Re: pearl's list update

On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 13:50:06 -0000, "pearl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>"swamp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Tue, 2 Dec 2003 14:10:58 -0000, "pearl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >"swamp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> On Tue, 2 Dec 2003 03:25:39 -0000, "pearl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >> wrote:
>> ><..>
>> >> >Support your claims.
>> >>
>> >> I have. You've got a minimum of 60 milliion calories *per head* of
>> >> cattle to account for. Find something wrong w/ my math. I
>> >> double-checked and my numbers work out fine.
>> >
>> >O.k.
>>
>> ok for me, bad for your calculations.
>>
>> [reresnip of bad math and misapplied data]
>
>You keep on running from the data, swamp.  No surprise.

"Ignoring the manure" would be the more appropriate phrase.

>> I told you I wasn't going to find your mistakes for you, but I'll give
>> you a hint. Protein and calorie percentages *by weight* increase
>> dramatically when you remove the water.
>
>You don't say.
>
>We have to find weight before we can calculate calories.
>
>> [snip]
>
>Running so fast you indicated snipping the same paragraph twice.

It wasn't any better the second time.

[snip]

>Scary data, huh.

I trust the rancher I talked to more than your "data." He has no
reason to distort the numbers. He said the *most* ration a steer would
eat is 6000 lbs., and that would only be if the animal were on the
feedlot from weaning to slaughter.

>> >That indicates that liveweight gain in the older animal aged 1-2
>> >years, from 800 - 1200lbs, is on average 1.09lb a day, not 3.
>>
>> So, naturally you chose the older animal to represent all livestock?
>
>To remind you- I'm calculating feedlot or high concentrate feed, to gain.
>
>> Not very honest of you, was it?
>
>You're crazy.

That's what they said about Son of Sam. How many websites did you look
thru before you chose the one which presented the best results for the
outcome you desired?

>> Another hint: at maturity mammals stop gaining weight.
>
>We know that.  What happens to all those calories they eat then?

I assume they would eat less or get fat. Of course, there aren't a
whole lot of elderly beef cattle running around now, are there?

>> >Of which _liveweight gain_, meat protein [DM] is only about 6.9%.*
>>
>> Remember the hint? You can take the water out of the ration, but not
>> out of the steer.
>
>Yes, water.  An increasingly scarce resource.  We can look at feed:beef
>with water content if you prefer.

Sure, and let's look at water consumption in rice and soya production
while we're at it. Livestock consume miniscule amounts of water in the
grand scheme of things. It's a non-issue.

>> [snip]
>
>Run, rabbit, run.
>
>---restore---
>'In addition to hay or silage, their rations can gradually be increased
>from 1.3kg (3lb) of Beef Finishing Pencils a day, up to 3.5 to 4.5 kg
>(8 or 10lb) for the older animals. Silage may be increased from 9kg
>(20lb) a day, up to a maximum of about 22kg. (30lbs)
>http://www.allenandpage.com/smallholders/healthcare/cattle1.htm
>---end---

<yawn> Your sources Allen and Page aren't exactly math wizards either.
22kg is equivalent to ~50 lbs, not 30. Why should we assume the other
numbers they give are accurate?

>> >Looks like my estimates were a gross UNDER-estimation.
>>
>> Nope, your estimates are a gross *over* estimation.
>
>Not so.  The data you keep snipping indicates appalling waste.

No, it indicates appalling math and leads to a ratio which is
impossibly high. Ground chuck would cost $30 a pound if your numbers
were right.

>> Otherwise, there wouldn't be mammals.
>
>That's the way it's going.

Last time I looked they seemed to be doing just fine.

>> >How many light-bulbs, swamp?
>>
>> How many amps does a 100 watt lightbulb draw in the UK, Pearl?
>
>Ask Ray.

I didn't think you'd answer, and don't believe you're qualified to
crunch numbers, even if the numbers themselves are accurate.

>> [snip]
>
>A veritable marathon!
>
>---restore---

[unrestore]

Haven't you figured it out yet? I don't care how many "data" you pull
from various websites to show your 80:1 ratio correct. I *know* from a
very basic understanding of physics that the figure is impossible. If
you'd tried for 15:1 or even 20:1 I might look at your math and tell
you where you went wrong, but at 80:1 you went wrong everywhere.

>> >24.74 lbs of meat protein for a year's hard work, confinement,
>> >slaughter, resources!  Waste, waste, waste, and yet more waste.
>>
>> For the average steer, the numbers are closer to 150 days of eating
>> 20-30 lbs. of ration and grazing, and gaining 2-3 lbs/day.
>
>>From eight to thirteen months old, possibly.  The average for one
>to two year olds is 1.01 lbs liveweight gain per day, on an average
>31 lbs of medium concentrate ration (6.5lbs grain + 25lbs silage).
>(See data you keep running from).

Then the average 1-2 y/o must be made of napalm. Either that or we're
back to explosive cow pies again. At 30:1 your 1 lb/day gain leaves
~17kcal unaccounted for even if all the gain is calorie-rich fat
(5kcal/lb).

>> Why do you ar/evs distrust Ma Nature so much?
>
>Not Nature, ignorant, gluttonous, greedy, shortsighted humans.

Even the ones who'd turn a natural pasture like US prairie land into
crop land?

-- swamp