Re: COMPOST TEA was Re: Perry's recnt posts

[Gil Robertson]

Allan Balliett wrote: I'll just put this out here for comment: Alan York and Will Brinton both
state that they have never seen or heard of claims of crops reliably
produced (this means year after year, something that excludes many
variables: repeatability) through the use of radionics, except by people
who are involved in selling radionics on some level. First person
ndorsements to the contrary are encouraged

Gil writes:-

I have a lot of difficulty make up my mind as to answer or not answer this sort of post.

Do York/ Brinton suggest that the only credible people are those who do not charge for services rendered? Do they get their chemicals free and the knowledge to apply them without charge? If they need an operation, do they pay and trained and equipped person, or do they seek some one with some likely looking tools and who does not charge a professional fee and accept that as a professional service? If all does not go well, do they then denigrate all trained persons?

I can not speak for those whom York/ Brinton are judging. It may be that those involved are not fully trained and there fore not providing a reliable service. There may be third party influences that are negating the Radionics. An example is a photograph Hugh published in an Acres USA, that clearly showed the effect of a power line across a crop of corn and the resulting reduction of the beneficial effect. We know that the effect of Nuclear Power Stations is much larger than the promoters would have us think. In many areas, ground water carries so much chemicals from other properties, that one must first start a program of nullifying that before doing other work.

Those of us involved, can tell so many stories of positive results, it is with wonderment that we read this sort of statement. Is it possible that York/ Brinton made their judgement on the work of some dabbler who is not properly trained?

Gil