ralis Posted February 19, 2020 20 minutes ago, liminal_luke said: Sex and reality TV take up a lot of my energy, so I don´t have time right now to engage in an extended scientific debate about the virtues of vegetarianism. Suffice it to say that there are reasons to question the oft-repeated notion that consuming meat is bad for health or the environment. Here are the facts regarding cattle production on AGW (global warming) which are indisputable! 18% contribution to AGW! http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2006/1000448/index.html Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
liminal_luke Posted February 19, 2020 (edited) 29 minutes ago, ralis said: Here are the facts regarding cattle production on AGW (global warming) which are indisputable! 18% contribution to AGW! http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2006/1000448/index.html Well, a little disputable... https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/12/151214130727.htm https://www.intechopen.com/books/forage-groups/domestic-livestock-and-its-alleged-role-in-climate-change https://theconversation.com/yes-eating-meat-affects-the-environment-but-cows-are-not-killing-the-climate-94968 Edited February 19, 2020 by liminal_luke 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted February 19, 2020 (edited) As I stated livestock are responsible for 18% of AGW which is measured as the total carbon footprint per pound of meat. Carbon footprint is calculated using the following criteria, fuel consumption, cattle feed, labor, electricity, transportation and so forth. Dr. Albrecht Glatzle's work has been thoroughly debunked with his AGW denial which you referred to in the second link. Dr. Glatzle is associated with The Heartland Institute, which has been in the denial business regarding AGW. 18% is one part of AGW and the arguments that you posted are dishonest. Edited February 19, 2020 by ralis Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
liminal_luke Posted February 19, 2020 I haven´t made an exhaustive study of it, @ralis. I´ve read that grass-fed cattle can be a net-positive influence on environmental gases though I can´t find that link now. Perhaps you´re right. Statistical analysis is very complicated and can be deceptive, especially when all the players potentially have axes to grind other than the truth. I just think there´s doubt about the subject and no one position possesses clear definitive proof. Ditto for the alledged health benefits of plant-centric eating. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted February 19, 2020 2 minutes ago, liminal_luke said: I haven´t made an exhaustive study of it, @ralis. I´ve read that grass-fed cattle can be a net-positive influence on environmental gases though I can´t find that link now. Perhaps you´re right. Statistical analysis is very complicated and can be deceptive, especially when all the players potentially have axes to grind other than the truth. I just think there´s doubt about the subject and no one position possesses clear definitive proof. Ditto for the alledged health benefits of plant-centric eating. ‘Actually climate scientists are very accurate in their modeling of AGW. The biosphere is already in the beginning of the sixth mass extinction being primarily caused by human impact. https://guymcpherson.com/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted February 19, 2020 All the bullshit belief systems which are spoon fed regarding enlightenment are just BS. The purity test as discussed in this thread is nothing more than “dark ages” propaganda filled with lies. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Limahong Posted February 19, 2020 25 minutes ago, ralis said: All the bullshit belief systems... Good morning ralis, Such systems are best curtailed at the embryonic stage? 8 hours ago, Heartbreak said: Simply put... More...? - Anand Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Limahong Posted February 19, 2020 1 hour ago, liminal_luke said: I´ve read that grass-fed cattle can be a net-positive influence on environmental gases though I can´t find that link now. Good morning LL, There are studies made that the methane gas from cattle poops adds to global warming. But... ... a methane free cow is ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT! Great ~ now I can add this on this thread... - Anand Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
liminal_luke Posted February 19, 2020 More on the relative influence of beef on greenhouse gases... https://agreenerworld.org/a-greener-world/it-wasnt-the-cows-after-all/ And here´s something about how cows raised in a certain way can be a net plus for the environment... https://sustainabledish.com/its-not-the-cow-its-the-how-new-study-shows-grass-fed-beef-can-be-a-carbon-sink/ If you don´t want to dig into this stuff, I certainly don´t blame you. But the cattle-are-bad battlecry is far from uncontested. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
old3bob Posted February 20, 2020 most pigs live a horrific life confined to small, dirty pins, some cattle live better lives out on the range and in the sunlight but not all of them by a long shot, anyway we will reap the violent karma of most of the modern day animal processing and slaughtering houses in one way or another...so don't worry much about chakras, worry about the impact of personal and massive scale karma! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
old3bob Posted February 20, 2020 4 hours ago, dwai said: Not too much, not too little. Everything must be in moderation. Also diet should be defined by our constituent energetic makeup. Balance is the key. not so according to strict Hindu precepts regarding meat eating... except in rare cases or for certain soldiers on the battlefield. Correct me if I'm wrong? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted February 20, 2020 2 hours ago, liminal_luke said: More on the relative influence of beef on greenhouse gases... https://agreenerworld.org/a-greener-world/it-wasnt-the-cows-after-all/ And here´s something about how cows raised in a certain way can be a net plus for the environment... https://sustainabledish.com/its-not-the-cow-its-the-how-new-study-shows-grass-fed-beef-can-be-a-carbon-sink/ If you don´t want to dig into this stuff, I certainly don´t blame you. But the cattle-are-bad battlecry is far from uncontested. 18% is a part of AGW contribution which may seem insignificant, but it is still part of the entire problem! Furthermore, I have studied this problem which is a the threat to all species in the biosphere, including humans! If you want to debate a broad range of facts on AGW be my guest. But, picking out minutiae as a defense will not work with me! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
liminal_luke Posted February 20, 2020 @ralis I don`t really want to debate at all. Many people feel strongly about the ethics of eating meat and some of them have organized politically to try and push a plant-centric agenda; I see the idea that vegetarianism is better for the planet as part of that push. But like I say, I`m no biochemist, no climate scientist. I just wanted to present an alternative viewpoint to show that there is an alternative viewpoint. You`re free to think the links I`ve presented are hooey or minutiae or hopelessly biased by big cattle. For all I know, you might be right. Seems to me though that there are intelligent people on both sides of this debate. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted February 20, 2020 1 minute ago, liminal_luke said: @ralis I don`t really want to debate at all. Many people feel strongly about the ethics of eating meat and some of them have organized politically to try and push a plant-centric agenda; I see the idea that vegetarianism is better for the planet as part of that push. But like I say, I`m no biochemist, no climate scientist. I just wanted to present an alternative viewpoint to show that there is an alternative viewpoint. You`re free to think the links I`ve presented are hooey or minutiae or hopelessly biased by big cattle. For all I know, you might be right. Seems to me though that there are intelligent people on both sides of this debate. My view is one of non-linear dynamic biological systems in which one small initial condition will result in massive changes. CO2 is an initial condition no matter the source! Cows, power generation, automobiles, trucks, all make the same CO2. No difference! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Limahong Posted February 20, 2020 6 hours ago, liminal_luke said: I just think there´s doubt about the subject and no one position possesses clear definitive proof. Hi LL, What does the above mean to me as a layman? Nothing. When the two world superpowers are the top two CO2 emitters - what can I say/do/...? Nothing. But I pray... - Anand Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted February 20, 2020 17 minutes ago, Limahong said: Hi LL, What does the above mean to me as a layman? Nothing. When the two world superpowers are the top two CO2 emitters - what can I say/do/...? Nothing. But I pray... - Anand CO2 has no borders! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Charris34 Posted February 25, 2020 (edited) So regardless of the climate change argument, I was vegan for 10 years (from the ages of 22-32) at which point I was showing signs of malnutrition. Now, you can argue that I was doing it wrong, but I lived it and can speak from experience. A vegan diet NEVER decreased my libido. I was as horny as ever. The only thing that ever decreased my urge was when I got into my 40s....almost 48 now (finishing my 6th cycle). Edited February 25, 2020 by Charris34 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted February 25, 2020 17 minutes ago, Charris34 said: Your videos posted here are in violation of what the owner Sean has set forth. "The Truth Factory" is a right wing conspiracy site replete with lies and propaganda. I looked up this site and the owner is anonymous posing as a cat. I seriously doubt you have read the relevant findings on AGW, but choose to listen to right wing propaganda! My advice is to not even try to defend such as a tenuous position on AGW. You will lose the argument and be banned! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Charris34 Posted February 25, 2020 (edited) @ralis I am not left or right. Why do you care where the truth comes from? Watch the video and learn something. Ban me if you must and hang out in your own echo chamber. Edited February 26, 2020 by Charris34 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted February 26, 2020 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Charris34 said: @ralis I am not left or right. Why do you care where the truth comes from? Watch the video and learn something. Ban me if you must and hang out in your own echo chamber. Condescending remarks are not apropos to any discussion involving AGW. By imploring me to learn something by watching a video which I already have done and with a little Google research, I was able to ascertain the motive of the so called "Truth Factory". The title of the YouTube site in and of itself is a giveaway as to the pretentious nature of the creator of the site. Propaganda is insidious and to be quite honest there are a number of well educated persons here who will detect spurious propaganda laden nonsense. I have a degree in the Biosciences, so don't take me for a fool! You are welcome to be here, but stay within the guidelines! Edited February 26, 2020 by ralis Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted February 26, 2020 In listening to the second video it was immediately clear that the author is very good at gaslighting! The speaker states, "something that we can all agree on" is a technique to draw in listeners to agree without question. After all, what sane person wants to go against the perceived consensus? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted February 26, 2020 (edited) On 20/02/2020 at 11:49 AM, old3bob said: most pigs live a horrific life confined to small, dirty pins, some cattle live better lives out on the range and in the sunlight but not all of them by a long shot, anyway we will reap the violent karma of most of the modern day animal processing and slaughtering houses in one way or another...so don't worry much about chakras, worry about the impact of personal and massive scale karma! Well, like most things, human greed ruins it . Small scale regional farming would be better , but, of course, multi corps take them over and turn them into conglomerated enviro destroying animal concentration camps . For example , if I go up the mountain on the plateau and got to Plateau Butchery , all meat there is locally produced, and as you drive through the area you can see the cows wandering around in large fields of green, with streams and copses of trees . The pork and chicken supplies come from local free range farms , the local trout hatchery probably crowds fish into ponds . The soil is good, grows good organic veg and its a famous good potato area . Local slaughtering used to happen, but nowadays its the horror round up and trip by truck down the coast to an abattoir , then truck the meat back to the butchers - how stupid is that . In other places mobile abortion trucks have been set up , they drive on to the farm - cows in one end , meat and by products out the other , farmer can then sell them direct to butcher . But this is a bit of a 'backwater' ( thank goodness ) and 'modern civilisation' has not taken over completely yet . Edited February 26, 2020 by Nungali 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EmeraldHead Posted February 29, 2020 (edited) On 2/19/2020 at 2:42 PM, Heartbreak said: Celibacy Cultivation. Have you read any books about Brahmacharya from actual yogis? The idea of celibacy as a form of cultivation comes from the hindus not anywhere else. Brahmacharya, is 100% not celibacy. And celibacy won't lead to Brahmacharya by itself, it's not guaranteed at all. Children have some talent for Brahmacharya, dirty adults not at all. In daoist terms Brahmacharya is a preheaven practice, not a postheaven. Brahmacharya is tantra. The highest form of tantra some say, eh. Celibacy is definitely not tantra as it does not lead to a higher consciousness. Sivananda says Brahmacharya can lead to self-realisation. You are a blind fool if you think celibacy will lead to self-realisation. As such Brahmacharya has little to do with merely accumulating post-natal chi. Surely that's part of it, as fuel. But it (celibacy) alone it just a short lived weak fire in the woods at night, in a dangerous and unsuitable vessel. You have to actually be able to touch a horny whore like Asa Akira on her pussy to massage her and it won't be any different 100% in the ultimate sense from touching a wooden table. It is incredible control of the higher koshas which are wild as .... really crazy. They are formless/unmanifested. That alone tells you how wild they are in their nature. It is the core of the mind itself. The mind substance, which has nothing to do with the thoughts on the screen. It's almost like you have to evolve into essentially a new species, an alien if you will, with Brahmacharya. Can you shapeshift by your will ? no. It is like that. It is unimaginably hard. It is an immense flex of krya shakti, constantly 24/7 sleep, tired, etc. So yes, to reach Brahmacharya you need to practice celibacy and yoga as intensely and devoted as possible. And then hope to actually reach the Brahmachary states of mind control and root your whole life in that massive state of being. Celibacy actually, similarly to other post-heaven ONLY practices is dangerous and eventually 'draining', burning-of preheaven energies. Look at repressed monks. They have no idea. But monks don't actually practice yoga intensely so they are idiots not failed practitioners. Also, you MUST practice kegels/bandhas otherwise the perineum/pelvis muscles stagnate in celibates. Once again if you read actual Brahmacharya books you would know this. you must 100% practice. pissing for a second then stopping and circulating or pissing very slowly only the whole time is a good practice with it. To exercise the muscles down there. There stories of ancient yogis who were celibate and had all kinds of secret practices, massive prana and whatnot. They would copulate by impregnating ethereally using the cord. Similar to how a lot of giants did it in the past. But again they have transformed themselves massively, they bodies and whatnot. Many of them could shapeshift, have all kinds of crazy siddhis. Nothing like the stuff you kind with a simple google or youtube-ing session. But then also Brahmacharya is not the only pathway that touches to upper states. Once you're self-realized you will be able to control the body mind properly and direct it properly so actual tantra can be very useful to you too. Massively useful. What makes you think you want to and must practice Brahmacharya ? Do you know yourself? Do you know your desire? Surely to gather chi if you gather it from the air, generate it from above, or steal it from others, you must still limit sexuality and especially the ejaculation itself. But that is nothing like Brahmacharya, that's called being healthy and not holding your genitals in your hand cup all day long. It's a natural thing to regulate your sexual activity. So not being celibate does NOT mean you are wasting post-natal chi/ pranamaya kosha. Edited February 29, 2020 by EmeraldHead Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
