Your least favorite thing about Winter? (homes, homeless, foods)

[Glenfield]

Originally Posted by ScrappyJoe

Once again, when it comes to poor soils, it's entirely a matter on whether or not the deficiencies are addressed. But, do note that with "temperate climates," they are referring more to mild winter areas like California, not really the Midwest.

So the soil of the rain forest is fertile if you add a bunch of fertilizer. Duh.

Temperate climate zone is the area between 35 and 50 degrees north and south latitudes, between sub-tropical and sub-Arctic zones. That would include California and all of the Midwest.

I get that you have some kind of chip on your shoulder about the Midwest, Scrappy, but your points are nonsensical.

Nice trolling exercise.

[TimtheGuy]

“Other”

Wind

[TimtheGuy]

Originally Posted by ScrappyJoe

Nah, so far the deficiencies are taken care of, the subtropical and tropical agriculture blows away anything seen up North. Even though the soil is richer, the colder climate up North truly limits the variety of useful crops that can be grown - no avocados, mangoes, bananas, papayas, etc being grown up North.

And as far as the natural landscape, you can easily pave over the entire Minnesota ecosystem without losing anything of value. Not the case with the tropics, where the forests are dripping with rich, unique biodiversity.

How about civilizations? Why didn't we see Aztec-level civilizations arise up in Minnesota? Why were they all south of the Rio Grande, in tropical Mexico and South America?

It's pretty clear that snow and cold is detrimental to a landscape with regards to productivity, and quality of life. Just some food for thought.

Weird because MN is toward the top or at the top of every U.S. quality of life article or survey I have ever seen. And 2/3rds of the land in MN is very productive as are the people.

[kemahkami]

Originally Posted by Glenfield

So the soil of the rain forest is fertile if you add a bunch of fertilizer. Duh.

Exactly. So as long as that issue is addressed, the tropical agriculture will blow away anything up North, with the power of the warm climate being utilized.

Temperate climate zone is the area between 35 and 50 degrees north and south latitudes, between sub-tropical and sub-Arctic zones. That would include California and all of the Midwest.

No, we're talking specifically about the portions where agriculture thrives. And that would be the warmer parts of the zone, not the Midwest.

I get that you have some kind of chip on your shoulder about the Midwest, Scrappy, but your points are nonsensical.

Nice trolling exercise.

Nope, that's just pure projection on your part. Keep it up, we'll have a cinema real soon.

[Glenfield]

Originally Posted by ScrappyJoe

No, we're talking specifically about the portions where agriculture thrives. And that would be the warmer parts of the zone, not the Midwest.

Scrappy says agriculture doesn’t thrive in the Midwest. I think that statement speaks volumes about Scrappy’s knowledge of agriculture and the Midwest.

[TimtheGuy]

Originally Posted by Glenfield

Scrappy says agriculture doesn’t thrive in the Midwest. I think that statement speaks volumes about Scrappy’s knowledge of agriculture and the Midwest.

I guess he has never heard of Cargill or ADM or CHS.

[jennifat]

Originally Posted by ScrappyJoe

Nah, so far the deficiencies are taken care of, the subtropical and tropical agriculture blows away anything seen up North. Even though the soil is richer, the colder climate up North truly limits the variety of useful crops that can be grown - no avocados, mangoes, bananas, papayas, etc being grown up North.

Can you explain to me how tropical fruits are more "useful" than the world's most important staple foods like potatoes, corn, wheat, beans, soy, etc., all of which are grown in the "barren wasteland" of the Midwest?

Originally Posted by ScrappyJoe

And as far as the natural landscape, you can easily pave over the entire Minnesota ecosystem without losing anything of value. Not the case with the tropics, where the forests are dripping with rich, unique biodiversity.

So you're saying that biodiversity in one part of the world is less important than biodiversity in another? Let's just pave over the Arctic, where there's relatively little biodiversity (we'll pretend it's not mostly ocean/ice cap). No unique species there that face imminent extinction. No siree.

Originally Posted by ScrappyJoe

How about civilizations? Why didn't we see Aztec-level civilizations arise up in Minnesota? Why were they all south of the Rio Grande, in tropical Mexico and South America?

Because they didn't have the resources, the knowledge, or technology needed to colonize. There's a reason why most of the world's tropical regions are still profoundly impoverished.

[Ghengis]

the annual clean-up of the softie's bodies that fell over and died along the streets, still clutching their ice scrapers

[slamont61]

... yet I'm thinking instead - what should I be planting in this FROZEN environment in order to obtain the technology needed to colonize rural MN or turn it into a bio diverse region?

[Kavalier]

Still no votes for snow. I actually like it cold - being cold is better than sweating your back off. There is nothing worse than thick humidity.