You don't dispove - the proponent of a hypothesis or theory must prove it.
Reich argued well for orgasm being the cure-all for neurosis, but never proved neither thatnir the existence of orgone.
And since orgone was supposedly produced by people having orgasms, you can imagine whatthe booths were actually intended for.
Rather, it was all a case of a) Reich not being able to let go of his hobbyhorse-hypothesis of orgasms and their role in psychotherapy, and b) Reich never being able to absolve himself of his guilt of having told his father of the affair his mother had, and Reich's incestous urges relating to that affair, an c) that Reich telling his father led to the father hurting his mother sobadly she committed suicide.
A disturbed, depressed person, carrying that guilt and also the experiences of the world war, finding a saviour-figure in Freud and his made-up unscientific ramblings (as so many others have done), Reich committed the scientific sin of believing his hypothesis true because he believed in it, not because he found proof for it.
You'll defend your obviously erroneous opinions against all evidence because you can't face the fact that you were wrong to begin with. Psychologically you are identical in this aspect to the "just one more booster" crowd. You wear the clothes of nonconformity when in reality, you are a herd-follower, and will double-down in a desperate attempt to maintain a false sense of being sure.
You don't dispove - the proponent of a hypothesis or theory must prove it.
Reich argued well for orgasm being the cure-all for neurosis, but never proved neither thatnir the existence of orgone.
And since orgone was supposedly produced by people having orgasms, you can imagine whatthe booths were actually intended for.
Rather, it was all a case of a) Reich not being able to let go of his hobbyhorse-hypothesis of orgasms and their role in psychotherapy, and b) Reich never being able to absolve himself of his guilt of having told his father of the affair his mother had, and Reich's incestous urges relating to that affair, an c) that Reich telling his father led to the father hurting his mother sobadly she committed suicide.
A disturbed, depressed person, carrying that guilt and also the experiences of the world war, finding a saviour-figure in Freud and his made-up unscientific ramblings (as so many others have done), Reich committed the scientific sin of believing his hypothesis true because he believed in it, not because he found proof for it.
His rejection by Albert Einstein was particularly pitiful. "Please don't mention my name again."
Einstein was a fraud.
https://search.brave.com/search?q=stephen+crothers+relativity+thunderbolts+einstein&source=web
You are an exceptionally conformist thinker.
Yeah, I'm the worst.
Oh, you're way worse than that: You're a conformist idiot.
You are what you claim to hate. Sucks to be you, apparently.
Tell me more about me! I enjoy attention.
You'll defend your obviously erroneous opinions against all evidence because you can't face the fact that you were wrong to begin with. Psychologically you are identical in this aspect to the "just one more booster" crowd. You wear the clothes of nonconformity when in reality, you are a herd-follower, and will double-down in a desperate attempt to maintain a false sense of being sure.
https://wilhelmreichmuseum.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Shortened-DoubleBlind-Controlled-Experiments.pdf
Maybe read up a bit more before opining.