Author Topic: natural vs. technology  (Read 7367 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Raw Kyle

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,701
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
natural vs. technology
« on: July 09, 2008, 11:47:19 am »
I seem to have two sides to my hopeful thinking, one is that doing everything naturally will solve all problems and the other lies in technology.

For instance I'm looking at buying this really high tech water filter system that I read about in a book, but then at the same time I'm moving more towards the least processed foods possible. I'm interested in technology for alternative energy and all this stuff, but then I'm afraid of technology and don't like how there's radio waves beaming around everywhere through my body without my permission.

I suppose it would be the responsible use of technology that I want, the best technology forwarded by brilliant good people not by corporate earnings. But it begs the question of whether that can be attained, or the very use and creation of technologies furthers the system that then turns around and propagates bad technologies.

I have a lot more to say about this but I'm going to stop there because of the inherent problems of communicating in the text medium and so that people can add to what I've said so as to better further this as a conversation and not just a monologue.

Offline TylerDurden

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,016
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Raw Paleolithic Diet
Re: natural vs. technology
« Reply #1 on: July 09, 2008, 05:00:06 pm »
Nothing wrong re combining need for technology with Nature. You could get hold of solar-power generators for your electricity for example. My own brother has a remote cottage in Donegal one of the wildest parts of Ireland with no leectricity pylon around for 4 km, so he's looking into a a geothermal energy generator.
"During the last campaign I knew what was happening. You know, they mocked me for my foreign policy and they laughed at my monetary policy. No more. No more.
" Ron Paul.

Offline Raw Kyle

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,701
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: natural vs. technology
« Reply #2 on: July 10, 2008, 12:09:50 am »
Maybe there's something wrong with solar though? I mean, they do have to be produced, and it's probably in some sort of factory that is actually not powered by solar power. Or maybe the parts will off gas toxins into the air and when everyone has them that would be a problem.

Offline Raw Kyle

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,701
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: natural vs. technology
« Reply #3 on: July 15, 2008, 11:53:58 pm »
*bump* I'd like to hear peoples opinions on this.

Satya

  • Guest
Re: natural vs. technology
« Reply #4 on: July 16, 2008, 01:19:25 am »
You can have solar power without photovoltaics, depending on your location.  A solar water heater would be an example.  Wind power is great, as is mechanical (ie. human/animal power).  These options will be more available in the future, yet nothing will ever power us like petroleum.  Consumption of fuels will decrease over time as a result of peak oil, which really is a good thing in many ways.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2008, 01:39:44 am by Satya »

Offline Raw Kyle

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,701
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: natural vs. technology
« Reply #5 on: July 16, 2008, 03:12:42 am »
You don't believe those water splitting machines work then Satya?

I'm not just talking about solar here, it's almost a philosophical point I'm trying to make. The point is that perhaps technology, no matter how benign it seems, could be at it's heart a negative thing for animals such as us. It could corrupt people, much like money or power.

And then the other side is that technology is in our destiny as intelligent organisms, and the problems caused by current technology is a side effect of global leaders taking the world (including it's technology) into a bad place that it doesn't have to go.

I wish I had my own lab and could perform simple experiments to verify that the stuff in textbooks of the various natural sciences is even accurate. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the equations and reactions are not even real. How would you verify that? If some body (the scientific community controlled by economic or global domination interests) says something, and they're the only ones that can refute it, well what then? The studies on pharmaceuticals are definitely falsified so why not other stuff?

I'm often inspired by the great minds of the past; and then discouraged about how they were usually killed or banished in some way.

Satya

  • Guest
Re: natural vs. technology
« Reply #6 on: July 16, 2008, 11:43:58 pm »
You don't believe those water splitting machines work then Satya?

Hydrogen is an energy carrier, not an energy source.  Talk of a hydrogen economy is laughable.

I'm not just talking about solar here, it's almost a philosophical point I'm trying to make. The point is that perhaps technology, no matter how benign it seems, could be at it's heart a negative thing for animals such as us. It could corrupt people, much like money or power.

And then the other side is that technology is in our destiny as intelligent organisms, and the problems caused by current technology is a side effect of global leaders taking the world (including it's technology) into a bad place that it doesn't have to go.

Yeah, good topic, Kyle!  Technology is a huge part of our nature and has been since we first used tools.  Technology is necessary, yet some technologies are detrimental to health. 

For instance, cell phones are pretty dangerous devices when used above and beyond rare use.  They're not as bad as thermonuclear weapons, but they are microwave emitting sources that people put close to their brains and other tissues.    In fact, I would posit that some forms of radiation, depending on the wavelength, are pretty dangerously ubiquitous in our environment because 1) we cannot sense them and 2) even non-ionizing, rf radiation can cause harm depending on a few factors.  If I stand in front of a live RADAR, I will not feel a thing, yet I will be damaging my body based on the distance away from it according to some polar graph. 

I wish I had my own lab and could perform simple experiments to verify that the stuff in textbooks of the various natural sciences is even accurate. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the equations and reactions are not even real. How would you verify that? If some body (the scientific community controlled by economic or global domination interests) says something, and they're the only ones that can refute it, well what then? The studies on pharmaceuticals are definitely falsified so why not other stuff?

I'm often inspired by the great minds of the past; and then discouraged about how they were usually killed or banished in some way.

Physics experiments are pretty easy to do at home.  You can do Galileo's rolling bodies, trajectories, electricity, magnetism, optics, simple harmonic motion, you name it. 

But yeah, great minds are often silenced.  How many electric car ideas have been hushed by General Motors over the years?  Now look at where they find themselves?  Stuck in the tar of old ideas that did nothing to address energy efficiency, all while such ideas are readily available and have been for decades.  And the sheepish public lapped up those behemoth trucks and SUVs that were marketed to them by publications such as National Geographic and mediums like the Boob Tube.  It's just like many people are programmed to believe they need pharmaceuticals and allopathic medicine in general.  Maybe the bad news on the economy hitting people in their pocketbooks will waken many out of their slumber stupor.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2008, 09:34:47 pm by Satya »

Offline Raw Kyle

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,701
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: natural vs. technology
« Reply #7 on: July 17, 2008, 02:36:47 am »
I'm not so sure about the hydrogen thing. It's easy to look at what established science says about energy and matter and leave it at that. To me it's the equivalent of using the food guide pyramid with no skepticism. I don't trust anyone in power to tell me the truth until I have a good reason to, and the scientific community has not given me much reason. Mind you I am not wholly an outsider to the community either as I went to school for science so if anything I would be erring on the side of believing them.

Satya

  • Guest
Re: natural vs. technology
« Reply #8 on: July 17, 2008, 03:57:26 am »
I'm not so sure about the hydrogen thing. It's easy to look at what established science says about energy and matter and leave it at that. To me it's the equivalent of using the food guide pyramid with no skepticism. I don't trust anyone in power to tell me the truth until I have a good reason to, and the scientific community has not given me much reason. Mind you I am not wholly an outsider to the community either as I went to school for science so if anything I would be erring on the side of believing them.

The difference probably mainly lies in the life sciences v. the physical sciences.  With physical science, it is easy to see if something works or not.  With biology, there are so many variables at play, that it often takes more time to figure out what's what.  Also, the market is more at play in the engineering world, whereas the government cronies are setting nutrition policy and the like.

Hydrogen is a fuel if it is for fusion reactions (and I believe that may be it).  The Europeans are building a fusion reactor - no waste involved with fusion.  The US is way behind in these technologies and we have been wasting a ton of energy.  Go to Europe and see how differently they live.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2008, 04:02:35 am by Satya »

Offline goodsamaritan

  • Administrator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,798
  • Gender: Male
  • Geek Healer Truth Seeker Pro-Natal Pro-Life
    • View Profile
    • Filipino Services Inc.
Re: natural vs. technology
« Reply #9 on: July 17, 2008, 09:15:23 pm »
The only reason I think we have gone this far in our health improvements is with the use of our smarts and technologies coming together.

Without today's high tech telecommunications appliances, we wouldn't have this forum and be able to collaborate teaching one another about good things.

Without water technologies, we wouldnt have toilets, distillers, reverse osmosis machines.  I use a TDS meter to check our home water because my wife and my kids drink water.

I just ordered a refractometer so I can measure which fruits and veggies are more nutritious.

Transport and storage technologies allow us to order and purchase wild / organic meats from far away places.

The nutrition therapy, raw therapy, herbal and detox methods and tools available today are all high tech.  The natural and truth technologies cure the "incurable diseases".  They leap frog old quack greed superstition masquerading and falsely marketing itself as "technology" (western pharmaceutical medicine).

« Last Edit: July 17, 2008, 09:19:28 pm by goodsamaritan »
Linux Geek, Web Developer, Email Provider, Businessman, Engineer, REAL Free Healer, Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Truther, Ripple-XRP Fan

I'm the network administrator.
My business: Website Dev & Hosting and Email Server Provider,
My blogs: Cure Manual, My Health Blog, Eczema Cure & Psoriasis Cure

Offline Raw Kyle

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,701
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: natural vs. technology
« Reply #10 on: July 19, 2008, 02:23:10 am »
The difference probably mainly lies in the life sciences v. the physical sciences.  With physical science, it is easy to see if something works or not.  With biology, there are so many variables at play, that it often takes more time to figure out what's what.  Also, the market is more at play in the engineering world, whereas the government cronies are setting nutrition policy and the like.

Hydrogen is a fuel if it is for fusion reactions (and I believe that may be it).  The Europeans are building a fusion reactor - no waste involved with fusion.  The US is way behind in these technologies and we have been wasting a ton of energy.  Go to Europe and see how differently they live.

Did you see those videos posted on the off topic section about splitting water with electronics that uses less energy than it produces? I'm not 100% convinced but I would certainly see a reason for people in power to make sure knowledge and technology such as that doesn't get out.

Offline Realist

  • Forager
  • *
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: natural vs. technology
« Reply #11 on: July 19, 2008, 04:03:24 am »
I seem to have two sides to my hopeful thinking, one is that doing everything naturally will solve all problems and the other lies in technology.


I have similar thoughts, but I wouldn't have learned about raw paleo if it wasn't for the web, the pinnacle of human technology. I also think ultimately it should be possible to manufacture the perfect human food, but still the energy has to come from somewhere.

You don't believe those water splitting machines work then Satya?

...

I'm often inspired by the great minds of the past; and then discouraged about how they were usually killed or banished in some way.

I've followed a lot of leads in the alternative science area, read forums like overunity.com, absorbed the ideas of people like Lindemann. At the moment the only authority in this area I trust is William Lyne, author of occult ether physics and space aliens from the pentagon. He focuses on Tesla inventing the electromagnetic flying saucer and the history of its cover up through the intentionally misleading staged debate between Skeptics and UFOlogists. I highly recommend his books to anyone interested in this area. An interview he did with an ex Disney animator is up on youtube, unfortunately the audio quality isn't very good (selecting always use high quality video in youtube's settings should help):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBrKJKFPjgc&hl=en
Sorry this is only the first part (1/9), I tried to make a text link but it shows up inline.

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk