Nexus - 1002 - New Times Magazine-pages

Page Content (OCR)

Graeme: One more question about measuring paramagnet- Graeme: That's interesting, considering the fact that ism with your meter: how do you differentiate between ferro- Roundup is always promoted as biodegradable. magnetism and paramagnetism, when both affect the meter Phil: It may biodegrade eventually, but it's never specified reading? how long this may take. The fact is that residues remain for Phil: Yes, that is a problem. Obviously, the ideal is a mater- many months. Earthworms don't like the stuff. Darwin himself ial with low iron levels and a high paramagnetic reading. stated that anything that will kill a plant will also affect Graeme: We work with a scoria/crushed lava product called earthworms. As I said, herbicides are far worse than Nutri-Score, with a reading of over 3,000 cgs, but it only has insecticides. 7.0 ppm of iron. We often combine it with other materials with Graeme: We have been promoting the concept of using water-holding capacity, like the soft rock phosphate and humic acid with herbicides to tie up residues and reduce ongo- humates, and then pump a microbial inoculant into the blend. ing damage. Are you familiar with this idea? When the scoria fines are part of the blend, the microbe count Phil: Yes; it's definitely a good concept. I think Arden and jumps from 1.0 billion per gram to 2.5 billion per gram. Phil Wheeler are promoting similar ideas. Phil Wheeler is a Phil: That's right. It works every time, but in the soil you brilliant young physicist and a great teacher, but he tells me he have to remember that you still need all of the chemicals in the __ really has to take it easy when he is talking about paramagnet- right balance. You will still need nutrition to benefit from para- ism, because it is such a strange idea that it tends to alienate magnetism. It's part of a bigger picture. Science is supposed to _ people. study nature. When you see something happen, you experiment Graeme: I disagree with Phil [Wheeler] on that score. I with it. Then you try to engineer it. This is when the maths agree that Phil is a highly credible communicator, but his work comes in, but it should come in after the experiments, not with radionics has far more alienating potential than the concept before. Thousands of researchers sit around theorising with of paramagnetism. Your PCSM takes the "witchcraft" out of computers. That's not the way science is supposed to work. the picture. This meter is 100% reliable. If you have a good, Graeme: One other thing we've noticed is that paramagnetic highly productive soil, it will always produce a high score on levels are usually higher on elevated ground. Even in the the meter. Conversely, if you have a problem area, then there Queensland case, where levels var- will always be a much lower ied between 3,000 and 10,000 cgs, reading. the higher readings were found at By contrast, it is a fairly hard sell an altitude of just 400 to 500 feet. to tell a conventional grower that he What is the explanation of this? can post a Polaroid photo of his crop Phil: When the volcano goes ' woe to the other side of the world and his off, the magma comes up from the lf you don't have a minimum problems will be diagnosed. It may bottom. It forms droplets and is i be true, but it is definitely more of a charged up with oxygen. When it level of Supe matter, fringe-dwelling concept than para- drops back down, more of it will paramagnetism doesn t work. magnetism. Paramagnetism is now land near the top of the cone. The wind gets hold of it and spreads it more thinly elsewhere. The weaker stuff will always be at the bottom. provable using your meter. I feel that it's been completely removed from the mystical realm. Phil: Yes, it's good, solid physics. Even electrical engineers take one look at this meter and say, WEEDS, HERBICIDES AND ELECTRONICS "God, that's it!" With radionics there is one main problem: Graeme: In your book, you make a statement about the pur- when you start trying to make a human being into an antenna, pose of weeds. You suggest that weeds are present when nutri- you've got troubles because you can't tune a human being. One ents are missing and that they serve the function of nutrient might measure 200,000 ohms resistance, and another measures recycling, bringing up nutrients from down deep and often actu- 500,000 ohms. When you're trying to match an antenna to a ally increasing paramagnetic levels. transmitter, this is a big problem. A scanner is essentially an Phil: Yes, that's correct. They are a deficiency signpost, and impedance box, except in that case you have a stable antenna they do recycle. The increased paramagnetism is to do with the and a stable transmitter. Scanners are incredibly operator- extra minerals and the extra oxygen allowed into the soil when dependent. Selling one of these things to me would be like weeds help condition the soil. selling me a violin and wanting me to play "Danny Boy" on it. Graeme: But when you weigh up the nutrient and moisture I don't have a musical ear. Some people—dowsers, for competition related to having weeds in your crop, do you still example—are very sensitive to radionics, but the majority of consider that we can live with them? people cannot reliably operate a scanner, and that is the major Phil: Often we can. There are many times when we overes- problem with this technology. timate the competition caused by weeds. We also have to look Graeme: Is there any hope of developing a reliable scanner at the alternative, which is herbicide. All herbicides kill micro- which is not dependent on the human antenna? organisms. Weed killers are far worse than insecticides in this Phil: Yes, there is, and I'm working on a prototype at the regard. moment. It's a remarkably simple idea, which should cost a Graeme: You have mentioned the negative aspects of herbi- _ fraction of the current cost for scanners when I've perfected it. cides. How does no-till farming rate with you in this regard? Graeme: You certainly managed to reduce the cost of para- No-till farmers are some of the biggest herbicide users. magnetic meters by several hundred per cent with your PCSM. Phil: Well, I must agree. Herbicides ruin no-till. All herbi- What is the history of the development of that meter? cides kill micro-organisms. Some of them are more destructive Phil: Well, I knew what I wanted but I wasn't capable of than others. Atrazine is probably the worst, but Roundup is wiring it up. I had to bring in an electrical engineer, Ed also a killer. O'Brien, the head of an electrical engineering department. If you don't have a minimum level of organic matter, paramagnetism doesn't work. a WEEDS, HERBICIDES AND ELECTRONICS Graeme: In your book, you make a statement about the pur- pose of weeds. You suggest that weeds are present when nutri- ents are missing and that they serve the function of nutrient recycling, bringing up nutrients from down deep and often actu- ally increasing paramagnetic levels. Phil: Yes, that's correct. They are a deficiency signpost, and they do recycle. The increased paramagnetism is to do with the extra minerals and the extra oxygen allowed into the soil when weeds help condition the soil. Graeme: But when you weigh up the nutrient and moisture competition related to having weeds in your crop, do you still consider that we can live with them? Phil: Often we can. There are many times when we overes- timate the competition caused by weeds. We also have to look at the alternative, which is herbicide. All herbicides kill micro- organisms. Weed killers are far worse than insecticides in this regard. Graeme: You have mentioned the negative aspects of herbi- cides. How does no-till farming rate with you in this regard? No-till farmers are some of the biggest herbicide users. Phil: Well, I must agree. Herbicides ruin no-till. All herbi- cides kill micro-organisms. Some of them are more destructive than others. Atrazine is probably the worst, but Roundup is also a killer. 38 + NEXUS www.nexusmagazine.com FEBRUARY — MARCH 2003