Lloyd - Looks like I was suffering more of a failure to communicate than usual yesterday! Brinton and York were ruing that they have never seen an affective application of radionics. This was not meant to imply that the radionics would be in isolation. It meant that the radionics was an effective component of a farm management system.Hmmm "crops reliably produced -year after year" I certainly would'nt make that claim for radionics(on its own), nor would I support it for biodynamics(on its own), it certainly does not happen in conventional agriculture, no one way is reliable when taken in isolation, and isolation is the special talent of scientists - when we eliminate the variables to allow a 'valid trial' we also eliminate many of the mechanisms that allow nature to function properly.
On the "BD only" remark, one can some times pick up the sense on this list that the preps are enough to make anyone a good farmer/gardener. York points out in his presentation that the men who gathered to listen to RS speak were not only very good farmers but they, for the most part, were also very perceptive individuals, realizing that early in the game that chemical agriculture was destroying the fertility of land and the flavor and nutritional value of food. Even AP, they say, is a stupendously talented farmer and that his successes in Australia are due to him experience-based insights into the needs of the land and the farms and not 'solely' due to the regular application of BD 500. (This one, I admit, I have problems with. I can't see how much direct input AP can have into millions of acres and hundreds of farms, many of which are operated with men who have no philosophical predisposition to holistic agriculture.)
Thanks for bringing these points up, Lloyd.
-Allan
