psketti wrote:
Come come psket, that's just lame Now stop doing this.>>> Or I'll report you to the.....oh fek ang on a mo............or I'll sulk, like you did t'other day

dubmeup wrote:
Yeah, thats what i was trying to say; 'profound simplicities'. And i dont just mean admiring something like a nice view, but rather there is litrally a feast to be had, but your senses need to be tuned to subtle, finer vibrations - and thats only possible when you are still, else it just goes right over your head. The world is all about cheap thrills and ego vibrations and all the stuff you said that people are concerned with. I've done a few 10 day silent meditation retreats which really shines a light on how loud the world is and also how utterly meaningless the chitter-chatter is. The really interesting thing is once the 'chitter-chatter' knows you understand its game, it starts trying harder to get your attention with more captivating thoughts. Its really funny to observe and thats when the magic really happens with regards to seeing the real nature of reality. Worry worry worry, want want want and you just melt straight though it and realsie there is nothing to fear, and nothing to crave either. Sometimes I wonder if th control system would fall if people just shut up for a while. (Casteneda said the way that the sorcerers defeated the 'flyers' (reptillians) was disciplining themselves in the art of silence.) this chatter blocks finer vibrations and also closes us off to nature- during these meditiation retreats, wild animals and birds were approaching us and literally eating out of our hands.

I heard that nature is waiting to reveal herself to us but is unable to - and clearly you are in such a state of being that you are receptive to more of what there is to be seen/felt so youre very fortunate As 'Britains Got talent' is put on the telly, I agree with you that the sooner this shit ends, and people learn to appreciate stillness, the better!

Sorry to hear about Hoppy, hopefully he's living it up somewhere
I rescued a baby blackbird a few days ago and sent it off with the RSPB which was nice, but wonder if i should have let nature take its course as the parents were dumb enough to build a nest vulnerable to cats. Maybe sometimes its best not to interfere with natural selection?

domathy wrote:
You were there in the moment, are a part of nature and chose to act. Nature did run it's course

That said, I get what you're saying and have asked myself the same question more than once.

dubmeup wrote:
Yeah, that's the problem with our species. Fighting nature/domination seems like a priority. I'd love to see a point in time where our species learns to live with and utilize nature. Hahaha, Yes! I love getting into conversations with people about classification of humans. They literally do get angry at the prospect of being an animal. We breath same air, eat, sleep, mate, and die just like any other creature. Sure we have a few extra tricks up our sleeves, but other than that there really isn't anything that separates us.

When I think of the naturalistic disassociation of the average person, I can't help but wonder if other domestic animals have similar thoughts? As far as I'm concerned, man is a domesticated hybrid ape. Pigs for example lose much of their body hair and tusks when in a domestic environment. When they go feral, it doesn't take them long to go back to their natural state. After a few generations they start to grow thick body hair and tusks. The people of the state of Texas know a lot about that. The more I look at it, the more I do think our ancestors were genetically tinkered with. I think it may explain the disconnection many have with nature. Every other creature is clearly connected. They're perfectly suited to their environment. They can sense when things are changing for better or worse. Most humans seem to be clueless in that sense. We're so out of place that the other creatures run from us. They don't even run from their natural predators unless they're in active hunting mode, but run from man at the slightest scent.

I often wonder about that naturalistic state too. I do think a time will come when that relationship is reawakened. It'll be a long road getting there, though a road worth traveling.

Mrindigo wrote:
I was talking about something similar re domesticated animals with someone recently.

We were talking about trying to eat a diet that's more in tune with what your body was 'designed' to consume. I told him about my theory re only eating stuff you could forage for or hunt in the wild and we came to milk/dairy, which he has a real problem with.

His reasoning was that he could just stroll up to a cow and milk it, so that was all good.

My point being, if we were in a 'real' natural state where breeds had not been tinkered with and altered by us, strolling up to anything and trying to milk it is gonna be a no-no.

I honestly believe you could get all you needed from veggies, even re calcium intake.

Then there are those who go one step further and say you don't even 'need' to be consuming food to get what you need. Interesting stuff.

Ab Origine wrote:
Ironically a vegan might me more successful if aproaching a wild cow. Animals seem less wary of people who dont carry the smell of animal products.

dubmeup wrote:
Hopefully the bird will put in a good word for me with the fairys

@Mr I, I usually ask the animal deniers if they consider themselves to be a mineral or a vegetable That really irks them


@ab, your friend does know about cows producing milk for their offspring and that we kind of force the reproduction on them at an alarming cyclical pace to maintain supply and that there is an inevitable problem for male calves that are born as a result? Ickle things like that?

@dom, if I was that bird, I'd be putting in a good word for you

Ab Origine wrote:
A lot of people think they HAVE to eat dairy for calcium. I guess that's how effective marketing is. You can get as much, and more from Almonds and Cauliflower. I don't eat much dairy, just a little cheese here and there for fun. I drink almond milk for my calcium intake. It actually has 50% more calcium than milk. It's also loaded with a bunch of vitamins. So that much said, you're right about not needing diary for calcium.

You couldn't pay me to try and milk a wild cow. I like my bones intact. Even domesticated milk cows can be aggressive if you don't know how to handle them. You're right, that would be a no-no.

You would likely be healthier eating game meat or at least organic free-range. You're not ingesting factory farm vaccines, hormones, preservatives, and pesticides. Factory farm animals chow down on GMO corn which is loaded with engineered pesticides. My favorite red meat is Bison, since they don't do well in tightly enclosed areas. It's extremely lean as well. I look at it like this, the native Americans of the great plains lived off of bison for thousands of years, and they weren't known for heart disease. Even then I don't eat meat as much as most Americans do. On average I'll eat it once a week. I do think it is possible to lead a vegan diet, but it's not for me personally.

I know a vegan lifestyle would in theory be ideal. My problem is that conglomerates like Monsanto push the lifestyle so much because of their GMO products. Their goal seems to be to control the food supplies. I think they're probably behind the 'green' studies which try and link cows to 'climate change' via their methane gases. Cow farts...they're really grasping at straws. Because of that, I leave meat in my diet. Besides, history has shown what happens to populations that rely too much on one food source. My Irish ancestors would know a lot about that. EDIT: Realistically you couldn't lead a vegan lifestyle in a totally natural state. Civilization creates the opportunity for it via large scale farming and global produce import/export.

Mrindigo wrote:
I know of one partcular advocate of eating a vegan diet and his bone density was increasing into his early 60's (medically unheard of) - but this was a specific type of diet, not your standard vegan fayre.

I sometimes wonder about what natural means. I mean, if we were meant to do only whats natural then we would still be swinging from the trees (if we subscibe to theory of evolution). The reason why we are where we are is because we push boundaries and create solutions to our needs. Nature creates challenges for us in some ways hence why we make clothes and create shelter. Its confusing really, as I dont think the solution is to go back to living in caves (fully embracing nature), nor do i think science/technology can solve our problems (trying to conquor nature). I think the answer is somewhere in the middleground - and tailoring things as best we can (using intuition to feel our way along). So, whilst I agree that a vegan diet may not be natural as such (although physiologically speaking it may be), for some people it is a natural choice.

dubmeup wrote:
Thanks

I saw what could only ever be described as a skeleton of a fairy


There were three of us , we each saw it and sort of went no it' a monkey skeleton


Becuse dead monkeys bones are really common in Scotland

domathy wrote:
If I'm understanding what you're saying, then I would say that I have given the subject another look from your perspective, and I agree. You make a valid point. If the things we do aren't natural, then we simply wouldn't be facilitating them. What is artificiality when one really thinks about? Creating a home may be considered artificial, but many creatures do, not just us. Beavers, ants, and termites make some truly impressive structures. They're typically viewed as natural, though they alter the land around them to suit their needs like we do. Now that I think about it, it may be just be another ideological/perceptional attempt by humans to disassociate themselves from the other animals of Earth. Delusions of grandeur at it's finest.

I don't think the solution would be to go back to dwelling in caves either. I do agree that some middle ground should be found. A level of respect and balance between nature and machine would be best.

Thanks Dom, it's conversations like this which keep me coming back.

dawnbreak wrote:
That's strange. What sort of setting were the bones found in?

Mrindigo wrote:
I totally agree with this post. I also consume almond milk and loads of broccoli for my calcium. People have been duped to believe that the milk from cows is mandatory for a healthy diet. They fail to realise that there are many alternatives and that cow milk contains puss from the cows' infected teats. That in itself should be enough to back away and see it for what it is...

Mountain wrote:
You're right about the pus, not to mention the blood from the infections. A lot of those infections come from the cows being injected with bovine hormones, namely rBGH. There are several countries that rejected the growth hormone. It causes calf deformities and a variety of bovine infections, let alone what it does to people. We can thank Monsanto for that. There's currently no law here in the US which indicates that a product must list GMO/hormones, which makes drinking milk here sketchy business. There are organic farms that place Non-gmo labeling out of courtesy and respect of their customers, but most of the big milk companies don't.

What other mammal continues to drink milk after childhood, let alone the milk of another species? Realistically we shouldn't be drinking it the way a lot of us do. It's strange when I think about it.

I too am of the opinion that there is nothing new under the sun. A microwave oven is as natural as a tree fern.

As a species we have developed incredible problem solving capabilities and that enables us to utilize resources to do staggering things.

Where we tend to fall down is on the moral/ethical side of things. Many times, homo sapiens will choose to ignore it's sense of right and wrong and be totally self serving.

There is a lot to be said for Schumacher style thinking with regards to technology. Granted, not in every avenue of our lives but certainly an awful lot of them. We are in very real danger of losing our artisan capabilities, as the apprentice so eloquently points out. More and more processes are carried out by machines, supposedly because it improves our quality of life . Yes, it's so much more fun to go to town and buy a CNCed bird table than it is to go to the shed and recycle a pallet into one. They don't have Subway in your garden shed now do they!

dawnbreak wrote:

Very interesting. Could you describe it? Size etc? Just to apply Sherlock Holmes style thought to it.