SOC Upped after Uninvited Comment on “Soil Syst. 2018, 2, 64” *

Coming soon…corrie

A full Reply with all gory background information appended is here –

Reply to Univited Comment.pdf 

The objectors are proponents of the and it seems they yet falsely promote just 1,417 or, at most, 2,125 Gt SOC total ( as they imply with their Comment title (viz., my 8,500 Gt SOC divided by four or by six times is just 2,125 or 1,417 Gt). Albeit permafrost, that extends down to 1.5 km (or about a mile), alone has ~1,800 Gt SOC to just about 3 m depth on a flat-Earth (Ref.) so, if doubled for depth & terrain, it may actually be at least 3,600 Gt!; and other workers also show total global values up to 8,000 or 9,000 Gt SOC, or more (Ref.). Contrarily, 4p1000 presentation (below) yet claims: “an estimated 1,417 gigatonnes remain in the first metre of the soil across the globe“:-

Arrougant and slash or As-holes uncool cravatte seals the deal

Nevertheless, IPCC’s most recent report (IPCC 2019a: 2-97), for example, has: “global soil organic carbon (SOC) stock down to 1 m depth, varying between 2,500 Pg to 3,400 Pg with differences among databases largely attributable to C stored in permafrost”. Either (1,417–1,500 Gt) or IPPC (2,500–3,400 Gt) are wrong (or they are both… ;p)!!! Median value from IPCC (2019) of ~3,000 Gt, doubled >1 m is 6,000 and, if reasonably doubled again for neglected terrain, is ~12,000 Gt SOC.All this before glomalin, that may itself increase all SOC measurements by 27%, are factored in! Then 12,000 Gt + 27% = ~15,000 Gt!Thus, best estimate for total global SOC is now >10,000–15,000 Gt (Ref.) so–unintentionally–the objectors are strictly correct: SOC stock are not “Four to Six Times Underestimated“, rather it’s more like Ten Times!Major flaws in their objection ( are rather obviously countered for three basically simple reasons:

  1. SOC is upped not just due to terrain (and not just by me but by many other authors too), rather due to soil bulk density re-calculations compelling revision in a way only terrain can explain.
  2. Soil bulk density data are planimetric as samples are sliced horizontally, yet all global calculations are for bumpy soil biomes. [As my paper clearly explains: “Tangible sub-samples are taken on the ground at fixed core sample volumes with a constant planimetric area (cm−2 or m−2 perpendicular to the centre of the Earth) [i.e., vertically!] and then multiplied by a biome’s area, thus mass may be adjusted to comply only by adding biome area by adding terrain/topsoil relief“].
  3. Their shifting geometry fails to reflect that same length rectangles or trapezoids have different volumes/footprints but SOC contents depend upon horizontal sampling depth as with bead-lines on a tilting but invariable “tamanoren” bead curtain (figured below).

Regardless, what really matters is the sampling regime as all samples for bulk density are taken on a planimetric basis then totals estimated by multiplication by a biome’s true undulating surface area.

Despite their claim: “We fully agree that the Earth is not flat“, they yet fail to provide their estimate for true topographical terrain area, apart from in their manifesto‘s statement: “If we take the land area of the world as 149 million km2 [= 14.9 Gha, i.e., on a flat-Earth!!]”.Perhaps now these authors will have the courage & conviction to admit their mistakes, to provide their own estimate of true surface area and revise or retract their papers? As any reputable Scientist is obliged to. Following figs (Figs. 1-3) show some of their fundamental flaws & failings due mainly to not realizing that idealized & ‘blind’ sampling is not the same as a true situation, merely an approximate representation for extrapolation. Viz. soil samples averaged per unit of surface area.

Anyone is invited to provide a sampling regime that accounts for terrain…

Figure 1. Invariability of soil volume changing with sample quadrat shape, exemplified by tilting soil tipper or dump-truck & shifting goalposts. Nobody measures the fake “Dslope” depth. Fig. 2 provides further details.

Fig 2 revised

Figure 2. Idealized soil sampling for bulk density, % carbon and total SOC. Conceptually, changing shape invariably changes area. An analogy is an Asian bead curtain (tamanoren as in Fig 3 below) of length L, if tilted 40° (red angle arrows) its planimetric footprint reduces 33% from Lslope = Lplane / cos(σ) as its shape changes due to gravity, but both its content and composition are demonstrably constant. Sigmoid curvature of a real-world slope along the 3D Y-axis further increases its surface area/volume = soil carbon content!! Without getting into complexities such as Riemann vs. Lebesgue integrals or Moser’s geometric “worm” problem (Fig. 5 below), finer sampling at the cm2 scale would likely double these effects yet again. 


Figure 3. String-bead curtain (tamanoren) representing soil carbon samples, with plants samples shown too. Blue curve represents likely sigmoid slope in natural, real-world settings that would somewhere have an equal down slope, yet again doubling the effect. As with historical victories, French arrougace is defeated with a simple red angle arrow (or a welsh one).

On a more pertinent matter, Blakemore (2018b: table 6) is here updated and corrected (as is also noted in recent publication Ref.):-

Table 6. Corrected Contingency Terrains from Bulk Density (BD) with SOC Mass.

BD tm-3

Area Gm2


Soil Gt

Depth m

SOC @ 1.3% Gt

Cf. SOC Gt*



x 1




x 0.7 (cf. 3,000)



x 2**




x 1.4 (cf. 3,000)



x 4




x 2.8 (cf. 3,000)



x 2




x 2.5 (cf. 5,000)



x 4




x 5.1 (cf. 5,000)

*Multiplication factors required on current SOC values to produce indicated SOC @ 1.3% total.  From IPCC’s most recent report (IPCC 2019a: 2-97) has median SOC value of ~3000 Gt to 1 m. Consolidated IPCC (2019a, 2019b) SOC values median is 5000 Gt to >3 m. This compares to objectors 2020 claim of just 1,417-3,000 Gt SOC total.

**Double land or soil relief area is most likely and reasoned situation at higher scales of observation (m to cm); a value of 4,212 Gt to 1 m, if doubled for deeper soil gives 8,424 which is close to my earlier calculated value of 8,580 Gt.Juliette s plotsFigure 4. Example of topsoil undulations from Juliette Bramowski’s 1 cm field scan data (Blakemore 2018b: tab. 4).


Figure 5. Example of scale of fractal observation and natural rugosity (cf. Blakemore 2018b: fig. 9).Moser s worm problem geometry

Figure 6. Moser’s “worm problem” of geometry (and importance of scales of observations!).And while we wait (now >8 months!) for formal publication of my response from July, 2019 […update July, 2020, nah, not gonna happen the editors have been messing around and so no progress made now they want me to pay 1,000 Euros page fees – on an uninvited Comment?!]… Meanwhile, here is a topic for urgent discussion:-


Not just the Marine Mafia/Media distorts the truth ( The under-ground “Soil Community”, familiarly known as the “sods”, also lies thickly & deeply, partly by omission. They are cowardly too to not fight against the marine, atmospheric or forestry cliques that misappropriate funds & media attention. Why are they like this? A reason may be that powerful chemical companies fund 99.9% of the science & media ‘advertizing’ so no dissent is allowed (their lobby groups also massively sponsor universities and politicians who direct allocations of tax dollars). Talks at Soil Ecology Societies or Climate meetings that I attended were by Syngenta $hills or bought-off Bayer/Dow reps. And their greatest threat is not the Marine Mafia, etc., rather it is organic farming. Organic farming rebuilds healthy soil and healthy food for healthy humans, using earthworms for free. More importantly it gives control back to the farmers who no longer need their expensive synthetic fertilizers and the biocides that are further required when these fertilizers disrupt mycorrhiza & microbes (and earthworms) that do all the true & honest work in soils in synchronized co-evolution with plants’ needs. Farming communities also get sicker quicker being more exposed to the toxins & carcinogens than most consumers; then they must seek expensive drugs & medicines that the self-same chemical companies (or their spin-offs) hawk. Many soil workers (some my farmer friends or research colleagues) suffer or have died from Parkinson’s, leukemia or other cancers as well as having allergies and often multiple other physical or mental health issues. For cancer rates see – .

Chemical or synical

CHEMICAL or CYNICAL? [Naïf or Evil?]

The chemical industry is separated into two branches on the same stem (often same company subsidiaries): The pharmaceutical & the farm agrichemical. The biggest threat to the pharmaceutical industry is healthy people. They maintain their profit by maintaining mis-health and they do this by promoting poisonous food (much US food is unhealthy!) and by promoting only allopathic medicine (surgery & chemical drug treatment to illness, often with other drugs for their unintended side effects) as opposed to homeopathic where the body heals itself. Similarly the greatest threat to the agrichemical industry cartel is healthy soil. They promote unhealthy soil by denigrating organic farming and by endlessly developing new chemicals to fix the problems they caused by their earlier interventions (many, such as synthetic N fertilizers and biocides from military surpluses). All these chemical insults are new and dangerous dating from the end of WW1 in 1918 and WW2 in 1945. This big misstep needs redress and time lost in seeking natural health in people & soils must be regained. Personally it is of no interest to me how much bonus a chemical mogul gets from chemical poisons, nor how big a chemical scientist’s ego is. My concern is the health of myself, the environment and that of the people and pets I care for most.

Here’s is a cancer cure: Don’t eat poisonous food with proven agrichemical carcinogens…

Just as with autism, ADHD, asthma, allergies, etc., the rates of cancer are rising not due to some genetic condition (there is no increase in DNA!) but rather due to air/water/food /soil contamination with toxins. Oncologists I have asked and the US Cancer agencies admit that most, perhaps 80% or more, is environmental with a slight disposition factor.

Yet hope is in the slow but steady general realization that we are being lied to, about how safe smoking, or drugs, or agrichemicals are, and so on… What is true is that soil is and always was the greatest carbon store offering the best & only way to sequester atmospheric CO2 in what is called Carbon Capture & Storage (CCS), more properly “organic farming” or Soil/Earthworm-Casts CCS (S/ECCS). At the same time the poor health outcomes of agrichemical toxins are increasingly exposed with glyphosate herbicide now ubiquitous in the air & water as well as in food & soil (e.g. threatening all life on Earth. It is also implicated in human breast cancer that affects an increasing number of us consumers (Stur et al. 2019 – This just as Giles Seralini proved in 2012 whilst later showing how control groups’ food was contaminated since glyphosate is so pervasive ( But don’t just take my word for it, read letter and comments by about 1,000 other Scientists/parents –

The affected public may help de-cide (i.e., to remove bio-cides) the issue rather than endlessly corrupted scientific debate: Lawsuits in the USA alone may exceed 45,000 cases (Ref.). Already, just in USA and just for one formulation (glyphosate / Roundup) and just one cancer (non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma), three cases prevailed (>$2 billion damages awarded) and 10,000’s of other trials are scheduled. This pernicious toxin is reported to cause many other diseases and disruptions to the soil ecosystem. AIEA Newsletter (Dec. 2019, Ref.) says: “In Sri Lanka 400,000 people are suffering from chronic kidney disease, out of which some 25,000 have died. The disease is related to heavy metals in drinking water in combination with glyphosate use. A group of farmer organizations, researchers, patients and the families of deceased farmers are set to take Bayer – Monsanto and other glyphosate herbicide manufacturers to the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka.” Other trials are scheduled for Canada, Europe & Australia and will doubtless spread as almost no one is personally unaffected.

But, as the saying goes: “Don’t hold yer breath!” Evil Mobay / Dow-DuPont after >100 yrs have yet to admit or pay proper, humane compensation for outrages of WW1, WW2 (including setting up Auschwitz & supporting Dr Death Mengele who, along with many other Nazi war criminals, escaped to Brazil where there were many sympathizers some working for chemical companies like Dow). Mobay was a combination of Monsanto-Bayer and another 1930’s manifestation was DuBay, just as the Nazi thing was working itself up. Still a rejoined joint-venture in 2000s there are no prizes for working out what comprised “DuBay”. They celebrated introducing toxic mercury seed dressings, e.g. Uspulun introduced in 1914 (also start of WW1!) and released until banned as Ceresan in US & UK, etc. Before buying DuPont, Dow made Agent Orange, Napalm, and took responsibly for the Bhopal disaster, and the list of evil goes on… They seem to lack any humane compassion or a basic standard of decency. So long as the profit, bonuses and dividends keep coming… who cares?

Agent orange shame – Don’t be sad, be angry!

[Update in Jan., 2020 is that up to 100,000 cancer plaintiffs are now suing and the trials will continue until all the chemical companies pay their long-overdue dues –].

Whether or not this portends the demise of chemical agriculture is moot, but the justification for agrichemical poisoning us and our Earth fails at every turn (; Only the immediate restoration of organic husbandry can save Nature & Civilization. It is that crucial & urgent. True Scientists must continue to serve the mantras: “Tell the Truth” and “Do no harm” only then can the public rebuild trust in what all applied research should be: Disinterestedly noble not vestedly base. Perhaps a better Science motto & ambition may be – “Do only good“? There is still time enough (just).

I concur with a need for: “Change of societal philosophy to one of scientific risk management and biological sustainability with complete cessation of species extinctions and zero tolerance for lying” (Ref.). A good start would be to redirect all our public funding from chemical agriculture to healthy organic research & extension. Also to defer funds for abysmal marine researchers who constantly lie to get funds, e.g. about the amount of food ocean supplies (they still claim >50% but it is truly <0.5% – Ref.: fig. 4) or that it provides us our daily oxygen. Funded people such as Sylvia Earle say >50% or even 80% oxygen, but proper Science e.g. Duursma & Boission (1994: tab. 2) has annual photosynthetic oxygen contribution from soil & sea combined as just 0.01% per year and turnover time for O2 in the order of 10,000 yrs!! So sea contributes less than 0.005% O2! – Ref.: tab. 2). Only approximately 1% of the world’s oxygen, for example, is in the oceans (Houghton 2007: 315), possibly less than in worm burrows that may extend 8,880 km/ha in pasture (Ref.:10). It does not supply our rainwater either: Two-thirds or about 65% is from plant evapo-transpiration & fires on land and just 35% due to evaporation from the ocean (Ref.). Also we urgently need to cancel all astronomically expensive and speculative space exploration until we have begun to fix the tangible problems closer to home, especially extinction of our unique biota and loss of our basic survival blanket:- A thin brown layer of soil here on Earth and its earthworm denizens that do much work. As I already paraphrased: “No brown, no green”.

January 2020 update

As Australia, the first continental victim of Climate Change (as in Mid East & much of east and southern Africa), burns or floods. It gives no satisfaction that this disaster demonstrates what scientists have been predicting for decades and is now too late to fix. Only damage control is possible by radical life-style and governance changes: The least painless of which are reducing meat and reversing chemical farming. The huge bushfires in Asia, Amazon and Australia further demonstrate that reforestation is not always a solution: Trees can burn setting progress back centuries. Neither is “biochar” charcoal: This poisons soil and offers zero advantage over proven compost. The only reliable restoration possible is organic vermicompost recycling with carbon storage in earthworm-worked soil humus. This humus is what urgently needs broad restoration and is what intensive, chemical agriculture has succeed in depleting around the globe in the last century (self-serving the chemical companies as depleted soils require more and more synthetics to produce diminishing crops before fields are abandoned as desert).

Earthworms help process soil, aerate it & store moisture in rich humus so that these fertile and well-drained soils, like the oceans, don’t burn nor flood nor blow away… A first step to understanding the basics of our soil resource is to have a correct estimate of its composition, including SOC that is the foundation of Soil Organic Matter or SOM, better known as earthworm-worked humus. Despite what these academic “experts” say (and most are mere chemists or, worst yet, engineers!). The real soil experts are earthworms now in soils with total global values not merely 1,417 but rather in the realms of >10,000 Gt SOC.


On a completely separate & historical subject concerning earlier EU attempts, I am quite proud to find my family name participating as members of the original “happy few” Band of Brothers with King Harry’s armies (selection from

First NameSurnameRankCaptain NameCommanderYearNature of ActivityReference
PiersBlakemoreArcherArundel, Richard Fitz Alan, earl ofArundel, Richard Fitz Alan, earl of1388Exped NavalTNA E101/41/5
WilliamBlakemoreArcherArundel, Thomas, Earl ofHenry V1415Exped FranceTNA E101/47/1
JohnBlakemoreMan-at-armsDevon, Hugh Courtenay, Earl ofDevon, Hugh Courtenay, Earl of1418Naval ExpedTNA E101/49/34
JohnBlakemoreMan-at-armsRetford, Philip, SirBeaufort, John, Duke of Somerset1443Exped FranceTNA E101/54/5

Cool there is an archer called “Piers” = Pierce. Battle of Agincourt in 1415 was a famous English victory in the Hundred Years’ War, made famous in Shakespeare’s “Henry V” play.

Schlacht von Azincourt.jpg

Agincourt battle in scene from 15th-century miniature.

First NameSurnameRankCaptain NameField CommanderNature of ActivityLocationDateReference
JohnBlakemoreArcherOgard, Andrew GarrisonVire14240322BL_EgCh_149
RobertBlakemoreArcher; Personal Retinue, siege of Conches (with garrison of Neubourg)Fauconberg, William LordYork, Richard Plantagenet, duke ofGarrison detachment in fieldSiege of Conches14420818BN_msfr_25776_1576

Siege of Conches in 1442 at the time of the Battle of Verneuil was when Sir John Talbot, newly the first Earl of Shrewsbury encountered Jean d’Orléans, Count of Dunois, also known as the “Bastard of Orléans” (French: bâtard d’Orléans). It is not known if any of these archers survived, or if they kept their bow fingers.

File:Vigiles du roi Charles VII 49.jpg

La Bataille de Verneil in 1442.

One thought on “SOC Upped after Uninvited Comment on “Soil Syst. 2018, 2, 64” *

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.