What is the collective word of milk
Page: De Chemische Briefe Justus von Liebig 450.jpg
just as the word phlogiston is used, which was used to explain chemical phenomena up to the end of the last century.
As long as one did not know what the phlogiston was, this word served as a collective word to bind a number of unknown active causes together and to make them understandable in teaching; but after one had found out what the “phlogiston” actually was and represented it, the correct terms took its place, and the explanations now became true, safe and reliable, which they were not before. The wood does not burn any differently than before, and the air was there earlier as it is now, the water also still makes you wet as usual, but what immeasurable progress the human race has made by replacing the phlogiston with correct ideas about air, entered the oxygen and the combustion process!
An equal, but far greater and infinitely more beneficial progress will develop from the correct knowledge of the nutritional process of plants and animals, and as absurd as it would be if a teacher of chemistry wanted to explain any chemical process from phlogiston is just as inadmissible it is when a teacher of scientific agriculture wants to explain a given case with the concept of “dung”, because the outdated concept of dung, which no longer has any meaning, has been replaced by very specific foods for each plant, from their interaction the appearance or the case needs to be explained.
The doctrine of the necessity of mister production by forage crops and thus the maintenance of a livestock for agriculture is a false doctrine.
Here one must know how to separate necessity and usefulness. The livestock can be useful to the farmer and grant him a rent in butter, cheese, meat; this is a different matter, but he must know and be taught that the livestock must not be a coercion.
The livestock is necessary for the production of muck; but the production of mishaps is not necessary for the fertility of the cornfields. In the system of alternating crops the cultivation of fodder crops and the incorporation of their components into the topsoil of the cornfields is all that is necessary, and it is completely useless and indifferent for the stalk crops whether the forage crops are previously eaten by cattle and turned into dung.
If the lupins, vetches, clover, turnips, etc., are cut up and plowed under green, their effect is far greater.
Grain production has no natural law connection with meat and cheese production, rather they harm one another and must be kept apart from one another scientifically; for what is sold in the flesh goes from the grain, and vice versa. We cannot dispense with meat, milk, or cheese, and if this is produced by the cattle-breeder, who, where possible, is not at all concerned with growing grain, both as well as the consumers will benefit from it
- How many lawyers love their job
- What is nothing 13
- What is the camera screen
- Bodycombat is a good cardio workout
- Why do American cars lose their value so quickly?
- What is data retrieval
- In which county is Huntsville Alabama
- What is meant by recognizing spirits
- Is anger a sign of stress?
- How is Melbourne University 1
- Fishing as a hobby is unethical
- Acting people on cruise ships are entitled
- What's your craziest checkout experience
- What are some good friendship songs
- How to read early childhood education
- What are some comments on NIT Silchar
- Contagion is based on the Nipah virus
- What are some random things to draw
- Was Sartre an atheist
- Can a pharmacist serve as a doctor
- What is quantum healing
- What is satoshi
- Women also pray the Tarawih
- How do I stop a vowel tic