Josh Young

I have to ask, are you being sarcastic? I can't tell but I think you are. Natural selection does not operate via goals, only natural selective pressures. Nature often selects for smaller, or weaker, in some contexts. What is good for the jungle plant is bad for the desert plant. Maybe when you say natural selection you mean artificial selection? Otherwise people do not make the selection, rather nature self selects. Monoculture is terrible and linked to many problems in sustainability. Our entire agricultural paradigm is full of terrible misconceptions. The idea that the only way to make things better, in terms of everything is to have a goal in mind goes against my own precepts which are based on tao. Why fuss so? I seek increased harmony and reciprocity, not increased yields, because sustainability is not about getting the most out of things or making things as tough as possible. Nothing is ever black and white. The world defies any overt and inclusive statement.

The best lunatic conspiracy is that conspiracy is for lunatics. Gerald Ford had a bit to say about what he knew. Apparently when he was in charge of the Warren Commission he openly covered up facts to protect the nation from the truth. He did not report the facts that members of the Warren commission did not agree with the official version of events. Many of the documents of the case will not be released until 2017, by then the man implicated by the circumstances and facts as the leader and organizer of the killing, himself a former president, may be dead. It is now no secret that 4 of the 7 members of the warren commission found fault with its conclusions and were skeptics themselves, but the fact that the majority of the the commission members distrusted the findings was not made public at the time of the report. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Commission you can read how full of holes the commission was. Conspiracy? The members of the commission felt there was. Gerald Ford later said there was. Governor Connally changed his testimony over the years about the events. Of course that is in relation to a single event. If there is a conspiracy it pertains to the founding fathers of the US and who and what they were like. These racist slave holding lawyers are worshiped now, but in their own time were controversial figures, as was the constitution. George Washington helped promote anti-slavery laws in several colonies while not passing them in his home state where he was the largest slave owner in the States at the time. The hypocrisy and evil deeds of the founders is the subject of much conspiracy in the Untied States. We seek to worship men who were politicians no less corrupt than those we know today. Indeed a conspiracy against the people, by the founders, can be found in the very transcripts of the debate of congressional convention which had not convened to create a constitution. The founders state that they are bitterly opposed to democracy and that a wealthy elite must be set up as stewards of the people in a way that ensures they shall retain power. The result was economic aristocracy and the class division inherent in the States today. Conspiracy abounds, but it is not theoretical except in promulgation, for in promulgation an ideal or theory must be had to bring into effect. For that matter however conspiracy is found in every culture and group, so the US is no exception. For this reason, the fact that conspiracy has existed as long as rule has, the only idea of conspiracy that is utterly ridiculous is the idea that they don't exist.

Tyagarajas devotional hymns.

Wow, I had no idea that Iran's elections were as bunk as those of the United States. Do they have an electoral college set up to prevent democracy as well?

Lovely. I bow before the beauty inherent in existence itself: Shi Vai Ya Na Ma

I think it is scam like most vitamin supplements. People have been eating well without supplements for thousands of years. There is not going to be a cure all pill, but they are all sold like one. If you don't want cancer then limit your exposure to roads and gasoline. Gasoline has very strong carcinogens and countries with the most developed roadways and highest gas consumption have the highest cancer rates.

I've been reading summations of his chapters. I am familiar with most of what he says and talks about. I have mixed feelings, some of what he provides is not the whole picture, like with the L-tryptophan GMO problem of 89 or so, there are simple ways that this could have been avoided, but they are expensive. All the GMO companies have to do is test the GMO products with a full comparison of protein products against the standard of an un-modified product, the truth is that this costs a great deal and could show that a product that they thought was ready to release is not worthy of being released. At this point I should note that Invasion biology is related to this, the ethics and details of invasion biology are complex and several people have some extremely good arguments in support of the fact that nature itself works with invasive species. Related to this is the fact that nature itself invents/recombines new untested allele combinations all the time and sometimes they are detrimental. The very thing we demand that Monsanto not do, is what nature itself does. There are ton of dangerous plants and foods that are organic too. Heck, the chickpea cannot be digested by all peoples and is not safe for some people to eat, you could easily make a case against it by selective presentation of evidence. The bulk of Smiths work is for sale, I can't help but think Monsanto and he have the same thing in mind: $$.

If you can present to me the studies themselves that would be good. I have no interest in video or presentations of any type like this. If you just PM me the bibliography of the presentation so that i can read the studies myself I would be very appreciative. for starters to lump all GMO together is a sign of the same types of poor considerations that the makers of the products are doing. Any overt condemnation of a class of things is unwise when they are subject to so many variables. The problem, which is stated in the very title of the thread, is the risk involved. When any individual GMO is released without proper study then those risks are far greater than if the proper tests were run, which cost millions more than without the tests and are not required by law. You can raise a GMO crop with organic methods. What is wrong with that? I think that the criteria of what counts as organic to the USDA is weak and even stupid. I much prefer the California standard of organic.

It is a modern myth that witches existed and modern witches have no connection to any authentic pagan traditions. This is my opinion, however it is not so hard to support with observation. What do you think of Obea and the Loa of Voudun?

I love it! It makes good sense this way. Besides, urine can't be as bad as cheap wine.

Hi Nick! Allow me to offer that if the thermodynamic laws are correct then time cannot be linear. Since time and space are also related then space is not-linear. This means that the idea of communication across vast distances must be seen as an artifact of perception. There is neither time nor distance, just the interaction that allows us to observe and experience in a subjective sense the existence of time and space. There is in effect no line, no clear division in time and space, between the protons you study. The answer is extra-dimensional, what we call the big bang is a constant event that is the dimensional origin of time/space. we however project the criteria of subjective experience upon the nature of the universe and so believe that time and space is linear, however this idea cannot be reconciled with the thermodynamic law that states that energy cannot be created nor destroyed. The conflation of the observation of particle interaction with the existence of particles relates to this too. Particles, like linear time, are an artifact of perception. No moment and no particle is actually independent of any other. This is why there is the Heisenberg uncertainty, because particle is an artifact. I'd love to exchange ideas with you, if you are interested I'll email you, if what I write strikes you as naive and misinformed however then feel free to let it drop right now. Enjoy.

Have your eye opened then. I prefer celibacy, orgasms cause the secretion of prolactin, this is what causes the sedated feeling after sex. This is not something I wish to promote in my lifestyle.

There is more to tantra than sex practices. It is a rich tradition with several scriptural works. I am pretty close to an anhedonist so can't comment on the idea of lasting orgasm.

The laws are meant to help lawmakers and their financial sponsors. I don't think they pertain to being efficient, it is all part of a system which is the progression of caste and class division, such a system is based upon the use of larger part of society as domesticated animals to support a minority of society. The nature of this system is exploitative and often violently opposed to any ideal of common interest, common good or public welfare. Monsanto and other companies exploit this relationship in their manufacture of GMO products. They know full well they do not have to operate according to any standard of ethics or legality.

I still think that suicide is an act of cowardice. I've attempted it before when i was 12. Facing life is facing death. Facing death is not rushing to meet it. I think the suicidal are cowards.

Awe is energy, as it is attention. How then may we confirm energy as existing outside of perception? We must have tools that measure independently of subjective perception. I do not believe that people can feel another person watching them, but maybe they can. I have never noticed it with myself watching or being watched by others.

As is your brief post above merely opinion as well. Why post your post? Just to say that my opinion was opinion? You think it is opinion that I had a friend take their own life? if I offended you so that you seek to discredit what i say then I am sorry. what other reason do you have for such comments? I certainly don't see any of my posts as long. But that is my opinion.

Bhakti is the goal of yoga. Yoga is simply that which leads to bhakti, through the realization of the continuity between self and other. How can this be anything other than self mastery? Thus for me bhakti is of self mastery and is the test of a master, for a true master will know it in one form or another. Devotion can be hard to fathom, it is not a faith based thing like some religions involve, no faith is required for devotion. It is not related to what you claim you believe, or what you think you think. It is beyond self and ego.

I have Cohens book, but am not that fond of it, nor do I dislike it. I like this article, it has something in it that I feel is important. That is the relationship of the mind to the body in practice, and how the sphere of being can cause perceptible differences in subjective experience which may imply that our will affects reality itself. Likewise important is that the mental state of a silent and physically inactive person can still affect others who are near them. This is a profound realization that I was once familiar with and have only just now been reminded of again after many years. Thanks.

Fuller stole the idea himself, much like Castaneda did later. Have you every seen the tensegrity exercises by Castaneda's people? It strikes me as relevant. Of course what you write has great truth to it. I may disagree with minor details but the overt points of the article remain valid and are worth considering by any practitioner of internal arts.

When death is inevitable, then why seek it? I suppose this has already been noted. Those whose suffering needs to be eased seldom are capable of taking their own lives, nor are those whose minds lean towards suicide always sane enough to make a proper choice. I lost a friend to suicide and don't think it is an ideal way to meet death. If you believe that the spirit must leave the body by a specific method then few forms of suicide lead to a proper death if any of them do. Have the courage to face your death. Suicide is cowardice, it is an inability to face death. Face death with courage, it is inevitable and meeting your fate requires that you be brave. Taking your own life requires extreme cowardice. However some people have been seen to die by will, without need for a tool or means of taking life. If you can let go of your existence and have not the will to live then you will die. If you breathe then you have the will to live even if you are not wise enough to know that your will is not the same as your thoughts.

I agree the FDA has shown itself to be a corrupt and greedy organization with very little interest in protecting consumers. However the idea that GMO foods are bad is a joke. The problem is that they are not well studied. Since genetics shows that genes are variably expressed that means that GMO products need to be screened, not only for the desired products of genes, but rather for all products of the inserted genes. The introduction of a new gene can affect genes transcription of other ORF sequences. Since the companies that do make GMO foods and plants are not screening their products against un-modified ones in terms of the total genetic expression of the organism, we cannot rule out the potential for a genetically modified food or plant to cause detriment. They entail specific risks, not specific health problems, and it is unwise to lump all GMO together. If someone GMO'd a plant 10,000 years ago, you would never know and it would be indistinguishable from evolved plants. I oppose the unethical actions of the companies that are not giving people choices when it comes to GMO products, but I am entirely in favor of the genetic sciences and this includes making GMO products, however the methods of screening GMO organisms that are ideal are not those that are being employed and I have deep concerns regarding GMO products for this reason. To put it in concise terms, making and releasing safe GMO products is less profitable than just making and releasing GMO products. Since companies by law must be interested in a profit, then according to business law any company that pursues action that is not in the best interest of it's profit is in violation of it's charter and any acting officer or director of a company who fails to direct the company according to the interest of profit is at risk for being replaced. It is illegal for a company in the western market to pursue a business plan that is not oriented at making a profit. Because of this it is arguable against business law for a company like Monsanto to be concerned with the health impact of the products they make unless that health impact harms their profit. The development of any product or company in western business relates entirely to making money. Because of this it is in effect illegal, though not against criminal code, to operate the company according to a concern for public welfare, rather money is the only thing that matters. Public and private interests cannot be reconciled in a free market.

the problem is which chi? It is a word with many meanings, to demonstrate the existence of one of those meanings does not infer the existence of others. The idea that there is any one theory of chi is laughable. 2000 years is not that long either, and moreover to assume that the period of time that something was believed has anything to do with truth is to be mislead. People have maintained poor concepts for longer than 2000 years. When I was a boy my mother told me: if a billion people believe a bad idea, it is still a bad idea. This goes for time as well. Moreover the very idea of being able to know something... what a joke. Belief is all there is. There is no fact, only the perception of what we call fact. We must endeavor to quite misleading ourselves into thinking we have knowledge when all we have is a type of faith in our experiences.

Where is the line between eternalism and the teachings of buddha?

If you read the scriptures you will note that Brahman is without origin or end. This is beginning-less-ness. If you read the scripture you will note Tao is without origin or end. This again is beginning-less-ness. To understand you must become familiar with the works, even if through translation. Brahma, Shiva, Vishnu, these are not names, they are meanings, those who speak of them as utterly distinct do not know them. There is no time, only the illusion/experience of it, this truth is self evident for those who know how to look, and it is found in Tao, Veda and Sankya traditions. There is no self, only the illusion/experience of it, this truth is self evident for those who know how to look, and it is found in the Tao, Veda and Sankya traditions. Even science says that all is energy and energy cannot be created or destroyed. Where then can an origin be? Where can an end be had? There is no line between one moment and the next, where can eternity be when there has always been and can only be now? Can you say the name of god and mean it?