Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

5218RE: [steiner] Re: Success of anthroposophy

Expand Messages
  • Durward Starman
    Aug 25, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Regarding your three questions: For the hotness of the sun, I´m only aware of Steiner and Viktor Schauberger saying that it´s not hot. So I guess followers in their tradition are open for the sun not being hot, whereas the vast majority of people would consider it uttermost nonsense that the sun would not be hot…Something similar goes for the earth and its interior. For the issue of Darwinism, it´s likely that people in general think differently than the scientists generally does...
      ******* I chose those examples because they showed the dogmatism of so-called science when they are challenged. First, magnetism decreases in the presence of heat; yet we are told that the interior of the earth is hot and ALSO the center of a powerful magnetic field. The same goes for our sun. The contradiction is ignored. Moreover, sunspots appear darker because they are cooler than the rest of the sun's surface, and they are also the source of strong magnetic fields. If you look closely at any photographs of sunspots, it is obvious that they are holes, openings to the interior. The clear conclusion is that the surface of the sun is hot, but the interior cannot be.
           There is a greater point than this however, which is simply that no one has physically been more than 5 miles into the 8000-mile thick earth, and no one has yet been even near to, much less inside, the sun. Therefore in the absence of direct knowledge a multitude of theories should be allowed, because they are all inferences from evidence, which could be a house of cards that is collapsed by other evidence in the future: but the current traitors to science who call themselves scientists don't allow any such thing, no debate. That's because they have manufactured a dogma to replace the Catholic Church's dogma, giving people false certainty to earn a living; it's much easier to see their dogmatism with the whole question of evolution theory, which cannot be duplicated in a laboratory and so seen firsthand, nor was anyone around to observe what happened thousands of years ago

      > > ******* There is a danger currently with the European Union bureaucracy developing a list of approved medicines which would be the only ones that can circulate in Europe, and of course our homeopathic medicines might be left off it. The society in Europe is aware of this danger and working against it. I'll look up that information about the petition that is circulating and post it here.
      *******It is ELIANT, at www.eliant.eu.

      > ******* I wasn't talking about the local society in Switzerland,

      RB: No, neither was I.

      > but about the center and heart of our movement, the Goetheanum with its various sections for education, science, agriculture etc., which anyone really getting into anthroposophy anywhere would want to connect with, and I think wouldn't really be able to make a judgment about where our movement is today without seeing.

      RB: Yes, and it would be even better if I had written a doctoral dissertation about the anthroposophic movement, before speaking about it…Yet, people seldom does that much research on things before speaking about them. Would it not be sad if ordinary people were not allowed to speak about things, without having perfect knowledge, provided they want to help or understand and not just provoke?
      So – what do you mean? Are you shutting out me – your discussion partner – from further discussion, because I did not visit Goetheanum?

      *******Not at all, I was responding to you saying that whatever goes on there is irrelevant to your experience in Sweden. I'm saying it is not because every major anthroposophical activity coordinates with the center of our movement, and if you want to judge how effective a worldwide movement is, you have to look at it worldwide.

    • Show all 12 messages in this topic