Vegans - are plants sentient life forms too?

[Edward Alexander]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-kqslXHQcZWc/TlwiOOzHmII/AAAAAAAAAJM/v1Gbm4o5dqE/s320/orangeflower.jpg
Since there is so much misconception from the New Age scene and Alternative movement these days on "vegan lifestyle" and "vegetarianism" I feel I must address this topic some.

Now, this is intended towards those whom have decided to eat plants and botanical lifeforms for certain "spiritual" purposes, or "moral ethics" etc. As in those whom believe, that eating botanical food is spiritually better than eating any other form of life, and that they will get better "karma" and so on for doing this.

These people are, generally, opposed to any form of eating animals, calling it cruel and horrible and claiming it to be a threat to ones spiritual development and, "karmic points" so to speak.

Now what they seem to completely ignore, and miss out on, is the very fact that every form of plantlife, botanical lifefroms, that they themselves consume, are STILL that very thing - LIFEFORMS. Not only Lifeforms, but highly conscious beings, their own form of entities. These too have feeligns, emotions, consciousness, awarness, and in fact can be said to often be MORE spiritually developed than most other forms of life.

Scientific research have even proven how conscious and alert plants really are, and in fact shown them to be highly empathic, telepathic, and intelligent. This has been verified by in fact rather highly profiled scientists, some studies in this field done by Cleve Backster, working along with scientist-Astronauts such as Dr. Brian O'Leary and Dr. Edgar Mitchell.

Cleve Backster was Director of the Keeler Polygraph Institute and worked for the CIA on interrogation tactics. In 1966 he attached a plant to a polygraph. The polygraph recording pen moved rapidly to the top of the chart when Cleve’s thought and intention was "to burn the leaf." As a result of this intriguing response, Cleve became obsessed with a desire to understand the cellular communication process which he called primary perception. He found out that plants are highly sensitive and psyhcic, conscious beings. Plants would be highly stressed and show signs of anxiousness and fear when any form of negative action were either directly done to them, or even when just THOUGHT of being done to them. Likewise, positive actions made the plants respond with what one could only call joy, happyness, comfort, security and relaxed emotions. Other plants in the area would also react, when something was intended to be done or actually done on any other plant nearby, showing their telepathic contact with eachother.

Then you have these other experiments people have done, from talking nice to their plants and giving them love and that apparently makes them healthier and grow better, while negative energies seem to make them more miserable. Again clearly showing them to be highly spiritually developed, conscious and understanding what is going on around them. Advanced lifeforms, in other words.

All LIFE is really EQUAL. It does NOT make a difference if you eat a plant, an animal, or an insect. They are all worthy the same respect and same treatments of kindness.

So dear Vegans, eating a plant is no better than eating a cow or any other animal. You still harm and perform a negative actions towards a brilliant lifeform.

We live in a world where we all depend on survival by eating other forms of Life, no matter how you want to twist and bend that fact, it remains a fact. This is natural, and all animals and plantlifes and other lifeforms do the very same thing themselves, and I'm sure you will not say a Lion will get "bad karma" for eating a zebra, and indeed for the Lion its only way of survival is to eat other animals and meat.

So, that does mean that being a vegan serves no real spiritual purpose of all, except for a false belief in such which may be mentally comforting, but if you know the facts and truth about the botanical Life as well, perhaps you will see things in a new perspective.

Thus ending this, I would like to point out that we still should respect all forms of live, whether animals or plants or other forms, and treat them as our equals, and not abuse them or kill any forms of life unless strictly for survival and to obtain our food.

Blessings,
-Maggador

Some references of interest:
Dr Clive Backsters research: http://www.primaryperception.com/bio/?page_id=7

Dr. Edgar Mitchell, at his Institute of Noetic Sciences: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Noetic_Sciences
If you like this article please vote for it by the button below:

[Robert J. Niewiadomski]

Hi :)

Edward, I would like to argue with you a little. First of all I am not a vegetarian. But I really would like to switch to some day. I agree with you that plants do have nervous system of some kind. Eating whole plants seams cruel to me just like hunting for animals. But I can not agree that eating fruits designed by Creator to be eaten is murder. Many types of fruits when mature can be picked without force and without damaging plant bearing them. This is our conscious part here to choose wisely what fruit we pick and how many we left for a plant so it could seed itself. I think it is proper also to ask a plant for permission to eat it's fruit or apologise to a plant for damaging it. Animals are different because their only "fruit" is their offsprings or their meat. Exception to this is milk or not fertilised eggs. I think that our attitude is important. It is difference if we see all nonhuman lifeforms as inferior to us or if we treat them like our peers. But what about germs? Our own bodies kills them by millions daily... I don't know where there is limit to such thinking. If we go too far we can get an impression that we are intruders here. I don't subscribe to such view. I feel I am an integral part of our planet. One of many important parts :)

[Orion.V]

This might be a little bit away from the subject but here it is:

Although I agree with the perception and understanding of the vegetarians, still if one becomes a vegetarian he/she must know that proteins are the essential building block components of the body and a stable protein intake must be maintained in the body to prevent muscle catabolic process. Meat is a strong protein source but it can be replaced with milk, eggs, grains, beans , soy and some other products. In order to compensate these will have to be taken in a little bit greater quantity.

[Tane Mahuta]

http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/4174/steakc.jpg

Nothin beats a bit of red meat(Blue)....

But thats just me!!

TM

[Abhaya]

It is true that plants are of course conscience beings. But this reality we live in forces all beings to consume other beings to live. I think the best we can do is take the path of least resistance. While plants feel some form of pain and maybe fear, I think it is safe to say that in comparrison to what say a cow experiances at the slaughter house, there is a universe wide difference. we should honor and thanks anybeing we have to consume to carry on in this less then ideal reality we live in.

The Title to this thread made me laugh though. (not taking a shot at you) just so intense!!!!

[Niobe]

The title of this thread is rude in my opinion- it is written to instill a reaction in people - why attack other people's beliefs or practices? I would think time would be better served making positive points about a topic- or contributing in other ways. Even this topic could be presented in a way that isn't so hostile (mainly the title). The last thing we need is more negative energy. Generally I try not to comment if I don't agree with someone's attitude or presentation- I just move on to something else- but I guess not today. Lots of love to you, Edward, it seems you could use some. And I do mean that in the nicest way. And no, I'm not vegan....

[thunder24]

The title of this thread is rude in my opinion- it is written to instill a reaction in people - why attack other people's beliefs or practices? I would think time would be better served making positive points about a topic- or contributing in other ways. Even this topic could be presented in a way that isn't so hostile (mainly the title). The last thing we need is more negative energy. Generally I try not to comment if I don't agree with someone's attitude or presentation- I just move on to something else- but I guess not today. Lots of love to you, Edward, it seems you could use some. And I do mean that in the nicest way. And no, I'm not vegan....

positive points only about a topic, is not looking 360 at the topic, thus missing something. this world is not just positive, its also negative. Life=death... hence circle.

Even breathanarians(sp) kill bugs when they breath....thats not negative, its just circular. LOL

PEACE

[RMorgan]

Well, I agree with you partially.

I´m a vegetarian for about 10 years, not a Vegan, because I eat eggs (organic eggs, when chicken are farmed in natural spaces, free to walk around and live their lives) and I drink milk and eat its derivatives, mostly organics as well.

I love animals, they are my friends and I am completely against animal cruelty. If you take a look at the standard animal farming facilities, and what they do with them, since they´re born until they get murdered, you will find out how cruel the whole process is.

I´m not against killing animals for eating. If you are a small farmer, and you raise your animals, with all respect and kindness, since they are born, giving them the proper time and space to live their lives, feeding them good food, and then, one day, you decide to kill them to feed your family, it´s ok for me. This is a natural process indeed.

However, the standard food industry is absolutely terrible and cruel , and I´ve decided not to be part of it anymore.

Also, I´m not a hunter. I don´t have the guts to kill a cow or to cut a chicken´s throat and I would only do this kind of things if I´m on an extreme survival situation. So, if I just picked a pack of meat on the mart, I would just be a coward and and a hypocrite, like most of the people.

I´ve seen a lot of people saying that they are so kind, that they would not kill a fly or an ant, while eating a big steak for lunch. This is the pure hypocrisy.

That´s it. I´m against the animal cruelty perpetrated by the food industry, and that´s why I´m a vegetarian and I try to feed from organic sources most of the times.

There´s also the ecologic problem with livestock farmers. In countries like Brazil, which is one of the biggest meat exporters of the word, they farm cows in an extensive livestock regime, which means that they have to deforest huge areas of vegetation to farm them, and deforest an even bigger area to cultivate their food, which is mostly soy. It´s terrible for our environment as a whole, because they rip away entire biomes to farm cows, entire forests to plant soy, which is a mono-culture, degrades the soil and it´s quickening the desertification process of the Amazonian and other natural forest regions.

There´s a research that points that, if they stop to feed all the cows with soy right now, and direct the soy to feed people, we could feed every single human being on the planet and stop starvation. It means that we are spending a huge amount of natural resources to feed only a small percentage of the world´s population, which have money to buy meat.

You know, who am I to say if I´m right, or you are wrong. Life is made of choices and I´ve made mine, you´ve made yours. That´s pretty much ok.

Not eating meat is a natural choice for me. Let´s take this example:

Put a hungry puppy wolf or dog in a closed room, with only an apple and a small rabbit. With which one he will choose to eat and which one he will choose to play?

Now, do the same with a hungry human kid...With which one he will choose to eat and which one he will choose to play? Would the kid eat the rabbit, raw, with fur, blood and bones, and play with the apple, or would he eat the apple and make the rabbit his friend?

[Marianne]

I agree that plants have a consciousness. I commune with plants sometimes, and always feel their life essence. It's an experience like no other.

As an herbalist, I do this when I am making medicine. My teacher calls it plant spirit medicine. In order to extract the highest healing from the plant, I connect with its energy and ask permission to harvest.

In all the time I've done this, I have felt an overwhelming joy from the plants, to be of service. In return for their sacrifice, I bless them with love and gratitude and leave something on their soil ... perhaps a kernel of dried corn, or a pinch of homegrown tobacco, or pehaps a silver strand of my hair (more and more silver all the time).

I think plants value a chance to be of service, just as humans do. They should be treated with respect, as we all wish to be.

When you buy food or harvest it from your garden, remember to give thanks to all the hands that helped bring it to you -- seedsmen and nursery folks, growers, pickers and distributors, stockers in the store, and cashiers. As you cook it, remember the elements that nurtured it, soil and rain and sun, and thank them too. As you eat it, remember the cycle of life that we are part of in this world of form. Bless the opportunity you have to be a part of it.

--Junebug

[777]

"The universe is hostile, so impersonal.......

.......Devour to survie. So it is. So it's always been"

Tool (The band, not an accusation).

Given that the above statement is (imo) a given from the micro to the macro and beyond I don't think an apology is needed for whatever we consume. We have to. But I do take a leaf out of Wiccans' books here and thank the maker/creator for whatever he/she/it has provided for us and heavens' bounty. To succumb to a strata is integral, but to dishonour those we devour is to poison ourselves, my little elves.

[Maia Gabrial]

By thanking the lifeforms for their sacrifices, we honor them....

[777]

By thanking the lifeforms for their sacrifices, we honor them....

and in turn they enrich us.......

[RMorgan]

By thanking the lifeforms for their sacrifices, we honor them....

I would not like anyone to eat me, even if they thank a billion times before murdering me.

[777]

By thanking the lifeforms for their sacrifices, we honor them....

I would not like anyone to eat me, even if they thank a billion times before murdering me.

You are Soul food every day. They thank you not and they still want to eat your energy with no honour. I know which I'd rather. I would rather enrich a more developed gratuitous being on my way out than satiate parasites.

[Pamela]

It is odd that I was thinking about this exact topic on my drive to work this morning. My thoughts are that when you eat plants you are not KILLING the plant. You are only taking the part that you need. The plant survives and flourishes. No harm is done.

Also, the fruit of a plant is meant to be taken. If not taken, it falls off the plant anyway.

This may seem like a strange analogy but it would be the same if something could eat the hair we grow from our heads. It would not harm me to cut it and it would provide nourishment for another lifeform. If they ate meat and chose to eat me - they would then be murdering me to gain the nourishment. Two completely different actions.

[thunder24]

By thanking the lifeforms for their sacrifices, we honor them....

I would not like anyone to eat me, even if they thank a billion times before murdering me.

lol , thats just called organ donation. :focus:

[RMorgan]

Ok! Back to topic now! ;)

I´ve found these useful articles about the consequences of livestock production on the planet.

"Extensive livestock production plays a critical role in land degradation, climate change, water and biodiversity loss," Steinfeld said. For example, grazing occupies 26 percent of the Earth's terrestrial surface, and feed-crop production requires about a third of all arable land, he said. Expansion of livestock grazing land is also a leading cause of deforestation, especially in Latin America, he added. In the Amazon basin alone, about 70 percent of previously forested land is used as pasture, while feed crops cover a large part of the remainder.
"We are seeing land once farmed locally being transformed to cropland for industrialized feed production, with grasslands and tropical forests being destroyed in these land use changes, with resources feeding livestock rather than the humans who previously depended on those lands," added Mooney, who co-chaired the scientific advisory panel for the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment.
Climate change
According to the FAO, when emissions from land use are factored in, the livestock sector accounts for 9 percent of all carbon dioxide emissions derived from human-related activities, as well as 37 percent of methane emissions--primarily gas from the digestive system of cattle and other domesticated ruminants--and 65 percent of nitrous oxide gases, mostly from manure.

Full article here: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/02/070220145244.htm

There´s also this PDF:

"By 2050, global livestock production is expected to double—growing faster than any other agricultural sub-sector—with most of this increase taking place in the developing world. As the United Nation’s four-hundred-page report, Livestock’s Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options, documents, livestock production is now one of three most significant contributors to environmental problems, leading to increased greenhouse gas emissions, land degradation, water pollution, and increased health problems. The paper draws on the UN report as well as a flurry of other recently published studies in order to demonstrate the effect of intensive livestock production on global warming and on people’s health. The paper’s goal is to outline the problems caused by intensive livestock farming and analyze a number of possible solutions, including legislative changes and stricter regulations, community mobilizing, and consumers choosing to decrease their demand for animal products."

Download PDF here: http://www.springerlink.com/content/3x0564784525k717/

Another nice PDF presentations about the subject here: http://www.shl.bfh.ch/fileadmin/docs/Forschung/KompetenzenTeams/NutztierUmweltInteraktion/LCL-Mooney-consequences.pdf

Now, there´s this 6 + pages article about the pros and cons of the vegetarian diet for health:

http://www.medicinenet.com/vegetarian_and_vegan_diet/article.htm

You see, there´s plenty of other reasons to not consume meat, besides karma and this kind of stuff.

[Lettherebelight]

Ha! The title of this thread is so un-Avalonian, I'm surprised the mods haven't picked up on it. Anyway, if someone points a finger, there's always three pointing right back at themselves. Kinda like...'what you say, is what you are'. Lol!

I've heard that line that 'everything is all the same' from many people over the years, usually from people who find it difficult to see things from another angle. With that logic, we could end up justifying doing anything!

Everyone will do what they feel is right for themselves...you're not going to catch any flies with vinegar, mate. Try a little honey, you might have better results.

[Agape]

We were created to feed on light , oxygen, water ..and nib a leave and fruit here and there .

And when you have to go and muder something, someone, another soveriegn creature ..with your hands..to satisfy your hunger life becomes more sad,
don't you think so .

You become more like the innocent animal driven by instincts , indifference . Do what you like to survive is certainly not the order of higher intelligencies in the universe .

Higher the enitity more pain, more guilt it feels when being killed. And when you consume the energy , the pain and guilt ,

no matter how loud you shout , no matter how far you can jump and beat your chest ,

you became stronger yet you have degraded.



Well. It's not a good topic for newbies anyway ..






;)

[Peace of Mind]

When the fruits and veggies I eat start screaming out in pain or display some signs of disapproval of me eating them I will reconsider. As of now, they are there for easy pickings…I do not have to hunt a apple or a head of lettuce down and kill it for my own nourishment. Plants have been here longer than Man so if we were their threat they would have evolved some form of protection by now…just like every other species did. “Live off the land” as it was written in some scriptures. Mother Earth provides us with all we need. It’s been said that all animals used to eat light/pranna, then vegetation, but something happened long ago. Humans (or some cataclysmic event) wipe out much of the worlds vegetations…leaving the seas and lands somewhat barren. Not long after… animals began to eat each other. This has kept our frequencies and the planets vibration low, but times is changing now….as she rises… our consciousness is too…which is the very reason why discussions such as this come up. And why so many people are changing their diets, therefore their minds. We begin to see what we are really doing here, the effects we have on the world.


Many scientists today are part TPTB dumbing down process. Who do you think funds them? Who makes the pricey prescription meds? Who tells you to eat so much every day? I don’t need someone else to tell me something I can clearly see for myself. Only naïve followers will trust a stranger over their own senses. I now the differences in my body because I’ve experienced both sides of the fence, I not sitting on top of it wondering.

My veganism over the last decade has made me healthier, I sleep a whole lot less, I’m more in tuned with nature and I’m virtually stress free. There are other advantages but the few I mentioned are the most notable ones. I haven’t been sick in ages, nor do I feel any of that negative energy when consuming dead flesh. Eating an orange/apple/tomato/ broccoli/etc… you can feel and taste the life nutrients it’s giving you. Flesh would probably taste horrible if it wasn’t for the fresh veggies they use to make into herbs/seasoning.


My body has a mind of its own (everyone’s does) I don’t have to tell it to breath/pump blood/heal and many other things…just enrich it with the things it needs, and all of them can be found and provided by the Mother. IMO, there is no true need for an intelligent being to kill another being when it can easily find the alternative/substitute.

Peace

[Decibellistics]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLv_yc4fPBc&feature=related

All life has conciousness, and the universe is predatory by nature.

Easy pickin's right......we all feed on energy. As above so below.

[Rog]

OP hit the nail on the head. It echoes what Inelia's talked about too even though I haven't seen her full interview. The cultural phenomenon of vegetarianism sits right next to shoulder-pad feminism. It's a bunch of whacko crap to be blunt. My grandmother and cousin both starting falling I'll because they thought they could better themselves by eating "better." Only to find out that their anatomy, in part, needs not protein, but ANIMAL protein.

If you're truly "enlightened" you don't need meat, veggies, oxygen, water, or light. You could swim through the void singing show tunes for a 1000 years if you were really on top of the ball. Nothing exists beyond the tip of your nose. This humanity gig's an all-inclusive cruise, we just have all sorts of personal issues that have us needing to do serious work to recalibrate ourselves back to that point of "daily" living.

With that said, I'm gonna go grab a cheeseburger, and unfortunately I won't know the name of the dude I'm chewing on. We'll have to laugh about it later in the ether.

Namaste

[meeradas]

I's born vegetarian.

Any meat smuggled into my meal immediately came out again, triggering an instant vomiting reflex.

Grand parents raised me ["omg, the boy doesn't eat properly... he's not normal"].

Whereever i had to attend group meals (starting home, then kindergarten, etc.), all of the others always looked at me - you know what i'm talkin' about; seems where and when i grew up i was "the only one".

"Taught" myself to eat meat to stop being looked at strangely; even "taught" myself to like it [ending up with my daily steak...].

Dropped the habit after that; went back to my what i thought 'natural' state [veggie; occasional egg/ milk: yes] without effort.

Remember some real quality time spent with a "spiritual master", couple yrs ago - and the strangest thing happened during one long sitting:

An overwhelming urge to have a steak with a dark heavy sauce, plus a beer! Could actually see, smell and feel them inside which is quite unusual for me...

Needless to say - afterwards i went to a restaurant to get what i had seen - and these were the most delicious and tastiest of the above mentioned i ever had.

Since then, no more rules, but one:

If it feels 100% right beforehand, i'll have it.
[I can easily tell when it wasn't 100%. Beforehand.]

---------------

Thread title too deliberately provocative for my taste.

[lake]

You don't require anything, you being will transmute to that which you need. It is only belief.


Newsgroups: alt.sci.physics.new-theories
Subject: Breaking down the barriers between physics, chemistry and biology.
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 12:06:20 +0200
Organization: Department of Computer Science, U of Copenhagen I would like to request that anyone who replies to this article on the newsgroup please send a CC to me at . That will be most helpful. Thank you! - Madhavendra Puri.
EVIDENCE THAT ATOMS BEHAVE DIFFERENTLY IN BIOLOGICAL SYSTEMS
THAN OUTSIDE OF THEM
Madhavendra Puri
The Bhaktivedanta Institute
E-mail:
A number of chemists report that plants, animals and human beings ROUTINELY TRANSMUTE MID-RANGE ELEMENTS (for example, potassium into calcium or magnesium into calcium) AS PART OF THEIR ORDINARY DAILY METABOLISM. These transmutations obey rules such as: Mg + O => Ca; K + H => Ca. This is revolutionary since, according to current physical theory, the energy levels required for such transmutations are billions of times higher than what is available in biological systems.
Equally inexplicable fission reactions such as Ca => Mg + O; Ca => K + H are also reported. But revolutions in physics have repeatedly occurred, such as the quantum revolution in which the radical property of non-locality, previously considered impossible, is now accepted by physicists (see Aspect and Grangier 1986, Bransden and Joachain 1989, p.671-681, Chiao et al 1993, Squires 1990, p.173, Rae 1986, p.25-44, and Penrose 1990, p.369).
What I am presenting here is not the "cold fusion" of Fleischmann and Pons which, as far as I know, lacks clear evidence of actual fusion.
Even if the Fleischmann and Pons effect turns out to be actual fusion, it is only the fusion of isotopes of the lightest element hydrogen under special laboratory conditions which is quite different from the UNEQUIVOCAL FUSION AND FISSION OF MID-RANGE elements found in biological transmutation reports.
Now let us examine the evidence for biological transmutation. Crabs, shellfish and crayfish have shells made largely of calcium. A crab 17 cm by 10 cm has a shell weighing around 350 grams. Periodically these animals shed their shell and create a new one. This is called molting.
When molting, a crab is very vulnerable and hides away from all other creatures so it can not get calcium by preying on other creatures.
According to French chemist C. Louis Kervran of the Conseil d'Hygiene in Paris, seawater contains far too little calcium to account for the rapid production of a shell (the calcium content of sea water is about 0.042% and a crab can form a new shell in little more than one day).
If the entire body of a crab is analyzed for calcium, it is found to contain only enough calcium to produce 3% of the shell (even taking into account the calcium carbonate stored in the hepato-pancreas just before molting).
Even in water completely devoid of calcium, shellfish can still create their calcium-bearing shells as shown by an experiment performed at the Maritime Laboratory of Roscoff:
"A crayfish was put in a sea water basin from which calcium carbonate had been removed by precipitation; the animal made its shell anyway." (Kervran 1972, p.58)
"Chemical analysis made on animals secreting their shells has revealed that calcium carbonate is formed on the outer side of a membrane although on the opposite side of the membrane, where matter enters, there is no calcium. This fact has left specialists perplexed." (Kervran 1972, p.58) Seawater contains a sufficient amount of magnesium to form a shell if we accept Kervran's proposition that crabs routinely transmute magnesium into calcium; Mg + O => Ca. It would be interesting to put a crayfish in water devoid of both calcium and magnesium and see if it can still create its shell. Normal egg shells produced by hens contain calcium.
Kervran (1972, p.41) reported an experiment in which hens were confined in an area in which there was no source of calcium and no calcium was present in their diet. The calcium deficiency became clearly manifested after a few days when the hens began to lay eggs with soft shells. Then purified mica (which contains potassium) was given to the hens.
Kervran (1972, p.41) described what then transpired: "The hens jumped on the mica and began scratching around it very rapidly, panting over it; then they rested, rolling their heads on it, threw it into the air, and began scratching it again. The next day eggs with normal shells (weight 7 grams) were laid. Thus, in the 20 hours that intervened, the hens transformed a supply of potassium into calcium. ...
An experiment of this kind, using the same mica, was undertaken with guinea-fowls over a period of forty days. The administering of the mica was suspended three times and each time a soft- shelled egg was laid ... ." One might suggest that the calcium in the egg shells was borrowed from the bones of the hens. But if this is true, why were soft eggs laid when the mica was withheld and normal eggs laid when mica was given to the hens?
In order to avoid the conclusion that the hens transmuted potassium into calcium, one would have to show that mica somehow stimulates a metabolic pathway in which calcium is removed from the hen's bones and used in the production of the egg shells. This could be completely refuted by feeding the hens mica (and of course absolutely no calcium) for such a long period of time that all the calcium in their bones would have been completely exhausted.
If after that time the hens still produce calcium-bearing egg shells, we must conclude that the calcium in the egg shells is not being taken from the bones.
At that point, we seem to have no choice but to acknowledge the transmutation of potassium into calcium within the hens.
Kervran (1972, p.52) described experiments performed in 1959 by the French government in the Sahara desert. The government was interested in determining the nutritional requirements of petroleum workers in the extreme heat prevalent in the desert.
In the first experiment, conducted near a place called Ouargla, the total amount of magnesium ingested per day per man was measured and compared with the amount excreted. It was found that, on the average, each man daily excreted 117.2 milligrams of magnesium more than he ingested. Thus, each day, each man lost on the average 117.2 milligrams of magnesium.
Now we must consider how much magnesium is on reserve in the human body: it turns out that the body is not able to mobilize more than 5000 milligrams of magnesium.
Thus, at a daily loss of 117.2 milligrams, it is clear that after 50 days the bodies of the petroleum workers should have been completely depleted of magnesium. But the experiment was conducted for 180 days and each day each man excreted on the average 117.2 milligrams more than he ingested.
The second experiment lasted for 240 days and was conducted near Tindouf which has a drier climate. This time each man excreted each day an average of 256 milligrams of magnesium more than he ingested.
Under these conditions, after 20 days, each man should have been completely depleted of magnesium; but somehow they survived for 220 days thereafter.
It seems difficult to avoid the conclusion that the human body is able to create magnesium.

Biochemist H. Komaki of the University of Mukogawa in Japan reported that a number of different families of microorganisms such as Aspergillus niger and Saccharomyces cerevisiae create potassium during growth.
(Komaki 1965, 1967) Kervran described a germination experiment using ryegrass seeds (type Rina) performed in 1971 by the Laboratory of the Societe des Agriculteurs de France (Kervran 1972, p.107). Out of an initial group of 2000 seeds, 1000 were set aside as a control batch and the other 1000 were germinated.
The control batch weighed 2.307 grams before drying and 2.035 grams after drying.
These 2.035 grams were analyzed and found to contain 3.02 milligrams of magnesium, 6.97 milligrams of potassium, 6.00 milligrams of calcium and 0.021 milligrams of copper.
The magnesium, calcium and copper contents were determined by atomic absorption spectroscopy and the potassium content was determined by flame emission.
The 1000 seeds to be germinated were germinated for 29 days in Petri dishes under a plastic sheet to insure that no dust could get in. Aside from 430 milliliters of Evian water, absolutely nothing else was supplied to the seeds during germination.
430 milliliters of Evian water was found to contain 10.32 milligrams of magnesium, 0.39 milligrams of potassium, 33.11 milligrams of calcium and 0.00 milligrams of copper.
After the 29 day germination period, the plants were converted to ashes under high temperature and the ashes and residual Evian water in the Petri dishes were found to contain 3.20 milligrams of magnesium, 16.67 milligrams of potassium, 36.50 milligrams of calcium and 0.10 milligrams of copper. Before germination there were 6.97 milligrams of potassium in the seeds. During germination 0.39 milligrams of potassium were added to the growing plants (this came from the Evian water).
If atomic nuclei can not be altered in biological systems, we expect that after germination there should be 6.97 + 0.39 = 7.36 milligrams of potassium in the plants and residual Evian water. But this was not the case.
After germination the plants and residual Evian water were found to contain 16.67 milligrams of potassium.
Thus 9.31 milligrams of potassium were apparently created during germination.
Before germination there were 3.02 milligrams of magnesium in the seeds. During germination 10.32 milligrams of magnesium were added to the growing plants (this came from the Evian water). If atomic nuclei cannot be altered in biological systems, we expect that after germination there should be 10.32 + 3.02 = 13.34 milligrams of magnesium in the plants and residual Evian water. But after germination the plants and residual Evian water were found to contain only 3.20 milligrams of magnesium.
Thus 10.14 milligrams of magnesium were apparently destroyed during germination.
Before germination there were 0.021 milligrams of copper in the seeds. During germination 0.00 milligrams of copper were added to the growing plants.
Assuming that atomic nuclei cannot be altered, we expect that after germination there should still be 0.021 milligrams of copper in the plants and residual Evian water. But it turned out that after germination the plants and residual Evian water were found to contain 0.10 milligrams of copper. Thus 0.079 milligrams of copper were apparently created during germination.
Before germination there were 6.00 milligrams of calcium in the seeds. During germination 33.11 milligrams of calcium were added to the growing plants (from the Evian water). Assuming that nuclei can not be altered, we expect that after germination there should be 39.11 milligrams of calcium in the plants and residual Evian water. However, after germination the plants and residual Evian water were found to contain 36.50 milligrams of calcium.
Thus 2.61 milligrams of calcium were apparently destroyed during germination.
The following challenge can be made: no one knows how much potassium, calcium, magnesium and copper was in the seeds before they were germinated.
It was assumed that the amounts of these elements was not significantly different from the amounts of these elements in the control batch.
How do we know this is true?
What should have been done is to start with a 100 grams of seeds, mix them around thoroughly, weigh out 50 batches of 2.000 grams each, randomly select 25 of these as control batches, determine the amounts of potassium, calcium, magnesium and copper in these batches and note the maximum variation in these elements among these batches.
The remaining 25 batches can then be germinated and the plants analyzed for element content. In this way we would have some measure of the variation among different batches (both germinated and control).
On the positive side, it can be argued that since the seeds of the control and germinated batches were of the same type, the variation in element content between these two batches was not significant.
Some support for this idea can be found in the data provided by chemist D. Long of the Michaelis Nutritional Research Laboratory in Harpenden, England.
Long analyzed (using atomic spectroscopy) six batches of rye grass seeds (each of which weighed 5.4 grams before drying) and discovered that the difference in potassium content between the batch containing the greatest amount of potassium and the batch containing the least amount of potassium was 0.054 milligrams of potassium per gram of dry seed weight.
Similarly, the maximum difference in magnesium content was 0.033 milligrams per gram of dry seed weight, that of calcium was 0.091 milligrams per gram of dry seed weight, and that of copper was 1.19 micrograms per gram of dry seed weight. (Long 1971, p.7)
Kervran proposed that the plants performed the following nuclear reactions: Mg + O => Ca; Ca => K + H.
Kervran did not discuss the reaction involving copper.
Based on experience derived from similar experiments, Kervran said that if the seeds are germinated in doubly-distilled water, the amount of transmuted material is much smaller and may fall within the range of experimental error and therefore not be significant.
The reason for this is that each kind of plant is only able to transmute certain elements into certain other elements.
Thus the experimenter must provide the plant with a certain amount of certain elements if he wants to observe a large amount of transmuted material.
For germinating rye grass seeds, Evian water is the perfect growth medium because it provides this particular kind of plant with the elements it needs.
Kervran (1972, p.132) also described a series of experiments in which wheat and oat seeds were germinated "on porous ash less paper saturated with a fertilizing solution of salts dissolved in water. The solution was free of calcium."
In the case of wheat (Roux Clair) there was 3.34 times more calcium in the plants than in the seeds; in the case of one kind of oats (Noire du Prieure) there was 4.16 times more calcium in the plants than in the seeds; in the case of another kind of oats (Panache de Roye) there was 4.51 times more calcium in the plants than in the seeds. The calcium content was determined by two independent methods (conventional chemical analysis and atomic absorption spectroscopy); both methods agreed closely.
Kervran performed more than 20 such experiments, mostly on oat seeds.
Kervran (1972, p.133) mentioned that the moon plays an important role in the production of calcium.
The above huge increases in calcium were obtained in experiments in which the germination started at the new moon and stopped on the second full moon (after 6 weeks). This is an important consideration for those who attempt to duplicate these results.
A lunar influence on the metabolic activity of various plants and animals was also reported by biologist Frank A. Brown. (Gauquelin 1969, p.131-133)
D. Long questioned Kervran's methods of analysis.
Long (1971, p.9) said that Kervran had made (in some of his earlier experiments) the mistake of comparing the ash weight of the control batch with the ash weight of the plants after germination. Kervran may have made this mistake in some of his earlier experiments but he did not do so in the rye grass, wheat and oat germination experiments described above.
In these experiments, he rightly compared the weight of the control batch with the weight of the seeds to be germinated. In other words, the weight comparison was done on the two batches of seeds before one batch was germinated. This is the correct procedure as acknowledged by Long himself.
Long germinated rye grass seeds in deionized water and reported that he was unable to observe a transmutation of elements.
As discussed above, this is to be expected since without a sufficient input of certain elements, there is insufficient material to be transmuted.
A more serious criticism is Long's claim that he corresponded with Kervran who advised him to germinate green lentil seeds (Leguminacae) in water containing certain minerals. Long reported that although he did this he was still unable to observe a significant transmutation of elements. But Long did not attempt to duplicate the best of Kervran's germination experiments, namely the rye grass, wheat and oat experiments described above.
I hope that many scientists will do these experiments and report the results to the scientific community.
In the 1950s Pierre Baranger, a professor and the director of the Laboratory of Organic Chemistry at the Ecole Polytechnique in Paris, performed a large number of germination experiments and concluded that plants routinely transmute elements.
Baranger did his experiments independently of Kervran.
Baranger said: "My results seem impossible, but here they are. I took every precaution. I repeated the experiments many times. I made thousands of analyses for years. I had the results verified by third parties who did not know what I was investigating. I used several methods. I changed my experimenters. But there is no escape. We must submit to the evidence: plants transmute elements." (Michel 1959, p.82)
I tried to get more information by writing letters to the Ecole Polytechnique, the Societe des Agriculteurs de France and the Agronomie Research National Institute, but I received no reply.
In 1975 chemists O. Heroux and D. Peter of the Division of Biological Sciences of the National Research Council of Canada conducted a meticulous experiment with rats (Heroux and Peter 1975). They measured the amount of magnesium ingested through food, water (and even air) as well as the amount of magnesium excreted in the form of urine and feces over three periods of time: 69 days, 240 days and 517 days.
In the case in which the rats were fed a diet in which the amount of magnesium ingested was less than the amount of magnesium excreted, it was expected that the total amount of magnesium in the body would decrease. In fact, long before the 517th day of the experiment it was expected that there would be zero magnesium in the body.
However, when the rats were analyzed for total magnesium on the 517th day, each rat contained, on the average, 82 milligrams of magnesium.
The method used to determine the amount of magnesium in the body, food, water, air, feces and urine was atomic absorption spectroscopy.
Heroux and Peter verified the accuracy of their determinations by giving samples to two other laboratories (the Division of Chemistry at the National Research Council and the Department of Chemistry at McMaster University); both of these laboratories obtained essentially the same results as Heroux and Peter at the Division of Biology at the National Research Council.
Finally, other methods were used (such as destructive neutron activation and spectrographic emission) and these methods yielded results very similar to those obtained using atomic absorption spectroscopy.
I do not advise the replication of this experiment since it involved killing the rats in order to analyze their bodies for magnesium. Experiments involving animal killing are not required since there are many ways (as described above) to verify biological transmutation without such killing.

Bibliography

* Albert, D. "Bohm's Alternative to Quantum Mechanics." Scientific American, May 1994, pages 32-39
* Aspect, A. and Grangier, P. "Experiments on Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-type Correlations with Pairs of Visible Photons."
* In Quantum Concepts in Space and Time (edited by R. Penrose and C. J. Isham). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986
* Bohm, D. and Peat, F. Science, Order and Creativity. New York: Bantam Books, 1987
* Bransden, B. and Joachain, C. Introduction to Quantum Mechanics. Essex: Longman Group U.K. Limited, 1989
* Chiao, R., Kwait, P. and Steinberg, A. "Faster than light?" Scientific American, August 1993, pages 38-46
* Darnell, J., Lodish, H. and Baltimore, D. Molecular Cell Biology. New York: W. H. Freeman and Co., 1990
* Gauquelin, M. The Cosmic Clocks. London: Peter Owen, 1969
* Heroux, O. and Peter, D. "Failure of balance measurements to predict actual retention of magnesium and calcium by rats as determined by direct carcass analysis." Journal of Nutrition, 1975, volume 105, pages 1157-1167
* Kervran, C. Louis. Biological Transmutation. New York: Swan House Publishing Company, 1972
* Komaki, H. "Sur la formation de sels de potassium par differentes familles de microorganismes dans un milieu sans potassium." Revue de Pathologie Comparee, Paris, September 1965
* Komaki, H. "Production de proteines par 29 souches de microorganismes et augmentation du potassium en milieu de culture sodique, sans potassium." Revue de Pathologie Comparee, Paris, April 1967
* Long, D. B. "Laboratory Report on Biological Transmutation." Monograph of the Henry Doubleday Research Society. Braintree, Essex, England, September 1971
* Michel, A. "Un savant francais bouleverse la science atomique." Science et Vie, Paris, 1959, pages 81-87
* Penrose, R. The Emperor's New Mind. New York: Vintage Press, 1990
* Rae, A. Quantum Physics: Illusion or Reality? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986
* Squires, E. Conscious Mind in the Physical World. Bristol: Adam Hilger, 1990

[TigaHawk]

I've met two Vegans when i was working for an organic cafe/store.

I must admit they were scary.

They got a kitten - and before they got it they were discussing how to make it a Vegan Cat.

Then she got knocked up by the other Vegan - and were planning to get married too - and were discussing Vegan baby food.

Sorry to all you good Vegans out there - but whenever i hear Vegan i immediately think of "them"

-----------------

I believe that we need to eat - plants do too - just not how we do. The best example of a plant eating "meat" as well are the Venus fly trap's and other plants that get their nourishment from consuming animals. There is also a plant that will eat mice, and other small animals that fall into it's big flower trap.

I honestly dont think its possible to consume food without killing, hurting, or injuring SOMETHING. Wether it be plant or animal.


If we eat it - and it gives us nourishment and allows us to survive - it is OK to eat. As long as prior to it being consumed - its able to live a happy and natural life - not like that of of a battery hen etc. As long as none is wasted, and you appreciate where the food has come from, and its not unneccesary slaughter (ie Gluttony - more than what is required to survive) and understand that one day a bear may come and eat you for the same reasons you've been eating bears or other wildlife/plants - as its part of being alive.

[lake]

Is the use of another species for food evil, is the use of a species that turns towards sunlight and requires water ( also love some my say) evil?

If you say that the use of others, of a preconceived lesser status, for food is ok then the use by a human of a preconceived lesser status human must also be ok?

Does the creation that we right now exist in consider such a thing as evil?

[Lisab]

I had read about the Cleve Baxter experiments before in Lyall Watsons book Supernature. Blew me away. I always bless and reiki my food before eating. X

[1159]

Killing to eat, be it animal or plant is a symptom of our fallen state. If you look at the animal kingdom, the same process is there, except it is not manipulated by consumerism. Nonetheless, almost every life form kills in order to preserve or maintain its own life, in one form or another. The problem with humans is we have compartmentalised and sentmentalised the process of killing to eat. IT is generally accepted as 'more humane to eat vegitation than flesh, but from a psychological point of view, this is because we identify more strongly with mammals that are part of our own life group. That identification, especially with soft, warm blooded fury creatures like us, makes us empathise and up-value their existance. For example, killing a fish is probably easier for most people than killing a cat. It is our own sense of resonance with mammals that closest match our own form that causes us to moralise and distinguish a type of hirarchy of acceptance towards killing. This is a fundamentally arbitary judgement based only on egocentric perception and value of our own life form.

There is something intrinsically wrong with killing to survive and that is the case throughout the animal kingdom. That any form of pain, suffering or curtailing of life should occur in order to maintain life (through food) is fundamentally flawed as a system. It is driven by power superiority, strength, cunning that all contributes to 'A dog eat dog food chain' If we agree that process is philosophically right, then we can not criticise the elite. Everything they do follows those principles and they see themselves as simply a higher form of life in the food chain. We become their prey, just as the lion hunts the gazelle. If we see this as legitimate for the lion, we must also consider that we maybe no longer at the top of the food chain ourselves, but have become a crop to be farmed by those that consider themselves stronger, smarter and with the power to control.

The root of this conundrum is that killing to eat relies of force of some type, be that psychological or physical. My guess is that this was not always the case, that all life forms were once free to live without fear of death or being part of a food chain. In fact the bible makes a small reference to the 'Lamb lying down with the lion' in Genesis, suggesting that we have devolved into a fallen state where killing is integral with a lower form of consciousness. It is my belief and hope that one day we will evolve past this primative need to eat and all of the associations of force, power and killing that woven into our consciousness. Living on light feels instinctively beautiful and the ultimate aspiration for a sentient beings like us.

Food is earthing, grounding and keeps our conscious awareness supressed. If you doubt this, I challenge you to fast for 3 days, taking only water. After that time you will almost certainly sense a far greater sensitivity in your spiritual awareness. As the physical is denied, so the spiritual strengthens and expands.

[Anno]

Can you imagine if we took this idea to it's fullest extent?

Eating fruit helps the tree. We get the energy and taste and then we go off in to the woods, dig a little hole and deposit the seeds in some fertiliser and a new plant grows. Perfectly balanced. But, if you use a toilet you're just throwing the seeds away and disrepecting the fruit>seed>poop system and are therefore a murderer. And let's not forget that toilet paper is a paper product made from plants.

If we're all from one source then I don't think it matters. My form is eating another form of myself. Aslong as I'm respectful and not cruel or greedy, what does it matter?

I think Vegan / Vegetarian is just another label to use to divide ourselves.

[noprophet]

An oddly related side note form a theosophical grounding;

The idea of the evolution of spirit through matter in theosophy exists as mineral <becomes> plant <> animal <> human <> spirit <> god - this, from an entity stand-point, being the conical (pyramidal?) evolution to unity consciousness.

In this structure was presented that consciousness at the level of humans is marked by 'self-awareness'. This does not mean 'human' mind you; just self-aware.

Below this we can actually see the development of consciousness in the individuality of 'forms' (I use the word forms instead of animals or species because it's a little looser.)

It is thought that forms such as fish that exist in enormous swarms are actually a 'group-soul' existing together as a singular entity. Losing a fish in this case would be like losing a finger.

Then as we go up the form ladder a bit we get to things like wolf packs and herd animals. Losing one of these would be much like losing an arm or a leg; depending on size.

Overall though we're looking at an evolution from unity to unity. In this evolution it's thought that plants in general (mostly - there's always exceptions) tend to exist in very large group souls. So while yes every plant has proper nervous response just as every part of you also does at a cellular level - the perspective brought about by this view is;

Plants allowed to grow and flourish would be properly evolving as long as they're not being grown and killed off in single clusters. This action would probably not be very different from growing and killing a single animal (hence I believe one of the bigger issues with mono-cultures.)

I will also say because Cows are pack animals under this description they're also not a whole lot farther off. If there are any biologists around I'd love to understand how a mammal came to produce milk without needing to birth consistently. I've been baffled by that for awhile.

Anyhow I don't necessarily have a point. Just some stuff to think about. Reality dictates, even when it argues.

<3

[Lettherebelight]

Here's my last post on a thread that I consider to be an insult to vegan folk. Nope, I'm not a vegan, but i wouldn't insult someone just because I disagreed with them. It sounds like Edward Alexander has some issues. I'm sure our vegan friends here at Avalon will not rise to the bait...which is rather telling in itself!

I like what Peace of Mind said about when fruits and veggies start screaming in pain, then she'll rethink her eating habits...good point, lol.

I also agree wholeheartedly with what Anno said earlier about how labeling people can create separatism. People eat and live according to their consciousness...how they think and feel, and that's just the way it is. Why insult them? (unless to create friction...firestarter?)

I'm a vegetarian, but I don't think I'm better than anyone else for it...even a crow can be vegetarian, what's the big deal? :noidea:

I just spent two weeks with my family who don't agree with my views, but we all got on fine...why?
Because we have love and understanding for one another...we accept each other the way we are.

We need to see that we are all one big family, let's open our minds, and accept where we are all at...
....it's easy!

Like the song says...
All you need is love, Edward, love is all you need.

[Anno]

An oddly related side note form a theosophical grounding;

The idea of the evolution of spirit through matter in theosophy exists as mineral <becomes> plant <> animal <> human <> spirit <> god - this, from an entity stand-point, being the conical (pyramidal?) evolution to unity consciousness.[...]

I've always thought this but lately I've hit of a couple of issues. Firstly, we /are/ spirit, as are plants and animals so spirit shouldn't be in the list. Also, we started out as God/Source and our Spirit is still God/Source so how can we 'evolve' back to what we already are?

It's this damn devolution theory, really messes everything up but it explains so much. Anyway, side topic lol.

And LetThereBeLight: I hope you didn't find my post insulting. I'd like to be a none mammal eating vegetarian (and keep fishies/eggs/milk) but I don't know enough about nutrition and veggies to do it properly yet although I'm learning. I'm becoming a big fan of Goat's milk.

Anyway... ...whilst it is yet one more label to to add to the pile of differences and reasons to disagree, I do respect people that make the choice and stick to it. One of my mates was raised vegetarian and recently (at 22) just started eating meat because they're dating a chef! =]

[noprophet]

It's this damn devolution theory, really messes everything up but it explains so much. Anyway, side topic lol.

I see what you're saying and agree but I think that we're moving through it as consciousness and it's reflecting back to us that movement. This is what we're seeing as evolution and calling it the world but it's us. I get and agree with the anything is everything notion (5% represent :P) however you still have movement. So that's what's measured on great and small scales. That's where the math is; in the movement; devil's in the details afterall ;) (by math i mean logistics)

The spirit thing is just a matter of semantics. I think the context they were using it meant incorporeal consciousness.

[Lettherebelight]

@ Anno... No worries. I liked what you said. It was the thread title I thought was an insult...a cheap shot.

I was just wondering why Edward started the thread with such a cannonball, and then ran away from the pool...maybe he's afraid of getting a dunking lol.

[Teakai]

Hi Edward - I stopped eating meat fairly recently after seeing something horrible in regard to abbatoirs and animal cruelty - now I just have no desire to eat meat. The thought of it makes me sick and sad. This is a girl who used to cook a roast pork so she could eat the crackle.

I haven't yet gotten to the stage where I'm repulsed by eating a plant. Possibly if and when I do breathanarianism(sp??) might be the next step.
:)


Just out of curiosity, Edward - do you think cannibalism is OK?

[Teakai]

I will also say because Cows are pack animals under this description they're also not a whole lot farther off. If there are any biologists around I'd love to understand how a mammal came to produce milk without needing to birth consistently. I've been baffled by that for awhile.

<3

Hi Noprophet - all cows have to give birth first - and then they are continuously milked which keeps them producing the milk.
A woman could produce breast milk most of her life if she continuosly and regularly expressed it.

[DarMar]

heh .. I soo wanted to start thread with this theme also, but you made it first and did put thoughts in words just i would.
Nice! and thanks for that :)

I would just add part that being which is born to eat vegs and meat, and eats only one is definetly not good.
Did you noticed that you can reckognise vegan from miles away? thin necks, pale skin and fake smile in soul.
Fact that eating only vegs will make you feel better is notorious nosense and is part of conspiracy, because if not getting all vitamins needed one is more easily harmfull.
It's something like that nosense that tobacco is bad too for health but thats far from truth also.
Also a big one similar is meditation but that one deserves thread on its own :)

My thoughts for vegans is that those peole are weak in making decissions and could buy almoust anything that is sold to them.
I know this sentence could bring unconfortable feeling to some but hey, i know to live with that responibility!
Lie is sweeter than truth yes i know ... but i soooo like truth one :)

[WhiteFeather]

In one of Alex Colliers Videos he states The Andromedan's an ET benevolent race from The Pleadian star system are Fruiteterians, they eat no meat or plants. Only fruit. I believe because you are not killing the tree, or its life source to consume its food. I think we should learn a lesson from The Andromedan's. Call me crazy, and yes i'm a vegetarian. I disagree with the OP's perspective. But value the opinion on this subject.

Here"s an interesting video about Meat and what we are eating. It's a little graphic to some viewers, so use caution.
http://www.meatvideo.com

[Teakai]

heh .. I soo wanted to start thread with this theme also, but you made it first and did put thoughts in words just i would.
Nice! and thanks for that :)

I would just add part that being which is born to eat vegs and meat, and eats only one is definetly not good.
Did you noticed that you can reckognise vegan from miles away? thin necks, pale skin and fake smile in soul.
Fact that eating only vegs will make you feel better is notorious nosense and is part of conspiracy, because if not getting all vitamins needed one is more easily harmfull.
It's something like that nosense that tobacco is bad too for health but thats far from truth also.
Also a big one similar is meditation but that one deserves thread on its own :)

My thoughts for vegans is that those peole are weak in making decissions and could buy almoust anything that is sold to them.
I know this sentence could bring unconfortable feeling to some but hey, i know to live with that responibility!
Lie is sweeter than truth yes i know ... but i soooo like truth one :)

Hi Dar Mar - google images of 'vegan body builders'.

Your post is made up of a whole lot of assumptions.

[Lettherebelight]

Did you noticed that you can reckognise vegan from miles away? thin necks, pale skin and fake smile in soul.
:)

Ha! Don't you love when someone makes some narrow-minded insult, and then they punctuate it with a smilie?

I know I said that was my last post, but I just couldn't resist. Good one, Duh-Mar:crazy:

[Anno]

It's this damn devolution theory, really messes everything up but it explains so much. Anyway, side topic lol.

I see what you're saying and agree but I think that we're moving through it as consciousness and it's reflecting back to us that movement. This is what we're seeing as evolution and calling it the world but it's us. I get and agree with the anything is everything notion (5% represent :P) however you still have movement. So that's what's measured on great and small scales. That's where the math is; in the movement; devil's in the details afterall ;) (by math i mean logistics)

The spirit thing is just a matter of semantics. I think the context they were using it meant incorporeal consciousness.

If we started off as God then split up in to infinite consciousnesseseseszz to experience ourself then the further we get away from the godstate the more we devolve and become human. I see it like this: God > Minerals > Plants > Animals > Humans. So we're at the bottom, not the top and the more 'human' we become the further from nature and god we become. But the other side want us to think we're at the top as they're below us and have lost their connection to god. By farming us they hope to reconnect although it means dragging us down to their level before they can.
That said, all forms are only vehicles for spirit so it really doesn't matter. It's just a game after all. =]


@ Anno... No worries. I liked what you said. It was the thread title I thought was an insult...a cheap shot.

I was just wondering why Edward started the thread with such a cannonball, and then ran away from the pool...maybe he's afraid of getting a dunking lol.

Careful now, he's the grandmaster of a secret order. He may have ninjas like that crazy dude from japan that Bill and Kerry interviewed. I forget his name. Journalist guy, was going to have Obama assasinated with ninjas. Most of the whistle blowers blur in to one to be honest. I just remember the big ones like Burisch and Dean. Anyway, don't be getting ninja'd!!

[noprophet]

If we started off as God then split up in to infinite consciousnesseseseszz to experience ourself then the further we get away from the godstate the more we devolve and become human. I see it like this: God > Minerals > Plants > Animals > Humans. So we're at the bottom, not the top and the more 'human' we become the further from nature and god we become. But the other side want us to think we're at the top as they're below us and have lost their connection to god. By farming us they hope to reconnect although it means dragging us down to their level before they can.

I agree with you except I think you're underestimating humanity. In the words of Louis C.K. - yea there's a lot of murder and rape in the world but there could be a hell of a lot more.

People seem to underestimate that part. We're at the bottom of the ladder, maybe, but we are climbing up. We at least now have the conscious recognition of what a Christ consciousness could be. Not saying it's a clean move - but then again our awareness of the whole is limited isn't it? For all we know it really could be exactly as it has to be. Not that it has to stay that way.

And yes it is a game. It's made to be played. there is no game in looking at the box art. :P

//edit// oh and P.S. I'll throw this out there for the 'ell of it. Imagine that it's a diamond - an evolution from unity to pure individuality with dualism on each side then an evolution back up to unity. This ties in with Drunvalo M's work about the falling asleep and waking up cycles.

Also this could mean on the reflect side of that diamonds horizontal center was a society just like us in evolution. - our hidden history, ancient technologies - think about it. :)

[Flash]

With such a title I got the impression I was on the wrong forum

I did not know that at Avalon, insulting others based on their diet was a good practice. If I were a vegan, such insult is truly not alright.

This is very PTB/sociapath looking, imho, I don't understant that somebody with a "consciencce" or "awareness" does that, and i don't understand that not more people here have taken notice of that and opposed such behavior.

This forum is getting quite low if allowing such behavior and generalised insults, and its members not taking notice really part of the sheeple.

This is really not better than saying all Muslims are murderers or all Jews are Christian killers.

I will not participate further in a thread were insults of members with different life styles are the entrance door.

[Mike]

it's Benjamin Fulford you're thinking of Anno, former Forbes contributor and frequently a bad faker of tears.

those Chinese assassins don't seem to be in any real hurry to help out, do they? ;)

[Lettherebelight]

Yeah, I better watch it. If he's not in the ninja'ing mood, he could be hungry! :behindsofa:

[Jeremy]

Well, sure. That is quite a generalized, naive perception. There are many bugs, rodents and other species affected by the harvesting of plant foods especially the large harvest of vegetable and plant type foods. Not so much the fruits and nuts from the vines and trees, though they are a source of food to some species. So stress could be cast onto beings which were feeding on those foods harvested.

People like to justify things to make themselves feel better, like with the diet they are eating so they don't feel guilty. That isn't abnormal. Or to not have to contradict themselves, question themselves and perhaps let go of a comfort zone, or a particular paradigm of diet, ideology or whatever. I'm not against eating meat, but I don't support the cruel meat and dairy industries that are so prevalent in the world today.

I don't remember being a plant, but maybe I was in a previous life. So I don't know much about the pain and emotions they feel. I imagine it though. I do have a very open and considerate view on the potentiality of the life they experience in terms of emotions and pain you depict. But, we can know some interesting, convincing and evidential stuff through science and biology. Such as plants not carrying a central nervous system like an animal. Which is where physical pain is felt and experienced when for example we get hit from a crowbar in the knee (as many farmers do to cows to get them to move, or just to terrify them so they submit more often to the orders given). Well, they say plants don't experience physical, emotional and psychological pain like the animals do because they don't have a complex central nervous system like we do. Or a neurological, synaptic system.

Can we talk degrees of pain, relative pain? I don't remember being a plant, but I do observe them, and have consumed them, including entheogenic plants which were very intelligent and informative through their own unique language and understanding. Yes, it is synergistic and it is occurring in the person with the neurological, biological/chemical, nervous system in tact. But who is to say the plant isn't perceiving and relating to the world and others around them in a similar way outside of human and animal consumption? Like perhaps their experience on their own could be similar to your experience after consuming them. Maybe they are always in the psychedelic, mysterious, multi-dimensional state of being? I don't think they are but could be wrong. Also I don't think they have emotions either, but could be wrong. I also don't think plants have empathy or feel pain similar to an animal when it gets a tear, a piece of its body ripped off alive etc. Like when cows have their horns burned off without anesthesia or pain killers that must be deeply painful.

In the documentary Earthlings and in many others we are shown that chickens are debeaked alive, chopped up alive, animals are exploited and beaten, dairy cows are abused through exhaustion, rape, and physical abuse. Animals are kept in tight corners where they can't move. And in dark, gloomy places. I came across a study revealing how chickens have empathy. I knew that before I read the study, so it wasn't a surprise. I see it and feel it when around them. So cramming a bunch into a small wired space where they can hardly move or stretch is very barbaric. Large factory farms are full of cruelty. They are full of fear and angry men staring into the animals eyes not caring about their pain (behind the fear, anger and repression I believe they truly do care). It's common for dairy cows in large factory farms to stand on concrete all day and be sucked dry so excessively that their life expectancy is reduced by 10-20 years. And they stand in tight stalls in spite of being raped constantly, having severe arthritis in the knees and so forth. I watched a video on youtube of Mcdonalds and how they process their baby chickens for food. It showed a video of the chicks being run through a debeaking machine, feather stripper on a rotator belt which eventually took them into a place where they were chopped up alive. No pain medicine. But when I eat lettuce for instance, it doesn't try running away, or scream or resist my actions. Am I not aware enough? However I wouldn't try eating my pet bird alive, although I do believe he would try to get away from me if I did.

I know plants feel pain. Relative pain. Pain is pain. But there are levels of pain and severity? If plants were as conscious, emotional and awake as us. They would show it through their body language or in other ways showing that they don't want to be consumed. Or is it our job to pick up on that? I think it is kind of silly to talk animals and plants into the same category. Not referring to anyone here by the way.

I don't feel pain when eating plants in grace, they are happy to become one with me it seems. But eating animals alive, and beating them up isn't so similar I'd say. If I were to hit a plant, it doesn't create a feeling similar to that of hitting an animal. I've done that with a dog friend before and he showed the pain and fear. Maybe I'm not empathic enough to feel the pain the same way from plants?

Nature must be really mad these days, but yet they remain quite peaceful in spite of all the wreckage and chaos. And I do feel their madness. Because I feel interconnected to nature. We are deeply, intimately connected, and inseparable. But again it is relative, experiential pain.

So I don't eat animals them anymore (grateful to have a choice). I do eat eggs from a local small flock chicken farm where the beings are roaming the way they like, outside feeding on pasture under the sun with access to a shelter voluntarily (I consider getting off of them one day, it is possible). Also it seems that most plants love to be rubbing up against each other, intertwined with no space in between. There are varying states of vibrations and consciousness I guess. Who wants to consume gloom and doom from the factory farms? Would it be the same to consume hydroponic plants confined to cages indoors? I don't think so, just my opinion. Eating animals from ethical, compassionate, respectful practices is fine? Sure. Go ahead and interpret it how you want and decide for yourself. I'm not against any way of eating. I just don't advocate some styles, or take part in some things others do. By the way I think part of the cosmic plan for humanity is for us to evolve to a state of consciousness where we don't need to eat matter for survival. But that's a whole other story.

[Anno]

[...]
I agree with you except I think you're underestimating humanity. In the words of Louis C.K. - yea there's a lot of murder and rape in the world but there could be a hell of a lot more.
[...]

I think 'humanity' is one of the biggest parts of the con. Humanity isn't human. Human, the animal vehicle, is all about the raping and killing. Spread my seed and kill the other guy's off. What we call humanity is (from my perspective) when we realise we are spirits and human is only our form, then choose to act accordingly. Although another side topic is whether all forms truly have a spirit in them.


it's Benjamin Fulford you're thinking of Anno, former Forbes contributor and frequently a bad faker of tears.

those Chinese assassins don't seem to be in any real hurry to help out, do they? ;)

Yes, that's the guy! And you can't blame the Chinese. It's almost Christmas, think of all the cheap plastic toys they have to get ready for Santa.


Yeah, I better watch it. If he's not in the ninja'ing mood, he could be hungry! :behindsofa:

Don't worry, my ninjas will protect you if he tries anything.

[Jeremy]

Just to add to the above rambling. My love, respect, appreciation for animals isn't anymore than that of nature (trees, plants, soil, minerals, rock, water etc.) I do feel intuitive pain, and pain through my psychic centre, my core when weeds get pulled, or trees get cut for instance. I refuse to cut grass, and pull weeds nowadays. I don't like interfering with the critters on the lawn, the grass, vines growing across the lawns or whatever it may be if I can choose not to, and thus avoid it. I used to cut grass through a landscaping business and I don't do it anymore. One experience I'd like to finish off with is the pain I felt when interfering with the huge ant kingdoms on the lawn that I had to cut the grass over. I hated seeing all the ants panicking like a hurricane just happened, or a 9/11 if you will. I felt the pain they were feeling. I felt like a terrorist. An intruder causing destruction and misery for the sake of getting money. Couldn't do it anymore. Too superficial. The grass loves to grow wild, along with the other plants. I like to leave them be, and let them unfold the way they want to. Things keep being destroyed by people trying to fix and shape everything. I appreciate the beauty that wild flowers, weeds, plants and grass emanates in the wild growing state. I get to enjoy that here in the town until the township comes along and cuts it. Then at night when I go by these places I don't get to hear the chanting crickets like I do when its left alone. My point being, it felt more alive, active, happy and vibrant when it was left alone.

[Jeremy]

Apparently there was a time when somebody in the presence of a plant, thought about, and envisioned burning it alive and the plant began to wilt and react as if it had been burned. Very intriguing I'd say. I feel that perhaps the plants are picking up on conscious and emotional vibrations around me. I'm just not too clear on it yet. Still some fuzziness between me and that place of being. Though I imagine these things all the time, and enthusiastically perceive it as if it's happening. Anyway, nature and the world's eco-systems and rainforests are certainly needed by us, others and gaia for balance, survival, beauty, abundance and prosperity! So man, will the deforestation and destruction come to an end?! Hopefully! I guess people need to free themselves first so that the forests and animals may be free.

[HORIZONS]

those Chinese assassins don't seem to be in any real hurry to help out, do they? ;)

ROTFLMAO!!! Thank you ;)

[HORIZONS]

Let's see how ridicules this line of thought can go...
If you use any kind of paper you murdered a tree.
If you used wood for building a house or anything else, you murdered many trees.
If you swatted a fly you murdered it - along with all the other pests you have committed genocide on.
If you drive a car you have murdered many things.
If you have washed your hands or taken a shower you have murdered many life-forms.
If you washed your clothes or bedding you have murdered many more.
If you... Shall we go on?
In this matrix is anything really dead - is anything really alive?

[Jeremy]

Ya we murder things by walking, and nothing really dies so maybe don't worry about things too much. But what can we eliminate or reduce? Billions of animals killed after being confined, exploited and abused? We could reduce it and perhaps get rid of it. You see, what is worse killing an animal or ant deliberately, or unconsciously like not knowing you did it? You know some angry or curious kids like to pull spiders legs off and such. I couldn't do such a thing, and would never. But I know I do kill them when walking the planet. Everybody does these things as long as they live but it's a matter of degree. Maybe some yogi's and buddhas or whatever might not interfere with hardly anything because some just sit and stay put in the same place for most of their life, if they are intense. Like that yogi man who hasn't eaten for 7 decades, apparently. Or buddha boy who has been sitting in the same place meditating with no food and insists on doing it for 6 years. I think we can be confident to say that these guys aren't having much of an impact in the sense of killing. Since we all unconsciously interfere with life, by squashing or washing, I think it comes down to where your intentions and will is at. Because I'm not an advocate of slavery, torture or abuse in any shape or form. Oh, what just came to mind is the notion that there are people cutting sharks fins off at shore to make fin soup for people to enjoy as a night's pleasure. Those poor guy's left to bleed and drown to death! How important is that soup to people? More important than the balance and health of the deep blue ocean/sea? I haven't come across anything lately where it says shark fins are essential for survival. Deliberate is worse than non-deliberate? Anyway, this is where I stand. But maybe I'm a fool and wrong in these peoples minds. We should try not to consume anymore than we need, or anything that we don't truly need. Though, I'm not quite there myself yet.

[Mike]

Well, sure.
... [Long quote, formatted as a single paragraph, deleted, for ease of reading by other members. -Paul.]
But that's a whole other story.

hi Jeremy,

welcome to Avalon! i really enjoyed reading your posts on this thread, but i'd enjoy them even more if some of the longer one's were separated into paragraphs;)

just a small tip. i only suggest it because some will (myself included) often skip over longer posts that do not include any separation, and we might miss out on something great.

[Kerrigan]

People call me Vegan. I don't understand.

I drastically reduce meat consumption because of various reasons. I know animals are poisoned by chemicals, they live a horrible life, they are deformed, probably cloned. I thought of their soul, and all the negative energy I was swallowing. Then I thought about the environment, all the nature destructed by mass producing.

I loved the taste of general tao chicken and I still do, but all those animals don't need to die for my taste buds. So I reduced, reduced, reduced to the point of eating 1 meal of meat per 2 weeks, 1 meal of fish every week, and eggs and milk when I feel like it. I feel healthy, that's the point, right? They key is balance really.

I just do what seems the right thing for me, what I feel in my heart what is the right thing to do. There's nothing abnormal in how I eat. People just don't realize how much animals they consume per month. People need to be aware and coherent with their soul.

[Jeremy]

Ya I thought it was a little too thick and people would skip it. I will try splitting it up like you say to make it more suitable. Thanks for your comments.

[Dennis Leahy]

"Vegans - Ignorant murderers & hypocrites"

I am very close to vegan, but the title and flavor of the original post are offensive to everyone at Avalon, regardless what's for dinner. We should be able to discuss issues (veganism has been discussed here before) without immediately ostracizing others and hurting feelings - unless that was the intent.

Buddhas and Bodhisattva crush microorganisms as they walk, but this is not hypocrisy - focus on the intent. When a vegetarian or vegan chooses to eat as far away from sentient life forms as possible, for ethical reasons rather than just dietary or ecological considerations, this is a sincere attempt to cause the least amount of suffering possible. Honor this, do not mock this - regardless what your personal choices and rationalizations are. Hooking an EEG to a carrot and to a gorilla may produce some indication that each has life energy flowing through it, but the implication that electrical energy found in each somehow equates them is, um, ignorant.

Dennis

[DeDukshyn]

All life is equal (as you say), but not all life has the same vibrations and not all vibrations have the same effect - everything is a vibration and follows the laws of vibrational physics. I also think the fact that harvesting intelligent and emotive mammals and forcing them to live an entire life in fear and suffering is an effect I may not want to pay for too often. Just sayin' ;)

BTW I eat meat.

[pharoah21]

We must all ask for permission, and thank and speak to the food we eat. I've been a vegetarian for a few months now (I used to despise them), and I will never go back to eating meat again, purely because it feels amazing. Please understand this:

LIFE IS A WIN WIN SITUATION! If you do the right thing, you'll get the right thing. I believe it's wrong to kill animals, and right to eat plants and vegetables (with their permission) and then you will become incredibly healthy. If anyone believes that becoming vegan/vegetarian is unhealthy, please watch this video.
bx_aAjxEHLw

[ThePythonicCow]

"Vegans - Ignorant murderers & hypocrites"

I am very close to vegan, but the title and flavor of the original post are offensive to everyone at Avalon, regardless what's for dinner.
I think you're right Dennis.

I am changing the title of this thread to "Vegans - are plants sentient life forms too?"

[Jeremy]

I agree Dennis. I don't like talking in hierarchy terms, and I'm not though it may sound like it in my posts. I just know when you put a needle into an animal, or pinch them they react and show the pain. A plant or microorganism doesn't show it. Does that mean the pain isn't equal? Now this is my opinion, I usually dislike physical pain, and would rather emotional pain over physical for the most part. Emotional and psychological pain can really help me to expand and grow. Physical pain doesn't help to strengthen me too much mentally, spiritually nor physically, it is more transient and just momentary pain which is very dense and acutely focused to a point. Where as the emotional pain seems to go out and touch many parts of me. Physical pain can be of benefit, sometimes too, though. Like how it shows the spirit has an alternative agenda. Anyway, I do think it is worse to insert a knife into a dog than it is a plant, or microorganism. They clearly react differently. Though I won't judge it in a hierarchy sense. Everything is sacred and has a purpose here. So what really matters most is intent, will and how things are cared for or not cared for. Just to say, I do feel more pain and sad when I accidentally step on a spider than I do a microorganism or the grass and weeds. It's all relative, really. You come cut me with a blade, then go to the plant next to me and see what the reactions are for both. Physical pain is so heavy. Affecting the plants aura, and energy vibration might cause some pain. But who knows how painful it really is to them. The earth itself which is an integrated living system of one along with all beings may feel more deep affecting pain from a single deliberate torturous act committed against a sentient being, than 1000 plants would while being cut up. I just no, personally, that I will never excuse or dismiss another's pain just to satiate or satisfy myself in any way.

[Jeremy]

Hey guys, just to let all of you know. In case any of you were wondering. I have with asperger's syndrome (mild form of autism, or high-functioning autism as they call it). Meaning that I really tend to communicate differently than most people without autism. My perception of the world and relation to it seems to differ a lot from the average person. It's as if I'm having a conversation with myself most of the time. I tend to be the speaker and listener, and the one who asks questions and answers them in my own writing or talking or story creation (as you can probably observe here). I think I talk to people and they think that I'm talking to them like they aren't even there in my presence. Because social cues, I really don't pick-up on, or seem not to appreciate them. It has been this way since childhood. I had a hard time looking people in the eye too, especially when I was the one talking, but the other way around too. I think it might be due to me being more of a visual thinker so that when I look away from the person I'm not distracted by their image, gestures and appearances. I'm not sure. I definitely don't adhere to social norms or the status quo at all. Sometimes my social positon scares people away initially (but they always seem interested and curious and come back wanting to know more). So excuse me for the heavy taking here to myself (well hopefully to others too) as I live in my own profound inner world. But hey, I don't ignore what's going on around me at all. I'm very aware and alert of my surroundings and what's going on. Because if I wasn't truly aware of the inner self, I certainly couldn't be too aware of the outer self which is the objective visual world we see. Also I'm not a literate at writing. It may be natural for me, which it probably is. But I do know that I didn't take it seriously in school. Just serious enough to pass. I wasn't a reader or a writer growing up. Would read things and it would go out as fast as it went in- just no comprehension. I have ADHD and dyslexia as well. Don't get me wrong here, I dont think these labels are bad. Just that it's a way of communicating it simply. Attention dialed into a higher dimension is a term I like for ADHD. I just like to direct my attention to what I want, or is necessary. And not submit to other peoples attempt of control over what and where I should give my attention. Or how I should use my mind and consciousness. Anyway that's all. Thought maybe people felt it was a bit strange how I was talking on n on like I was the only one here.

Peace~*

[Guest]

Hi :)

Edward, I would like to argue with you a little. First of all I am not a vegetarian. But I really would like to switch to some day. I agree with you that plants do have nervous system of some kind. Eating whole plants seams cruel to me just like hunting for animals. But I can not agree that eating fruits designed by Creator to be eaten is murder. Many types of fruits when mature can be picked without force and without damaging plant bearing them. This is our conscious part here to choose wisely what fruit we pick and how many we left for a plant so it could seed itself. I think it is proper also to ask a plant for permission to eat it's fruit or apologise to a plant for damaging it. Animals are different because their only "fruit" is their offsprings or their meat. Exception to this is milk or not fertilised eggs. I think that our attitude is important. It is difference if we see all nonhuman lifeforms as inferior to us or if we treat them like our peers. But what about germs? Our own bodies kills them by millions daily... I don't know where there is limit to such thinking. If we go too far we can get an impression that we are intruders here. I don't subscribe to such view. I feel I am an integral part of our planet. One of many important parts :)

I just want to thank you Robert and add that in traditional cultures they put food out or give tobacco offerings to the plant when picking and they also say a prayer to our Creator and the spirit of the plant.

Nora

we are all related

[raymond]

1)How do you "kill" a plant? by pulling it out of the ground?

2)do plants "die" automatically when you pull them out of the ground?

3) if i pull a plant out of the ground and then re-root the plant into the ground an hour later, will it still live?

4) assuming 3 is true, that means that plants do not automatically "die" when their roots leave the ground.

so if i consume the plant when it is still "alive", does that constitue me killing the plant or does the plant's consciouness live on in me?

5)do rocks have consciousness? if so what's the karmic retribution for breaking rocks?

6)do wood have consciousness? if so what's the karmic retribution for using wooden furniture?

[The Truth Is In There]

This might be a little bit away from the subject but here it is:

Although I agree with the perception and understanding of the vegetarians, still if one becomes a vegetarian he/she must know that proteins are the essential building block components of the body and a stable protein intake must be maintained in the body to prevent muscle catabolic process. Meat is a strong protein source but it can be replaced with milk, eggs, grains, beans , soy and some other products. In order to compensate these will have to be taken in a little bit greater quantity.

without going into the vegan discussion i just wanted to add to the above statement that it has been scientifically proven that animal protein is one of the most unhealthy foods you can eat (barring poisons and stuff like that of course). it has also been proven that a diet high in animal protein activates cancer growth while switching to a diet low in or completely without animal protein turns cancer growth off. people who have never heard something as outrageous as that should get the book "the china study". it's a bestseller and one of the most important books on nutrition ever released.

[The One]

That’s dandelion and burdock of the menu today

Lol

:cool:

Onto something completely different but i watched a film about the tribes of the Amazon and if i can find it in my archives i will post it.

It actually shows these tribes eating specific plants and what amazes me when you see them hunting the accuracy when they shoot their bows at the animals is amazing. they seem so alert.

I never thought of this before but maybe their pineal gland isn’t messed up like ours. Let’s face it they have not been introduced to the rubbish that we have. No fluoride in their water.

Just a thought mmmmmmmmmm

[161803398]

I wish there was a no thanks button. Nice you are worried about plants. Take a closer look at some factory farms and what they do there...to the animals who, I am sorry to say have feelings much like you or I do....they also have something called nerve endings or hadn't you heard. If that leaves you cold, then perhaps you might consider what factory farming is doing to our environment and our health. I'll say no more or it will be rude.

[The One]

.........................

[161803398]

Ah, one last point. Think on it because I wont waste any time explaining it.

As long as there are slaughterhouses, there will be battlefields. --Leo Tolstoy, author

http://www.earthlings.com/

The trailer will do if you don't like too much exposure to reality.

[DarMar]

I maybe caricated too much picture that i see in vegan eyes to the point of picture that i see. But thats how i really see them.
Since i always reckognise them with exact description we can also make test since people love proof above words, me too like that better. Bring 100 people and ill tell you which are vegans without too much looking or thinking even he's eating proteins (bodybuilders). I can tell you which person meditates alot even so.
I dont know what to say if that insults you but is complete truth.
Personally i hate assumptions so i dont use them at all. and this one describes few posts below mine :

I know this sentence could bring unconfortable feeling to some but hey, i know to live with that responibility!

And it did, yes i knew i would get: look for super hero plant eaters and im wrong typo person.
Im not convincing anyone and just stated my thoughts as we all do here, please dont eat me alive cause of that :)
And if you feel uncomfortable by these word, you should ask yourself why you feel that not blame others for that feeling.

Imagine:
You have nice couple living in lets say suburbian area .. having three kids and living earthly lifes totaly consumed by system. Never ever thinking about extraterrestrials, conspiracy and stuff like we do talk arround here. Then you approach and start talking. Ofc to them that all is a rubbish, and you are talking jibberish to them. conspiracy is narrow minded theme and so on and so on....Did you ever got that?
Or i believe there are aliens but reptilians are complete nonsense is somekind of answers you could get.

This what i described about vegans is just another layer of onion which is legacy from system programme. And i expected explosion from it even if i didnt brought dynamite to the scene.
So i still am stayiing behind my words in complete form and no one still convinced me the other way. And it will be hard one to go cause im too old sould seeing all kinda things. You can call it narrow mind, i call it experience and knowledge.
I specially love that im assumption dude and Duh-Mar :) ( duh on my language means ghost hehe )

[mahalall]

Ahimsa my friend,

In order to overcome the complexities of our karmic existance i have evolved on to the poo diet!

Yes, i have established, that specific plants have evolved to be reborn into a better nutritional life through death. Through the effect of dispersal through feces.

To save you the indignity of examining ones crap!

below is a wee list;
Tomatoes,
peppers,
seeds-sun flower and pumkin seeds.
chillis,

and my favourite, except i do find it expensive is philippino cat poo coffee- known as Kopi Luwak, i joke you not!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kopi_Luwak

hahahah

P.S, I would not recommend being eaten by a dragon because a beech tree told me yesterday, that it does not lead to a more nutritional rebirth.

[<8>]

Everything are alive, when i pour up a glass of water i give it my love and respect, then i thank the water that we are becoming one.

[Lord Sidious]

I would say, with the little knowledge that I have, there is a huge difference between meat and fruit/vege diets.
Animals are abused, frightened out of their wits, drugged, medicated and all manner of evils.
You can't eat meat and NOT absorb something, that doesn't make sense to me.
Fruit and veges don't suffer in the same way, so there isn't the same negativity that is associated with meat.
And the original title to me, is attacking other members.
Very naughty indeed.
All fruit and vege diet for Eddie boy for a month. :p

[ThePythonicCow]

it has also been proven that a diet high in animal protein activates cancer growth while switching to a diet low in or completely without animal protein turns cancer growth off. people who have never heard something as outrageous as that should get the book "the china study". it's a bestseller and one of the most important books on nutrition ever released.
After reading Denise Minger's analysis of The China Study, at The China Study: Fact or Fallacy? (http://rawfoodsos.com/the-china-study/), I no longer recommend The China Study. But I do recommend Denise Minger's blog - she's awesome.

[161803398]

All fruit and vege diet for Eddie boy for a month

Well, I was looking for my favourite rice, walnut and pecan salad recipe but its late. So here:

http://www.living-foods.com/recipes/curried.html

[161803398]

I was vegetarian for a while but I decided to go vegan not actually for health benefits but because I wanted to be able to put my money where my mouth is. Humans have the idea that killing things for their own benefit is right and proper and look where that philosophy has taken us. I think there are some vegans who are on the fringe; but there are many others who understand, on a deeper level, the connection between human rights and animal rights. This is where I put my mouth and my money. That aside, the situation with slaughterhouses is horrific and I see them as training grounds for the kind of dissociated and compartmentalized thinking that is plaguing us at this time. As for the plants: my lettuces lived the whole summer now; happy in their pots while I ate the leaves :)

[Alan]

After reading Denise Minger's analysis of The China Study, at The China Study: Fact or Fallacy? (http://rawfoodsos.com/the-china-study/), I no longer recommend The China Study. But I do recommend Denise Minger's blog - she's awesome.

Chris Masterjohn also does a good job analyzing the China Study:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5gNzBNgZas&feature=player_embedded&list=PL65E7557DCB91D41B

http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com/China-Study.html

(O and thanks for changing the title of the thread, it was unnecessarily provocative and inflammatory.)

[mahalall]

Clever one such Strong intellectual analysis!

however truly experienced Spiritual Ones say,

"How sad to build a sinful wall of meat, made of one's dying parents' flesh;
How sad to see meat eaten and blood flowing!"

milarepa

much metta

http://blog.gaiam.com/quotes/authors/milarepa/51321

[Flash]

it has also been proven that a diet high in animal protein activates cancer growth while switching to a diet low in or completely without animal protein turns cancer growth off. people who have never heard something as outrageous as that should get the book "the china study". it's a bestseller and one of the most important books on nutrition ever released.
After reading Denise Minger's analysis of The China Study, at The China Study: Fact or Fallacy? (http://rawfoodsos.com/the-china-study/), I no longer recommend The China Study. But I do recommend Denise Minger's blog - she's awesome.

Thank you very much Paul for the reference to Denise Minger and the China Study. Both, the study and its critic, are quite interesting and Minger's is very comprehensive even though basic knowledge in statistics helps in reading it.

In fact, thank you a thousand times. I have research good nutrition for quite a while and we do avoid caseine in my family as well as gluten. Very very interesting and in relation to my own thinking - eat healthy year around, with a varied diet including meats, excluding wheat and caseine.. Avoid pollutants and be happy.

[Flash]

Thanks you Edward Alexander for having taken our comments about the previous title of the thread into consideration, I may now resume my participation.

[animalspirits]

By thanking the lifeforms for their sacrifices, we honor them....

and in turn they enrich us.......

IMO, plants are sentient.

We should be thanking anything that provides us with sustenance. We should honor each and everything that keeps us alive.

[drneglector]

Thanks for this interesting post.

I am not a vegetarian or a vegan, but totally respect them.

Here is a great video relating to this topic.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=es6U00LMmC4&list=PLB984A267D8BF4EC1&index=16&feature=plpp

"Gary Yourofsky's entire inspirational speech on animal rights and veganism held at Georgia Tech in summer of 2010. Listen to this amazing speaker who will blow away the myths, fill your mind with interesting facts, and help you make ethical choices for a healthy heart and soul. His charismatic preachy style is one of a kind - a must-see for anyone who cares about nonhuman animals or wishes to make the world a better place."

[christian]

Everything is consciousness. So it makes sense to treat everything humbly, including plants and rocks. Then again, I can see how an apple tree has fresh apples every year, while a pig killed is just dead. Of course, one can breed new ones in the first place, but why do that, when there are ample fruits and vegetables?

To put things in perspective, have a look at this article from the Discover magazine (http://discovermagazine.com/2004/oct/inuit-paradox), called "the Inuit paradox", explaining "how people who gorge on fat and rarely see a vegetable can be healthier than we are".

[StateOfTheHeart]

There’s some very interesting information in the opening post of this thread which is incredibly useful for people to know; however I feel it’s been presented in an awful way… I think it’s a shame, Edward, that you’ve chosen to focus on the negative aspect of plant consciousness and their ability to respond to emotion and intent, by attacking vegans; rather than enlightening us as to how we may better approach, regard and interact with the plant kingdom (ie. showing adoration, admiration and appreciation for its beauty and vitality) and by also highlighting the suffering caused to animals (and plants) via their immature and often brutal deaths.


These people are, generally, opposed to any form of eating animals, calling it cruel and horrible

Have you seen footage of factory farming in the US and around the globe?
Have you seen footage from inside slaughterhouses where the overwhelming majority of domestic and commercial meat comes from?
Have you seen the way animals are transported?
Have you seen the results of preparing land for livestock – deforestation and land degradation?
Have you seen the way fish and seafood is harvested from the oceans – major destruction of seafloors and huge fishing hauls with massive amounts of bycatch? etc. etc.
Mate, it is cruel and horrible.


every form of plantlife [has] feeligns, emotions, consciousness, awarness

Just because plants have consciousness doesn’t mean they share the same perspective upon life as humans and other animals. Just because they experience emotions doesn’t mean they feel the same fear of death and attachment to the corporeal as many of us do. (Does it?)


The polygraph recording pen moved rapidly to the top of the chart when Cleve’s thought and intention was "to burn the leaf.” He found out that plants are highly sensitive and psyhcic, conscious beings. Plants would be highly stressed and show signs of anxiousness and fear when any form of negative action were either directly done to them, or even when just THOUGHT of being done to them.
It’s an odd example to use, in order to denigrate vegans, the response of a plant to the burning of its leaf… Of course the plant isn’t going to be happy about that… And how many vegans - who chose not to eat animals for moral, ethical or spiritual purposes - would approach the consumption of vegetables or fruit in that manner? And how many fruit and vegetable growers would perform any such act to their crop? On the other hand, if you’ve looked into industrial meat production – you’d observe that these sorts of torturous acts (perhaps much worse than leaf burning) are not unheard of and, as far I’ve seen, are even common…

A more relevant (and interesting) example would the response of a plant to the intent “Ah, what immaculate form! I’m going to enjoy the flavour and nourishment this apple!”


- - - - -

Edward, simple question:

Given all that you've said in the opening post, plus our own personal pledge and the purpose of your order (to raise awareness and vibration in humanity) - why have you chosen to attack a minority who are actually making an effort to lessen their negative impact and better themselves?


Animal slaughter/Meat Production Vs. fruit and vegetable production:

Which do you think incurs a greater degree of suffering?
Which do you think causes greater damage to the Earth?
Which do you think has more consumers?


If you and your order's goal is to illuminate the masses and raise humanity's vibration - why have you chosen to target herbivores with your thread? Wouldn't approaching a wider audience who are causing greater harm be of more use? (no direct offense intended to omnivores - just expressing the facts as I see it)

[Edward Alexander]

There’s some very interesting information in the opening post of this thread which is incredibly useful for people to know; however I feel it’s been presented in an awful way… I think it’s a shame, Edward, that you’ve chosen to focus on the negative aspect of plant consciousness and their ability to respond to emotion and intent, by attacking vegans; rather than enlightening us as to how we may better approach, regard and interact with the plant kingdom (ie. showing adoration, admiration and appreciation for its beauty and vitality) and by also highlighting the suffering caused to animals (and plants) via their immature and often brutal deaths.

Thanks, I appreciate your input, and agree to a lot of what you put forth. Now my goal was never to be rude or attack vegans, my goal was to bring some facts regarding their own consumption, from my perspective, to those whom use the same approach against us meat eaters, trying to blame us for being cruel, murderous, killing intelligent life forms, and taking part of "negatively loaded" activities. Thus, it was to show that these vegans, are per definition not any different than us eating meat, since everything of the same applies for them as for us eating meat. Of course I respect them for being in good faith and truly doing it for compassion, love, higher principles and ethics. The problem is that those reasons are misconceptions and not the actual truth of what they are doing. Further on, a main point was that we are ALL living in a physical world that has its specific and direct systems of survival, where all creatures and beings eat other creatures and beings, whether such being animals, or plant life. It is a natural cycle that we are part of, and our physical body created for, and the nature and life around us in turn existing for that purpose. I highly advocate positive and respectful gratitude toward any form of live you may consume, whether animal or plant, and be grateful for them being there to aid you and feed you, and in turn letting them know you will be there in the end of your cycle to give back that which you have been given, as you will dissolve and emerge with the very ground of earth and nature that you lived of. Be conscious and aware when you eat, with a loving energy and bless the food you eat and wish it all the best and direct it with guiding positive thoughts towards their own part of the system and further development.

Also, there is truth in our possibility to take a more active part and involvement in the Nature and Life around us, connecting with such, participating, sharing energies and love and thanks, both to plant life and animal life. As an example try meditate in solitary far into the undisturbed nature on your own and just let yourself merge with all around you, become one, and a conduit for sharing and forwarding energies between both yourself, Nature and Life, and the Earth and Cosmos and their spiritual connection with each other.

For the suffering and brutality put upon these lifeforms, when solely bread and produced for consumer reasons as food, I totally agree it is not acceptable and truly acts of cruelty and selfishness to participate in such. All lifeforms should be equally respected, given freedom, good lives and conditions, and made sure to be happy, content and in a positive state of mind and experience of their life situation. Myself I eat food prepared from this group of lifeforms who have lived goo and been treated well, where they are ending their lives with a lot of great and positive experiences and freedom behind them. This process itself being done as compassionate, stress-free and fearless as possible to help them go out in the most calm, quiet and secure state upon them as they leave their life to take part of the further levels of the systems they exist within, and serve more purposes.




These people are, generally, opposed to any form of eating animals, calling it cruel and horrible

Have you seen footage of factory farming in the US and around the globe?
Have you seen footage from inside slaughterhouses where the overwhelming majority of domestic and commercial meat comes from?
Have you seen the way animals are transported?
Have you seen the results of preparing land for livestock – deforestation and land degradation?
Have you seen the way fish and seafood is harvested from the oceans – major destruction of seafloors and huge fishing hauls with massive amounts of bycatch? etc. etc.
Mate, it is cruel and horrible.
Yes to all the above, and I explained my viewpoints and ways of approaching this as honorable and positive as possible. I do not support any of those points you make there and am strongly against such activities. Care and respect, compassion and love must always be a part of how we do anything in life.




every form of plantlife [has] feeligns, emotions, consciousness, awarness

Just because plants have consciousness doesn’t mean they share the same perspective upon life as humans and other animals. Just because they experience emotions doesn’t mean they feel the same fear of death and attachment to the corporeal as many of us do. (Does it?)
I'm fairly sure they have some perspectives on their life that does not make them "less" worthy any other life form. They do fear death and injury and that was explained and given references to research proving it in my first post. In fact, they seem even more affected by such than other animals for example, as they are much more telepathic and the sensations, fears, dreads, worries, pain etc is shared collectively between them. Their conscious level is also very high, and spiritual in its essence, these are entities with great insights, teachings one can learn from, ways for us to gain understanding, and also to be healed, grounded, be receiving positive energies and love, when approached correctly such as through meditation like the example I gave above. You CAN communicate with plant life and have more or less direct communication with them telepathically and energetically.




The polygraph recording pen moved rapidly to the top of the chart when Cleve’s thought and intention was "to burn the leaf.” He found out that plants are highly sensitive and psyhcic, conscious beings. Plants would be highly stressed and show signs of anxiousness and fear when any form of negative action were either directly done to them, or even when just THOUGHT of being done to them.
It’s an odd example to use, in order to denigrate vegans, the response of a plant to the burning of its leaf… Of course the plant isn’t going to be happy about that… And how many vegans - who chose not to eat animals for moral, ethical or spiritual purposes - would approach the consumption of vegetables or fruit in that manner? And how many fruit and vegetable growers would perform any such act to their crop? On the other hand, if you’ve looked into industrial meat production – you’d observe that these sorts of torturous acts (perhaps much worse than leaf burning) are not unheard of and, as far I’ve seen, are even common…

To put it this way: Do you think cutting of parts of the plants hurts less? Or that being boiled alive is enjoyable? Or that even being chewed down by our teeth and swallowed down into our stomach acid is any pleasant for them still alive? And, how do you imagine that these very plants that vegans eat are collected for food processing in the first place? Do you not agree that they violently slice them down, rip them up, and cut them apart by large machines running through the fields doing so? And, not to mention all the toxic waste and poison that are put upon them, fertilizers etc, chemicals, gene modifications, hormones and and other nastiness which I'm fairly sure is not enjoyable for them and only serves our selfish purpose of getting more production, larger fruits & vegetables, and something more useful for own selfish purposes.



A more relevant (and interesting) example would the response of a plant to the intent “Ah, what immaculate form! I’m going to enjoy the flavour and nourishment this apple!”
Yes, as explained above where I pointed out the need for respect, being grateful, thank them and appreciate them for what they are - this goes for both plant life and animal life consumed. They should all be consumed with positive energies towards them, of blessings and thanks for providing your needed survival material. While at it, also send your good thoughts with thanks and gratefulness , love and kindness and the best wishes to every PERSON that was involved with getting you that food - all the enegies they have put into the food you eat from their work with planting the seeds, plowing the fields, taking care of the plants and giving them what they need to survive and grow, then collecting them at its ripe time, preparing them into suitable packaging for sale, transporting it to stores and sales markets, doing the sales and handing the food over to us. There's many levels and processes involved there with a large amount of dedicated people putting their energies and efforts into the different stages of the cycle from the preparation of the seeds to the final product in your hand. Of course again the same applies for animals and those doing the same work and efforts there to give you the final product. All this should be respected and acknowledged, and there's nothing wrong about doing a quick silent moment before eating the food when you send such appreciation to all those involved in the every step of the process, both the people involved, and the very food you eat itself.

- - - - -


Edward, simple question:

Given all that you've said in the opening post, plus our own personal pledge and the purpose of your order (to raise awareness and vibration in humanity) - why have you chosen to attack a minority who are actually making an effort to lessen their negative impact and better themselves?
Again, it is not an attack, as what I feel for the vegan's applies to the meat eaters as well, as said all is equal and deserves the same respect without and delusions of one thing being better than another.

Animal slaughter/Meat Production Vs. fruit and vegetable production:

Which do you think incurs a greater degree of suffering?
Which do you think causes greater damage to the Earth?
Which do you think has more consumers?

If you and your order's goal is to illuminate the masses and raise humanity's vibration - why have you chosen to target herbivores with your thread? Wouldn't approaching a wider audience who are causing greater harm be of more use? (no direct offense intended to omnivores - just expressing the facts as I see it)[/QUOTE]

I feel I have addressed all of these last questions already in my replies above.

Best
-EA

[PurpleLama]

I have not read the entire thread, here. It appeared disingenious form the start to me. However, in light of recent unsubscriptions, I will speak to this. I got my copy of wilcock's book, and the first chapter speaks to backster's study and other science along with the whole plant freaking out because a human was going to burn it's leaf experiment, and I don't recall immediately if it was backster of another scientist who was doing the same type of research but it was actually shown that by giving love and thanks to the vegetables and such eaten that *exactly the opposite was true* and that rather than showing the high peaks of electrochemical reactions associated with fear and anxiety, the things to be eaten kept a smoothe graph similar to the loving grateful person consuming it. It's just my own opinion, of course, but to me this shows the lie of edward's entire premise in this thread.

[Tenzin]

What is the purpose of posting here when he could no longer reply? Other than to sway the people here towards our fearfully held belief? I have been a vegan for 15 years, and even if he said we are murderers, does it mean that he wants to brand us as such with a negative tone? I am still happily a vegan to this day.

If anyone is serious about getting a response, contact him from his website directly.

It does look very fishy when he was not even given the chance to first explain himself before the swiftly executed ban. <- Just this alone flies a very big red flag for me.

[Aryslan]

z9dP9F5nKpY

Experimental proof that plants have consciousness, perhaps one more evolved than our own.

[161803398]

we are seed distributors that got out of hand. but my lettuces seem to like me.

however, no one will ever convince me that we can have an integrated consciousness and kill animals. they are too much like us. we have to be duplicitous to kill them and that's where the problems start.

[OnyxKnight]

OP hit the nail on the head. It echoes what Inelia's talked about too even though I haven't seen her full interview. The cultural phenomenon of vegetarianism sits right next to shoulder-pad feminism. It's a bunch of whacko crap to be blunt. My grandmother and cousin both starting falling I'll because they thought they could better themselves by eating "better." Only to find out that their anatomy, in part, needs not protein, but ANIMAL protein.

Well, that shows Inelia hasn't got a clue what she's talking about, and neither do you.

Living more "healthy" by eating more "healthy" is not just an empty statement, and adding a few more vegetables and fruits to your present diet. It requires a specific food regime accustomed to your blood type, body type, and lifestyle. You might even be required to change the latter two in order to be or eat more healthy (so it counts).

It didn't work because:

1 - You didn't stick to the regime, and you are sugar-coating the truth here about what really happened;

2 - Whoever gave you the food regime, had no clue about whether or not is healthy;

It has to be one of these two.

As far as feminism goes .... Well, actually any movement, that becomes so radical it becomes a mere shadow of what the movement's goals were originally for, is ridiculous.

That goes for radical feminism, of which I suppose you were referring to. There is nothing wrong with feminism in general. Maybe you would have preferred that women bow down to the will of men? And have no voice to express their thoughts or concerns?

No to go too off topic - Sentience of plants. Yes, they do possess a nervous system. So?

We eat the fruits of the plant, no the plant itself. The nervous system stays intact.

Even if we did eat it that way, there will be technology soon that will enable people to just replicate the food, instead of killing animals or plants.

[WhiteFeather]

In the first Chapter of David Wilcocks New Book (SFI), Dr Beckster does an experiment on a plant with a polygraph test, the plant responds to the test. Even though i am a vegetarian, i agree that plants have a consciousness field as well, and everything in this universe is connected to this field.

[WhiteFeather]

We are all connected to each other.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGK84Poeynk