Ethnoob
-
Content count
676 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
9
Posts posted by Ethnoob
-
-
if you ever want to part with another piece shoot us a pm ;)
-
Some pics I took today.
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, Paradoxical said:Anyone got any info on foolsbreath, apart from being a cv from moonunit?
He told me he took it on from a winemaker who tested it as having 3% mescaline content which is where the whole athlete stuff comes from. It's meant to be as good as they come.
-
2 hours ago, ph7 said:Amazing bro! I really think you should start planting some privacy screening around the borders. Maybe some Acacia or Brugs, or a passion fruit vine on a trellis
I've tried growing all those and kill everything lol I seriously know the basics for plant care but fate seems to have it in for me and only allows me to grow cactus and cannabis. I don't really mind though, those two alone are enough to keep me happy.
-
1
-
-
Since it's been about a month have some pics that I took today. First up is a peru called Eva, then there's Tripsis #2, Medicine Garden Red Spine, Mum & Dad, an infected cresty/monstrose of unknown origin, the new plants that I potted up as a group shot, the cacti in larger pots group shot and then it's a few pics of the ones in smaller pots, a group shot of all the ones in smaller pots and then a pic showing how my garden has grown over the months. I believe those months were March, April, July and then today where I'm unable to get all my cacti in a single shot. It's been a crazy ride so far considering I planted my first cactus 10 months ago
-
14 hours ago, Humbolt said:Looks like youve got plenty of grass yet to cover Ethnoob. Awesome collection sir.
I've still got the bottom half of the yard to fill up as well. Give me a year and I'll sort it all out
-
I've been slack and not updated in forever. I've added way too many cacti to list. Cactaids has me.
What's really fucked is that there's a bunch of cacti, around 30 or so, that aren't even in that pic as I just potted them up and have them beside the house and some are still in my laundry as I ran out of supplies to pot them up. I'm beyond help at this point, the addiction has me.
-
3
-
-
Take it from my experience of frying cacti, get them used to the local conditions by having them in a semi shaded area for at least a week and then put them somewhere that gets a good few hours of sun for another week before smashing them with the full force of the sun. That said I think cacti are a bit happier in filtered light anyway. It seems to give them a break instead of fighting against the constant intensity of the sun and the bluer cacti end up much bluer for it too.
-
Looks like it split itself open from having too much to drink. Normally that wouldn't be too much to fuss over but it looks like it's oozing out black liquid which isn't good at all because if that's the case it's likely rotting on the inside. Personally if it is oozing to be on the safe side I'd cut above the damage and root the tip in some far less wet soil and then let the stump dry out for a couple of weeks before slowly reintroducing water to it again. If you're lucky you'd end up with two cacti but at worst if the stump dies you should be able to save the tip.
-
6 minutes ago, bardo said:Yeh, make the most of every moment, live and let live, do all you want and remember all is transient anyhow
heads in the sand is exactly how we got into this problem in the first place.
-
30 minutes ago, bardo said:Out of those 3 only the semi monstrose is still available : )
Thanks for getting back to me. Unfortunately it was the other two I really wanted. I was just going to throw the semi monstrose in as an added bonus. Oh well, if the other two ever become available again send me a PM
-
7 hours ago, ph7 said:You're building a very nice collection mate! Also very neat and tidy in the garden, those square pots look good.
Thanks mate
I'm terrible at making memes but I was told my old man of the mountain looks like a hairy prick by a girl I know so I sent her this back. She didn't respond lol
-
1
-
-
On 26/03/2019 at 12:40 PM, bardo said:some more cuttings -
Bridgesii Con, 29cm tip $29 and a 29cm log $20 + postage
Bridgesii Hans, 24cm tip $24
Semi monstrose bridgesii, 28cm tip $28 + postage
Update - the con log and tip as well as hans have been claimed
Are these still available?
-
Well it's been about a month and I can't be arsed listing out all the names again but if you're well keen on finding out what's what the names are in the filenames
-
1
-
-
Been lazy and didn't post for a while. Time for an update...
Bridgesii OP, Bruce, Cactus Mc Spiny, T. Carmaguensis, Foolsbreath and a gecko guardian
Gold Spine Peru, Hamilton's Peru Crest, T. Huascha, Ivan, LC002 and a new loph
Los Gentiles, Locanthocereus Cliestocactus Fieldianus, Mum & Dad, Pacharu, Pachanoi x Psycho0 and T. Schickendantzii
Some slime mold giving me some grief, T. Spachianus, TBMC and a T. Thelegonus that got toppled just before I took the pic due to the intense rain I've had today.
That's it for now but I have lots more coming so stay tuned
-
22 hours ago, paradox said:I’d be more inclined to call you monumentally psychopathic to a degree that’s beyond comprehension.. insane doesn’t come close.
You describe rounding up & murdering BILLIONS of innocent babies & children & people (I guess as long as it’s not you & your friends) as ‘cold’? I’m sure for those billions of people murdered it would also be a bit annoying, slightly inconvenient, kind of mean, a little slack..
So if this psychopathic, genocidal slaughtering of billions of babies & innocent people is such that ‘you'd never consider it an option’ then why are you saying it’s our only viable option? What’s your point? Are you interested in solutions or do you just like fantasising about mass murder on a scale unfathomable by worst genocidal dictators known to humanity?
if this scale of mass genocide can’t be considered ‘wrong’ then how on earth do you define that word? What kind of demented post modernist extremist projection do you inhabit where you can’t even define something of that scale as wrong?
Please explain how you aren’t the most deplorable kind of psychopathic freak?
I am a psychopath in that I can look at things objectively without involving emotion bu that doesn't mean I'm wrong. Every species can live in harmony with the surrounding environment provided it's numbers are kept in balance and it's obvious our species is out of balance due to the global effects we're having. As such logically the cure is a reduction in our numbers to bring us back into line.
Now that said I know it's morally objectionable to kill even pedophiles so it's not like the idea of murdering billions of innocents sits well with me. My only point was that since there's not going to be some technological miracle cure that allows us to make all 7.5 billion people live the 1% lifestyle without causing the entire world to get fucked over a forced reduction in the human population is in the interest of everything. Now if we can admit that to ourselves and consider ourselves guardians of the planet is it then not our duty to lessen the suffering of that decision being made? To me though this is where the real moral implications come into play though because by which criteria do you judge? Let's say you wanted Africa for Africans, Japan for the Japanese, etc. to preserve all the races in a distinct place of their own then places like Australia that have been taken over by whites would either be forced to take measures like saying Australia is for the Aboriginals or that the nation was founded in 1901 and if you can't trace your family history to then you've gotta go. Choosing the sick, the elderly, druggos on welfare, fresh off the boat immigrants, etc. seems easy enough but it can get real complicated, real fast and it's going to be a shit show either way. What I do know is that people would be absolutely butt hurt for all of eternity over it no matter how much better off they and the rest of the world has it.
Another thing I know is that if humanity was to go down that path then there needs to be an all powerful global force that can land a nuke anywhere. They need to hold the world hostage and say either you stick to your breeding plan so your numbers stay within their limits or you get hit with a nuke and lose an even greater number of people. If the punishment isn't worse like that people simply won't care and we'll end right back where we are today. I know, I know, psychopath, but explain how I'm wrong with cold logic and change my mind....
3 hours ago, nothinghead said:If you read the book he gives one of the most straightforward explanations of why our global ecosystem is in the precarious state that it is in, and describes the existing and potential technologies that have the best chance of stabilising it.
I'd say that advocating a population reduction ultimately fails to address the underlying cause of global environmental degradation. Why would a reduced population not simply breed back to the point we're at today? Most of the ecological damage we've inflicted as a species has happened within roughly the last couple of centuries, the same time period for the rapid growth of human population. Leave in place the societal structures, national and international systems of governance that have gotten us here, largely defined by industrial capitalism, international competition, and religion-based morality, and reduce the number of people and you're probably just deferring the problem without addressing its underlying cause.
Tim Flannery talks about the practical steps we can take towards curbing ecological degradation. Leftist/anarchist philosophers from Leopold Kohr to Murray Bookchin have described ways of organising society that reduces our propensity for violence and destruction and would allow us to live with a more harmonious relationship to each other, other species' and our environment.
There may be too many people living in some parts of the world for that ecosystem to support them, but ultimately climate change and other large scale environmental problems are about how we live. We know that economic affluence is a large factor in determining birth-rate, and we know that affluence is, demographically, causative of a large carbon footprint. We need to address the material issues of inequality and the systems that cause it, the cultural practices that support selfish and ecologically destructive behaviours, and of course the actual problems like ocean acidification, glacial melt, and reduction of biodiversity.
The earth tries to live in harmony like two sides of an equation trying to even each other out. There's a certain number of people that can live on this earth but it depends on the lifestyles that we have. We can have more vegans living in mud huts for example than we can westerners that eat meat. My point was that people are never going to forget the western life, our sciences, the technology, etc. which means they absolutely will strive for it again and that as a result we have to pick lower numbers of people with a greater impact over more people with less impact.
As for addressing the population to make sure it doesn't jump again hold the world hostage with nukes.
Leftists are mostly retarded. They always put feels before reals and put all their faith in future technologies that are either unproven, unworkable or as in most cases simply don't exist. More than that they don't think about the ramifications of their plans because they live in an imaginary world. Take multiculturalism for example. It's meant to make us less racist, be our strength and all that shit right? Instead it destroys both cultures by forcing them to change, it forces the races to inevitably blend destroying the ethnic differences we once had and until that happens it fosters hatred and self segregation. Don't believe me? Why is there a China town in every major city in the world? Why do muslims hang around one another more than they do us? Why is white flight a thing? Deep down we know these things to be true but it feels bad thinking that way so a leftist ignores reality to absolve them of their wrongthink crime which they also do to everything else in life such as renewable energy sources like solar saying it's energy from the sun while completely ignoring the absolutely horrendous impact the panels construction has done before ending up on their roof. It's always feels before reals so I'll never buy into their philosophy or politics. Don't get me wrong, the hardcore right are retarded too, just leftists more so.
Now obviously it's about how we live as a species that impacts the environment as I described in the first paragraph of my reply to you but if you think for a moment dealing with inequality will help you're assuming that the 3rd world will start breeding at 1st world rates. The 3rd world will forever breed like the 3rd world and by giving them greater access to resources like food and medicine it just means more will survive and make the overpopulation problem worse. Look at Africa. We've fed them for over 100 years and they're still popping out like 8 kids knowing they're going to starve too. More than that their now western lifestyles are going to devastate the planet in real short order. It's psychopathic again on my behalf, probably racist too, but logically if you want to address the overpopulation issue you absolutely must start with the ones doing the majority of the breeding and prevent them from wanting to emulate our lifestyles too. If you don't you're literally just adding fuel to the fire.
-
3 hours ago, nothinghead said:Population problem or not (I think there is one), carbon emissions per capita is pretty central to the issue. But before we go all controlled intentional apocalypse on one more species on the planet, maybe we should listen to what people in the field are saying: https://www.textpublishing.com.au/books/atmosphere-of-hope
This is what he recommends:
From atmospheric carbon capture through extensive seaweed farming, CO2 snow production in Antarctica and the manufacture of carbon-rich biochar to reflecting the sun’s rays by releasing sulphur into the atmosphere and painting landscapes and cities white, Flannery outlines an array of innovative technologies that give cause for hope.
Every single one of those suggestions are band aid solutions that ultimately fail to address the underlying cause of their necessity. Sure they could help a little but why would we want to make all our towns blindingly white and identical the world over for example when doing so ruins architecture which is one of the largest defining qualities of every culture not to mention it actually helping to make the problem worse with the constant maintenance and production of the paint? I won't even get started on the million plus reasons why geoengineering is retarded or how when plants die they ultimately release all their carbon back as they decay.
Deep down we all know that human existence has a negative effect on this planet which means the fewer of us there are the better off the world would be. It's just no one wants to admit that people need to be killed off in such numbers that Thanos would look like a pussy because if we admit that we then have to consider the reasons why certain people should live or die which is horribly uncomfortable to think about. It makes you feel like a racist, it makes you feel like a eugenicist and really just plain evil in general but we already have examples from nature to reflect upon that proves it is the right course of action to take. Just look at what happens when kangaroos breed out of control for example. They all suffer until they start dying off but can cause so much damage between now and then the humane thing to do is to thin the herd. We don't like to do it but we know it's ultimately morally correct to forcibly bring them back in balance with nature and lessen their suffering and all I'm saying is that we need to take a similar approach with ourselves.
-
18 minutes ago, waterboy 2.0 said:You know.... maybe work on the actual problem of fixed carbon becoming free atmospheric carbon.
Edit - and the other turbo charged gases
That's a change to business as usual. Then accomodate sequestration into development works.
The "western" model as aspirational it is has a lot of room left to improve its performance sustainability wise.
It's not rocket science
Yep... Lol... "Sane" people wanna go culling folk who are not them.
You're kidding yourself if you think there's a technological solution that doesn't result in the human population going up which is literally the sole cause of the environmental damage we're doing as a species. Even if I were wrong though how much of the Earth should be dedicated to a single species? We've chopped down the majority of forests, we've raped the oceans for food and every single person that's born has a mouth that needs feeding and absolutely will put their foot down claiming some space as for themselves displacing other species. The more of us there are the less room there is for everything else and there's no technological solution for that.
You may call me insane for thinking population control is the only viable cure for what ails this planet but I think you're the insane one for ignoring it merely because it makes you feel bad to think about it. I get how it's cold, ruthless and we'd lose what remains of our humanity going down that path which is why you'd never consider it an option but that doesn't make it wrong. It just makes it morally objectionable and even then that depends on how much of a greater good you believe such actions would result in.
-
2 hours ago, waterboy 2.0 said:
However playing the population numbers game hides the real impacts of emissions per capita.... Not the number of kids any demographic/"race" has...
But it's another justification for inaction by some... Can't slay half the world.. Lol. Personally I think the Thanos solution is a crock of shit in regards to the current carbon balance (the issue) . Most likely help relieve several other enviro problems though pretty quickly
It's an individuals choice to accept, deny, do shit or surrender.... We are all gunna have to adapt regardless, and pay one way or another.
Western lifestyles are spreading the globe over at an alarming rate. Don't get me wrong it's good for those people to have a higher quality of life but the more people that get it the less the Earth can support. We can either have more people living a caveman type existence or we can have less people living in a high tech society. Either way balance will be reached so what is it you'd prefer? More people living a shit life or less people living a good one? Now if you pick less people as any sane person would due to the fact the memory of science and technology will inspire people to rebuild their lost societies, you still have to acknowledge that some people are going to continue breeding out of control unless their numbers are kept in check by force. You can forcibly sterilize them, you can bomb them, whatever, point is if you don't do something we're going to go back up to our current numbers in no time at all putting us in an even worse position than we're in now because absolutely everyone will be living like a western lifestyle and most likely to a higher degree than we do now.
But hey, let's assume I'm completely wrong as you don't believe it would make a difference. In your ideal world how would you go about fixing the issue? Make yourself emperor of Earth and your will gets done no matter what anyone else thinks. What do you do?
-
3 hours ago, waterboy 2.0 said:We scientists sound like a broken record. Every year we present the science and plead for action. Not nearly enough is being done. We can still tackle climate change, but we must act immediately. We have the means to make a difference, we lack only the will.
The only action that would have any real effect is an immediate reduction in the human population. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it. The hard part is setting a desirable number of people that we believe can live in harmony with the earth and the rest of it's inhabitants and then choosing who gets to live and die.
We're never going to have a technological solution that allows the human population to continue growing and sterilization of the masses is still picking and choosing but allowing the carnage to continue for the rest of their lives. We can't rely on mother nature to give us the solution in the form of a new flu or plague either as there's an extremely good chance we'll cure it before it lowers our numbers to acceptable levels and then due to it's indiscriminate nature we're just going to breed out of control again anyway.
So if you want to be real about it you need to find reasons why certain people should die. Given that it's a population issue the logical place to start is by looking at which groups of people are having more children than others. If your group is having say 6-8 kids per family on average like you see in a lot of African and Muslim nations that's considerably worse than what you see in a lot of western nations like Germany where they're having 1.3 children per family which is below the 2.1 children needed to maintain any given population. If you do not address this fundamental fact what's going to happen is that you'll get us to a billion people or whatever and then the problematic reproduction begins again which will bring us right back to where we started.
Now lets assume you can't bring yourself to be an eco nazi and want to preserve the other peoples and cultures of the planet. Your only option is to set hard numbers for every race and force them to kill their own using whatever criteria they judge to be fair for themselves and there needs to be harsh retaliation for refusing to keep to within their limits. The punishment would have to be so severe that they'd rather kill their own so essentially you're going to need to nuke them or worse otherwise they absolutely will not comply.
So how strongly do you believe that level of action should be taken? Literally no one will find it acceptable so buckle up kids because we're gonna watch the world burn.
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, Freakosystem said:It's Myxomycetes, a massive colony of individual unicellular orgsnisms functioning as a single organism and exhibiting incredible emergent properties. They are commonly called plasmodial slime molds.They are truly a fascinating group, unrelated to all other extant fungal species. Do an image search on them and be blown away.
There was no need to apply chemicsl fungicides here. The slime mold has been in your soil for a long time, but only when these cells congregate did they become visible. You should try to identify whether something is truly a pest or not before applying chemicals in my opinion.
You're right, I shouldn't panic and go full nuclear option at the first sign of something I don't understand. Still though it was climbing my cactus and needed to be told to fuck off.
-
I hit it hard but then it rained heavily last night which wasn't great. I'll hit the garden again today after it dries up but I think I hurt it all the same
-
HEEEEEEEELP!!!!!!
WTF IS this shit? It started over a period of like 6 hours and has spread to other pots as well
The layer I was meant to be able to peel back laughed at my attempt to reveal what was underneath so I gave it two caps to about 750mL to hit everything hard. I sprayed all my cacti so wish me luck.
I'll update again in the morning...
-
Today has been a good day. I scored a J2 x Psycho0 from @MountainGoat and some pupping cream and seeds from Makka Pakka's Night Garden.
It's also been a shit day. I hurt myself applying pupping cream to the vast majority of my cacti and then some filthy fucker attacked my cacti again. This time it happened to my beloved Crazy Spine
Oh well, the other cacti pulled through no problems and the pupping cream will bring about a massive replication of my garden in the near future so if those psychonaut cunts want to have a nibble and trip balls for the rest of the day they can have their nibble.
Pereskiopsis
in Wanted
Posted
If you're on facebook there's a guy David Styles whom I bought literally hundreds of pereskiopsis from and would highly recommend him to anyone.