On Dec/4/2016 at 9:36 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote :
Alain Fournier wrote:

On Dec/4/2016 at 2:02 AM, Fred J. McCall wrote :
Alain Fournier wrote:

On Dec/3/2016 at 6:57 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote :
Harri Tavaila wrote:

29.11.2016, 4:53, Fred J. McCall kirjoitti:

Try growing plants in soil with no carbon in it and see how that works
for you (it mostly will work very poorly, if at all).

I believe this is essentially what hydroponic farming is about.


Yes, but that's not what's being discussed. If you 'predigest'
everything for the plants, you can grown them in air.


Here is the silly challenge you gave me:
On Nov/30/2016 at 6:31 AM, Fred J. McCall wrote :
«The proof is in the pudding. Go grow some plants of various types in
«sand with no carbon content. Fertilize at will, but nothing with
«carbon as a component. Let us know how that goes.»

Oh! So that meant fertilize at will but not using the ingredients that
work. Moving the goalpost again?


If you don't know the difference between fertilizer and hydroponics,
you really are too pig ignorant to bother with.


Oh I see now. It isn't that you moved the goalpost. It is because the
dictionary doesn't have the right definition for the word fertilize.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/fertilize :
fertilize
1. To make (the soil) more fertile by adding nutrients to it.

Silly me to use normal definitions for words. I now see that you were
right all along.


It's about time you figured that out. You really are just a bit of a
thickie, aren't you?

If you wish, you can keep on believing that that wasn't sarcasm. As I
have already said I don't care about that point. What I would like to
know is what does this have to do with what we were discussing. You know
growing food in a spaceship using human poop after extracting methane?


Alain Fournier