063: Gardening Myths With Robert Pavlis: Part 2

063: Gardening Myths With Robert Pavlis: Part 2

065: Building Natural Ponds with Robert Pavlis

065 : Building Natural Ponds with Robert Pavlis

June 23, 2018 Comments (2) General Gardening, Podcast

064 : Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc

MG064 - Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc

We all seek to explain our gardening successes and failures to get better results in the future, but our reasoning is not always sound. In this episode I’m going a little outside the gardening world to talk about logic and reasoning, and how to apply some basic logic and scientific method to solving problems in the garden.

2 Responses to 064 : Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc

  1. Anne says:

    You made some good points, and I definitely agree that there is so much going on in the environment, under, on, and above the ground that we don’t begin to know about. The best we can do is observe regularly and deeply, test, and observe patterns – or read research that looks at patterns. I also believe in the power of mind/intention as in quantum physics. Not that my wishing can make things happen! And while you’re on this subject, you might check this out on using pressure treated wood in making garden beds (you made an off-the-cuff comment on the last podcast you put onto youtube): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCXDo1Qjdm8

    I did have to throw in something unscientific, though: What I’ve heard is that marigolds are a sacrificial plant so that the slugs go for that instead of your kale – or at least don’t decimate your kale. I can’t begin to test that because I can’t get marigolds to grow in my garden!

    • Greg Auton says:

      Thanks Anne. Thanks for the comment. I have mixed feelings about the “sacrificial plant” approach. It assumes that there are a finite number of pests, and that they will go for your sacrificial plant instead of your “food” plant, as though there is some contract with the insect. What the argument does not account for is the contingency that more pests will show up (do to the abundance of edible plants that they like), and that they will proliferate and eat everything (which has been my experience). With regard to AUGSOS’s argument/research, I agree with the observation that leachate levels are relatively low with ACQ, and that copper is not a big problem. With all that being said; neither AUGSOS’s (small sample) research, nor any peer reviewed research I can find speaks to the effect of on overall soil health; it just speaks to whether the leachate is within “acceptable limits”. So, for me, there’s still more work to be done, and given that it costs more, and will rot anyway over time, I prefer to use other materials; especially given that many are free. Everything I use goes back into the soil. I could not conceive of pouring a gallon of ACQ into any of my gardens, as it would definitely do no good (would not feed the soil); so for me, there is no benefit and only potential risk. I hope that helps. In the end, it’s your garden so do what seems best. Happy gardening, and thank you so much for listening and your comment.

Leave a Reply to Anne Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *