"The Crisis of Civilization"

[Ryan]

With all the chemicals in our food and environment, there'll be more gays in the future, and humanity may have problems to reproduce itself if one day half the people are gays. Self-evident truth.

Seriously, what the... !?!? Homosexuality comes from chemicals in our food and environment?!?!? Boy, did your critical thinking suddenly degrade! :O

I think you nailed it with your comments, Anne. baklavatsky might have a few issues he's not really looking at...

 

[Tenten]

With all the chemicals in our food and environment, there'll be more gays in the future, and humanity may have problems to reproduce itself if one day half the people are gays. Self-evident truth.

Seriously, what the... !?!? Homosexuality comes from chemicals in our food and environment?!?!? Boy, did your critical thinking suddenly degrade! :O

I think you nailed it with your comments, Anne. baklavatsky might have a few issues he's not really looking at...

FYI

_http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/medical_notes/449303.stm

...

What are "hormone disruptors"?

A number of pesticides which are commonly found in our food have been identified by the European Union as likely to cause disturbance to natural hormones in our bodies.

These "hormone disruptors" can affect behaviour, brain development and development of reproductive organs.

They have also been linked to such as falling sperm counts and girls entering puberty earlier.

Hormone disruptors can cause problems at very low doses. Some block the bodies natural hormones from working, while others mimic the action of natural hormones.

Is there a risk to children?

Some scientists believe exposure to pesticides in the womb may be to blame for the growth of behavioural disorders among children in industrial countries.

They also suspect that subtle harm done to the brain early in life may not become evident until much later.

...

_http://www.pan-uk.org/pestnews/actives/endocrin.htm

About PAN UK
Pesticide Action Network UK (PAN UK) promotes healthy food, agriculture and an environment which will provide food and meet public health needs without dependence on toxic chemicals, and without harm to food producers and agricultural workers.


PAN UK is an independent, non-profit organisation. We work nationally and internationally with like-minded groups and individuals concerned with health, environment and development to:
Eliminate the hazards of pesticides
Reduce dependence on pesticides and prevent unnecessary expansion of use
Increase the sustainable and ecological alternatives to chemical pest control.

Endocrine disrupting pesticides

Many pesticides are now suspected of being endocrine disruptors - chemicals that can lead to an increase in birth defects, sexual abnormalities and reproductive failure. Gwynne Lyons of WWF-UK examines the current evidence and potential for adverse effects to occur in both wildlife and human populations.

Endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are substances that can cause adverse effects by interfering in some way with the body's hormones or chemical messengers. These substances are therefore called hormone disruptors or endocrine disruptors, as it is the endocrine glands that secrete the hormones.

Hormones play a crucial role in guiding normal cell differentiation in early life forms, and so exposure to endocrine disrupting substances in the egg or in the womb can alter the normal process of development. Mature animals can also be affected, but it is the developing organism that is especially vulnerable. Exposure at this sensitive time may cause effects that are not evident until later in life, such as effects on learning ability, behaviour, reproduction and increased susceptibility to cancer and other diseases.

Few official lists of suspected endocrine disruptors have been published. Table 1 details the pesticides that have been identified as potential endocrine disruptors in the list produced under the auspices of the Oslo and Paris Commissions (OSPAR). Table 2 details additional pesticides which might be endocrine disruptors and which feature on the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) list of chemicals in the environment reported to have reproductive and/or endocrine disrupting effects. However, for some of these substances, without further detailed investigation of their mode of action, it is not known whether their reproductive effects are actually the consequence of endocrine disruption. Apart from the pesticides documented in these two tables, others suspected of having endocrine effects include: metam natrium, methylbromide, carbendazim, prochloraz, dibromoethane (EDB), propanil, iprodione, thiram, diuron, diazinon and fenthion. These pesticides were amongst the 116 substances on which information was examined by EU experts, brought together by the European Commission in September 1999 for the prpose of drawing up a list of endocrine disrupting substances.

Effects of EDCs

The effects that can be seen in an organism exposed to an endocrine disrupting chemical (EDC) depend on which hormone system is targeted. For example, if an organism is exposed to sex hormone disrupting pesticides in the womb, then the sort of effects that may be evident include effects on sexual behaviour, structural deformities of the reproductive tract, including intersex type conditions and undescended testes, deficits in sperm counts, and effects on sex ratios. However, if the primary action is on the thyroid hormones, then as these hormones are responsible for metabolism and normal brain development, exposure in the womb may cause effects on intelligence and growth. Laboratory tests have confirmed that endocrine disrupting chemicals do indeed cause such effects in exposed animals, but all the effects listed above have also been noted in wildlife or humans heavily exposed to endocrine disrupting pesticides or industrial chemicals.

Some endocrine disruptors may exert their action by interfering with the brain's release of hormones, which in turn regulate the production of other hormones that control the growth and the activity of many other endocrine glands. Indeed, the pituitary has been termed the conductor of the endocrine orchestra, and pollutants that cause the pituitary region in the brain to malfunction may therefore have multiple effects.

....

 

[Ryan]

FYI

Thanks for the data. Can you show me how they support a broad assumption like, "With all the chemicals in our food and environment, there'll be more gays in the future" ? It seems like a false correlation to me.

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

my books showed some researches that claimed that homosexuality is largely determined by traumas linked to bad experiences with the other sex

Researchers can claim anything they want.

that there is this thread of thinking that claims that we have to accept homosexuals...

Well you accept people with green eyes right? Is there a thread of thinking that claims we have to accept green-eyed people? Why would acceptance or not of green eyed people even be a question that requires threads of thinking?

But, it is a widely known fact that a LOT of homosexuals like very young men. Maybe you don't agree, but you just have to look at it to see it. In "hot lines for chat and meet", they warn young homos about this.

They have the same "warnings" for young "heteros". They even have entire mainstream TV SHOWS set up where they have cops pose as young girls and try to get "picked up" by somebody in a chatroom to bust them on TV.

fundamentals of nature and mankind as divided in a sacred polarity that cannot be overlooked or denied.

Sacred to whom?

because everyone knows that TODAY the ones who go in prison are not the gays

Well everyone also knows that the ones who go to prison are not the green-eyed people, it's the ones who talk against the lack of conscience of outrageously transgressive green-eyes. Again, why would you talk about "the gays" and how many of them go to jail and not "the green-eyed people"? What does being gay have to do with jail, why are you even drawing that connection like it has some significance, any more significance than drawing a connection between green-eyed people and jail?

People who talk against gays and jews (zionists) are targetted now.

Jews are NOT zionists. Targeting jews makes no more sense than targeting gays or people with green eyes. By confusing jews and zionists (psychopaths), you're trying to equate gays with psychopaths. That's pretty manipulative, though it seems like you're not just trying to manipulate us, you've manipulated yourself to the point where you don't even see the absurdity and serious distortions of your thinking regarding this matter. It's clear that you have a serious psychological problem with homosexuals. It is a program. My advice is pretty straight forward - find where this program came from and throw it out. To help yourself see it, in everything you said on this thread, take the word gays or homosexuals and replace it with "people with green eyes". Once you see the absurdity of that, you will understand exactly how your statements about homosexuals look to others. Addressing that distortion is upto you.

Do the homos have to be protected anymore?

What about the green-eyed people? How about the brown-haired people? People who like Honda Civics?

They have their own "B'nai B'rith"! They became the gay lobby, same as civil liberties lobby and jewish lobby. Gays did the same as the Zionists did. They share the same 'victimist communitarism'.

If everybody was up in arms about green-eyed people, they'd have a friggin lobby too. But again, don't confuse zionists/israel and jews. The "Israeli Lobby", and the Zionist manipulation of the population is designed to create the connection that speaking out against psychopathic Zionists = being against Jews = antisemitism. Anybody who speaks out against JEWS (not Zionists, Israel, etc, but JEWS as a people) is insane, just like anybody who speaks out against homosexuals or green-eyed people or against people who love toyota corolas.

Some people only see the anti-fascist battles of the past

Don't call homosexuals fascists. Just don't. Similarly, don't call people who like Honda Civics fascist either. It's equally absurd in both cases. Women, black people, homosexuals, and many other groups have historically been oppressed and denied all sorts of rights, and often religiously persecuted etc. Since it was all completely insane and done by psychopaths to draw attention away from themselves, these groups are now trying to regain their rightful status as being no different than anybody else. If honda civic lovers were persecuted, they'd also have a lobby, and they'd also be fighting for being treated as equals, which they ARE. So take your bigotry and address it, because it is pretty serious, and obvious to EVERYBODY who's reading your post. If you're going to argue that we're all just blind and don't "see" what you're seeing, you might want to consider the improbability of that situation before making such an argument. You know very well what we do on this forum - do the Work on self. We're not a bunch of naive and ignorant dupes running around screaming opinions. So you have to at least consider the nature of the forum you're in, and just out of that consideration, seriously consider what is being said to you by many people. You know how programs work? They speak "through" you, pretend they ARE your own mind, your thoughts, so you'll no doubt feel that you're just being honest, unable to see your own distortions or blindness because they are (for the time being) fused with your mind. Which is why a network is so vital, and why if you have any understanding or faith in the concept of a network and how it works to root our programs within each of us that we by ourselves are unable to see, you'll seriously consider what is being said.

 

[baklavatsky]

You anart and scioagapeomnis always take my words the wrong way, it's almost like you do it intentionally.

I never called gays "fascists". This is ridiculous.

I said that the battle against homophobics is a battle of the past. Today, it's people who criticise the excesses of the gay lobby who are targetted with heavy prison terms.

If you don't understand that, it's because you clearly don't want to understand.

Or you're afraid of something...

Also, we all know for certain that "zionists are not all jews, and all jews are not zionists". Right. I said "Jewish lobby" and not "Zionist lobby" because most zionist are not jews, they're christians! Right? I should have said "Jewish zionist lobby".

Do you know "communitarism"? This is a strenght of Jews, and Zionists use this to their own advantage. Now other groups copied this model and became a communitarist lobby. Victimist communitarism supports this creation of many lobby, such as the lobby of Blacks, Gays, Women, etc. I'm not against these people (!!!), I'm against "victimist communitarism" as a new communitarism, which is against universalism. Universalism is a higher moral ideal than communitarism.

Can you understand this?

It dissolves real politics into communities and groups fighting wih each other to proove they're the biggest victim in recent history. The anglo-american elits like this because it weakens the State!

In France, the Socialist Party doesn't talk to "French citizens", it talks to "Young people", "Black", Gays", "Women", etc. (all poorly defined concepts!). Therefore the French SP is racialist because it supports an essentialist vision of humanity!

 

[anart]

You anart and scioagapeomnis always take my words the wrong way, it's almost like you do it intentionally.

No, not at all. We took your words for what they mean. If you do not mean what you write, then use different words. I have neither the time nor the inclination to walk you through your consistent examples of hatred and bigotry based on ignorance - using the word 'disgusted' indicates hatred, pure and simple.

If you don't understand that, it's because you clearly don't want to understand.

Or you're afraid of something...

Exactly - if you do not understand that your bigotry and hatred are indicative of a much deeper problem within yourself, most likely linked to your own sexuality, then it is because you do not want to understand - or you are afraid of something.

You see, what you have consistently written in this thread stands on its own and evidences serious issues that it would benefit you to discover and work on, if you are sincere. Posting that you are misunderstood and shifting your focus to take the heat off is not a tactic that works well on this forum - this forum is for the truth - not your opinions and certainly not your ignorance.

What you have posted concerning homosexuals is not the truth, equating homosexuality with bestiality and spamming your version of 'morality', as you did in your last two posts, which have been removed due to content, is so ignorant as to be mind-boggling.

This forum is not the place for such behavior and please understand that if you persist, you will be removed.

 

[anart]

FYI (posted information on soy/food consumption contributing to homosexuality)

Thanks for the data. Can you show me how they support a broad assumption like, "With all the chemicals in our food and environment, there'll be more gays in the future" ? It seems like a false correlation to me.

Yes, the connection between hormone production/level and sexual preference has never been proven, nor has a strong correlation ever been clinically indicated. See this thread for a discussion on it - http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=4339

 

[mudrabbit]

Hi baklavatsky,

Only have one comment to make concerning your take on all of this.

The fact that you separate gays out from the rest of the crowd shows how you think about homosexuality. It's not that your words are being taken the wrong way, it's how you use them that is telling. No amount of trying to explain it will work until you see it yourself.

I come from the South (Southern US), where racism was rampant when I grew up, and now live in what is known as "The Bible Belt". I've often heard the comment, "I've got black friends." (Or Cuban friends, or Mexican friends, or what ever you choose to fill in the blank). The fact that one has to distinguish their background, race, nationality, or orientation in itself proves this point. Rarely do you hear of anyone making a deal of describing the noun if their friend is white, and heterosexual.

The fact that some feel compelled to make this distinction indicates there is an issue there concerning that very distinction, IMO. Even if they don't see it themselves, their words betray them.

Peg

 

[Tenten]

FYI

Thanks for the data. Can you show me how they support a broad assumption like, "With all the chemicals in our food and environment, there'll be more gays in the future" ? It seems like a false correlation to me.

According to some studies, exposition to pesticids/fungicid modify sex behavior in the rat
For example : "Perinatal exposure to low levels of the environmental antiandrogen vinclozolin alters sex-differentiated social play and sexual behaviors in the rat
_http://www.ehponline.org/members/2005/7509/7509.html

You may be also interested in this document (pdf) "The role of animal behaviour in the study of endocrine-disrupting chemicals"
_http://www.life.uiuc.edu/bell/EDC%20an%20behav.pdf

So it seems that there are some effects on animals.

Regarding human sexuality, i couldn't find anything.

 

[Ryan]

Regarding human sexuality, i couldn't find anything.

So why did you post that data? Do you think there is something to baklavatsky's statement? Were you "defending" him? Did something of what he said resonate in you?

 

[Tenten]

Regarding human sexuality, i couldn't find anything.

So why did you post that data? Do you think there is something to baklavatsky's statement? Were you "defending" him? Did something of what he said resonate in you?

Data shows that some chemicals have effects on animal sexuality. Btw, overpopulation too have effects on animal sexuality (see "Behavioral sink" from John Calhoun). Human are animals .So those chemicals may have some effects on human too. This can't be ruled out. This is not proved but can't be ruled out.

That's why I answer your post.

 

[Ryan]

So those chemicals may have some effects on human too. This can't be ruled out. This is not proved but can't be ruled out.

That's why I answer your post.

Ok, I understand now. I didn't intend to rule out any possibilities with my original comment, but the context of baklavatsky's statement was not really about seriously exploring the possibilities and probabilities - it was about drawing ludicrous conclusions in order to justify an emotional reaction he had to homosexuality. Thus I responded in a slightly "tongue-in-cheek" manner. Sorry if this was a bit confusing.

Given the data discussed above though, it does seem that the probability is low (at best), osit.

 

[ella]

Re: \

The Excerpts from The Crisis of Civilization by Gennady Bondarev plus 4 whole chapters of the book can now be found here. The book discusses the events in the world from another angle, based on the works of Steiner. It talks about the role of secret societies and occult politics, and about spiritual tasks of different nations, most importantly Russia and Germany at the moment.
http://www.altanthroinfo.9f.com/BondarevExcerpts.htm

In 1916 Steiner said:

" . . . The greater part of humanity will continue to be influenced by America, but not the America we know today. It will not be long after the year 2000 has come round, that not a direct, but a kind of prohibition on all thinking will issue from America, a law whose purpose will be the suppression of all individual thinking (Apr. 4, 1916, GA 167).”