The redneck strike again.

[Whateverist]

I admit that in some instance i was wrong but most of the time i am not which means that rather than my argument being illogical they just go against their belief and for this reason only they think that i am wrong.

Funny how it goes. I was just thinking about your intuitional science and wondering how useful and reliable you find it to be, and then you write this. We may be the same species after all.

Specifically, I was wondering if you thought intuitional science was always true or sometimes true. Have you ever used it to form a belief which you subsequently rejected due to what you observe 'out there' in the world?

And then there is the question of how widely it applies. It seems that you use it to come up with answers to empirical questions as well as existential questions. Do you use it to formulate your beliefs regarding man's 'natural' diet, or 'ideal' diet?

[Little Rik]

Saturated fat doesn't cause clogged arteries. This is caused by LDL which is rushed to a site where the heart tissue is inflamed or damaged often due to smoking or diabetes being oxidized as a result of metabolic rate syndrome, or due to a diet high in trans fats, or smoking. This causes clogged arteries, and ultimately heart attacks. People on high protien low carb diets rarely have heart problems, and generally have better health than those who eat a lot of carbs and very little meat.

Every day, every year medical science discover more and more.
Often a new discover knock down a previous one which was held as gold truth and the previous golden truth end up in the rubbish bin of history to be replaced by the new one which again will be replaced as well.
I agree that meat is not the only cause of diseases.
We live in a polluted environment. Many people smoke, eat junk food or are just frustrated of this life so the reasons are many.
My direct experience in medical facilities show me that meat is an important factor in many diseases.
Most of the sick people that i come across do not smoke or eat junk food or lead a frustration life yet they are very sick and 99% of them are meat eater.
This ring a bell in my mind how else they could ever become sick.
One more thing that medical science has not yet understood is about the putting on the same level different types of proteins like meat proteins and vegetable proteins as they would give a similar result.

Many of us were Christians. Many of us thought we knew God. Yet there was no real evidence to substantiate out beliefs besides our own personal subjective experience, which is not reliable. This was really sad for me because I LIKE Catholicism. I wanted it to be true.

Christianity try to find God externally when in reality God is within so no wonder you never find Him.

[Whateverist]

Many of us were Christians. Many of us thought we knew God. Yet there was no real evidence to substantiate out beliefs besides our own personal subjective experience, which is not reliable. This was really sad for me because I LIKE Catholicism. I wanted it to be true.

Just wondering if you'd given agnostic theism a go. I'm sure it would be quite a balancing act but it seems some Catholics are able to persist in faith without objective support. Mother Teresa apparently corresponded with the pope about her lack of belief. His response was that her faith must be even stronger and was all the more praiseworthy. My impression is that other higher ups in RCC also manage to admit they don't know if any particular thing in the bible is true but continue to find meaning and satisfaction in faith regardless. We briefly had a poster here who went by Purplundy who seemed to embody such a position. Agnostic theism must not be a very stable position (looking at you Jacob), but it does seem to be a possible one.

[Little Rik]

I admit that in some instance i was wrong but most of the time i am not which means that rather than my argument being illogical they just go against their belief and for this reason only they think that i am wrong.

Funny how it goes. I was just thinking about your intuitional science and wondering how useful and reliable you find it to be, and then you write this. We may be the same species after all.
Specifically, I was wondering if you thought intuitional science was always true or sometimes true. Have you ever used it to form a belief which you subsequently rejected due to what you observe 'out there' in the world?
And then there is the question of how widely it applies. It seems that you use it to come up with answers to empirical questions as well as existential questions. Do you use it to formulate your beliefs regarding man's 'natural' diet, or 'ideal' diet?

1) The question about intuitional science is not whether it is always correct or not.
It is always correct but the question is rather different.
You should ask........ARE YOU ABLE TO GET 100% OF INTUITIONAL SCIENCE IN YOUR JUDGEMENT OR NOT?
If i could i would be like God.
The way to the top is long and hard so until you reach the top you are not qualified enough to say that you are able to gather 100%.
I never said that my judgement is 100% correct but at the same time i can say that as you get deeper and deeper into spirituality more and more intuitional consciousness is available to you.
2) To understand how the system works in the diet or anywhere else is not only a question to follow your intuition.
The guru or teacher is also very important.
The teacher in the past did the same hard work that i am doing now before he-she got at the very top so it is also by following his-her teaching that you can progress.

[Cyberman]

Seriously? This thread is still here? Whatever point there might have been was wanked dry months ago.

[Little Rik]

You can freeze a wet ball and then with a heater melt the ice in the middle.
Now you have the ice only at the extremities.

Have you tried doing this?

Years ago i have seen doing this.

Ape, you just can't get away from my example of how people react in different countries.
The example didn't mean to point the finger here or there but rather to see how the culture of a particular place can affect people of different culture and from here to see how new challenges can affect people consciousness.

I can't see what this has to do with spirituality, though.

It is a question of tuning up properly.
As the consciousness increase and the physical-material-mental side get under control you want to go further up and further up lie the spiritual side.
You just try to tune up your radio into a station.
As you get closer and closer to a perfect tuning the static noise goes away to give way to a perfect sound.
Consciousness works in a similar way.
As you get away from materialism and all lower stages of consciousness you get a better and better stage of consciousness.
This related to my example in which a possible pole shift can affect people consciousness as they are worry for their survival.
When people realize that materialism and atheism get them nowhere many of them will try to get out the dead trap and move to a better stage of consciousness such as spirituality.

According to some Hindu philosophies, all the gods and goddesses are really different aspects of Brahman. If there is only one absolute reality God, all the gods and goddesses of any culture could be aspects of it as well. This still isn't proof of existence other than subjective experience, though.

Hindu is a religion and as such it believe into too many external factors which don't really help anyone spiritual progress.

Jungian psychology requires me to keep digging. If I ever find anything it will still be subjective reality.

A subject it is like the reflection that the moon does on a lake.
You can see a myriad of moons according to the angle or place in which you are position on the lake so you may wrongly think that there are million of moons but the moon is only one so in reality the subjectivity is all but an illusion.

[bennyboy]

I got a different story Ben.
If people would consider most of my argument illogical they would come up with a counter argument that would knock down my idea.
I found very very rare that they are able to do so.

This is exactly wrong. It is BECAUSE your arguments are illogical that counter arguments are pointless against them. You think that you are a deep well of intuitional wisdom-- however, most other people identify your ideas as made up bullshit. They have their own "intuitions" to dwell on, and there's no logical reason for them to believe that your bullshit is more valuable than their own bullshit. That's what you fail to understand-- if you are going to present new ideas, you also need to present reasons for people to accept them. Nobody sees you as a deep well of intuitional wisdom-- and therefore your claim that they should believe you because you are a deep well of intuitional wisdom will be ignored 100% of the time.

How can you define God when you realize that God is within?

If God is found only within, it must be revealed to you through your feelings or through ideas. Your feelings or ideas are truthful AS IDEAS-- but in order to demonstrate that they come from something other than your imagination, you have to show something outside your mind that meets your definition of God.

It is already difficult to explain the excitement that you feel physically speaking when you are in love with someone so to explain spiritual love is even more difficult.

Right. That's because your love is an experience generated by your body and brain. All you can do is hope that if you describe it, other people will recognize their own feelings in your description.

I've had religious experiences, including experiences of/from God-- sometimes in dreams or in meditation on the Bible (not now-- when I was younger). I also had dreams of fucking Angelina Jolie. But just because I had that experience doesn't mean I actually fucked Angelina Jolie. It only means that I have a strong imagination. Don't get me wrong, that dream was a fantastic experience, and has been an important part of my lifetime memories despite not being rooted in any objective reality.

Your intuitions can be a wonderful part of what it is like to be you. But if you want OUR experience of life to be altered by the ideas you present, you need to do a MUCH better job of proving them to have value to the non-Rikettos.

[Little Rik]

Seriously? This thread is still here? Whatever point there might have been was wanked dry months ago.

Where have you been mate?
I miss you very much.
Please don't wank around, i rather see you as Lee Van Cleef the smart pistolero.

[Cyberman]

Thanks for making my point for me.

[Little Rik]

I've had religious experiences, including experiences of/from God-- sometimes in dreams or in meditation on the Bible (not now-- when I was younger). I also had dreams of fucking Angelina Jolie. But just because I had that experience doesn't mean I actually fucked Angelina Jolie. It only means that I have a strong imagination. Don't get me wrong, that dream was a fantastic experience, and has been an important part of my lifetime memories despite not being rooted in any objective reality.

Slow down Ben.
Your imagination take you too far away from the reality.
You can not demonstrate to anyone that mental feeling that you had.
Even if you could have had sex with Angelina you still could not have demonstrate to anyone your feeling.
Now if you can not demonstrate something physical-mental how the hell can you expect to have a spiritual experience to be demonstrate considering that spirituality is something higher than the physical-mental side?
Get real Ben.