• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

"Organic Farming cannot feed the world"

LegionOnomaMoi

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Also, I agree with others, a huge still growing population isn't going to be sustainable at some point. This is a planet with finite ressources after all.

This certainly seems to be true, and is indeed so intuitive that even in 1798 this very reasoning had been around in some form only to be elucidated most clearly that year by Malthus' An Essay on the Principle of Population. More recently, Ehrlich (among others, although he is probably the most (in)famous) has spoken and written about the inevitability of disaster which will result from overpopulation. However, in perhaps his best known work, The Population Bomb, were statements about mass death from famine which never happened (in the first edition, it was supposed to happen in the 1970s; in the second this was pushed back into the 80s).

The problem with Malthusian-like doomsday proclamations is two-fold:
1) They underestimate the ability of humans to turn things that weren't resources into resources, from steam engines to nuclear power plants.
2) They all to often involve statements about the future which do not come to pass, thus increasing a public apathy and feelings of security instead of the activism they were intended to produce.

It's certainly true that humans have surpassed population limits ever since the beginning of agriculture. But this is no reason to suppose that we should ignore the possibility that at some point the population will increase faster than the technology to support it and in such away that we set off a domino effect of disasters.

Additionally, some of the technology which has enabled us to sustain greater populations seems to have caused other problems such as climate change which can spell disaster regardless of population levels. Rather than focus on "organic farming" or on population, I think new or at least (in the case of nuclear power) updated sources of energy are of primary concern, as is the need to understand the effects any type of farming can have on everything from surrounding ecosystems to land surface temperature readings used in global climate models.
 
Last edited:

Shuddhasattva

Well-Known Member
Even so, "infinite" is such a bold word to use. Do you really mean it?

Wholeheartedly.

Kardashev 5 Inc.

I think it's because you're using the word "information" here where another word would be better suited to describe the phenomena.

Information is precisely the correct word.

None of this negates the fact that all exchanges of energy are inefficient and involve loss of energy that isn't utilized by the organism.

Do you know what a semiochemical is?
None of this negates the fact that matter and energy are not created or destroyed.

No, rather it rests on that fact.

None of this negates the intrinsic limitations of any environmental system as bound by the laws of nature (as we understand them).

Which limitations would those be, and why do they curtail an infinite growth scenario?
 

Penumbra

Veteran Member
Premium Member
It seems to me that population growth is the largest variable to take control of.

After that, I remember a funny quote where a farmer basically said that the argument for intensive farming being necessary to feed everyone is like saying, "The only way to feed everyone is to poison the land."

I think a really high significance needs to be placed on sustainable farming. Crop rotation and rest periods to maintain soil quantity and quality. Multi-crop farming rather than mono-crop farming. Not artificially separating animals and plants, and instead trying to create farming methods that more closely resemble nature. Emphasis on local farming when possible. "Organic" is arguably better than chemical pesticide farming but when it's done on a large scale it becomes basically as industrial as other farming methods with an organic label good for marketing higher prices. So small, local farms that stick to really high standards that you can visit seem to be a better choice.

Plus for those that eat farmed animals there is the variable of suffering to consider. On some farms, animals live fairly naturally and happily and are then milked, or their eggs are taken, or they are eventually killed. On other farms, animals suffer in misery throughout life and then their milk/eggs are taken or they're killed.
 

MysticSang'ha

Big Squishy Hugger
Premium Member
Something to consider is that much of our economy is based on the supply side. People rarely eat seasonally anymore, finding tomatoes in the store year-round, or coconut oil, or any other tropical fruit, plant, or nut that people wish for is readily available. This simply doesn't happen without some deviation from pure, local, organic methods.

If organic farming were to be an answer, I think we ought to seriously consider our eating habits that do not reflect nature's bounty. At least here in the U.S. midwest, where we experience 4 seasons, it would make more sense to practice the kind of agricultural model where milk, honey, butter, tomatoes, wheat, corn, etc. are available only certain times of the year. We DO have a local farm (one of the larger pick-your-own) that offers their own produce throughout the year on a seasonal basis, but to date they also offer produce that has traveled thousands of miles to get there too because of demand.

But that is not going to happen overnight.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
Something to consider is that much of our economy is based on the supply side. People rarely eat seasonally anymore, finding tomatoes in the store year-round, or coconut oil, or any other tropical fruit, plant, or nut that people wish for is readily available. This simply doesn't happen without some deviation from pure, local, organic methods.

If organic farming were to be an answer, I think we ought to seriously consider our eating habits that do not reflect nature's bounty. At least here in the U.S. midwest, where we experience 4 seasons, it would make more sense to practice the kind of agricultural model where milk, honey, butter, tomatoes, wheat, corn, etc. are available only certain times of the year. We DO have a local farm (one of the larger pick-your-own) that offers their own produce throughout the year on a seasonal basis, but to date they also offer produce that has traveled thousands of miles to get there too because of demand.

But that is not going to happen overnight.

Agreed, theres a long way to go, but ultimely organic farms with more small farms are the way to go IMO.
The risks, general problems with big farm GMO outweighs the benefits on any large scale.
 

MysticSang'ha

Big Squishy Hugger
Premium Member
Greenhouses aren't organic?

Sure they can be. On the scale of demand, however, I wonder what would be needed. The best bet if people overall want to continue getting bananas and tomatoes year-round and consuming them at the rate they do would require more vertical farming in temperature-controlled greenhouses.

I've been interested in some initial attempts of doing so by people like Will Allen. He uses quite a bit of vermiculture and aquaponics to create a closed-loop system on his small plot to provide his neighborhood - mostly low-income - with fresh organic produce and fish.

Honestly, I think this guy is amazing. :yes:
 

painted wolf

Grey Muzzle
I think the real problem is the widespread use of farming practices that waste soil and contaminate water supplies... (even organic farming can do both of these). This is aggravated by poor education in many places and in systemic neglect in others.

Ok.. the real real problem is our population levels... but that will correct itself one way or another.

Honestly the best solution is to use the best practices from the Green Revolution along with Organic and Permaculture techniques. GMO's if done right have amazing potential. (not all GMO's are transgenic bogymen)

Food waste, at least in the USA, is traced mostly to our legal system. In order to protect themselves from lawsuits, restaurants and supermarkets have to follow very careful rules on food disposal. Our high rates of food waste are a direct result of our low incidence of food-born illness.

However, repurposing our food waste is a good idea. That food waste can be turned into feed for animals like pigs and chickens. (this is what the local permaculture farm where I used to live did) Unfortunately there are places that have laws against this. At a minimum it can and should be composted. Yet there are local laws that prohibit both.

ps. I think Will Allen is amazing!

wa:do
 
Top