Julie wrote:

>>
>> I am keeping up, you seem to have not researched your subject and
>> have no answers for simple straight forward questions.
>
> They are not questions they are nonsense obstacles proving you are
> just a troll.

But they are not, they are extremely serious issues that have to be
addressed before anyone will take such a drastic change in direction
seriously.
If you cannot answer simple queries about the basics of fertility, ecology
and logistics without turning to abuse because you have nothing to
contribute, you cannot ever expect anyone to believe the system is robust
enough to work. Therefore its a non starter.
So far, its been shown that your proposals are unsustainable at the most
elemental level, but if there is more that you can offer to change this it
would be interesting to hear.

>
>>> <snip trolling>
>>
>> Not trolling, simply endeavouring to find out how you propose to
>> support your new ecosystem, only to find you have no answers.
>
> You are trolling and it's quite blatant a diversionary tactic to take
> us away from the unsustainability of meat production in the modern
> world.

Not at all, I am interested in your alternatives.
Jumping up and down saying something is wrong is to no effect unless you can
offer a viable alternative.

>
> You can play chase your tail or punch & judy with Jim. When you are
> ready for serious discussion come back.

I am trying to get a serious discussion with you but you are evading at
every turn and then turn abusive and childish.

>
>>> If you cant be sensible about it get lost.
>>
>> Why, because you are shown to not understand some basic ecology and
>> logistics?
>
>> I am interested to hear how you make your system work, how you
>> sustain food productivity for all the people now and the growing
>> population in the future using the circumstances we are in NOW, not
>> those of a time when the common rural way of life involved
>> subsistance living and no Ipods.
>> At the same time reducing the carbon footprint, creating a
>> sustainable rural economy and protecting the land we need to feed
>> ourselves with.
>
> You've already been told and shown easily viable alternatives

But they are not viable in the 21st century UK situation.

which
> we, the planet will need to adopt if we are to save ourselves for
> anything like a decent future. You have no comprehension of what's
> involved so I suppose breeding a couple of fluffy chickens doesn't a
> farmer make!

I have a strong idea what is involved, coupled with a hefty dose of reality.
So far you have given fluffy ideals but nothing that is a robust strategy to
put food on the tables of the populace for the next 100 years.

--

regards
Jill Bowis

Pure bred utility chickens and ducks
Housing; Equipment, Books, Videos, Gifts
Herbaceous; Herb and Alpine nursery
Working Holidays in Scotland
http://www.kintaline.co.uk