Free for All Comers Discussion: History and Science
11 years ago
Featured Answer
Sort by:Oldest
Comments (79)
- 11 years ago
Related Discussions
A Soil Discussion
Comments (150)Again, I don't know what to say, Jodi. My face got all red (yeah, I blushed) and I was really touched by your comments. I'm just really glad you're getting more out of your growing experience. THAT really rocks me. ;o) From Arjadiejai: Have you tried rooting cuttings in this mix? If I have a cutting that is important to me, or hard to root, I always stick it in a sterile medium like perlite or Turface. Strangely, I get the VERY best results from rooting in chopped sphagnum moss (not peat - the whole pieces of moss that were harvested live). The moss makes sense if you consider it's the medium most used in air layering. A mix of any combination of the three ingredients also works very well. If I'm starting cuttings and I really don't care about the strike rate, I use a soil made of screened Turface, fir bark, and crushed granite - the same soil as above. I screen it so particles are all larger than 1/16 inch so there is almost NO perched water to rot cuttings. By doing it that way, I can start the cuttings in larger containers and not have to worry either about a setback from potting up soon after the cuttings strike, or about overpotting and the accompanying saturated soil. In short, cuttings root fast and you can save a step because of a larger soil volume, but again - if the cuttings are important, use a sterile medium - it's the bark that could harbor rot organisms. About the cacti and succulents, if you water your typical tropical houseplants every day or every other day, how often would you water the cacs & sucs in comparison? It varies. I have caudex forming succulents that get water once/week in winter (they're under lights in winter), and every other day in summer (outdoors/full sun/clay pots). The plants in plastic pots get watered less & the ones in clay pots get it more - you know how that goes ..... I/you just develop a feel for what is needed & when after a while I guess. I kind of have a calculator in my mind that factors in how hot it's been, how windy, how much sun, how big the plant is in relation to the pot size and soil volume ..... and I decide based on that. With succulents & cacti, if I'm in doubt, I usually wait. To answer your question directly: It varies, but the interval between waterings is about twice as long - all things being equal. Also, have you ever ventured into terrariums? Would you use a mix of this sort in there? I haven't done terrariums, but I worked with a guy to develop a soil and fertilizer program for his. I think he was doing them to sell, and I might even have sent him some soil to try, I don't remember - I talk to a lot of people off forum about plant stuff. I didn't save his e-mail addy, but I talked quite a bit with him on a thread over on the Container Forum. I might go over there & see if I can look him up & find how he fared, but only if you're interested. ;o) Al...See MorePolling Data, or why Johnny can't do science
Comments (69)Here's a follow-up to Edna DeVore's column ~6-7 posts back : Evolution: It's Only a Theory, But One Worth Teaching By Edna DeVore Director of Education and Public Outreach posted: 03 March 2005 06:13 am ET My prior column was composed at 35,000 feet above North America as I surveyed the landscape from the air. The patterns etched by geological evolution are visible at altitude. Closer up, fossils tell the story of earlier life upon our continent. Gazing to the heavens, astronomers gather evidence of the evolution of planets, stars, galaxiesthe whole universe evolves. Natural history museums host large collections of extant and extinct life that document biological evolution. Yet, as I noted, teaching evolution remains controversial in America. A flood of email ensued. Many were supportive; some asked questions. Several negative and hostile emails were openly critical of my assertion that American schools should teach evolution in science classrooms to "leave no child behind". In addition to rejecting evolution for religious reasons, several people claimed that there was not sufficient evidence, that scientists could not all agree, or that evolution is "only a theory" which they equate with an unfounded idea. Evolution is supported by evidence. There are several thousand peer-reviewed scientific journals where the evidence is presented in article after article. Natural history museums house large collections of fossils that document the history of life. Geologists and astronomers have a massive amount of observational evidence of the long-term change in physical systems: stars, galaxies, planets, interstellar dust, asteroids, etc. Biologists observe and document the patterns of the evolution of life: for example, the fossil record, DNA, and the observation of evolution in action such as the adaptive evolution of antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria that now pose a serious threat to human health. Selective breeding in agriculture generated our crops and domestic animals over thousands of years; agriculture is evolution in action. Certainly, there are continuing debates among scientists about the particulars of cosmic, planetary, and biological evolution. The nature of science requires continual questioning of ideas, evidence and theories. Theoretical scientists consider what we know, and pose new ideas and models to explain the natural world. New models and ideas generate new scientific tests of theory: observational experiments at Earth and space-based observatories, high-energy collisions of particle physics, deep-sea dives at the plate boundaries, and lab experiments in molecular biology to cite a few. Science is based upon observational and experimental evidence. Concepts that dont match observations are altered or tossed out. Its an iterative cycle. Likewise, if a scientist makes an observation or does an experiment that cannot be replicated, the results are suspect. Scientific explanations of the natural world are tested against nature, and discarded if they do not work. Consider cold fusion. Science is a self-correcting system that provides humans with powerful descriptions that allow us to understand and predict how the natural world works. Consider Johannes Kepler, a mathematician who is often cited as one of the first modern astronomers. He took observational data collected by Tycho Brahe who was a terrific observer and had mounds of measurements for Mars. Brahe challenged Kepler to make sense of these Mars data. Tycho had his own ideas, but he didnt have Keplers mathematical skills. Kepler spent months trying to fit the Mars data to the circular epicycles and deferents that explained planetary orbits in the astronomical tradition of his day. The data just didnt fit. Unlike his predecessors, Kepler took a leap toward modern science. He elected to trust the data, and abandoned the ancient model of circles upon circles for a new description of planetary motion. His ideas can be condensed into three statements which we call Keplers laws. In their simplest form, they are: planets orbit on elliptical paths with the Sun at one focus; the period of a planets orbit is proportional to its distance from the Sun; and a planets speed in orbit is proportional to its distance from the Sun (equal areas are swept out in equal time). Kepler didnt know why the planets orbited as they did, but he could describe their orbits and make accurate predictions about future positions. The next big step came with Isaac Newton who explained that why planets orbit the Sun: gravity. Only Mercury didnt behave as predicted by Newtons physics. Einstein remodeled physics once again with special and general relativity, and was able to explain Mercurys motion. The theory of gravitation is a powerful explanation of how objects interact in space-time. Its heritage goes back to Keplers description of planetary motion based upon Brahes observational data. Its funny how no one argues that gravity is "only a theory," yet many dismiss evolution as "only a theory." At a fundamental level, popular English and scientific usage are at odds here. In popular culture, a "theory" is understood to be a guess or speculation that may or may not be based upon evidence and analysis. In science, a theory is "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses." (Teaching About Evolution and the Nature of Science,National Academy of Sciences, 1998: 7). A scientific theory is the larger explanation of how the well-tested "laws" fit together to describe the natural world. Dismissing evolution as "only a theory" is, at the simplest level, a misunderstanding of the meaning of "theory" in science. But, in the current controversy, discounting evolution as "only a theory" is more than a semantic debate. Its a political statement at the heart of the attack upon teaching evolution in science classrooms in America. Science is a powerful tool for understanding the natural world, and has a dominant role in modern economics and culture. Scientific theories are at the heart of the enterprise. In the science classroom, children should learn about major scientific theories such as gravitation and evolution. Science is a way of knowing, but not the only way of knowing. There are things that science does not address. For example, music, art, emotion, and religious beliefs are all outside the domain of what science can address. I find it unfortunate that the controversy over the theory of evolution continues as science offers all humans a way to know about the natural world and how it works....See MorePlant Science Day, Wednesday, August 1, 2012
Comments (1)Linked below is a pic of a tomato hornworm someone brought to the event. I thought it was rather large and we could watch as it chewed the leaf down. That is a dime & a quarter in the pic. Here is a link that might be useful: Tomato Hornworm pic...See MoreJanuary Discussion: Undaunted Courage
Comments (20)I have nearly finished Undaunted Courage and thought I would add my thoughts as an overseas reader. Firstly, I enjoyed the book very much. I had a vague idea that 'lewisandclark' had gone across the US but I didn't know the time, the route or anything about them, so the book was interesting from that point of view. My edition had a few maps, but I would have liked a lot more, with more detail. I really had no idea that the headwaters of the Missouri were that far west, or indeed that the Missouri was quite so long. At times I was annoyed by Ambrose's writing. I know that for an American the use of 'he wrote his mother' is normal (rather than the 'he wrote to his mother' that we use), but the phrase occurred so much in the first portion of the book that it began to grate on me. Furthermore, there were many times in the narrative where the sentence construction was unwieldy or plain wrong (I spotted a couple of sentences with no verb), and these should have been picked up by the editor. I know I am being picky here, but it still detracted from the book for me. He also said many times 'the first Americans' when referring to the white men, which seemed a bit careless too. I did enjoy the varied spelling of Lewis and Clark in their journals - I know spelling wasn't fixed in those days, but it is interesting when they spell the same word differently in one sentence *g* Overall, I found it an interesting and educational read. I didn't know that humans could survive so well on a basically all meat diet (although fresh fruit vegetables may not have featured much in their diets before the trek either, especially those in the army). Please don't tell my teenaged sons this :-)) The success of the exploration seemed to hinge quite a lot on luck (the Native Americans being mainly friendly, not getting lost in the snow and so on) but this is probably true for most expeditions of this kind. The variety of Lewis' skills in recognising flora and fauna and taking scientific readings is amazing too. It reminded me of our previous discussions about 'renaissance man', or in this case, 'enlightenment man' and what would be required knowledge. I am greatly impressed with the way the group could function so well in such conditions. Lewis and Clark were both very young, although Lewis in particular had had a lot of responsibility already in his life. The hardship of the journey would tend to either pull the men together or drive them apart, and with a large group of 30 or so it is to the credit of the captains that there was so little dissent. I get the feeling that Lewis, once he was back into 'civilisation' felt that there wasn't much else ahead of him. I think that he may have delayed the publication of the journals because he felt that once that was done, the whole episode was past, and he wouldn't be so important, in his own eyes or in those of others. I think he may also have felt lonely, despite his drinking outings and......See More- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years agolast modified: 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
- 11 years agolast modified: 11 years ago
- 11 years agolast modified: 11 years ago
- 11 years ago
Related Stories

DECORATING GUIDES16 Lounges Go Wild for Science at San Francisco's Exploratorium
See the imaginative designs concocted and let us know which style formula works best for you
Full Story
TRADITIONAL ARCHITECTUREHow to Research Your Home's History
Learn what your house looked like in a previous life to make updates that fit — or just for fun
Full Story
DECORATING GUIDESCity View: History Meets Modern Tastes in St. Louis
This Missouri city celebrates a heritage that goes way back, but its architecture and interiors are moving decidedly forward
Full Story
LANDSCAPE DESIGNEvoke Mystery and History With Moss in the Garden
Go ahead, lie about age. Moss on garden statues, planters and pavers creates the beautifully deceptive look of time’s passing
Full Story
LIFE'Not My Precious Books!' — Pain-Free Ways to Declutter Your Library
Have your books and neatness too, with these ideas for paring down and straightening up a beloved collection
Full Story
KITCHEN DESIGNKitchen Sinks: Soapstone for Germ-Free Beauty and Durability
Stains and bacteria? Not on soapstone's watch. But this sink material's benefits don't come cheap.
Full Story
DECORATING GUIDESFeel Free to Break Some Decorating Rules
Ditch the dogma about color, style and matching, and watch your rooms come alive
Full Story
GARDENING GUIDESGet on a Composting Kick (Hello, Free Fertilizer!)
Quit shelling out for pricey substitutes that aren’t even as good. Here’s how to give your soil the best while lightening your trash load
Full Story
LIFEModern Manners for Conflict-Free Family Visits
Avoid thermostat wars, pet peeves and the great shower squeeze with these tips for having family as houseguests
Full Story
GARDENING GUIDESNew Ways to Think About All That Mulch in the Garden
Before you go making a mountain out of a mulch hill, learn the facts about what your plants and soil really want
Full Story
friedagOriginal Author