Yes, it tends to be the regular participants and their frequent contributions that bring whatever life there is to ANY of these forums!!

There are some very wise and thoughtful responses in this thread.

It may well be that the use of derogatory terms, such as "organo-Nazis" and worse may be off putting to many. Respectful disagreement can be done without using derogatory terms.

kimmq is kimmsr

kimmq, You are right about derogatory terms. However, this site has tended to be somewhat "our way or the highway". When some like Henry have posted, it has been kind of contentious. Perhaps that is ok. Still, I feel I can contribute without being 'totally' organic. Otherwise it is a closed club.

Also, most things have been already discussed before and without newcomers, there may not be much left to say daily.

May all be blessed and grow in the knowledge and faith of Christ through the coming year.

I'd like to think that you, kimmsr, can be more helpful, respectful, and less narrowly didactic in your posts....especially to the newbies.

We should be welcoming and open to discussions and questions.

I also think that the popup from Houzz, if one is not logged in, is very annoying. Ok to have a popup but that popup is like playing whack-a-mole.

Clint, I come here rarely. The Organic paradigm is incomplete, half-baked, and obsolete. Bio-dynamic systems is where it's at these days. Much more complex, but much more promising and much closer to nature.

A good amount of the bio dynamic principles makes sense to me until it comes to burying the cow's horn filled with quartz.

gjcore ... I thought it was a bull's horn full of manure that has been exposed to the moonlight. And the usual prancing widdershins sky-clad stuff. Tupping in the fields is a dying art, unfortunately, because no one has the time.

the above two comments are jus the kind needed to spike interest in this forum.

kimmq is kimmsr

Believe me ... tupping in the fields would get a lot of interest.

I meant the real biodynamic effects, as described in numerous papers in the last 15 years or so. you know, like plants exchanging nutrients, simulation of natural ecosystems, that kind of stuff.

gligb - You'll have to come up with a new name for it, because for decades (not just the past few years) "biodynamic" is the name for the cow-horns buried under a full moon, sprinkling homeopathic quantities of various concoction over the fields, and other total nonsense.

bummer. suggestions are welcome. modern soil science? biology-based fertility? don't waste all that carbon and nitrogen composting?

Biodynamic gardening/farming has been around since Rudolf Steiner first proposed the ideas in the 1920's Biodynamic gardening/farming is much more involved than simply filling a horn from a bovine with manure and burying it.

kimmq is kimmsr

I was run out of this forum years ago by rigid thinkers.

Biodynamic gardening/farming is much more involved than simply filling a horn from a bovine with manure and burying it.

Biodymanic gardening/farming is nothing more than a load of bovine manure.

Based on magic, mysticism, and tapping into cosmic energies, there is no evidence to show it provides any benefit to agriculture. Steiner was a quack with zero background in farming or agriculture.

I meant the real biodynamic effects, as described in numerous papers in the last 15 years or so.

Please, share these numerous papers with us.

You will have to do it yourself, Sclerid. Start by becoming familiar with the ATTRA, SARE, and USDANRCS website. If you want a more practical approach, youtube is your friend. Just looking at one page you can get at about 500 papers on cover crops by clicking on links (luckily, this page also introduces you to the whole field of cover crops)

http://www.sare.org/Learning-Center/Books/Managing-Cover-Crops-Profitably-3rd-Edition/Text-Version/How-to-Use-This-Book

You could also google some terms such as

nutrient exchanges between plants (search with and without mycorrhizae)

nutrient cycling by cover crops

biodynamic effects of pasturing animals on soil fertility

no-till and fertility

if you need more ideas let me know.

If biodynamics didn't have so much woo-woo mysticism associated with it, it would be taken a lot more seriously. There is definitely some substance to it but also a great deal of hocus-pocus, as referred to above. All of the topics listed in the previous post are also addressed by just the common concept of organic gardening or better yet, sustainable gardening.

"No difference in beneficial outcomes has been scientifically established between certified biodynamic agricultural techniques and similar organic and integrated farming practices. Biodynamic agriculture is a pseudoscience because of a lack of strong evidence for its efficacy and its roots in magical thinking."

Near me are the Josephine Porter Institute, Spikenard Bee Sanctuary, and the Blue Ridge Center for Chinese Medicine -- all biodynamic and run by serious, sincere people. I don't claim to understand it, though I compost lots of nettles.

But here's the story. There's a grass pasture in a local eco community that has been treated with biodynamic preparations for years. Some friends have three dairy cows that go straight to that pasture when they get the chance. Go figure.

although I appreciate that "biodynamic" is associated with practices which did not have a firm theoretical grounding, the original meaning of the world is about dynamic processes in soil driven by biological agents. It should still be used as such. Soil science has grown a lot in the last 20 years and that growth has resulted in an understanding of soil dynamics as being dominated by biological agents.

I also read european gardening forums where the world "biodynamic" is used frequently, often associated with Fukuoka practices, which have now been largely validated, although Fukuoka was, like Holzer, just a farmer.

You will have to do it yourself, Sclerid.

You seem confused as to who has the burden of proof when a claim is being made.

you just checkmated me, pal. there is no proof whatsoever in those pages.

Why not share this "proof" you claim to have rather than resorting to the "do-your-own-research" argument and sophomoric sarcasm?

"Do your own research!"... a form of the escape hatch used by a charlatan who wants to win the argument but does not want to bear the burden of proof. ...Youtube is the best source for all your "research" too.

Name calling has no place here.

Unless I am missing something, no one here is calling anybody "names". This is just a spirited difference of opinion. Which IMO is one of the best features of any of these forums - it gets folks thinking and opens up other points of view. And having to defend your opinion against opposing points of view is an excellent way of gaining a further understanding of it, at least for normally intelligent, rational human beings, which all here appear to be :-) On other forums........maybe not so much!

This is just a spirited difference of opinion. Which IMO is one of the best features of any of these forums - it gets folks thinking and opens up other points of view.
And having to defend your opinion against opposing points of view is an excellent way of gaining a further understanding of it

Absolutely. Civil discourse is an excellent way to challenge beliefs and develop a better understanding, but opinions themselves don't matter much when discussing topics that can easily be substantiated. There's really no sense in arguing an opinion, as opinions are matters of personal preferences and therefore cannot be 'wrong'.

When very specific claims are made, they can either be supported with empirical evidence or dismissed as empty chatter.

and to think, sclerid, that I spent 15 mins typing a reply looking for websites. live and learn. One studies these things but then things get lost over time. nevertheless, to satisfy your curiosity you only need to start clicking. It is not an easy subject, and it takes time, and it still developing, but probably close to 50% of the original papers are available on the internet without paying for access.

glib: I've read and heard enough about biodynamics to understand that it's complete pseudoscience. My post on January 23rd should have made that pretty clear to you.

If you have some treasure trove of knowledge that shows otherwise, as you've claimed to, please share. Telling me to "do my research" simply diminishes your argument while the continued use of sarcasm diminishes your credibility.

call it modern soil science, then. Regardless, the original query by Clint is answered by the fact that the conceptual pillars of the organic movement have been overtaken by a better picture of the way soils work. The forum is dead because it is passe'.

call it modern soil science, then.

Absolutely not. Even by their own definition, biodynamics is not scientific at all. Science eschews superstition.

"What Is Biodynamics?

Biodynamic principles and practices are based on the spiritual insights and practical suggestions of Dr. Rudolf Steiner..."

I read articles about better health. I read articles about better spiritual health. I read articles about soil health. I don't think this forum is to have a scientific peer reviewed journal requirement.

point conceded, sclerid. the word biodynamics is taken for all times and despite the roots of the compound word, is to mean scientific quackery. to indicate dynamically, biologically driven soil phenomena we will have to come up with a new word.

Soil ecology?

not bad. I suggest replica of natural biological systems for the purpose of maximizing and maintaining land productivity. Organic, IMHO, was at the core a movement to reduce man made toxicity. But core concepts were missing.

I have been interested in what makes forums wax and wane since I discovered Prodigy, in 1992 I believe. The best survivor I am aware of seems to be SDMB but even they have lost what I estimate to be 6% since perhaps 2013. I attribute that to Facebook, Twitter and their ilk.

ed - I got called away before I finished above, Perhaps few noticed.

There was a time, not too long ago, when I could put almost any gardening keywords into Google and Gardenweb would show up on the first page of ghits. Often GW was the first ghit. I just Googled my dozen most recent searches and none had GW on Googles first page. What happened? Did Google change it's algorithm? Did Houzz make it harder for Google to find Gardenweb? Is there just less here to find and/or better competition?

A lot of people left after the Houzz
takeover from many forums. The rollout to the "new" forum look compared
to the old one was a bit clunky and it turned some regulars off. Houzz
admins did a great job (imo) of making changes over time to get
functionality better, but a lot of people that used to use the site a
lot had already left for other forums, a lot of
plant/veggie/regional-specific ones. The veggie, pepper, tomato, and
many regional forums lost a chunk of regulars from my own personal
observation.

There's some of us that pop in from time to time, but don't
contribute much anymore. Hell, this is my first post in many months. I
don't mind helping people or bouncing around ideas, but there's not a
lot of that anymore, especially on this particular organic gardening forum.

Aside from that, it seems the "home garden" thing isn't taking on as many new users as in the past. I don't want to call it a fad, but there was a stretch of huge interest in gardening (especially food) that seems to have waned the last 2-3 years after a nice run of almost a decade.

Good to see you posting nc_crn! Your vast gardening knowledge has been missed on GW. Hope you are doing well and can pop in from time to time.

GardenWeb lost much of its high relevancy ranking on Google with the site re-model. The new group of folks should consider working on Search Engine Optimizations (SEO).

For me it's becoming harder to find people here with actual hands on experience on a given topic, whereas I see a lot of generalized boilerplate answers that can be found just about anywhere, and are downright preachy at times. All gardening is local and much of what I find does not apply to my applications.

"All gardening is local"

I would amend that to read "much of gardening is local" - just as much of it is governed by biological and horticultural facts that are rooted in science, are beyond dispute and have nothing to do with location :-)

How one approaches "organic gardening" is very personal and rather subjective. The term means different things to different people and there is very little that is right or wrong about the different approaches. Because the concept is so personalized as to philosophy or attitude, there is little point in being dogmatic or arguing the details. And there is far too much of that going on in this forum and that tends to put people off and shy them away. No one wants to be put down or lectured to because of their specific method of organic gardening. That they try and adopt any form of organic gardening is all to the good.

I think someone must have hinted at this above. Perhaps they stated it outright and I missed it.

''Organic'' is now an industry. It is no longer just an exciting fad. There is no longer the thrill of rebellion; of advocating for the good, in word and practice.

I think Janes may be on to something referring to 'organic' as an industry. Over on Vermicomposting there are threads mentioning OMRI and ''... 2,000 lbs bag of castings...'' Organic is now more than just a cult of hobbyists.

I was poking around in the Wayback machine and it would appear that this forum was established minutes before November 11, 1996 at 22:02.

Have not read the entire thread, but am rather tired of the large companies feeding the consumer a product(s) that appears organic but is only in appearance. And they seem to have a monopoly at the moment. Granted there are some better aspects to each player, but the sum seems to be a manipulative bunch. Even this morning, on the TV, Scott's advertising for Bonnie, who also grows for Walmart. Thinking the only organic things in this situation are the peat pots and non gmo seeds. Not sure why there is not an concerted effort to start a competitive market. I really think the consumers would pick the organic/green choice.

I really think the consumers would pick the organic/green choice.

That has been tested ... consumers, for the most part are price sensitive more than anything.

The amount of shelf space dedicated to the "organic" produce in my local grocery store has declined dramatically ... a national management decision to push organic led to 75% of the fresh produce being "organic" and 2x more expensive than the conventional. It immediately slowed sales down (this is a low income town), which meant that the organic produce turned over slowly and was going bad on the shelf, while they couldn't keep the conventional (grown closer) stuff in stock.

I pointed out to the produce manager that although I could afford to buy the organic stuff, after lengthy shipping and sitting on the shelf it was flabby and slimy and I was buying conventional elsewhere.

Since then, they have reversed the proportions. There is about a 25% organic for the ones who insist and 75% unspecified for the rest of us.

As far as garden plants, Bonnie's stuff has the advantage of being grown for the locals. We get a bazillion kinds of chiles favored locally, and short-season or heat tolerant tomatoes.

Thanks for the response LG and I agree. My communication skills are not what the should be, apologies. What I am attempting to convey is I think if people had the choice of buying organically grown anything...vegetables, bedding plants, flowers, etc. GROWN by Bonnie and provided to Walmart via a competitive organic process, they would choose those plants if the cost were the same. I think it just takes experimenting and innovation.....and then serious investment. Right now, I think these entities are very much the good ole boys club that will mash the competition if you upset their cash flow. As I speculated....the only thing organic to their product now is essentially the pot......and that's only a "green" marketing tool in my opinion.....that robs peat bogs.

A Science-Based Whole Foods Would Look a Lot Different -- Science of Us - Labels like “organic” and “conventional” are too broad, and too black and white, to really be all that helpful.

To some people Organic Garden means making your own compost to have healthier food supply.

Some it is a life style.

To some it is a religion, not all but some are hard core & pushy when it comes to what they believe to be true.

this last group can some times put other off.

what-would-it-take-to-bring-some-life-to-this-forum?

I may not have been here in years, if ever, then one tuesday last november this suddenly became one of the less obnoxious places on the internet. I visit here daily now.