Yes, I know. Check out the very first sentence of my comment:

> For this thesis, you need to show that movable type in specific, rather than printing in general, was necessary and sufficient for the scientific revolution.

My whole point is that movable type doesn't offer much in the way of civilizational advantages compared to block printing, so it's very odd to attribute Europe's success to its writing system. I agree that it makes sense to attribute the choice of movable type over block printing to the writing system. But saying that this choice "determined the trajectory of history" seems like a stretch. Movable type vs. block printing is a choice of no great consequence.