Paradigm Shifts – Witnessing the Evolution of a New Agriculture

Paradigm Shifts – Witnessing the Evolution of a New Agriculture

These past months, in my travels around the globe, I have witnessed an increased hunger for change, where food producers are reconsidering their impact upon soil, plant, animal, human and planetary health. Food production has always been the single most important profession and now farmers seem to be increasingly recognising the importance of their role and the far reaching implications of their decisions. In this article, I will consider some of the key factors driving this change.

Old Science vs New Science

Modern science remains governed by Newtonian principles, the science of the big visible world. Here, the cell is seen as a machine, a collection of working parts. If you understand the machine, then you can fix the parts and reap the rewards. This, of course, is the basic premise behind the massive pharmaceutical industry and it really is the essence of medical, veterinarian and agricultural science. The central philosophy here is that things exist independently of each other. Our constant striving to master nature is based upon a mechanistic model where we have simplified complex interrelationships. When we simplify nutrition down to three minerals or treat symptoms with chemicals rather than addressing root causes, we are ignoring interconnectedness. This sense of separateness can be linked to many of the current problems in agriculture. The new science of quantum physics has much to offer a more integrated, holistic approach to agriculture. In fact, the dynamic, emerging field of “energy agriculture” is concerned with a quantum approach.

Understanding Consciousness – The Quantum Shellshock

The mechanistic vision excludes consciousness from the equation. New evidence suggests that thoughts and intentions are an actual physical “something” with astonishing power to change our world. A thought is not only a “thing”, it is a “thing” that influences other things. The view that consciousness can affect matter, highlights the irreconcilable difference between classical physics and quantum physics. In the late 1920’s the Copenhagen Interpretation proposed by Bohr and Heisenberg, shook the very foundations of science. The old system of solidarity and certainty was now confronted with a concept that atoms are not simply a little solar system of billiard balls. Sub atomic particles did not obey the rules of the game. Matter could not be divided into independently existing units, in fact, it could not even be described. Things suddenly had no meaning in isolation, but only in a web of dynamic interrelationship. It was recognised that subatomic particles seemed to be in a constant state of change and information sharing. A completely unanticipated problem emerged when scientist tried to measure these particles. When observed, the cloud of pure potential would always collapse into one particular state. This phenomenon is called “the observer effect“. In effect, the observer had impacted reality. Living consciousness had turned something possible into something real.

The implications of “the observer effect” are profound. Before anything can be manifested from this quantum soup it must first be observed. It stands to reason that the observation could not occur without the pre-existence of some sort of consciousness to do the observing. The “observer effect” actually implies that the physical universe is the direct result of consciousness. It could even be described as a form of scientific evidence of the existence of God, as the integral concept that there is no phenomenon until it is observed perfectly fits the whole idea of “the mind of God“.

The New Biology

I recently became involved in an Eco village project in NZ, as I believe that this type of community living may well prove to be part of the future. One of my partners in this sustainable showpiece is the American researcher/ author, Bruce Lipton. This scientist is at the cutting-edge of the new science I am describing. Bruce is the cell biologist who has rewritten the rules relating to the role of individual cells and their interrelationships in the cellular community that is our body. His work is a precursor to the new science of epigenetics, where genetic determinism is seen to be just another part of the mechanistic model that is no longer relevant. Bruce has demonstrated that we are no longer prisoners of the physical and emotional weaknesses of our ancestors. Just 5% of disease is genetically determined and even that genetic predisposition can be changed.

Our body contains 50 trillion cells and, in holographic fashion, each one mirrors the whole organism, containing all the same apparatus. We are in effect a community of cells. Bruce Lipton has debunked the concept that genes are the brains of the cell. In fact, cells can survive for up to two months with all of their genes removed¹. Working from Stanford Medical School between 1987 and 1992, Bruce discovered that the cell membrane was in fact the “brain” of the cell. He showed that the environment, operating through the cell membrane, controlled the behaviour and physiology of the cell, turning genes on and off. Bruce also showed that the all-important “environment” could include energetic messages emanating from positive and negative thoughts and intent.

This is such a revolutionary finding.  We now understand that our genes are only computer programs. The information entered determines the outcome and we, the operators, can choose which details to enter. It turns out that the cell membrane has receptors for chemical signals derived from food, drugs, biochemicals and hormones. However, it also features receptors for vibrational signals, including our thoughts. Now we have a scientific explanation of energy healing and the impact of our thoughts upon our own healing. In this context, we can better understand the mechanics of the new mind/ body science of psychoneuroimmunology. We also have a deeper understanding of the mechanisms at work in what is often called “energy agriculture”, where practices like biodynamics, radionics and the use of broadcasting towers can be seen as vibrational energy impacting the plant or soil biology at a cellular level.

Intent and Science

The observer phenomenon can also impact the validity of scientific research. In his truly remarkable book, “The Biology of Belief“, Bruce cites research involving a study where live shrimps are removed from a holding tank and placed in boiling water. All of the remaining shrimp community go crazy at the exact moment when their compatriots enter the boiling water. In this study, machines were introduced to remove the shrimps and boil them at varying times. Amazingly there was no response from the remaining shrimps when there was no human involvement. It was human intent that changed the reality of the remaining shrimps! How much does this impact research one may ask? New findings show that researchers are 4.5 times more likely to achieve the desired result in privately funded research. We can now understand that this may simply involve intent rather than scientific fraud. However, it provides good reason for a “show me the money” scepticism when considering the findings of the chemical, drug and GMO giants.

Food Producers Impacting at the Cellular Level

The simplistic mechanistic model in agriculture has involved a scenario where you toss on some NPK, whack emergent pests with a chemical and hopefully pull off a crop which covers the cost of both (and hopefully leaves a little profit. Thankfully, that extractive approach is gradually diminishing in favour of a biological approach that factors in many more mineral and microbial interrelationships. Working with nature rather than against her is proving a lot more fun than operating in constant readiness for war. However, I mentioned earlier that this new understanding of interconnectness is evolving to involve the farmer in ways that might surprise. They certainly might serve to test the open-mindedness of the more recalcitrant of the food producers amongst us.

One of my recent four day courses was attended by two consultants from Canada, who have been working with large scale, biological farming in that country for several years. Over dinner they shared a story about a hugely successful Canadian consultant who is in such demand that he literally picks and chooses his clients from those clamouring for his services. This very wealthy man consults out of passion rather than financial need and his clients have apparently achieved a remarkable average yield increase of over 25% (hence the clamouring). This legendary consultant insists that all of his clients abide by two rules (or they are simply no longer his clients).

Rule 1 – Discontinue Fungicides

The first of these rules is that growers involved in his programs must immediately forsake fungicides.  Fungicides are amongst the most widely used chemicals and many conventional growers consider them an essential production tool. However, the Canadian master consultant’s unusual demand actually mirrors the contentions of the French agronomist, Francis Chaboussou. In his book, “Healthy Crops – A New Agricultural Revolution“, Francis suggests that fungicides and other farm chemicals compromise plant immunity and inevitably lead to the need for more chemicals. Anything that compromises immunity generally reduces yields. Similarly, anything that boosts plant immunity increases yields (as is commonly seen in the case of Systemic Acquired Resistance).

This is an interesting concept in light of our years of field observations around the globe and a recent illuminating conversation. My brother and fellow NTS director, Bryan Sait, recently relayed details of his informal dinner conversation with scientists from a large research organisation (which shall remain unnamed for obvious reasons). These scientists have been involved for decades in the testing of the efficacy of various fungicides (usually commissioned by the chemical companies involved). They revealed (off the record) that they had never tested any fungicide which did not result in some degree of yield limitation.

Rule 2 – Communicate with Your Crop

The second confronting requirement for clients of the Canadian master consultant was that the growers and their staff were obliged to communicate with their crops. They were literally asked to make positive comments to the crop at every opportunity. You walk through your crop saying “wow, you guys are really doing well, you are looking so healthy!  Keep up the good work, fight off the pests and I will keep the good food coming”.  Of course, nutrition was also a big part of the success of the approach, but if we understand that cells respond to positive messages or vibrations this seemingly bizarre request makes a little more sense. The bottom line here is that this unusual approach may have some relevance and that should be the only guideline in a truly open-minded approach. It would be great to see some research to support such an esoteric contention but who would finance such research when there is no money in it for anyone but the food producer. The best approach is to simply trial the idea for yourself. It is free and who knows, it could prove a productive new tool. However, I would tend to trial it in a private vegetable patch before insisting that my farm workers sing daily praises in the field!

Interconnectedness is Not New

It was Lord Northbourne, in his ground-breaking 1940 publication, “Look to The Land“, who first viewed the farm as a single organism. In fact, it was this gentleman who first coined the term “organic farming”. He acknowledges the dynamic relationship between the soil, soil organisms, plants, animals and of course the humans at the helm of the enterprise. This holistic perspective is part of the reason NTS has always focused so heavily upon improving the personal health of farmers. The farmer is an integral and essential part of the farm organism and it becomes more difficult to achieve farm health if the farmer is unhealthy.

Look to The Land” is a wonderful book that reads like it was written yesterday. Northbourne’s prescience is exceptional. He clearly identified the increasing problems we would encounter as a result of diminishing biodiversity. He also recognised the issues associated with the pursuit of “cheap food” and the likelihood that a solely profit driven focus would further reduce food quality. He stated “we have come to have no idea of profit other than financial profit…. The delusion is that cheapness leads to plenty. But what use is plenty of rubbish!”

He also highlighted the potential for extractive agriculture to kill the goose that lays the golden egg when he stated; “the relation of “financial cost” to what may be termed “biological cost” has not been considered, still less estimated”. However, Lord Northbourne strikes home most powerfully when he states; “We have tried to conquer nature by force and by intellect. It is now for us to try the way of love”. Making positive affirmations to your plants to impact them at a cellular level is a more extreme example of “the way of love” but the entire, dynamic, nature-focused science we call Nutrition Farming® is about love vs fear. Conventional farming is dominated by the most negative of all emotions, fear. This is characteristic of any enterprise when we fight against something rather than for something. When we work with nature rather than against her, fear becomes understanding and food production becomes the fascinating, passion driven enterprise that it was intended to be.

¹Bruce Lipton (The Biology of Belief)