an anti climate change rightard site.