[www.youtube.com]


thoughts?

life vs lifelessness

Agree with some of what Chek says, but the argument that because plants eat animals(as biota), vegans are the equivalent of meateaters is so simplistic, even with all the fancy, sciencey words he used, that I laughed. But not as much as when he posited that, sans humans, New Zealand would be quickly denuded by gigantic wild flocks of rapacious feral sheep is stupid. Without humans to help them, sheep--an alien species--would be curtailed by heat stroke, disease, and falls off of icy mountains. Duh.

Interesting vid just the same.

Man is a rational animal and man can rationalize anything

-- Prana

ok get this . they made another video saying Vegan Raw diets lower testosterone yet this study proves other wise. [www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

[www.youtube.com]

life vs lifelessness

Ugh. More silly behavior from the 80/10/10 cult in the comments, totally cutting off any chance of rational dialogue. Are we now supposed to believe that people who have lost their hair aren't allowed to be healthy or creative or to even talk about it? I guess they haven't noticed that Graham is balding? If you want to know if a diet is healthy, look at the thoughts and behavior of those who follow that diet. 80/10/10 is nothing more than a prescription for clueless misery.

HeavenHands,

Curious as to what you thought about the ideas Chek expressed in the video. The few comments that I read beneath the vid focused on that

[www.youtube.com]

this is another video
the first video was 6 minutes of meaningless rambling.

in the video above, a rawbrah draws the invalid conclusion that 5 months on raw vegan and subsequent failure is an indication that the diet is flawed.

it is a shame that so much misinformation such as this is propagated.

All that happened there is that one man calmly brought forth an opinion. In the process, one of the most insanely delusional and tortured egos on the internet felt offended. Now, we all have to deal with it and its need to avenge itself.

I don't believe that Chek's theory is justification for eating meat, but I also don't remember him saying that it is. He simply articulated a thought that has probably not occurred to 99.99999999999999% of the people in this world. I'm not a soil scientist. Because I pursue truth I don't speak authoritatively about things that I know very little about. That's it. I do agree with his statements about gurus who know nothing about nutrition and life and who inevitably fail those who are gullible enough to follow them. Wherever you find people in need, you will find very disturbed people who are trying to liberate them of their money and their identity. When they fail at doing this through pure guile, they resort to anger. That's what I see.

Tamukh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> HeavenHands,
>
> Curious as to what you thought about the ideas
> Chek expressed in the video. The few comments
> that I read beneath the vid focused on that

who is angry, be specific . i posted a scientific paper that disproves their 'opinions'

life vs lifelessness

Diogenez, I think HH was referring to the comments on the YouTube page.

HeavenHands,

The thought that soil is composed of dead living things, which plants that we eat uptake, HAS probably occured to most people on the planet, excepting perhaps people that can't spell "bro'"

they are xtian, nuff said. aka they were told lies as children and under over due pressure to conform in their mentality

life vs lifelessness

Really? You come from a strange land my friend. Where I come from, the overwhelming majority of people simply see dirt as dirt and have given zero thought to what it's composed of or that there are even differences in soil. The notion that a head of lettuce is composed of the properties of the soil from which it sprang is a little too out there for "my people."

Tamukha Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> HeavenHands,
>
> The thought that soil is composed of dead living
> things, which plants that we eat uptake, HAS
> probably occured to most people on the planet,
> excepting perhaps people that can't spell "bro'"
>

As Prana said, I was referring to the comments at youtube and in general bemoaning the lack of peaceful cyber-space reserved for health junkies and truth-seekers away from the Rupert Murdochish clamor of anger, fabrication, psychopathy, and self-promotion. 5D earth can't get here soon enough!

Just looked at the youtube comments for the first time in 24 hours. Things are looking a bit more rational. Oops, but according to the comments I'm all wrong because logic and rationale are products of left-brain activity which is apparently THE cause of male pattern baldness, so claims the angry vegan who loves animals that eat animals but loves to hate human beings who disagree with them, regardless of if they eat animals or not.

Diogenez Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> who is angry, be specific . i posted a scientific
> paper that disproves their 'opinions'



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/20/2011 05:00PM by HeavenHands.

Tam and I (virtually neighbours) hale from farm country. We may just be taking for granted our rather down to earthy view of soils and it's processes. It doesn't seem that mysterious to me, I mean, even city folk know about fertilizing soil to get plants to grow well. A little Miracle-Gro, anyone?

Diogenez Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> they are xtian, nuff said. aka they were told
> lies as children and under over due pressure to
> conform in their mentality

could we keep religious slandering out of these discussions .. its very disrespectfull to the christians that read, write and lurk here. Thanks very much !

...Jodi, the banana eating buddhist

Ha Jo, I had no idea what that even meant! Makes sense though, Xmas, Xtians.
I agree though, that's rude and uncalled for.

That's understood and I'm personally well aware of the basics of soil and its relationship with the plant world. I also come from a place with a lot of farms but I do live in the college town/island that it surrounds. There are a lot of people around here who have never read a book, let alone eaten a salad and given any thought to whether or not the tomato in it feasted on whatever to get big and strong.

coco Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tam and I (virtually neighbours) hale from farm
> country. We may just be taking for granted our
> rather down to earthy view of soils and it's
> processes. It doesn't seem that mysterious to me,
> I mean, even city folk know about fertilizing soil
> to get plants to grow well. A little Miracle-Gro,
> anyone?

to me moving beyond myth is empowering and i see all people as Bright. (having a worldview that is naturalistic, even if they are in the closet about it) it is not their fault or anything negative it is just something their parents put them into or the culture of their community. nobody IS anything people Do stuff. that is very important and how debates are won/lost.

peace to all life as it is a need we all share and if people want to divide others into groups it will not work as empathy is in us all, the need to give it and to get it.

1

i saw the study on soil and that organic soil is more important as it allows for stuff to grow that would not be able to in convention poisoned soil. But that in no way can be hijacked to make a pro paleo (indigenous meat eating) argument that is anti vegan or raw. like i said raw braws got punked.

life vs lifelessness

HeavenHands,

As coco mentioned, we're from agricultural regions in our respective nations, and even suburbanites in each of our "hereabouts" are aware that soil needs decomposing stuff to produce plants. In any case, most people on the planet are not so divorced from the natural world as some of us in North America are, I'd wager, so they are aware of the cycle of life in dirt, etc.

Find it frightening that you live in a college town where people don't read books. Now that is a strange land . . .

So sorry if I ruined your day.

Diogenez Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ok get this . they made another video saying
> Vegan Raw diets lower testosterone yet this study
> proves other wise.
> [www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]
> 7/pdf/83-6691152a.pdf
>
> [www.youtube.com]
> =relmfu

Its not really fair for Paul Chek to say that vegan diets lower testosterone. Every vegan diet is different, Ive found that eating high fat jacks up my hormones, it didn't really matter if it was plant or animal.

From skimming that article, I can only assume that it's useless to this argument because it does not take into account how long the subjects of the study had been vegan or vegetarian. It says that they recorded their lifestyle habits. They make no mention of qualifying or disqualifying subjects based on the length of their commitment to a particular diet. The sex-drive problem has always been related to issues over the long-term. If a man eats no animal products for 3 months, he can legitimately call himself a vegan. However, that does not make him a good subject for a study on the effects of veganism.

Not trying to take a side here. Just pointing out the classic vegan argumentative weakness...logic.

Diogenez Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ok get this . they made another video saying
> Vegan Raw diets lower testosterone yet this study
> proves other wise.
> [www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]
> 7/pdf/83-6691152a.pdf
>
> [www.youtube.com]
> =relmfu