mycorrhizae tolerance to fertilizer

Eric Grunden egrunden at
Tue Dec 31 00:22:32 EST 1996

In a previous article, gdwill at (Garry Williams) says:

>Frankly, I don't see any difference in tone between "Your extreme
>bitterness about the grant process..." and "E.Grunden is still stuck
>in the old..." Perhaps one or both of you see it differently, but I
>thought each was merely stating what s/he thinks to be the case. Had
>poster X stated that poster Y was a slime sucking maggot, I could see
>one calling it a personal flame attack, however from here it just
>looks like one party is pointing out a difference of opinion from the
>other party. How is this a  "personal flame attack"?


You are correct, there is no difference. My statement was written 
in frustration after time and again "Dr." Rateaver used my name
in association with statements like "assonine", "silliest thing
I ever heard", "idiotic", and after his prolonged bashing of 
academia. If he wants to discuss mycorrhizae, fine. If he wants
to foward discourteous comments and vent hostility, I recommend
he try alt.bitterness.


>What happened to the exchange of ideas and information? If someone
>doesn't agree with you, you just run away instead of answering the

Yes, that's what I asked.  Questions? I didn't see any. Only answers
that insinuate that academia's answers are too biased by the chemical
industry to be true. I recognize that I am only a student, and that he
supposedly has all this experience he speaks about, but the majority of 
his statements are so far from the realities that I've experienced thus
far, that I don't even know how to begin to reply. Plus he uses some 
strange esoteric logic (ie. mycorrhizae didn't evolve..... they are a
part of all creation...) that I don't understand.


>I for one am deeply disappointed. How am I supposed to get
>a balanced point of view and enough information to make informed
>decisions when those that are supposed to know the most take all their
>marbles and go home just because they thought someone called them a
>"bad" name?   =:o  I hope that you aren't really as thin-skinned as
>you lead us to believe with the above paragraph and that you will do
>us the honor of replying to the points made by Dr. Rateaver (and not
>to any real or imagined personal barbs). As a volunteer Master
>Gardener I have hands-on experience with several different approaches
>to growing plants, and I hoped to learn some more of the theory behind
>these methods by listening to the debates of my betters, but now it
>seems as if I and others will be denied that opportunity because
>stroking the human ego is more important than honest, open discussion
>of scientific information and ideas. What a shame!


Okay, fair enough. I too desire a well balanced point of view from my
betters. I realize that I appear the bad guy, opposed to organic methods 
and wanting to pollute the planet, in this thread. I assure you that is 
not the case. As I've stated previously, I would love to see mycorrhizae 
(and mycoparasites) incorporated as biological methods in agronomic 
operations. I have only tried to be a realist based on my very limited 
knowledge and experience. My ego does not need stroked, but it also does 
not need to be called an idiot either. I will go back and read the post 
that you mention and consider whether to give my comments or not. 
Meanwhile, I would like to hear any and all ideas about specific 
research that you all feel needs to be done to clear up the controversy
on the topic. I will be starting grad. school next fall, and will
most likely be focussing my research on mycorrhizae. I guarentee that
I do not accept money from the chemical companies, unless the Pell Grant 
and student loan programs are in on the conspiracy as well  ;> 

The Spirit of Nature, a powerful force,
	belongs and returns to its creative source.
- Excerpted from The Collective Works of Johnny Pokerface -

More information about the Plantbio mailing list