Dynamic Farming

lloydevans
mooncorn_edited-2large.jpg

A recent article in a mainstream British newspaper has given favourable coverage to the controversial practice of biodynamic agriculture. Based on lectures given by esoteric philosopher Rudolf Steiner, the biodynamic farm is conceived of as a holistic self-regulating entity. While sharing many of the principles of organic farming, biodynamic farmers also seek to acknowledge and harness elemental and celestial influences. Practitioners claim to produce tastier, more nutritious crops, while also improving soil quality and regional biodiversity.

 

 

Creative Commons Image: panaramabanana on Flickr 
 

Comments

Reclaiming lost art

Submitted by vivifidal on Mon, 07/21/2008 - 10:15.
there was a time when folklore and a good Farmer's Almanac had these same answers...often we search jungle ruins for lost cultures and lose culture less than 2 generations past a few scant miles from us.

Rudolf Steiner.

Submitted by Furinoa on Mon, 07/21/2008 - 11:32.
We'd all probably do well to learn more from Rudolf Steiner's teachings.

its like being reduced to pre stonage

Submitted by vivifidal on Mon, 07/21/2008 - 15:39.
the average paleolithic farmer most likely had better data resources. Steiner is certainly a step in the right direction but the soil preparations are rudimentary compared to what could be accomplished with experimentation and group feedback.

Biodynamic articles

Submitted by Metasattva on Mon, 07/21/2008 - 18:02.
There have been several positive articles on biodynamics in the British press the last couple of years.. Here's another: http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/diet_and_fitness...

Fluff

Submitted by Skrepp on Tue, 07/22/2008 - 05:26.
What a frivolous, uncritical fluff piece. The reader is left no more knowledgable about why biodynamic agriculture "works", if indeed it does, after than before reading it. The "open-mindedness" advised by the author is of the variety that causes one's brain to fall out, and clearly is not the kind that allows one to investigate interesting unknown properties of the world-- at least as indicated by her failure to mention that Rudolph Steiner's prescriptions can be most charitably described as made up and least charitably described as utter nonsense, as well as her uncritical assertions about BD superiority when the best science done on the subject shows no difference between standard organic and biodynamic methods.This is of the same merit as the horoscopes they also put in the paper: meaningless entertainment published simply for the sake of appealing to certain readers' uninformed prejudices.