The Vegetarian Myth
- Thread starter truth seeker
- Start date
mada85
The Cosmic Force
Re: Consuming consciousness - I am stuck
Nobody, I think you've missed a very valuable learning experience offered by the quote above. Science has shown us the optimal foods for the human body. The Cs make the distinction between creatures that are the body of the mother (Earth), and the 'children of the cosmos' (humans). Are you here to learn?
Nobody said:
Nobody, I think you've missed a very valuable learning experience offered by the quote above. Science has shown us the optimal foods for the human body. The Cs make the distinction between creatures that are the body of the mother (Earth), and the 'children of the cosmos' (humans). Are you here to learn?
HiThere
The Living Force
Re: Consuming consciousness - I am stuck
Herbivores don't accumulate metals and toxic substances to the same degree as carnivores, as predators are higher up in the food chain. A diet consisting of mainly carnivores leads to high levels of undesirable metals etc over time.Nobody said:
Re: Consuming consciousness - I am stuck
Indisputable truth in this world is as scarce as hen's teeth. What you can find is details and information that give you an idea of what is more likely to be the truth and what is more likely to be a lie. There is also the idea of 'your truth' and 'my truth', which are, in a sense, equally valid for the individuals concerned. Secret agendas and disinfo and programming are actually a useful way to come to a close approximation of the truth of any given topic, rather than a reason to give up on finding such a thing. And here I'm talking about the programming and disinfo that comes from the ptb. For example, if you see programming around vegetarianism, then you at least have an idea that that might be the wrong option. If you see claims that animal fat makes you fat, or clogs your arteries with fat, a little research will soon prove that not only is this programming, it is also disinfo.
Vic said:
Indisputable truth in this world is as scarce as hen's teeth. What you can find is details and information that give you an idea of what is more likely to be the truth and what is more likely to be a lie. There is also the idea of 'your truth' and 'my truth', which are, in a sense, equally valid for the individuals concerned. Secret agendas and disinfo and programming are actually a useful way to come to a close approximation of the truth of any given topic, rather than a reason to give up on finding such a thing. And here I'm talking about the programming and disinfo that comes from the ptb. For example, if you see programming around vegetarianism, then you at least have an idea that that might be the wrong option. If you see claims that animal fat makes you fat, or clogs your arteries with fat, a little research will soon prove that not only is this programming, it is also disinfo.
Re: Consuming consciousness - I am stuck
That is a point, I admit. But still, I would be cautious in giving science such a credit. What IMO has shown us the optimal foods is the history of humanity before the agricultural revolution. And cannibalism is a part of it. On the islands of South Pacific you could buy human flesh on a market till the end of the 19th century. But meat is meat, it is nutrients-dense, essential for our body and so on. What really interests me is consuming one's consciousness. I am aware that we cannot concume the consciousness of higher beings (assuming that we could somehow eat them...) just like animals can consume our meat but not our consciousness. But is an animal eats an animal or a human eats a human?
Endymion said:
That is a point, I admit. But still, I would be cautious in giving science such a credit. What IMO has shown us the optimal foods is the history of humanity before the agricultural revolution. And cannibalism is a part of it. On the islands of South Pacific you could buy human flesh on a market till the end of the 19th century. But meat is meat, it is nutrients-dense, essential for our body and so on. What really interests me is consuming one's consciousness. I am aware that we cannot concume the consciousness of higher beings (assuming that we could somehow eat them...) just like animals can consume our meat but not our consciousness. But is an animal eats an animal or a human eats a human?
Re: Consuming consciousness - I am stuck
How does that match the concept of humans eating like carnivores to stay healthy? And I'm talking not in terms of switching from carnivores meat to herbivores meat but in terms of becoming a herbivore to accumulate less metals and toxic substances.
Hithere said:
How does that match the concept of humans eating like carnivores to stay healthy? And I'm talking not in terms of switching from carnivores meat to herbivores meat but in terms of becoming a herbivore to accumulate less metals and toxic substances.
HiThere
The Living Force
Re: Consuming consciousness - I am stuck
Meat has higher nutricious value, but accumulates toxins if one is on a strict meat-based diet.
The evolutionary evidence from our teeth and gastrointestinal system makes it reasonable to assume that the most healthy diet is a mixture of vegetables and meat. There is a lot of literature about this, including on the web. Look it up for further details, if you are interested - this is not considered to be controversial science.
The digestive system of humans is that of an omnivore, suited for a diet consisting of meat/fruits/vegtables. This has enabled humans to make use of diverse sources as sustenance, and is probably a strong factor in allowing us to live all over the world in different enviroments - we couldn't survive as vegetarians on Greenland.Nobody said:
Meat has higher nutricious value, but accumulates toxins if one is on a strict meat-based diet.
The evolutionary evidence from our teeth and gastrointestinal system makes it reasonable to assume that the most healthy diet is a mixture of vegetables and meat. There is a lot of literature about this, including on the web. Look it up for further details, if you are interested - this is not considered to be controversial science.
Vic
Jedi Council Member
Re: Consuming consciousness - I am stuck
Hi Perceval
My own take on it is that the 'your truth' 'my truth' concept is a matter of perception or subjectivity, so, whilst valid in its own way, doesn't have the validity of truth that is objective, or cosmic. My current issue (now resolved) centers on what resonates with me as indisputable, cosmic Truth, that 3rd density human beings need to consume consciousness of a higher level than plants.
Right now, and this may change, there isn't a need for me to compare scientific studies on the 'rightness' of the consumption of animals for physical health. When you say "If you see claims that animal fat makes you fat, or clogs your arteries with fat, a little research will soon prove that not only is this programming, it is also disinfo." I think: but the opposite can also be true - such a search can also produce a counter conclusion. 'Proof' doesn't come into it, because such research and findings rest on perception and subjectivity - especially that of the searcher.
The issue that I mention above, consciousness consumption, has been resolved because knowledge was presented to me, I received it objectively, and applied it in whatever way was available to me. The result is an awareness that shows me that I do in fact need to consume consciousness that is of a higher level than plants if I want to operate at the optimum level to support my hope that I can be a 4th density STO candidate and contribute to the victory of STO in the big picture. It is, to me, a hen's tooth, an indisputable, cosmic truth. If it didn't resonate so absolutely with me then I would be on my way,munching my Quorn burgers, whilst searching elsewhere for yet another pool of knowledge on the meaning of life.
I am also having to present this to my wife - a vegetarian from the age of 13!
Exciting times.
Please bear in mind that I am fully aware that what I have written above has issued forth from my mind - I have no proof it has come from anywhere else. This whole thing could be a product of programming that is so all-encompassing I wouldn't know the difference. I suggest that we are all in that situation. But that's where the beauty of free will to choose comes in. All my thoughts and bodily sensations tell me that right now I am in a place of objective, cosmic truth, and I am adjusting my daily activities to be in line with that. But the real point I am trying to make is that I am open and objective to any and all feedback that might correct my beliefs if they need correcting.
Perceval said:
Hi Perceval
My own take on it is that the 'your truth' 'my truth' concept is a matter of perception or subjectivity, so, whilst valid in its own way, doesn't have the validity of truth that is objective, or cosmic. My current issue (now resolved) centers on what resonates with me as indisputable, cosmic Truth, that 3rd density human beings need to consume consciousness of a higher level than plants.
Right now, and this may change, there isn't a need for me to compare scientific studies on the 'rightness' of the consumption of animals for physical health. When you say "If you see claims that animal fat makes you fat, or clogs your arteries with fat, a little research will soon prove that not only is this programming, it is also disinfo." I think: but the opposite can also be true - such a search can also produce a counter conclusion. 'Proof' doesn't come into it, because such research and findings rest on perception and subjectivity - especially that of the searcher.
The issue that I mention above, consciousness consumption, has been resolved because knowledge was presented to me, I received it objectively, and applied it in whatever way was available to me. The result is an awareness that shows me that I do in fact need to consume consciousness that is of a higher level than plants if I want to operate at the optimum level to support my hope that I can be a 4th density STO candidate and contribute to the victory of STO in the big picture. It is, to me, a hen's tooth, an indisputable, cosmic truth. If it didn't resonate so absolutely with me then I would be on my way,munching my Quorn burgers, whilst searching elsewhere for yet another pool of knowledge on the meaning of life.
I am also having to present this to my wife - a vegetarian from the age of 13!
Exciting times.
Please bear in mind that I am fully aware that what I have written above has issued forth from my mind - I have no proof it has come from anywhere else. This whole thing could be a product of programming that is so all-encompassing I wouldn't know the difference. I suggest that we are all in that situation. But that's where the beauty of free will to choose comes in. All my thoughts and bodily sensations tell me that right now I am in a place of objective, cosmic truth, and I am adjusting my daily activities to be in line with that. But the real point I am trying to make is that I am open and objective to any and all feedback that might correct my beliefs if they need correcting.
Vic
Jedi Council Member
Thanks, Laura.
I want to ask about eating fish only. Does anyone have any experience, or knowledge, in terms of consuming consciousness for optimal growth (spiritual) and ... I'm rambling, let me cut to the thrust:
I can't see a way of enabling myself to eat any animals except fish. I am hoping to be told that eating fish only is absolutely acceptable, although I fear that isn't the case. I am not asking about the health of the physical body, but purely in terms of optimal STO growth. I'm not dismissing the physical health side of it, it's just that the one comes before the other for me. It's the only way I can do it at the moment.
My own vegetarian programming is actually a massive part of my 'identity' and part of it's influence has me feeling like vomiting whenever I imagine eating meat other than fish. I feel sick as I write this.
Seems this is a biggie for me
I want to ask about eating fish only. Does anyone have any experience, or knowledge, in terms of consuming consciousness for optimal growth (spiritual) and ... I'm rambling, let me cut to the thrust:
I can't see a way of enabling myself to eat any animals except fish. I am hoping to be told that eating fish only is absolutely acceptable, although I fear that isn't the case. I am not asking about the health of the physical body, but purely in terms of optimal STO growth. I'm not dismissing the physical health side of it, it's just that the one comes before the other for me. It's the only way I can do it at the moment.
My own vegetarian programming is actually a massive part of my 'identity' and part of it's influence has me feeling like vomiting whenever I imagine eating meat other than fish. I feel sick as I write this.
Seems this is a biggie for me
Vic said:
Well I've been a vegetarian too. It lasted 11 years and nearly killed me. It made me feel special and compassionate though. But was it really justified?
Is a vegetarian really more STO than a meat eater? Keith shows that agriculture is what kills the planet and the wild fauna. Consuming vegetarian food produced by the agriculture leads to the destruction of animals. Before the development of annual monocrops, the US territories was covered with natural prairies where millions of buffalo were grazing. Actually extensive grazing is the only sustainable way of producing food. Even organic extensive farming destroys the planet (top soil, water reserves, biotopes...). So I don't think following a vegetarian diet is more STO than eating a meat-based diet.
Fish are adequate enough. If you read the aquatic ape hypothesis, you'll see that it is theorized that we became human on fish and shellfish.
But, personally, I think bacon is the food of the gods with ham running a close second. We cure and smoke our own bacon here because it is much cheaper than buying it in bulk and we can be sure there are no sugars or chemicals in it. A little ham and eggs or bacon and eggs is a quick, fairly light meal when you are in a hurry, too.
But, personally, I think bacon is the food of the gods with ham running a close second. We cure and smoke our own bacon here because it is much cheaper than buying it in bulk and we can be sure there are no sugars or chemicals in it. A little ham and eggs or bacon and eggs is a quick, fairly light meal when you are in a hurry, too.
Vic, I can't say one way or the other about just eating fish from the "metaphysical" perspective. If I had to speculate, I would say most of the types of fish one would consume wouldn't have a very high level of consciousness (as for example mammals). I'd say don't worry about all this for now. If you've decided you want to give up being a vegetarian, and you can only start by eating fish, then do that for a while a see what happens.
It's understandable that you have become very identified with being a vegetarian, so take it slow until that (now "false") identity dissolves away. Maybe at some point in the future, you'll be able to eat other animal-based food.
The interesting thing about the actual data in even the mainstream databases is that there is WAY more evidence supporting the benefits of a high animal fat, low carb diet than any of the other nonsense that is hyped in the media. That was one of the things that surprised me: how much is actually known about this, how many studies have been done for the last century establishing this. The benefits and extraordinary characteristics of being on a ketogenic diet, for example, have been known since the late 19th century and been studied in a controlled scientific setting thoroughly since the early 20th century. But the general public doesn't know a thing about all this.
There's basically no evidence of the saturated fat, cholesterol, and other claims being detrimental. Even Ansel Keys had admitted decades ago that the cholesterol in the diet has no correlation to cholesterol in the blood, for example. You'll see many other uncontroversial, mainstream sources in the last few decades, when the cholesterol and saturated fats myths were being spread, admit that there's no correlation between cholesterol in the diet and blood lipid status, even if they believe the myth that cholesterol is detrimental or the cause of heart disease.
It's just like the anti-smoking propaganda. In both cases the only "data" that supports the false claims is data that's cooked (like the anthropogenic global warming scam). They've been trying to induce lung cancer in lab animals for around 45 years (by forced smoking methods) and they've never been successful. In both cases, when the anti-smoking propaganda was gearing up and when the anti-cholesterol, low fat campaign was starting, a number of competent and honest doctors and scientists came out and said that the claims were complete nonsense with no science supporting them (and in the case of the anti-cholesterol, anti-saturated fat campaign, they said that it will be a human health disaster, as has proved to be in the decades since).
Even though you say you're not interested in the science and research or the physical health aspects of the issue, it is really important in learning discernment to look at these aspects too. These are just some of my thoughts. FWIW.
ADDED: Just saw the 2 new posts by Laura and Belibaste.
Edit: fixed wrongly continued italics
It's understandable that you have become very identified with being a vegetarian, so take it slow until that (now "false") identity dissolves away. Maybe at some point in the future, you'll be able to eat other animal-based food.
The interesting thing about the actual data in even the mainstream databases is that there is WAY more evidence supporting the benefits of a high animal fat, low carb diet than any of the other nonsense that is hyped in the media. That was one of the things that surprised me: how much is actually known about this, how many studies have been done for the last century establishing this. The benefits and extraordinary characteristics of being on a ketogenic diet, for example, have been known since the late 19th century and been studied in a controlled scientific setting thoroughly since the early 20th century. But the general public doesn't know a thing about all this.
There's basically no evidence of the saturated fat, cholesterol, and other claims being detrimental. Even Ansel Keys had admitted decades ago that the cholesterol in the diet has no correlation to cholesterol in the blood, for example. You'll see many other uncontroversial, mainstream sources in the last few decades, when the cholesterol and saturated fats myths were being spread, admit that there's no correlation between cholesterol in the diet and blood lipid status, even if they believe the myth that cholesterol is detrimental or the cause of heart disease.
It's just like the anti-smoking propaganda. In both cases the only "data" that supports the false claims is data that's cooked (like the anthropogenic global warming scam). They've been trying to induce lung cancer in lab animals for around 45 years (by forced smoking methods) and they've never been successful. In both cases, when the anti-smoking propaganda was gearing up and when the anti-cholesterol, low fat campaign was starting, a number of competent and honest doctors and scientists came out and said that the claims were complete nonsense with no science supporting them (and in the case of the anti-cholesterol, anti-saturated fat campaign, they said that it will be a human health disaster, as has proved to be in the decades since).
Even though you say you're not interested in the science and research or the physical health aspects of the issue, it is really important in learning discernment to look at these aspects too. These are just some of my thoughts. FWIW.
ADDED: Just saw the 2 new posts by Laura and Belibaste.
Edit: fixed wrongly continued italics
Vic
Jedi Council Member
Yes!!! I'll run with that, Laura. Thanks.
It's not that I'm not 'interested' in the science and research side of it, SeekinTruth, it's more that I have spent many years studying it, and I know that it's impossible to trust findings. Mainstream research is the last place I would go for the truth - the mainstream belongs to the control system. Scientists in its employ 'find' what they are told to 'find'
I am very aware of the link between food and health. Six years ago my mum was diagnosed by the psychopathic UK national health service (the institution, not every individual within it) with Stage 4 cancer. She was riddled with it they said - breast, lymph nodes, lungs and bones. They declared her 'terminal.' I concentrated my research specifically on cancer and offered my findings to my mum. She was totally receptive,refused chemo and radiotherapy, followed my suggestions (diet change and supplements, as well as looking at her life in a different way) and for five years has been cancer free. She is healthier now than she ever was before.
It was the same with my Dad. Shortly before my mum's situation he was diagnosed with Type 2 Diabetes, high blood pressure, and dangerously high cholesterol that the system blamed for the double heart bypass he went through. My dad was also receptive to my research, immediately stopped taking metformin, statins and betablockers. He altered his diet and took certain supplements. He has been checked every six months since - his blood sugar, blood pressure, cholesterol, and heart are all absolutely fine.
My information came from alternative sources - sources that were aware of big pharma and suppressed information. And that information proved to be reliable - so far. But, of course, reliable sources can be corrupted so need monitoring.
My point is that right now I don't think I need to look at research into whether human beings should eat meat or not. My issue is in terms of the spiritual side of eating animals. That issue has been resolved through the knowledge-application-awareness process as revealed through Laura and the Cassiopaean project, as well as the feedback I received from forum members. I'm grateful for that, because an issue that could have taken a long time, if ever, was sorted out in a matter of days.
"It's understandable that you have become very identified with being a vegetarian, so take it slow until that (now "false") identity dissolves away. Maybe at some point in the future, you'll be able to eat other animal-based food."
That's good advice, ST. I'm going to follow it. Thank you.
It's not that I'm not 'interested' in the science and research side of it, SeekinTruth, it's more that I have spent many years studying it, and I know that it's impossible to trust findings. Mainstream research is the last place I would go for the truth - the mainstream belongs to the control system. Scientists in its employ 'find' what they are told to 'find'
I am very aware of the link between food and health. Six years ago my mum was diagnosed by the psychopathic UK national health service (the institution, not every individual within it) with Stage 4 cancer. She was riddled with it they said - breast, lymph nodes, lungs and bones. They declared her 'terminal.' I concentrated my research specifically on cancer and offered my findings to my mum. She was totally receptive,refused chemo and radiotherapy, followed my suggestions (diet change and supplements, as well as looking at her life in a different way) and for five years has been cancer free. She is healthier now than she ever was before.
It was the same with my Dad. Shortly before my mum's situation he was diagnosed with Type 2 Diabetes, high blood pressure, and dangerously high cholesterol that the system blamed for the double heart bypass he went through. My dad was also receptive to my research, immediately stopped taking metformin, statins and betablockers. He altered his diet and took certain supplements. He has been checked every six months since - his blood sugar, blood pressure, cholesterol, and heart are all absolutely fine.
My information came from alternative sources - sources that were aware of big pharma and suppressed information. And that information proved to be reliable - so far. But, of course, reliable sources can be corrupted so need monitoring.
My point is that right now I don't think I need to look at research into whether human beings should eat meat or not. My issue is in terms of the spiritual side of eating animals. That issue has been resolved through the knowledge-application-awareness process as revealed through Laura and the Cassiopaean project, as well as the feedback I received from forum members. I'm grateful for that, because an issue that could have taken a long time, if ever, was sorted out in a matter of days.
"It's understandable that you have become very identified with being a vegetarian, so take it slow until that (now "false") identity dissolves away. Maybe at some point in the future, you'll be able to eat other animal-based food."
That's good advice, ST. I'm going to follow it. Thank you.
