by Moindreffor »09 / 08 / 21, 20: 46
least effort of reflection
well no need to study biodynamics, given the way you describe it, we understand that Steiner did not invent anything but that he took over the work of others and that he just added his mystical side, and that subsequently his disciples did the same
which would then show that mysticism is really effective, much more than a failed pseudo chemical rationalism!
you are absolutely right and that is what is currently dangerous, we are returning to obscurantism, pseudo-sciences and beliefs
You still suck intentionally tweak what I wrote above, which is why I underlined:
least effort of reflection because on this side it is well confirmed.
a) I am not saying that it is dangerous, Mr. Obscurantist, but that this mysticism in question would show itself
far superior to your pseudo-scientific pseudo rationalism, not scientific but pseudo-scientific because only the results count
b) So the obscurantist is really you ignoring both the main principles put forward and especially a serious ignorance of all the results
scientifically established by thousands of independent measurements
and people like you rejoice because it is all fertile ground for mass manipulation,
manipulation which you use and abuse like all ignorant people who pretend to know, because they have read an article or two of fakenews edited by the chemical industry. It is indeed mass manipulation. Mass that wakes up and realizes, slowly, that you and your chemistry jerks have poisoned millions of people with impunity and it still continues!
there were the "big" religions, and we unfortunately see where religious extremism leads, now with the Internet we see rather small groups appearing that we can associate with sectarian excesses, which are just as dangerous, if not more because they are more and more numerous
obvious sign that the veneer of the good thinking of the powerful in the orders of finance, see, with terror, called into question their hegemony as at the time of royalty and the all-powerful Catholic Church which took their pants off in 1789 and which was then recovered to found another religion supposedly scientific and atheist. A blind man against a one-eyed man.
it is you who tells us that Steiner did not invent anything, that he just took over as I highlighted in your message and you compare him to Leonardo da Vinci, nobody ever said that Leonardo had nothing invented and that he had taken over the work of others so your comparison is silly, even if we recognized the genius of Leonardo 500 years later he is indeed the original inventor, Steiner is only a buyer and it are you not the one writing it?
We can see that you have never invented anything in your life! No inventor whatsoever, even among the most brilliant, starts from nothing, he only brings together existing means and knowledge, but bringing them together in a different way from his predecessors and there are some professionals on this site. who are part of it and who can attest to it on a technical level. Leonardo da Vinci was one of those brilliant assemblers who succeeded in linking the technique with the observation of the living world and not like you by being satisfied with bits of knowledge, without imagination.
On the other hand, you have a fertile imagination to say nonsense
using nettle manure or other that's scientifically proven, and it works, and it's not biodynamics, it's herbalism and herbalism is a science,
The guy is really bad! Who invented herbalism? Nature observers then recorded by them for the following generations and your science has only confirmed these? I do not mind calling science what confirms previous knowledge, but not that it replaces and even denies it like you.
that the followers of biodynamics also use herbalist and whoever speaks in the video never speaks of biodynamics elsewhere, on the other hand the fact that he is organic and that he is looking for alternative solutions is very well and like many,
he turns to a science a real not a pseudo-science and it works and there I agree
conceited and pretentious in addition to decide, like the other funny ones besides, of what is true or false. Your conception of science is just a pseudo science which recovers the knowledge of others by claiming to attribute it to itself as Pastor from elsewhere
after again and again multiple insults which once again shows your little spirit, low blows to try to cover up your own mistakes
these supposed insults are only observations expressed with the current language. Your reaction underlines that you do not like to be labeled like this, although it is indeed the case!
And when it comes from a pretentious ignoramus who claims to be more knowledgeable than those who really know, having studied and experimented, in the field, and verified the validity of these. It is sure that the funny that you are does not make the weight.
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
