Ao anh o sa mac

However, it wasn't what I expected. The author talks a lot about zen and being one with the earth. Overall it just didn't seem very practical or helpful. This is the complete review as it appears at my blog dedicated to reading, writing no 'rithmatic! Blog reviews often contain links which are not reproduced here, nor will updates or modifications to the blog review be replicated here. Graphic and children's reviews on the blog typically feature two or three images from the book's interior, which are not reproduced here.

Note that I don't really do stars. To me a book is either worth reading or it isn't. I can't rate it three- This is the complete review as it appears at my blog dedicated to reading, writing no 'rithmatic! I can't rate it three-fifths worth reading! The only reason I've relented and started putting stars up there is to credit the good ones, which were being unfairly uncredited.

So, all you'll ever see from me is a five-star or a one-star since no stars isn't a rating, unfortunately. The library had this book on a display about water use and smart farming. It sounded interesting, but turned out to be not so much once I started reading it. It was first published in , and unfortunately is filled with "Gaia" talk along the lines of the whole planet being one living, breathing entity and it's blabbering about spirit and stuff, which is odd given that the authors appears to be an atheist.

Some of what Fukuoka says makes sense, but none of what he says is ground-breaking or hitherto unknown.

The author's main thesis seems to be that plants which have grown wild and become used to local conditions will do better than artificially engineered or bred plants. Well duhh! The books seems full of contradiction, too. He talks on the one hand of naturally revitalizing areas which human depredation have rendered waste land, yet he derides attempts to irrigate those same areas and grow plants. Either growing stuff there will contribute to increased rainfall, as he advocates, or it will achieve nothing, as he also claims in deriding these projects!

He doesn't seem to grasp that increased rainfall won't automatically precipitate just because you plant seeds and get a few plants growing. There are climactic, geographical, and topological reasons for rainfall or the lack of it. No one ruined the land to create the Sahara.

That happened perfectly naturally. In other instances he repeatedly says there are no bad insects - such as on page 43, where the page title is "In Nature There are No Beneficial or Harmful Insects" which is such patent bullshit that it would definitely fertilize crops organically. Later, he talks of protecting plants from insects and disease - such as on p93 protect the seeds from animals and insects , p susceptible to insects and disease , and p more resistant to insects and disease.

If there are no bad insects and no disease, why must we protect plants?! This scatter-brained approach to writing undermines everything he says. Another contradiction lay in his relation of a story about an orchard on his family's farm. On the one hand, later in the book, he talks about letting nature work in our favor instead of fighting it, but at the start of chapter one, he tells us of this orchard which as a young man, he left to its own devices purely from his own laziness i.

The result was that trees died. What he did was natural farming - not doing anything to the trees and letting nature take its course, yet immediately after telling us this story of the dead trees, he then claims what he did wasn't natural farming! He makes no sense. He doesn't even revisit this to explain to us what he ought to have done - how the death of his two hundred apple trees could have been avoided.

The book is all over the place and full of unsupported anecdote. Repeated tales of the nature, "I did X and got a wonderful result Y" do not explain anything, or support his thesis - whatever that was supposed to be he never really makes it clear other than to say nature knows best which is patently obvious. There are a lot of people who urge us to go back to nature, back to organic, back to the land, but not a one of them addresses the massive increase in farming yields brought about by modern farming methods or how we're to feed seven billion people by living as hunter gatherers.

Admittedly a lot of the bounty produced by modern farming techniques unfortunately goes to waste or to feed animals instead of feeding starving people, but you can't argue with the yield which is far higher than nature's original versions of the fruits and grains ever was.

• Những thành phần của vòng tuần hoàn nước.
• Customize ESPN.
• In Desert and Wilderness?
• open ape file on mac!

The truth is that there is nothing that we farm which is 'natural' - defined as 'exists in this form in nature'. Everything out there is a result of genetic manipulation - except that the purists are too dishonest to call it that. The food we enjoy was originally not manipulated in a lab in the manner in which modern agribusiness pursues those same aims, but it certainly was genetically manipulated for quantity and size over many years by farmers.

Fukuoka is absolutely right in his assertion that no gods or Buddhas will save us. The plain fact is that no gods have ever saved us or ever will; it's in our hands, and we've screwed it up, but vague appeals to some non-existent, nebulous 'golden past' will not save us either.

Tóc Tiên, Bảo Anh hở bạo gây tranh cãi, H’hen Niê lọt top sao xấu vì trang điểm

Neither will claims that there are no parasites and harmful insects. Yes, there are! Nature is indeed red in tooth and claw - and in virus and parasite. That doesn't mean we've been smart in attacking these problems, but sticking our fingers in your ears and chanting "Gaia will save us! Gaia will save us" doesn't work either.

If it did, humanity would not have been almost wiped out a few thousand years ago - and Homo sapiens wouldn't be the only human species remaining on the planet. Everything save for about one percent of all living things has been wiped out, and none save the most recent of those were wiped out because ancient Middle-East farmers genetically manipulated crops or laid waste to land, or because Cro-Magnon people used chemical farming methods. Fukuoka is woefully ignorant about evolution, and anyone who ignores or misunderstands those particular facts of life is doomed.

Yes creationists, I'm looking at you. There was no oxygen on Earth when life first began. No free oxygen, that is - it was bound up in minerals and compounds. Contrary to Fukuoka's evident belief, it was life which produced the very oxygen which in the end killed life. Only those organisms which had mutations which could handle this highly poisonous and dangerously corrosive gas - a waste product back then - survived to go on to evolve into what we see today.

The old life - the anaerobic life as we now know it - exists only in obscure, out-of-the-way locations these days, buried in mud, hidden away from the deadly oxygen which would lay waste to it. Yes, modern life lived on the excrement of anaerobic life! At one point in this book p86 there's a footnote which declares that Fukuoka is not saying his orchard was grown on a desert, yet less than a dozen pages later p97 , he says in the text "You may think it reckless for me to say that we can revegetate the desert.

Although I have confirmed the theory in my own mind and in my orchard And good luck with confirming a theory in your own mind very scientific! The problem is that he never actually defines desert so we don't know if he views a desert in the way in which deserts are commonly defined through rainfall or lack thereof , or if he merely means impoverished land or land to which waste has been laid in one way or another. He appears never to have heard of the dangers of invasive species either in his advocating taking seeds from Thailand to plant in India to revegetate the deserts there.

India has no native vegetation that would serve this purpose? So no, I have no faith in what this author claims except in the very vaguest of terms: I refuse to recommend this book. May 12, chuoibantho rated it liked it. This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. Jul 09, MyNguyen rated it it was amazing. Fukuoka is a Japanese farmer and philosopher who largely coined the term natural farming.

Natural farming is an approach to farming that eliminates the use of manufactured inputs and equipment, and instead, leverages the work of nature and ecosystems. Fukuoka claims that natural farming provides yield Fukuoka is a Japanese farmer and philosopher who largely coined the term natural farming. Fukuoka claims that natural farming provides yields to the same extent to that of conventional farming, with the enormous benefit of having no negative impacts on the environment. Unfortunately, however, his claims and supporting evidence are almost entirely anecdotal.

Going further, Fukuoka rejects scientific research, and thinks human knowledge is useless.

As a researcher, I find this perspective a bit hard to hear. However, I imagine his perspective may be partly emotionally influenced, perhaps stemming from his frustration with conventional farming systems and the environmental degradation it has caused. While I would have preferred more credible evidence to support his claims, I have much respect for Fukuoka. He challenged the norm and made me think a bit differently about how we grow our food.

This book is informally organized into two sections. The first is an overview of Fukuoka's philosophies regarding re-greening the man-made deserts of the earth. The second is part of the story of how he came to these philosophies, where he has seen them work, and how he himself applied them. When I started reading the first part seemed a bit preachy and out of character for Fukuoka. It was not until I finished reading the book that I understood why it was presented in that way. Maybe it could ha This book is informally organized into two sections. Maybe it could have been better organized but the text is sounds and the philosophies are reasonable, even if sometimes a bit ethereal.

The book is profound and inspiring just as one would expect from Mr. I would suggest a read, especially if you enjoyed The One Straw Revolution, just don't get lost in the first part and you will come to understand his message. Sep 15, Trang rated it it was amazing. It made me think, "We might just be able to save this world. Highly recommend to anyone who cares to restore our soil and bloom the deserts again. A pleasure to read! Masanobu Fukuoka was a farmer and philosopher who first became a leader in the worldwide sustainable agriculture movement with the release of The One-Straw Revolution in Sowing Seeds in the Desert seems to build off of his introduction to his farming techniques, but is still easily accessible and understandable for those, such as myself, who have not read his previous works.

The book begins with some history to help the reader understand Fukuoka's life; his world, spiritual, political, and Masanobu Fukuoka was a farmer and philosopher who first became a leader in the worldwide sustainable agriculture movement with the release of The One-Straw Revolution in The book begins with some history to help the reader understand Fukuoka's life; his world, spiritual, political, and economic views.

The actual agricultural discussion does not begin until page 60, so be ready for that I found his philosophical beliefs very intriguing and thought-provoking, even if a little too paradoxical at times; I only make note of the length of this section because neither the book's title or subtitle hint at anything beyond practical knowledge. Fukuoka has not conducted any controlled studies but instead relies largely on the extremely successful restoration of his own farm and his experiences in other countries specifically the United States, Africa, India, and the Philippines.

In a nutshell, Fukuoka opposes everything about modern farming techniques - monoculture, artificial crossbreeding, pesticides, tilling, fertilizers, dams and irrigation canals, deforestation, and the change from perennials to annuals - and does not view organic farming as much different from industrial farming because "they both begin by addressing the same question: Similar to modern pharmaceuticals' concern with addressing symptoms over causes, Fukuoka explains that humankind's current approaches to farming and global restoration are only delaying the inevitable depletion of the world's soil.

Tuần hoàn nước - The Water Cycle, Vietnamese, from USGS Water-Science School

After following Fukuoka's travels and vicariously seeing multiple examples of mistaken agricultural practices and the benefits of true natural farming in places where these methods have already been implemented, it becomes clear that he is on to something profound and yet so simple that the only explanation for our nations' slow progress in revegetation has to be control and money.

Fortunately, Fukuoka details the "ideal natural farm" for individuals, and the appendices starting on page go into the specific details on how to start a natural farm. Those looking solely for step-by-step instruction may be disappointed with the more narrative-style of the pages prior, but as editor once-apprentice Larry Korn states in his introduction, "[Mr. Fukuoka's] philosophy was everything, and the farming was merely an example of the philosophy. At first, I was disappointed by the lack of detail when it came to Fukuoka's plans to reverse desertification. But then I recalled Larry Korn's words in the book's introduction: Fukuoka told us over and over that the philosophy was everything, and the farming was merely an example of the philosophy" xxi.

This book deals quite heavily with Fukuoka's philosophy. His statements are entwined with a few anecdotes that--in my mind--often a have loose connection with what he is trying to say. ESPN Deportes. The Undefeated. SEC Network. ESPN Fantasy. NFL Mock Draft: ESPN Illustration. NFL experts predict: Kyler Murray's perfect fit in draft. Harden says streak reflects necessity of situation 'Trash' talk: Clemson on top.

Contenders, playoff hopefuls and lottery dreamers to watch down the stretch Are LeBron and the Lakers in trouble? Harden acknowledges it's hard not to hear critics. Virginia's Kyle Guy leads the way with 23 points. Ovo je jedna od onih knjiga za koju su mi vezana najranija secanja kada mi je baka citala knjige posto sam nisam znao da citam. Samim tim tesko mi je da budemobjektivan sa ovakvim stavrima pa necu ni biti: P Knjiga je odlicna avanturisticna prica za mladju ali i stariju publiku koja prikazuje sve lepote i strahote kada se nadjemo izgubljeni u opasnim delovima sveta.

Likova nema puno i u sustini nisu previse duboki ili razradjeni sem nasih junaka ali to ovde ne pretstavlja problem posto fokus i ni Ovo je jedna od onih knjiga za koju su mi vezana najranija secanja kada mi je baka citala knjige posto sam nisam znao da citam. Likova nema puno i u sustini nisu previse duboki ili razradjeni sem nasih junaka ali to ovde ne pretstavlja problem posto fokus i nije na ljudskim odnosima kolko samo na putovanju i prezivljavanju. Naravno knjiga je pisana u drugacijem dobu i lako bi moglo da se desi da ljudi osetljivi na politicku korektnost osude ovu knjigu posto su belci prikazani u dosta povoljnijem svetlu nego drugi.

Meni nije smetalo al opet ja i nisam osteljiv na takve stvari al za nekog bi to mogla biti mana. Drugi problem koji sam imao nije vezan za samu pricu nego za izdanje koje sam ja citao izdavaca JRJ iz Tolko gresaka, ponavljajucih reci i lose prevedenih delova de nekada uopste nema smisla odavno nisam naleteo sem u dnevnim novinama i lektorku koja je bila zaduzena za ovo licno nikada vise ne bih hteo zaposlim. Sramota posto takve gluposti prosto izbacuju iz uzivanja na svakih 10tak strana.

Ako mozete nadjite neko od ranijih izdanja iz 80tih posto se onda daleko vise vodilo racuna na kvalitet izdanja nego danas izgleda. View all 4 comments. This book brings me back to my childhood: Nov 10, Jennifer rated it it was amazing Shelves: I found the movie on Netflix last year and then saw it was based on a book. It was written in Polish about and translated in It was really gripping and kept me thinking what else is going to happen and how are they going to get out of that situation.

I like books like this and Out of Africa that have little conversations in a language I know because I feel like I have an insight that the average reader doesn't know. There were a few parts that didn't use quite the right words in the t I found the movie on Netflix last year and then saw it was based on a book. There were a few parts that didn't use quite the right words in the translation, but maybe that's how English speakers did talk years ago. Also, I don't know if the translator was British or American. In Polish "Pan" means Mister. I wish they would have just written Mr. In Swahili "bwana" is mister or sir but also God when capitalized.

• convert ps file to pdf mac.
• Các Tiểu vương quốc Ả Rập Thống nhất – Wikivoyage?
• mac hello kitty brush set original!
• Trình đơn chuyển hướng.

I think then it's important to keep Kali calling Stas Bwana Kubwa. View 1 comment. Prima data am citit-o cand aveam 13 ani. Mi-aduc aminte ca am descoperit-o in biblioteca sateasca si am avut o oarecare reticenta in privinta subiectului si a autorului Nu stiam eu pe atunci cine este Sienkiewicz: Talentul de prozator al lui Sienkewicz a creat o capodopera care trebuie sa fie in biblioteca fiecaruia! Dec 12, Arminion rated it did not like it Shelves: I had this book on my shelf for a very very long time.

My grandmother used to tell me to read this book, it was one of her favorite books for children. But I always found something else to do or read. Until now, 20 years later. I couldn't finish this book. Right from the first page I knew this book wasn't for me. When I heard that 14 year old kid talk like a 34 year old politician I almost fell asleep from boredom.

This is a kid's book for God's sake! Why do we keep reading about this political a I had this book on my shelf for a very very long time. Why do we keep reading about this political and social affairs in Egypt, Sudan and other African countries? If I found it boring, I can only imagine what would a 10 year old think about this. And the main character, Stasio is described as the super duper ultimate hero - he speaks dozen of languages, he swims like no other, he writes, he reads, he is a master marksman etc, etc. It was just annoying. I could buy it if he was like 20 or something, but a 14 year old kid?

And just by those traits I could already tell that he would pass any obstacle in the "desert and wilderness", probably saving the entire country from civil war. I don't know, maybe if I was younger, I would have enjoyed this book, but as it is, it was just boring drivel. It never really felt like a children's book. So, I'm sorry grandma, but this book will remain on my shelf, unread, gathering dust like it always has.

Trình đơn chuyển hướng

View all 3 comments. I can't stand its racism. I can't bear its kids talking and acting like adults. It's too bad to finish reading. Jun 01, Jana rated it it was ok Shelves: I had this University professor who was obsessed with this book. He had all major psychological problems, we students had a tendency to develop them as well. If I had to put it in any category, it would be, college memories. Except that, I don't really like it.

In other circumstances, maybe I would love it. But, not in this life. May 03, Andrew Clement rated it it was amazing. This classic novel has been my favorite novel since I first read it at the age of I've read it three or four times since then in both English and the original Polish and have enjoyed it more every time I do.