Sorry GG, this is weak dispite an underlying central strength. The strength being that the more profoundly integrated knowledge is the better off we may be. However the article is an "anti-science" rant. No better then the outlook it criticises. (I assume the translation is satisfactory.)
Article quote: "Unused knowledge is useless knowledge"
(end-quote) is nonsense. Do you, I or anyone else have the right to consider we know what is useless for others? Knowledge may not be understood or assimilated for a considerable period of time. To dismiss it because it has no use sings our ignorance. The issue is to be seeking unused/ignored/disabused knowledge. Doesn't exactly that happen here? Yesterday's falsity is today's news and tomorrow's wisdom.
Quote "Scientists solve a puzzle, but may not have all the pieces. The rest of the pieces must be added by others. If the image is to be completely filled, the experiential knowledge is as important as the research-based." (End quote.)
Find me a "completely filled image" anywhere - impossible other than in our own delusion. Delusion/fantasy is the only completeness we ever know. (Using the word image is questionable in that context.)
The point "experimental knowledge is as important as the research based" is fine but the expression before it is nonsense.