Xisca Nicolas wrote:
About the "huge" difference, I could read / hear an average of 10% according to people who measured it, when you follow the root, flower, leaf, fruit pattern.
Well, it is good to get rhythm form nature herself!
Paulo Bessa wrote:Folks, neither permaculture or byodinamics are science or scientific.
In fact both are rejected by conventional science. Though permaculture draws a bit from ecological science.
Paulo Bessa wrote:
Therefore both biodynamics and permaculture are outsiders and pseudosciences as considered by current scientific approaches.
Howeve this is just a label people put.
To me, nothing of this really matters. Why can't a scientist be a mystic, or a mystic be a scientist? Why can't science study life after death, cryptoanimals or whatever is strange and freak?
Paulo Bessa wrote:
I really don't get it: these kind of ideological battles between science and religion, religion and mysticism, mysticism and science, or between politics, etc... Just because there is two completely different approaches, it does not mean that they exclude from each other. Or are we approaching permaculture, politics or else, like a form of a religion. Whoever thinks outside, is considered a lunatic.
Michel Kegels wrote:In a way Rudolf Steiner was like Jezus. Itś not that he walked on water, and lets face it, Christ is a mythological character that represents psychological aspects of ourselves, but both dudes wouldn't want their words being made in to dogma.
Alicia Gaul wrote:
I use permaculture for designing & bd for soil prep, growing & animal health.
paul wheaton wrote:This kinda reminds me of the point that some people have that you cannot talk about going to mars until several people have done it, documented it, and submitted their experiences to peer reviewed journals.
Trial and Error is a big part of science. And before you can do trial and error, somebody has to have a bit of creative thought about what to try. And the very first part of trial and error is going to be trying something once.
From the perspective of a lot of scientists, all of permaculture is just a bunch of kooky hippie fantasy talk.
Steiner may be a kook, but a lot of steiners kooky stuff is turning out to be rather brilliant. A hundred years from now, we might have figured out that 63% was brilliant and 22% was kind kooky and 15% was way off.
I think that a scientist that writes it all of as crap is a poor scientist.
Here is a video of Brian Kerkvliet in august of 2010. I spent two days in the bellingham area taking video and pictures of lots of farms and gardens. Nearly every squash I saw had mildew on the leaves. Except for Brian's. These leaves are perfect. He says that the reason is a biodynamic concoction he made. He has my attention. Those of you that are not keen on biodynamic should not look at this, because it is biodynamic and, therefore, too woowoo for you.