The redneck strike again.

[Little Rik]

What sort of ball is used in this experiment? How can two extremities of this ball be frozen without freezing the entire ball? Full instructions, please.

I thought that you heard about a planet called EARTH.
It is in the solar system and is where Riketto live.
It happen that it is frozen at the two extremities only with some peaks as well but mainly at the two extremities.
Don't ask me why it is frozen only at the extremities.
I am not a physical scientist but that is the way it is.

Italians worst Europeans behind the wheel

I believe you but what this has got to do with the point that i was making?
Let me remind you.
I took the example of changing way of doing things as you get into a different culture and this related to a possible pole shift in which people get worry for their own existence.
At this stage it will be very hard to keep on believing in nothing.
And this may well be the time in which people may change for the better.

I use Jungian psychology which doesn't require me to accept anything without proof.

It is up to you to turn an hypothesis into reality.
Everything in this life require effort.
You dream to have your own house.
You can't have it until you work hard for years and years.
You dream to have a perfect lover.
You must build up yourself in many ways so a good match can get into your life.
You want to know whether God exist or not.
Again you got to have desire for it and then build up a relationship with that entity.
You want proofs of God first?
You can't have them as you could have them in a physical-material situation as God is not physical-material.
As you can see it is not easy whether you want this or that in your life.

If I get an important dream or vision such as Apollo or the Earth as a goddess I ask myself what my unconscious is telling me. I then do my best to interpret the symbolic meaning.

I doubt that God will ever let you know that he exist unless you get interest in this matter.
Would you care to let know that you care about someone that doesn't care about you?

It's possible that some outstanding people were remembered in folklore and then regarded as deities. This still isn't proof of anything, though.

Again, it does not exclude the opposite.

We evolved to eat insects and meat from wild animals. That makes us omnivores like chimpanzees and bonobos which share a common ancestor with us.

1) Freedom is also part of human evolution and freedom allow man to do so many things.
It allow us to steal to kill and to pick the nose so your belief is totally wrong.
2) If we could do what primates do we could deal with saturated fat, cholesterol and toxin but we can't so you are wrong once again.

It's our modern diet that's the problem. We haven't adapted very well to factory farmed meat (which is different to wild animal meat) and processed foods etc. It now makes sense to be a vegetarian or cut back on the amount of factory farmed meat we eat. A vegetarian won't be very healthy, though, if they consume too much salt and sugar.

Salt and sugar wasn't good even then not just now.
Farm meat is worse that wild meat but both are bad as well.

---

In theory you got a good point.
In reality your point is meaningless.
If this website would be attended by people that know what they are talking about then i would have to agree with you but when you find people that post in the philosophy or religious forums without having a clue about the meaning of these things then everything at times become a big joke and when you are dealing with jokes everybody tend to forget the good manners.
If i would have to complain about the bad jokes that people in this forum make about me i should complain every single day but i don't so i don't expect that people complain about me.

Until you invest in a mirror, you will always get the same response, on any site where people have an education, or an interest in science, or a lack of belief in unprovable spiritual or religious ideas.

You've had some good ideas, but they are too mixed-up with random ideas that you clearly just thought of, without being able to test them, or caring whether they are even testable.

That works fine for self-study. I have lots of spiritual or superstitious ideas. But when I think about mentioning them, I stop and ask, "Why should anybody listen to me?" The answer is-- if I'm trying to change someone's thinking, I need compelling logical reasons for them to spend the mental effort to change their thinking. Just liking my own answer isn't a good enough reason to make other people listen to it. You wouldn't listen to someone telling you that God is a Pink Unicorn-- no matter how sure that person believed that, or how strongly they insulted you for refusing to accept their belief.

Many of your posts and links are corrupted because they are too obviously connected to an unprofessional bias. For example, you link to spiritualist websites to argue vegetarian morality, when your "audience" needs something more solid-- strong philosophical arguments, or better yet, actual scientific results (and not "interpreted" by biased sources, actual links or descriptions of the science).

Many people have asked you to present your arguments in a way that is meaningful to non-Riketto humans, but you generally have not done this. The result is that you are mocked.

If you want to argue, and say "Everyone else does it too," or think you are free to say whatever you like, that's fine-- you are free to do so. But nothing will ever change-- nobody will listen to the many GOOD arguments you make, because you've made too many weak ones. It's too bad for me-- as an agnostic, I'm fairly "spiritual," and I'm strongly vegetarian. If you listened better to what people have said, you could have been a strong ally. Instead, I have to try hard not to let people think all vegetarians are as illogical as they think you are.

1) If my arguments are illogical how come that you guys never explained how the saturated fats the cholesterol and the toxins are choking the arteries of meat eaters than don't eat junk food or got any other bad habits?
2) If my arguments are illogical why don't you disproof my idea that you can only have the evidence that God exist if you show any interest in it?
Why God would ever show in people that are not interested in him?
This to me is illogical.