Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - dariorpl

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... 38
Primal Diet / Re: Aajonus' Conspiracy Theories
« on: June 06, 2018, 10:38:08 am »
Alex Jones is actually part of the global conspiracy... Controlled opposition. There were hints of it going back years, while he was ridiculing AV and others and promoting fake health gurus pushing a semi vegan agenda, all the while his show mostly centered around selling all kinds of pills to their listeners. Not drugs, but supplements of all sorts. And terrible "investment" schemes like numismatic gold coins, where you needed the price to go up by 1000% to break even. Even then I refused to believe it, and just passed it off as him being dumb and uninformed.

Once he began cheerleading for Trump it became undeniable. Now he's actually got his audience convinced that the conspirators want to take Trump out because he represents a threat to them. Ha!

Primal Diet / Re: Aajonus' Conspiracy Theories
« on: June 04, 2018, 08:55:30 am »
Not a great persuasive talk, lacked any credibility and seems meant for those who want to cheer him on..

You're dismissing this because he wasn't persuasive? How is that relevant?

Show me the evidence that his intended vaccines are killing billions.

I could, but that's not the point here. The point is that he believes it can be done and wants to do it. And btw, his "charity" foundation does a lot of these things he mentions in the clip. Mostly in poor african countries.

And I'm sure if I tried I could easily show you the evidence that someone is making millions on the vaccines.

And I never said otherwise.

What I'm more curious about is the fascination with conspiracy theories in general, as in why are some so attracted to what may or may not be true.

Because a lot of them are true or partially true. A lot of them are disinfo operations created, disseminated and supported by those running the real conspiracies, though.

What's more interesting is to consider how so many people are so terribly afraid of finding out the real truths, that they make up excuses for even the most obvious of conspiracies, and continually ridicule those who would show them they're wrong. I've noticed this phenomenon is much more common among people who live in the countries who's governments are most heavily engaged in global conspiracies, than in people living elsewhere. Those living in countries where their gov's conspiracies mostly stay confined within their own country, are generally more willing to look into both local and global conspiracies.

You can shout back, Wake up Man.  But now that you've woken up, How has that helped you along? this may step on a few toes, but my guess is that it's something about wanting to feel more secure  or reduce anxiety from living in a world that is totally  impossible to fully grasp

I look to understand the world and the misconceptions and lies in it, and once I identify a pernicious lie, and figure out the cause for it, I can avoid some of the damage done to me by that lie.  How do you think I even got here in the first place?

The trickiest part is not figuring out the lies, but telling the real lie from the ones that are just made up to catch, distract, discredit and punish someone looking for them.

Primal Diet / Re: Aajonus' Conspiracy Theories
« on: June 01, 2018, 11:32:47 pm »
Ok, now you have my attention, show me where they are saying that 'openly'.  And please be it the head of the worlds major companies, like a Monsanto, an Exxon, or any or the major drug company players.

Just one example out of many that could be given

Off Topic / Re: worms eating plastic
« on: June 01, 2018, 04:57:12 am »
So it's not that they live and thrive off plastic, but that they can eat and somewhat decompose it if forced to.

It has limited potential, but it's a start.

General Discussion / Re: Raw Cod Liver? Has anyone tried it?
« on: June 01, 2018, 01:43:59 am »
The head of large fish is not easily chewable, so it makes sense that we wouldn't eat them. The eyes however, depending on the fish type and how fresh it is, can be a real treat. They're juicy, fatty and sometimes even sweet. I just poke 'em out with a fork, being careful not to puncture them too much, or plently of the fluid will leak - sometimes even squirt all over the place lol

I'm not sure what you meant about the scales. I used to eat scales cooked, but raw I hate them. There are no scales in the eyes, though.

General Discussion / Re: Raw Cod Liver? Has anyone tried it?
« on: June 01, 2018, 12:12:19 am »
You don't like the eyes?

Science / Re: 2nd human brain found in bowels
« on: June 01, 2018, 12:11:35 am »
Thanks, that makes sense too

General Discussion / Re: Raw Cod Liver? Has anyone tried it?
« on: May 31, 2018, 11:47:29 pm »
Some pointers or pictures on how to identify the liver in whole fish and squid would be great. I often get them ungutted but I have no idea what's what, and most of it tastes horribly bitter, so I throw it all out and stick to the meat, skin and eyes. Sometimes the cartilage too, depending on the type of fish it is.

Maybe I'm wrong but it doesn't seem like the liver in fish looks at all like the liver in mammals or birds.

Science / Re: 2nd human brain found in bowels
« on: May 31, 2018, 11:42:02 pm »
This seems like big news. I've always wondered about that.

I know you hate when I bring up AV in every thread, but he said that the appendix (which could be categorized as a part of the intestine even though it is a separate organ in and of itself), was not "vestigial" and that it had a very real and important purpose, and that was to identify toxins in the body and to store the "memory" of the chemical reaction needed to handle them. Because of this, he said that people who had their appendix surgically removed (like him) would take 24 to 48 hours since a toxin enters the body, to develop the proper reaction to it, whereas in people who had an appendix, it would take around 20 minutes.

Primal Diet / Re: Aajonus' Conspiracy Theories
« on: May 31, 2018, 11:27:07 pm »
where we differ, is you keep saying 'they'.  As if there's some secret club to turn us into slaves.  And I keep saying that the very things you say 'they' mandate for us to do, 'they do also'.  You don't think that Kellog himself ate his own cereal believing it was good for him?  And even if he didn't,  he did it to make money,, just like every other billionaire entrepreneur that will try to make every buck he can till he stops kicking.   Every one of the injustices you mention can be traced back to some scheme to make big money.

There's more than that. You hear very wealthy, powerful and influential people talking openly about how they want to use vaccinations, the health "care" system, tap water, and GMO foods to lower the population, or to reduce aggressiveness and make people more obedient and docile.

I suppose you can still argue that they're doing all that because they believe it's what's best for everybody, but why shun discussion of these things in a forum about health, when all of these things are designed to damage our health directly?

Primal Diet / Re: Aajonus' Conspiracy Theories
« on: May 28, 2018, 04:24:22 am »
I don't know who the ones at the top are, all I see is that there's an agenda that has moved consistently towards one direction, and many of the self made megarich and high ranking politicians start pushing it once they get to a certain age and certain level of wealth and influence. It's obvious that someone is telling them what to think, what to do, and what the plan is.

Or perhaps there's no one calling the shots, and it's all just the way the system is set up. But being that it's been so long and the direction is so clear, I would highly doubt there isn't any group that's behind this. But again, it's not like you'd hear about this group, their members and their plan on the evening news.

This is why talking about such entities as the illuminati, the bilderberg group or whatever, is counterproductive, as it is exactly what they want. Surely these organizations play a role, but they're not the ones designing the plan.

Primal Diet / Re: Aajonus' Conspiracy Theories
« on: May 28, 2018, 03:37:11 am »
I don't think it's that simple. I think most of the rich are simply more pawns in this game, just wearing fancier clothes.

Primal Diet / Re: Aajonus' Conspiracy Theories
« on: May 28, 2018, 02:38:35 am »
Yeah, but they don't. Most live in major metropolitan areas where they eat the same crap, breathe the same air etc..   The rich have their country homes in pristine areas but grind it out for most of their lives in the city where the deals are made.

Yeah, that's not who we're talking about.

Most of the true people running the show stay behind the scene and few if any even know who they are.

It's kind of like black holes. We can't see them, but we see the effects of them being there.

Primal Diet / Re: Aajonus' Conspiracy Theories
« on: May 27, 2018, 10:01:52 pm »
I think it's always amusing about these conspiracy theories,, that  the 'they' are the 'you'.   Everyone drinks the fluoridated water, everyone eats the glycosides, everyone is affected by chemtrails, everyone is harmed by mono crop farming, everyone gets blood sugar problems from carbs and sugar....    The 'they' wanting to create a weaker race are weakening themselves.

Not everyone is affected to the same degree. If you live in a paradisiacal island in the middle of the ocean, use no chemicals and all your food is clean, you're barely affected by the pollution and the brainwashing.

Also, don't think these people are entirely rational. If they could destroy the rest while doing minimal damage to themselves, they will do it.

Any part of the animal that is edible and tastes good to you should be a good addition

The combination of nicotine and a high glycemic index (high sugar / carb) diet is even more harmful than the smoke itself, as it essentially turns people into type 2 diabetics faster than anything else could accomplish.

If you're addicted to nicotine at least make sure to eat a ketogenic diet or as close to it as possible.

By contrast, weed has the opposite effects regarding insulin.

Maybe that's why people who smoke both weed and tobacco have a 50% reduced risk of developing lung cancer when compared with people who just smoke tobacco.

Off Topic / Re: Even standing close to a barbecue is harmful...
« on: May 25, 2018, 08:30:29 am »
How long until the mainstream realizes that all cooking is harmful?

Hot Topics / Re: Vegan Freelee again in the news...
« on: May 25, 2018, 07:57:37 am »
Sillicone boobs and botox face but no make up because it's more natural that way. Sure! haha

btw, if you haven't seen it, she thinks if you eat meat, you should be killed:

General Discussion / Re: Enema - Colonic administration Guidelines
« on: May 25, 2018, 07:23:26 am »
In my experience if you feel you need fiber, it's better to get it from bland fruits: tomatoes, cucumbers, peppers, avocados, raw coconut meat, etc. Sweet fruits not only are high in sugar but will often have the opposite effect than that which you're seeking (sweet fruit juices would be even worse). Leafy greens have cellulose, that's another kind of fiber that I don't think we're supposed to get a lot of. And then you've got the herbs and spices, but those should only be eaten in small quantities if at all. The strong pungent flavor is telling you that. Some people recommend nuts and seeds to increase fiber intake, but I've found those when consumed in large quantities dry out your body, they will make you want to drink a lot of water and even then you'll be dehydrated as your body tries to make something useful out of a non fresh food. Soaking them in water for 20 minutes to a few hours may help, but I haven't found them very useful even after that. Also, most of the nuts at least are cooked.

Also, before you decide you need colossal amounts of fiber, look into what you're eating. Cooked foods are always detrimental in large quantities, whether it's meat, olive oil (most of it is cooked), coconut oil (doesn't exist raw), sweet potatoes (you're probably cooking them), table salt (cooked and refined), magnesium (chemically extracted, totally unnatural), gelatin (highly cooked and denatured protein collagen from meat waste)... All of these are cooked and toxic, pretty much listed in increasing degrees of toxicity.


Here, in LOTR, Gollum is revealed as being a fan of raw fish and a hater of cooked foods. Needless to say, the one eating raw meat is also the most repulsive one in the group. I generally prefer it when the raw-meat-eating actor is also the hero of the movie/Tv series etc.  rather than the villain.

It's interesting that (at least in the movies) while Bilbo has the ring, he never ages, but once he loses the ring, he quickly catches up on his missed aging and deteriorates and has to be sent off to live with the elves so as not to die of old age. However, while Smeagol turns into Gollum after centuries possessing and obsessing over the ring, and while he doesn't age, once he loses the ring, plenty of time passes (all the time that Bilbo has the ring and even more), and he still doesn't age a day. Could it be a concession that all of the raw fish he liked (and which he ate whole) kept him from aging too much?

General Discussion / Re: Enema - Colonic administration Guidelines
« on: May 23, 2018, 12:51:31 am »
Enemas are TOOLS.

I have saved real PEOPLE with enemas.

Always have enema buckets at home for any emergency.

I am the family healer and enema knowledge is a MUST.

Enemas I have used to heal people:

Water enema
Sugar and Salt enema
Oil enemas (VCO, Olive oil)
Coffee enemas

TOOLS are no different from having a HAMMER, a COMPUTER, etc.

From the trend of your questions... it seems you want to know if enemas are recommended as a mainstay of a healthy life style?

My answer would be in the same tone as most of the long timers here... NO... not for a long term healthy lifestyle.

I only recommend enemas as TOOLS.

Strive to live a clean and healthy life... keep enema knowledge and equipment for emergencies.

This is how I think about them. They can be used in the case of severe constipation or intestinal blockage?

General Discussion / Re: Enema - Colonic administration Guidelines
« on: May 23, 2018, 12:47:37 am »
In a recent interview that sv3 conducted with an ex-vegan, it was mentioned that bread and similar foods stick to the intestines and can cause problems. Perhaps this is the reason vegans suffer a greater risk of colon cancer?

Also, cleansing enemas, such as coffee enemas and the like, tend to be very popular in the vegan community. Any thoughts if this might be diet related, or if it's just a psychological obsession with being clean?

You are missing the point. The point being that the mother in a tribal community of c.1,000 shares so many genes with others in the tribe that killing her own child is no big deal, no real loss.More importantly, these women HAD to kill their children or face starvation and eventual death if they kept on sparing them. They did not have contraception in those days. Strange though it might seem, people, in desperate circumstances, or even wild animals, will inevitably kill their own baby if that means they survive and are thus able to have children in the future. Wild animals also sometimes  kill their children even if they are healthy. so, meaningless...A case in point are some birds which deliberately feed the older chick(the  first one out of the shell), so that, if they have more chicks than just one, the others die even if they are ultra-healthy.

Again, they would not willingly and happily kill their own children to benefit other children in the tribe/band/group/whatever, it doesn't matter how small the difference in genetics is, there's a difference.

And you keep failing to recognize that a mother in paleo times did not provide herself with all of the resources required for survival, she's not a bear. H-G humans lived in groups and shared resources in a communistic style. Which is why communism is so attractive for people who don't understand economics and don't understand that the paradigm shifted 180 degrees with the development of agriculture and civilization.

If they are gods to us, then their impact on Earth would be devastating. The evidence of UFOs is anyway bogus, and a lot of people who report UFOs have a hidden agenda to report such fakes.

More anthropomorphism... Or worse, you only grant them the worse human qualities in these terms. You often argue against destroying the Earth,  that means you must believe humans have the capacity to not destroy the Earth. Then an infinitely powerful and infinitely wise being would be infinitely able to do this as well (infinite in relative terms to our power and wisdom)

The evidence of UFOs is anyway bogus, and a lot of people who report UFOs have a hidden agenda to report such fakes.

Most people have seen UFOs. By definition, anytime you've seen something moving across the sky and you don't know what it is, you've seen a UFO. Personally I've seen many, and 2 in particular I can't explain in any other way than a superior intelligence, or a hidden technology so far beyond my understanding that it seems like a superior intelligence. Either that, or they might have been hallucinations. I obviously can't tell.

The ashkenazi jews iq studies were highly flawed. They were too small and were hopelessly biased, being accused of not being truly representative of that population, and called "bad science".

Haha, you obviously haven't encountered many. The difference is so big that once you've met a few dozen of them at random, you immediately realize it's true.

Indeed, I read once that the  average IQ of  Israelis is a mere 94 IQ, which makes more sense in the light of inbreeding.

Askenazis only make up 30% of Israel's population, and in fact they are much less inbred in Israel than they are anywhere else in the world, since in Israel they frequently mix with non ashkenazi jews, whereas in other parts of the world, they don't do it as much (at least the religious ones), simply because they don't live in close proximity to other jewish groups in large numbers. Other jewish populations have roughly the same IQ as the broader race they belong to, it's only ashkenazis that have much higher IQ.

So yes, an average IQ of all Israeli people is irrelevant when calculating the ashkenazi IQ, and even a study of ashkenazi IQ in Israel should be taken with a grain of salt.

And of course, your claim that inbreeding to a mild extent like that seen by these groups decreases IQ and longevity is again disproven.

As regards the Amish, they have numerous genetic diseases as well, but, perhaps because of their healthier, ancestral diet(raw milk etc.) are less inclined to have the more modern diseases.

So even though they're genetically much worse off, they're much healthier. Then your claim that most of human ill health is caused by inbreeding is again proved to be nonsense.

Pure bullsh*t. As I pointed out, the genetic variation between 1,000 closely-related individuals is not extreme enough to mean that 1 mother's offspring's death will be a serious loss of genetic data.

Who's talking about a "loss in genetic data"? Unless you mean HER genetic data...

I don't know how to make this more simple so you can understand it. However small the differences from her genetic code to everybody else in the group, if she benefits her offspring more than the group, there will be a higher prevalence of her genetic makeup in the group. If she sacrifices her offspring to benefit the group, the opposite will happen.

Over many generations, those genes that survive and reproduce the most, and become the prevalent ones, are those that make mothers who don't mindlessly sacrifice their children to benefit other women's children; unless in doing so she gains favor with the group so that her future chilldren are allowed to live and/or are better cared for, or have a higher status which will enable them to mate if they're males, or to have their children stay alive and fed if they're female.

All 3  perfectly good enough reasons for a mother to kill her own offspring. And, just a few of the possible other examples...

But those are all the reasons I've always said exist in nature, whereas yours, which go against the genetic fitness of the entity by needlessly reducing their viable offspring to benefit others, don't.

Again, pure nonsense. If aliens were already here, we would be extinct. Likelihood is, that aliens would have had enough impact on the Earth's ecosystem to wipe out mankind  long ago.

Now who is the one with human hubris? Haha. You're making assumptions about the motives and behavior of a lifeform we've never encountered, and which would have to be so much beyond our capacities, that they would in effect be gods to us.

Besides, why oh why have we never found genuine evidence of aliens, unless they never came here? Again, moronically wrong. Just look at this article for confirmation:-

Again we have to repeat this... Just because you haven't found something, doesn't mean it's not there. And of course, there are many who claim that such evidence does in fact exist, but rather than having this evidence examined, what most researchers, scientists, and the media do, with few exceptions, is ridicule those who claim to have seen such evidence.

What, like the ashkenazis who have the highest average IQ of all races and one of the highest life expectancy? Like the amish who have some of the lowest incidences of most diseases? Not everything is black and white.

Wrong again, but , in this case, so wrong it is rather painful! So, at least you admit you were wrong. You admit that ancinet hominids did indeed hunt mammoths etc. So your notions re neanderthals swimming without boats are also obviously deluded.

Errr no. Again, I have to repeat myself. I didn't say Neanderthals didn't build boats, nor that humans didn't hunt Mammoths. I said it's hard to tell whether they did or did not.

Wrong again, I have already shown that average human brain-szie/intelligence has decreased greatly since the Neolithic era, along with health/tribal-patterns/diet  etc,

Even if "raw" intelligence has decreased, abstract concepts intelligence has skyrocketed.

A quite stupid remark, in view of the fact that a tribe of a 1,000 individuals are so related to each other, that the elimination  of a few offspring by 1 mother means absolutely nothing re removing that mother's dna. Absurd!

Not a stupid remark at all, if you understand that whosoever in the "tribe" (using your definition) manages to provide their offspring with the best conditions among all relevant members of the group, and if such knowledge and ability is passed on to their offspring, either through learning or through genetics, will have a genetic makeup that, over time, becomes more prevalent within the given relevant group. So even if everybody else shares most of your own genes they don't share all of your genes, nor have them in the same combinations you do, so you still have a biological incentive to be selfish. It's only via culture that you can pretend to go against this, and usually it's just for show, to gain benefits.

Here is more info on mothers eliminating their offspring in the wild:-

Do you even read something before you link to it? Horribly formatted site, super small font and long text saying nothing except everything I've already been saying - animals kill young of their own species for three reasons: 1) Because they're not THEIR offspring, but someone else's. 2) Because they are too ill and will soon die anyway, and to spend resources raising them instead of having more offspring who have a better chance of survival and reproduction would be a waste. 3) Because they already have other offspring to take care of, and can't manage to care for all of them, so they choose the least fit and eliminate them. Or if the mother is starving and calculates it's better to eliminate her offspring now, so that she can survive and have offspring in the future which have a better chance to survive and reproduce.

Quite remarkable ignorance! More numbers does NOT imply superiority. The fact that there are no genuine aliens, implies that Fermi's Paradox is correct, meaning that humans will eventually become extinct. Once that happens, as I have shown, all domesticated plants and animals will either become extinct, or , in a very few cases, evolve to become like their wild counterparts.

Nonsense based on a ton of assumptions with no evidence to back up any of them.

What if life as we know it is much more rare than we think? What if the development of high intelligence like that of humans is much more rare than we think even in planets where life exists? (it apparently took 3.5 billion years to develop on Earth even after life got started, which apparently took another billion years)

What if the Universe isn't as old as we think? What if interstellar travel at a near or faster than light speed is physically impossible?

What if the aliens have already been here but they don't necessarily want us to know about them? We could even be their ant farm for all we know (think: God)

No, YOU are showing a complete lack of understanding of what I am saying. My point was that there are a lot of severely inbred populations, which are NOT interbreeding with others in a big way, such as Fundamentalist Middle-Eastern Muslims, Hasidic/Orthodox Jews, the Amish, which are exploding in numbers.

Even these populations are much less inbred now than they were before. But your claims were that the general decrease in health in the human population was caused by this, not only in particular groups. (and by the way, most of those particular groups usually have way better health than the average for the human population)

Err, dumbass, there are reports of damage to the bones via tools etc.:-

Typical. You start to see your arguments fall down so you start calling names. You're making a good job at showing who, if any of us, is the dumb one.

I wasn't aware that in butchering and eating animals, you wouldn't damage their bones with tools! Especially to get to that tasty bone marrow inside. In fact when you are trying to kill an animal of a much larger size than you, attempting to break or damage its bones is a terrible idea. What you do is target their organs and vital areas, or to a lesser extent at least the soft muscle. Even after removing all of the skin and meat, breaking a mammoth's bones with stone age tools would be a challenge. Attempting to do so as a means of killing the animal would be idiotic, if not suicidal.

To be clear, I never said humans didn't hunt mammoths. Just like I never said Neanderthals didn't build ships.

The problem with you is that your main, deluded, philosophy is that modern humans are superior, no matter what. The (raw) palaeolithic philosophy is that ancient humans were (mostly) superior, and modern science has shown this again and again.

You don't even define a loaded word like "superior" and still use it to talk about what you think I think.

The raw paleo philosophy is that humans have evolved to thrive on a raw paleo diet, and so a raw paleo diet is our natural diet and the diet we do best on. If you will, it's the superior diet for us.

So if you're talking about health, then yes, obviously, paleo people were superior to us. If you're talking about power, achievements, intelligence or morality, then we are.

In any case, we are what they became by succeeding at what they did. Some of that is great. Some of that needs to be improved upon. some of that needs to be flipped around 180 degrees.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... 38
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk