Well....as long as you learn from the experience.

(May 22, 2014 at 2:54 pm)Rampant.A.I. Wrote: I was kidding earlier, but I'm starting to wonder if Enrico isn't already institutionalized, someone should get on that.

1: He believes in reincarnation. Umpteen millions of people have, and still do, believe in reincarnation. Many of these people are highly educated. In some belief systems humans can reincarnate as animals.

2: He insists that humans aren't designed to eat meat. Many vegans and vegetarians insist that humans aren't designed to eat meat and they have posted dozens of articles on the internet about it. He's getting his information from these people.

3: He follows the teachings of a cult which, according to wikipedia, uses Tantra Yoga/meditation. As it was founded in 1955 it could be classed as New Age. This isn't a particularly odd belief system when you consider that shamans in Peru make a living catering to well off New Agers who are seeking spiritual revelations by taking ayahuasca.

4: His concept of God can be found on the internet using keywords like 'god is within you Hnduism'. This isn't surprising when the Ananda Marga cult was founded by an Indian philosopher.

5: He doesn't listen when it comes to scientific evidence which conflicts with his beliefs so he's the same as the other religious forum members in this respect.

6: I googled Intuitional Science and discovered it's something to do with the philosophy of yoga.

7: He makes interesting points about the environmental issues connected to meat production. Here is a Scientific American article about it - How Does eat in the Diet Take an Environmental Toll?

Quote:Our meat consumption habits take a serious toll on the environment. According to the Environmental Working Group (EWG), the production, processing and distribution of meat requires huge outlays of pesticides, fertilizer, fuel, feed and water while releasing greenhouse gases, manure and a range of toxic chemicals into our air and water. A lifecycle analysis conducted by EWG that took into account the production and distribution of 20 common agricultural products found that red meat such as beef and lamb is responsible for 10 to 40 times as many greenhouse gas emissions as common vegetables and grains.

“If all the grain currently fed to livestock in the United States were consumed directly by people, the number of people who could be fed would be nearly 800 million,” reports ecologist David Pimentel of Cornell University’s College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. He adds that the seven billion livestock in the U.S. consume five times as much grain as is consumed directly by the entire U.S. population.

Our meat consumption habits also cause other environmental problems. A 2009 study found that four-fifths of the deforestation across the Amazon rainforest could be linked to cattle ranching. And the water pollution from factory farms (also called concentrated animal feeding operations or CAFOs)—whereby pigs and other livestock are contained in tight quarters—can produce as much sewage waste as a small city, according to the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). Further, the widespread use of antibiotics to keep livestock healthy on those overcrowded CAFOs has led to the development of antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria that threaten human health and the environment in their own right.

8: I've found articles about the health risks of eating too much factory farmed meat while doing research for this topic. The Scientific American article, after mentioning the use of antibiotics, goes on to say -

Quote:Eating too much meat is no good for our health, with overindulgence linked to increasing rates of heart disease, cancer and obesity. Worldwide, between 1971 and 2010, production of meat tripled to around 600 billion pounds while global population grew by 81 percent, meaning that we are eating a lot more meat than our grandparents. Researchers extrapolate that global meat production will double by 2050 to about 1.2 trillion pounds a year, putting further pressure on the environment and human health.

9: He's got an odd way of writing his posts but he's explained that English isn't his mother language. I don't know what his mother language is but I certainly couldn't write posts in it because I can't speak or write anything but English.

So, I've never wondered if he's institutionalised because he's not alone where his beliefs are concerned.

(May 22, 2014 at 5:57 pm)Confused Ape Wrote:

(May 22, 2014 at 2:54 pm)Rampant.A.I. Wrote: I was kidding earlier, but I'm starting to wonder if Enrico isn't already institutionalized, someone should get on that.

So, I've never wondered if he's institutionalised because he's not alone where his beliefs are concerned.

I believe he has mentioned that he works in an institution. Thus the jokes.

"Works in" like John Cusack in the movie Identity.

(May 22, 2014 at 8:17 pm)rasetsu Wrote:

(May 22, 2014 at 5:57 pm)Confused Ape Wrote: So, I've never wondered if he's institutionalised because he's not alone where his beliefs are concerned.

I believe he has mentioned that he works in an institution. Thus the jokes.

Thanks for explaining it.

(May 22, 2014 at 8:17 pm)rasetsu Wrote:

(May 22, 2014 at 5:57 pm)Confused Ape Wrote: So, I've never wondered if he's institutionalised because he's not alone where his beliefs are concerned.

I believe he has mentioned that he works in an institution. Thus the jokes.

His English is particularly bad, I took it that he meant he was housed in an institution.

Also when he said that he's managed to heal people when conventional medicine doesn't work, which came just before he said that medicine is pretty much crap, which was right after he claimed to be a nurse.

Also when he said Dynamo, a magician from West Yorkshire, was actually magical, as in, supernatural magical, even though he's just an illusionist.

To be fair to Rick, he's come out with so much during his time here that could convince almost anyone he is classed as medically insane, it's hard to pick out specifically where I became convinced.

This isn't even meant as an insult, but it will be insulting but the things he has said.......I've heard similar stuff from people with schizophrenia. There was this one guy I saw on a documentary that was so sure that if he killed himself, he would go to hell and return to earth as a god. Ricky is like that, both with his level of certainty and his outrageous beliefs.

(May 22, 2014 at 2:22 pm)Confused Ape Wrote: Regardless of the predominate meat procurement mode, the increased availability of protein and fat in the diet of H. erectus via oil-rich seeds, USOs and meat [17] would provide consistently available, high-quality, calorie-rich fuels for such energetically expensive adaptations as a large brain.[/b]

Quote:So, if our pre-human ancestors hadn't changed their diet to include meat, humans wouldn't have big brains. Without our big brains we wouldn't be arguing about diet on the internet. We'd just be sitting in some jungle going "Oook" and eating plants and insects. This probably would have been a lot better for the planet, of course.

So you came to the conclusion that is the meat that we have to thank
for our big brains?
I am afraid that your belief is one more guessing.
There is no evidence for it as these scholars are guessing like you.
I also got one guessing if you don't mind.
Meat reduce the consciousness as the frustration to be killed is
recorded in the meat and this prevent the consciousness to expand.
The level of brain-intuition is based on the level of consciousness
so less consciousness=less brains.
In other words consciousness must come from something sentient
which of course is not meat.

Quote:The same evolutionary genetic advantages that have helped increase human lifespans by regulating the effects of meat-rich diets also make us uniquely susceptible to diseases of aging such as cancer, heart disease, and dementia.

Talking about dementia just today on tv they were talking about the level
of dementia in Japan which is getting out of control.
These people eat a lot of raw meat (Sushi).
Until short time ago they use to get their proteins from soya (milk, tofu)
and they were quite healthy.
Now that they change this natural diet for something non-healthy they are paying the price.

(May 22, 2014 at 10:59 am)Riketto Wrote: You keep on guessing again and again but as all other guys here
you are not telling me why man can not deal with saturated fat, cholesterol and toxins like omnivore animals?

Quote:I posted links to articles about Inuit diet and the difference between meat from wild animals and domesticated animals fed on unnatural diets. As you obviously didn't bother to read them you can ignore this article as well.

[url=http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/02/0218_050218_human_diet.html][/url]

Quote:"Evolving To Eat Mush" - : How Meat Changed Our Bodies

Funny, your link say........we can handle a diet that's high in fat and cholesterol...........
Again, at this stage (after dinner) i am unable to laugh but i will later on.

Quote:I loathe peanuts, walnuts, carrots and cucumber. I wonder what that's telling me about my previous life?

Let me GUESS.............................

---

(May 23, 2014 at 6:40 am)Bad Wolf Wrote: This isn't even meant as an insult, but it will be insulting but the things he has said.......I've heard similar stuff from people with schizophrenia. There was this one guy I saw on a documentary that was so sure that if he killed himself, he would go to hell and return to earth as a god. Ricky is like that, both with his level of certainty and his outrageous beliefs.

Ok. after the usual garbage let us concentrate on serious things.
CAN MAN DEAL WITH SATURATED FAT, CHOLESTEROL AND TOXINS?

(May 23, 2014 at 9:58 am)Riketto Wrote: CAN MAN DEAL WITH SATURATED FAT, CHOLESTEROL AND TOXINS?

.. for how many years? It may be that those things will only permit you to live to 75 - 85 years of age. Most of us would be able to reproduce within that time frame so I suppose as a species we'll be okay with such a diet.