Found it grassfarmer

[ado089]

Grassfarmer, I acknowledge what you are
saying. However I think the further the
hypothesis strays from the generally
accepted normal, the higher the burden
of proof is to support the statement.
Hypocritical? Somewhat but its necessary
to ensure integrity of the scientific
process.

Questioning the world around us and
challenging the normal is how we move,
forward, both social and scientifically.
Discussions like these are highly
constructive when it leads to people of
different views researching the other
perspective. I for example got deeper
into allan savory and Gabe browns work
then I ever have before. As a result
they've helped me consolidate some ideas
I've been noodling on for quite some
time. Hopefully I can implement some of
them next spring. Wild conspiracy
theories on Monsanto and them Chem boys
hasn't enriched my life whatsoever
though.

Thanks for reminding me of the early
infancy colostrum absorption, that
totally slipped my mind. However it
still doesn't explain how it transfers
from beast to man.

[ianben]

BSE while it remained in cattle was just another
disease. It was the mouse and link to humans
which caused most of the hysteria and actually
ruined farmers businesses and lives.

How good was the evidence back then if it turns
out that there is no human link.

Will anyone ever admit they got it wrong?

[oneoff]

Would anyone deny that some members of any population appear more susceptable than others to an exposure that can cause disease or illness.

That difference is not caused by the substance that triggers the illness (eg. contaminated milk replacer or asbestos fibres etc.)

Anyone who doesn't appreciate a "scientific approach" probably never has been exposed to the ideas of debate; bouncing all ideas around, statistical analysis, research and digging for all the ideas,hypotheses and explanations that one can get their hands on.


And beliefs just aren't liable to produce anything more than dogma and propaganda that gets swallowed instantly by hasty people looking to "confirm what they already think they know".....or an explanation to ease their worries about their present illnesses.

Beliefs produce next to nothing; except soothing troubled minds. Give e an example to the contray.

[ianben]

Columbus believed the earth was round and
sailed west over the edge. America
Watt believed he could build a boiler that would
not explode.Steam engine
Brunell believed he could build iron ship that
would float on the ocean. Modern ships
The Wright brothers believed they could
fly.Aeroplane

None of them had the proof that is apparently
necessary today.

I find the idea that we should be able to know
everything about something and predict the
future from the past unrealistic and depressing.

Just live for today and be thankful if tomorrow
comes.

[oneoff]

Who says everyone or anyone is driven by beliefs. Perhaps dreams and wildest wishes are even more responsible in driving ideas into practical applications. And since when does all time and effort get devoted to into practial applications?

I think it is a matter of observing various phenomena, thinking about ways and tricks that might make the goal come closer; scratching your brain really hard and perservering though many setbacks and failures. And once in a hundred ties someone might come a little closer to the elusive dream that was probably envisioned by many others a thousand years ago. All they lacked was the scientific knowledge, resoures and equipent and support services that was not yet available.

There is also lots of effort devoted to art, music, creating worthless knick nacks, recording history and even posting on Agriville.