THE "CHATBOX"

A place to relax and socialize - to muse, think aloud and suggest

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Postby HonestlyNow on Wed May 10, 2017 2:19 am

From this post in Devolving Darwin:
patrix wrote:It's interesting to note how a controversial subject diet really is. I don't want to step on any toes, and I am speculating. I think that is pretty necessary to try and get to the bottom of these kind of subjects. And yes, I happen to suspect veganism is a psyop, and seeing these kind of in my opinion emotional out-lashes strengthens that suspicion.

Patrix, you say that veganism is being pushed; I can't say if it is or is not. Without specifying that it is raw-food veganism, I'm going to assume that you are talking about cooked food vegan/vegetarianism. Knowing what I now know, I would place that in the "Controlled Opposition" category.

~~~~~

Official story: 19 hi-jackers, blah, blah, blah.
Official story: Eat meat and a variety of other cooked foods.

Controlled opposition: Other stuff that doesn't make sense, confusion among researchers, but keep the major media sources sacrosanct.
Controlled opposition: Other stuff that doesn't make sense, confusion among researchers, but keep the idea of treating disease sacrosanct.

Discoverable reality: That one can closely study the output of media and find inconsistencies both within the output itself and between the output and observable reality which can only be explained by what is known here by the term media fakery.
Discoverable reality: That one can closely study nature, anatomy and physiology, as well as observe the results of certain lifestyle changes in other persons (and ourselves), to find that, to put it shortly and without explanation here, we are a frugivore species.

~~~~~

And now, I ask, before you bring up again that lard and tallow and butter are good food, have you looked into fruitarianism, which would be a diet high in fresh, raw, properly-grown, picked-ripe fruits and berries and melons?
HonestlyNow
Member
 
Posts: 412
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:15 pm

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Postby dblitz on Wed May 10, 2017 4:42 am

Regarding the nuclear question, I am convinced the test footage is fake but I am not convinced nuclear power generation is also fake. There is just so much infrastructure and people involved, including people who study and teach the subject for a career, seems it would be pretty hard to fake all that. So I'm on the fence for now.

Anyway, Youtube recommended one of this guy's videos to me for some reason, he calls himself Thunderfoot and he makes science, anti-feminist and other 'debunking' videos. In this one he tours a nuclear reactor, check it out, I would like to see what the members think:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDarcdMiIGs

Sorry about the link, I tried -_-
dblitz
Member
 
Posts: 246
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 2:32 am

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Postby patrix on Wed May 10, 2017 7:47 am

HonestlyNow » May 10th, 2017, 3:19 am wrote:Patrix, you say that veganism is being pushed; I can't say if it is or is not. Without specifying that it is raw-food veganism, I'm going to assume that you are talking about cooked food vegan/vegetarianism. Knowing what I now know, I would place that in the "Controlled Opposition" category.

And now, I ask, before you bring up again that lard and tallow and butter are good food, have you looked into fruitarianism, which would be a diet high in fresh, raw, properly-grown, picked-ripe fruits and berries and melons?

Dear HonestlyNow
I've looked into vegetarianism/veganism a great deal. I've also looked into the Flat Earth Hypothesis. And I have conclusively dismissed both based on my research and personal experiences.
And what's left after that is to figure out the Cui Bono - Why are these fallacies promoted? Who gains from it?
Simon gave me the best explanation regarding FE on this site in his excellent Flat Earth DBA article.
And my theory when it comes to vegetarianism/veganism is what I have stated before. Animal fat is a required nutrient for humans and by removing that from our diet through propaganda and social engineering, the Nutwork gains in numerous ways. Animal fat is essential for us to be able to make cholesterol. Without adequate amounts of cholesterol our body have to ration and recycle it. This works for some time but will gradually lead us into impaired health and disease. One of the first consequences of too little cholesterol is impaired brain function. We become short sighted, irritable and depressed. The brain is a real resource hog and without adequate nutrition, the body can simply not allow it to work at full speed. But the brain is powered by glucose, you might argue. This is true, but what they don’t tell you is that the body will produce all the glucose you need from fat. You don’t need to eat any carbohydrates. I’m not saying you shouldn’t, but if you get too much glucose/fructose from your diet this will get you into trouble, *especially* if you don’t eat enough animal fat. High blood sugar promotes cell damage. That's why insulin is secreted to make our cells remove it from the blood stream. And cholesterol is needed to repair the damage.
This is why I would say a fruit based diet is probably the most harmful imaginable, aside from maybe a diet consisting of only sugary drinks (fruit juices and soda). Fructose is very hard for the body to handle. It’s a poison similar to alcohol. Some is manageable, but high amounts is toxic. In fruits the impact is somewhat softened by fibre, but will still be harmful in excess.

Have you looked at the video I posted before HonestlyNow? Posted again below for your convenience. I would say it gets a bit weird at the end talking about the elites cannibalism and child abuse, which may well be true, but I regard it more of a psyop to instill fear. But up until that point I agree on everything in it.
I’m deeply concerned by this psyop. Beside all the pointless suffering (heart disease, diabetes, cancer, dementia etc), monoculture crops produced with fertilizer and pesicides is rapidly destroying the earths soils. We need to get back to traditional small scale farming with cattle or the soils will erode irrecoverably leading to a global famine. Which may sadly be precisely what tptb have in mind for us.

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_CXwa-_5Uk
Last edited by patrix on Wed May 10, 2017 10:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
patrix
Member
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:24 am

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Postby HonestlyNow on Wed May 10, 2017 10:14 am

patrix » May 10th, 2017, 2:47 am wrote:
HonestlyNow » May 10th, 2017, 3:19 am wrote:And now, I ask, before you bring up again that lard and tallow and butter are good food, have you looked into fruitarianism, which would be a diet high in fresh, raw, properly-grown, picked-ripe fruits and berries and melons?

I've looked into vegetarianism/veganism a great deal.

So, the answer would be "No."

patrix » May 10th, 2017, 2:47 am wrote:Animal fat is essential for us to be able to make cholesterol. Without adequate amounts of cholesterol our body have to ration and recycle it.

As I've noted to you previously, animals make their own cholesterol, including the human animal.

patrix » May 10th, 2017, 2:47 am wrote:This works for some time but will gradually lead us into impaired health and disease. One of the first consequences of too little cholesterol is impaired brain function. We become short sighted, irritable and depressed. The brain is a real resource hog and without adequate nutrition, the body can simply not allow it to work at full speed. But the brain is powered by glucose, you might argue. This is true, but what they don’t tell you is that the body will produce all the glucose you need from fat. You don’t need to eat any carbohydrates. I’m not saying you shouldn’t, but if you get too much glucose/fructose from your diet this will get you into trouble, *especially* if you don’t eat enough animal fat. High blood sugar promotes cell damage. That's why insulin is secreted to make our cells remove it from the blood stream. And cholesterol is needed to repair the damage.
This is why I would say a fruit based diet is probably the most harmful imaginable, aside from maybe a diet consisting of only sugary drinks (fruit juices and soda). Fructose is very hard for the body to handle. It’s a poison similar to alcohol. Some is manageable, but high amounts is toxic. In fruits the impact is somewhat softened by fibre, but will still be harmful in excess.


Fructose and glucose are simple sugars. A simple sugar is the proper fuel for cells. Fructose, the highest energetic form of a simple sugar, enters a cell through diffusion. Neurons attract fructose molecules. Glucose, to feed the cell, needs a transport into the cell which is facilitated by the hormone insulin.
Source: information taken from The Detox Miracle Sourcebook, Robert Morse N.D.

The phenomenal results of the Raw Fruit Lifestyle will become known, given time. Then, if you're still around and paying attention, you, too, will know. Until then, good luck, patrix!



Have I watched your video? I barely "glanced" through it; I couldn't stand the presentation. However, you and your posting of it inspired me to write my previous Chatbox post. Thank you.


Edit to add:
patrix wrote:*especially* if you don’t eat enough animal fat.

I'm really curious as to the proper amount of animal fat recommended. Is that something you can answer here?
HonestlyNow
Member
 
Posts: 412
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:15 pm

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Postby patrix on Wed May 10, 2017 1:21 pm

So, the answer would be "No."

To me it's not a different diet. And eating a lot of fructose dense fruits for an extended period is not something I would recommend for the reasons I mentioned. Look up "Sugar the bitter truth" for a good explanation on the problem with sugar and fructose.
As I've noted to you previously, animals make their own cholesterol

This is not true for humans. We need animal fat to be able to produce the amounts of cholesterol we need. AHA is part of the Nutwork nutrition and medicine. No organisation in history has produced more heart disease than AHA.

Fructose and glucose are simple sugars. A simple sugar is the proper fuel for cells. Fructose, the highest energetic form of a simple sugar, enters a cell through diffusion. Neurons attract fructose molecules. Glucose, to feed the cell, needs a transport into the cell which is facilitated by the hormone insulin.
Source: information taken from The Detox Miracle Sourcebook, Robert Morse N.D.

The phenomenal results of the Raw Fruit Lifestyle will become known, given time. Then, if you're still around and paying attention, you, too, will know. Until then, good luck, patrix!

This is not true at all for human metabolism. We are omnivores but are best adapted to fat burning. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatty_acid_metabolism Yes it's Wickedpedia but it's correct

I'm really curious as to the proper amount of animal fat recommended. Is that something you can answer here?

I've been experimenting for 6 years. When I first understood that LowCarbHigh(animal)Fat was so beneficial I went a bit fanatical for about two years eating as little carbs as possible. I gained a lot of health and lost weight. Today I eat a regular diet but limit my starch (bread, pasta, rice potato) and avoid vegetable oils and sugary drinks. I replace that with mostly butter and cream. I don't count calories or fat intake. I do however skip breakfast which I experience is very healthy. A key thing with nutrition is to get the fasting insulin to low levels and an extended fasting really period helps with that.
This video summaries pretty well where I've landed

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EmcyfzGIzw

Thank you. Good luck to to you too HonestlyNow.
patrix
Member
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:24 am

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Postby HonestlyNow on Wed May 10, 2017 1:33 pm

patrix wrote:
HonestlyNow wrote:So, the answer would be "No."

To me it's not a different diet.

It most certainly is a different diet. If you can't see that cooked is different than raw, and that fruits are different from vegetables, then how should one consider any advice that comes from you?
HonestlyNow
Member
 
Posts: 412
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:15 pm

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Postby patrix on Thu May 11, 2017 4:11 am

simonshack » May 11th, 2017, 12:34 am wrote:°

Hey everyone!

Ironically enough, this thread (on my own forum) fills me with dire terror! Or maybe I should call it "evolution terror". And this, just as I thought that this very forum was ALL about shredding our various fears of living in this mad world of ours.

See, having lived in the below-mentioned places, my lifetime diet has included the FOLLOWING FOODS


Dear Simon

I don't know if you're ironic and/or thinks this draws away from the purpose of this forum. And if so, I'm the one to blame. This is a subject I think is important and I've looked into nutrition and medicine a great deal. And it was when I found the things typically researched here that I could understand why things are so upside down as they are. It is not honest mistakes but intentional.

We have an epidemic of obesity, diabetes, cancer and dementia and I believe Nutwork nutrition and medicine is the cause.

Regarding diet the human body is very flexible and it typically takes years, even decades, for diet related problems to occur. If you had a good diet, you could be on a bad one for a long time before having trouble. Especially when young.

And I don't be to be alarmist or fanatic. I think people should eat mostly what they like. But what gets to me is that the Nutwork have engineered us to do the exact opposite of what we should do if we do have diet related problems. And this makes people sick and kills them. For real.

The other day a colleague in my age (40) told me his doctor had given him statins because he had high cholesterol. If he eats that shit for an extended period his liver might never be able to make adequate amounts of cholesterol again and he will eventually get heart disease, arthritis or something else nice because of it. I tried to talk to him about it and give references but I don't know if it helped. I mean what the fuck do I know? I'm not a doctor.
Last edited by patrix on Thu May 11, 2017 5:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
patrix
Member
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:24 am

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Postby brianv on Thu May 11, 2017 4:59 am

I've been avoiding this thread and others topics like the plague, why do we now have to suffer them in the chatbox?
Start a fucking blog somewhere...far away preferably!
brianv
Member
 
Posts: 3959
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:19 pm

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Postby simonshack on Thu May 11, 2017 10:06 am

Dear patrix,

Yes of course, my 'food terror' post was lightheartedly ironic - it wasn't directed at any members in particular and I didn't mean to offend or make fun of anyone! However, to be quite frank, I've been a bit taken aback at the apparent, escalating 'tones' of the diet debates here - what with the various advocates of, shall we say, diametrically opposed (or 'exclusive') nutritional regimes. For what it's worth, my (perhaps overly-simplistic) opinion is that we are omnivores - and that the more varied our food intake, the better. Then again, I fully respect anyone's personal nutritional choices - but just think we should stop short of "bickering" about what's best for us. Having said that, I understand and appreciate your concerns about the vicious health-harming propaganda - most likely sponsored by Big Pharma - and it can't be bad to spread good info (and food for thought) so as to ... stay healthy and survive - two things that I hold very dearly!
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6616
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Postby patrix on Thu May 11, 2017 1:09 pm

Simon,

Good points. I saw the irony of course but have made mistakes on that before. To much doom and gloom doesn't do any good and is also precisely the state these pricks want us to be in. And I may be a bit overly emphatic about all this for many reasons. One being that my mother was heavily involved in the anti Nukes and Nuclear movement in the 70s and 80s. I don't have the heart to tell her that her son does not believe Nukes exists and I still admire her for what she's done. She devoted her time to something she thought was important but did the mistake of trusting those who betrayed her the most.

And now I'm seeing her and many of her generation becoming sick in their older days. Pills and heart, back, hip and eye surgery is the Nutwork cure. And it doesn't do much good but quite the opposite. Heart surgery almost killed my dad and mom has made numerous back surgeries but is of course not releived from pain anyway. And I happen to think that if these fuckers did not use their propaganda to make them limit the one nutrient they need the most when getting older, they might not be in this situation.

brianv » May 11th, 2017, 5:59 am wrote:I've been avoiding this thread and others topics like the plague, why do we now have to suffer them in the chatbox?
Start a fucking blog somewhere...far away preferably!

Point taken brianv. I appreciate the honesty. I live in Sweden. Hope that's far away enough. :) A bit too lazy to blog though but I promise to limit my diet preaching here from now on.
patrix
Member
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:24 am

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Postby patrix on Sun May 14, 2017 7:28 am

I'm curious if this video of building 7 collapsing has been talked about here. Does it show signs of CGI? I'm not very good at detecting that.
https://webmshare.com/aox0g
patrix
Member
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:24 am

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Postby simonshack on Sun May 14, 2017 8:20 am

patrix » May 14th, 2017, 7:28 am wrote:I'm curious if this video of building 7 collapsing has been talked about here. Does it show signs of CGI? I'm not very good at detecting that.
https://webmshare.com/aox0g


Dear Patrix,

Have you watched my "WTC7 STUDY"?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4Vrsjs_cLg

At about 5 minutes into the video I analyze that particular "WTC7 collapse footage" (which, as you can see, was indeed aired on TV).

Not only do all existing "WTC7 collapse clips" show signs of CGI - they also contradict each other in several ways. Therefore, they cannot represent real camera footage captured on September 11, 2001.
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6616
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Postby patrix on Sun May 14, 2017 10:18 am

simonshack » May 14th, 2017, 9:20 am wrote:
patrix » May 14th, 2017, 7:28 am wrote:I'm curious if this video of building 7 collapsing has been talked about here. Does it show signs of CGI? I'm not very good at detecting that.
https://webmshare.com/aox0g


Dear Patrix,

Have you watched my "WTC7 STUDY"?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4Vrsjs_cLg

At about 5 minutes into the video I analyze that particular "WTC7 collapse footage" (which, as you can see, was indeed aired on TV).

Not only do all existing "WTC7 collapse clips" show signs of CGI - they also contradict each other in several ways. Therefore, they cannot represent real camera footage captured on September 11, 2001.

Thank you Simon. No I haven't seen that one. Looking forward to it :)
patrix
Member
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:24 am

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Postby hoi.polloi on Sun May 14, 2017 3:56 pm

patrix, with truly all due respect, I think it is critical that the human race begins to develop a "defense" against the most obvious signs of fakery and forgery, and if you would recommend our site to others (though I know many are reticent to do so for various personal reasons) you should demonstrate an understanding of our research. Please do work on your basic abilities to detect fakery, CGI, compositing and signs of doctoring. It is integral to the arguments of this forum. Please educate yourself on the differences between the excuse of "compression error" and the simple logical problems with the "physics" of the CGI shown on 9/11.

I appreciate your humble stance, but definitely take up our invitation to no longer remain helpless to manipulative imagery. You don't have to be an expert. Just use your brain. On our site, you not only have permission. You are encouraged to doubt video and imagery and help everyone come to understandings about what is or is not a raw unedited/untampered image. And to at least know about, if not understand, the many ways that imagery is tampered with today.

A great place to start is to watch some Hollywood "behind the scenes" featurettes, found on many DVDs or even all over YouTube, which compare a production's pre-modified footage to the final format. If you see just these enough, you can begin to see blatant and obvious signs of the seams and glue, where it isn't already apparent.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5053
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Postby Flabbergasted on Thu May 18, 2017 4:27 pm

Over the last couple of decades a story about a monstrously large “Pre-Columbian” Chinese fleet has surfaced in the Western media, giving rise to the so-called “Zheng He fever”.

It’s strange that such an impressive military and technical accomplishment could have remained ignored for centuries. It also begs the question of how long it took China to reach the pinnacle of naval engineering which they paraded along the shores of the Indian Ocean in the 1400s. Their 140-m long 9-masted super junks seem to have materialized out of the blue. Manned by 28,000 men, the fleet is said to have consisted of approximately 300 ships, 62 of which were king-size. Large vessels were equipped with sophisticated balanced rudders and water-tight bulkheads. Some people have expressed doubts the ships ever existed (a 140-m framework without iron is hard to picture), but in 1962 a rudder post measuring 11 m was found in the original shipyard. By reverse calculation, the respective hull would have been an estimated 152 m long.

Chinese super junk compared to Columbus' Niña:
Image
Source of picture and information: “1001 Inventions: the enduring legacy of the Muslim civilization”, p. 254-7.

One wonders how all this relates to China’s propaganda efforts to conjure up the image of a super power, past and present. I am not dismissing the story (allegedly backed up by Zheng He’s own writings and the existence of artifacts in museums), and I do suspect seafaring was much more common in the distant past than most historians are willing to concede, but the whole thing appears to be cluttered with fiction and politics.

For the record:

A boy by the name Ma He was born in Kunming, Mongolia, to Muslim parents. His father and grandfather took him on pilgrimages to Mecca during which he perfected his Arabic and Chinese language skills. When his town was invaded by the Ming dynasty, Ma He was taken prisoner and made a eunuch. He became a servant in the imperial household of Duke Yan (Zhu Di) who later seized the throne and became the Emperor Yong Le.

The boy was very gifted and grew up (according to some accounts, over 2 m tall) to become a successful military commander and the emperor’s closest advisor. He received several high honors, was allowed to use the surname Zheng (hence, Zheng He), and was eventually given command of the Chinese imperial fleet.

Over a period of 28 years and assisted by other eunuch leaders (including Hou Hsien and Wang Ching-Hung), Zheng He conducted seven expeditions, some of which required the fleet to split in two: 1) Champa, Java, Sumatra, Ceylon and Calcutta (1405-1407), 2) Siam, India and Cochin (1407-1409), 3) East Indies and Quilon (1409-1411), 4) East Indies, Bengal, Maldives and Hormuz (1413-1415), 5) Java, Ryukyu, Brunei, Hormuz, Aden, Mogadishu and Mombasa (1416-1419), 6) 36 states between Borneo and Zanzibar (1421-1422), and 7) 20 realms and sultanates from Java to Mecca to East Africa, possibly rounding the Cape (1431-1433). There is no record of a voyage to America, as claimed by historical novelist Gavin Menzies.

Map of expeditions:
Image
Source: http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0 ... 2/map.html

As the story goes, the expeditions were not motivated by greed, but by scientific discovery, trade (gems, minerals, plants, exotic animals, drugs, medicine), the wish to improve navigational and cartographical knowledge, and the desire to make “the transforming power of the imperial virtue” known to all nations.

Zheng He apparently died in India in 1433, on his way back to China. At the time, Confucian philosophy was enjoying a comeback. The internationalist outlook which characterized early 15th century China was replaced by a more isolationist mindset, and seagoing trade was eventually banned. In 1625, the Chinese emperor ordered the destruction of all oceangoing ships. If true, this change in Chinese government policy was everything the European explorers could have wished for.

Lecture by Adam Smith:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=le7r93whykg
Flabbergasted
Member
 
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:19 am

PreviousNext

Return to THE LIVING ROOM

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests