Page 25 of 28 FirstFirst ... 152324252627 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 250 of 271

Thread: Nikola Tesla: Oatmeal > Meat page 25

  1. #241
    Kochin's Avatar
    Kochin is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Horsham
    Posts
    918
    Shop Now
    Quote Originally Posted by DamienMaddox View Post
    As quality of life increases, human population actually tends to decline. In first world countries the death rate already exceeds the birth rate.



    There isn't any evidence that suggests that kind of future is likely.

    On the contrary, if technology continues to improve exponentially as it does today, it is far more likely that in the future we would be terraforming other planets and populating them with more animals, than it would be for your darker future to pan out.
    No, as the pressure to work and the availability of condoms increases, human population declines. Think of the baby-booms, China's population surge, France's post-war welfare program... All created a state of wealth WITHOUT the need to choose "career or family" and WITHOUT a culture where contraception is the norm. Result: babies. Once we're past the stage where anyone who wants a career or money has to opt-out of having a family, we'll start seeing population surges.

    That's pretty much sci-fi. What I suggested is where we're headed:
    -taller and taller buildings
    -denser and denser cities
    -larger and larger population
    -wild ecosystems slowly disappearing, year by year
    -people buying the most economical, most intensively produced foods
    The natural steps up:
    -larger cities
    -denser cities
    -decline of agriculture
    -loss of wild ecosystems to the cities, only parks and some farms remain
    -people buying the (now cheap) lab-grown food over the (now artificially expensive) natural food
    -(eventually) people thinking lab-grown food is normal and protesting the waste of space used for agriculture or parks
    To move to other planets would be expensive. To preserve the rainforests when we need more housing would be expensive. To farm traditionally would be expensive. I'm not talking about money, either, I'm talking about resources in general. If society remains plutocratic and income-driven, we will remain the same. If society remains plutocratic but resources are evenly spread, then we'll see a population explosion due to the removal of poverty and pressure. If society returns to true capitalism and fordism, then we'll see a return to almost tribal patterns, just on a slightly larger scale, where centralized government slowly loses its influence and meaning and where we start reversing the damage done to the planet through urbanization. I think we're headed toward the latter, but another industrial revolution of sorts would start pushing us into a more permanent form of plutocracy.
    --
    Perfection is entirely individual. Any philosophy or pursuit that encourages individuality has merit in that it frees people. Any that encourages shackles only has merit in that it shows you how wrong and desperate the human mind can get in its pursuit of truth.

    --
    I get blunter and more narcissistic by the day.
    I'd apologize, but...

  2. #242
    Kochin's Avatar
    Kochin is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Horsham
    Posts
    918
    Quote Originally Posted by DamienMaddox View Post
    When a biological creature is dead, does it still require energy?
    Yet it is a source of energy. Everything consumes, transforms and sheds energy throughout life and continues to be a source of uncapped energy once it dies. Only once you're fully decomposed and moved along is the energy no longer "you". Protein is energy. Light is energy. Heat is energy. The bacteria in your gut (that will outlive you by weeks, maybe even months) are energy. Fat is energy. Carbs are energy. Your whole body can provide energy to something. Therefore, it's still a source of energy and, thus, it's energy. Even once you're dead.
    --
    Perfection is entirely individual. Any philosophy or pursuit that encourages individuality has merit in that it frees people. Any that encourages shackles only has merit in that it shows you how wrong and desperate the human mind can get in its pursuit of truth.

    --
    I get blunter and more narcissistic by the day.
    I'd apologize, but...

  3. #243
    j3nn's Avatar
    j3nn is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Hudson Valley, NY
    Posts
    4,007
    Quote Originally Posted by Kochin View Post
    No, as the pressure to work and the availability of condoms increases, human population declines. Think of the baby-booms, China's population surge, France's post-war welfare program... All created a state of wealth WITHOUT the need to choose "career or family" and WITHOUT a culture where contraception is the norm. Result: babies. Once we're past the stage where anyone who wants a career or money has to opt-out of having a family, we'll start seeing population surges.

    That's pretty much sci-fi. What I suggested is where we're headed:
    -taller and taller buildings
    -denser and denser cities
    -larger and larger population
    -wild ecosystems slowly disappearing, year by year
    -people buying the most economical, most intensively produced foods
    The natural steps up:
    -larger cities
    -denser cities
    -decline of agriculture
    -loss of wild ecosystems to the cities, only parks and some farms remain
    -people buying the (now cheap) lab-grown food over the (now artificially expensive) natural food
    -(eventually) people thinking lab-grown food is normal and protesting the waste of space used for agriculture or parks
    To move to other planets would be expensive. To preserve the rainforests when we need more housing would be expensive. To farm traditionally would be expensive. I'm not talking about money, either, I'm talking about resources in general. If society remains plutocratic and income-driven, we will remain the same. If society remains plutocratic but resources are evenly spread, then we'll see a population explosion due to the removal of poverty and pressure. If society returns to true capitalism and fordism, then we'll see a return to almost tribal patterns, just on a slightly larger scale, where centralized government slowly loses its influence and meaning and where we start reversing the damage done to the planet through urbanization. I think we're headed toward the latter, but another industrial revolution of sorts would start pushing us into a more permanent form of plutocracy.
    Oh my, have we here an anarcho-primitivist?
    | My (food) Blog | Follow me on Facebook | Pinterest | Twitter |

    “It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” - Samuel Adams

  4. #244
    Paleobird's Avatar
    Paleobird Guest
    Wow I mention the word "predator" and we are off again for another round of nonsense. I just meant that in that we do kill things to eat them. Other than being out in the wild with a shark or a bear, nobody else eats us for food. The worms will eventually but that is their niche. They don't kill their food, we do.

    So in our ecosystem we are the apex predators.
    So what if our weapon of choice these days is a debit card and not spear? What difference does that make? I buy buffalo heart at Sprouts instead of ripping it out of the dying beast's chest and eating it warm. So? I never beat my chest and claimed to be a mighty hunter.

    I'm talking about evolutionary niches here. We kill and eat other creatures. Therefore we are predators.

    I never said exclusively meat eaters either. Sure "opportunistic omnivore" is a good description. Part of that omnivorousness is being a predator.

  5. #245
    GuitarGrok's Avatar
    GuitarGrok is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Cochrane, AB
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by Zach View Post
    Hyenas will kill when the opportunity arrises as well. A true predator will be a carnivore and born with the tools to kill. Felines, canines, sharks, etc.
    True, but I think our tool to use to kill is our large brain. The natives knew just how to "heard" the bison off a cliff in a mad frenzy, and with our big brain comes tool making like spears, and bows, and arrows etc right to using rocks as weapons.

  6. #246
    Markbt's Avatar
    Markbt is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    655
    To get this nonsense thread back on track after being derailed by Hitler, lions, vegans, the consumption of rotting carcases, politics, survival in the wilderness, and predicting the future, by what mechanism would eating mushed up soggy grains make a person smart? I'm not saying people who eat lots of oatmeal cannot be smart, I just don't think their intelligence is connected to the consumption of oatmeal.

    High carb or low carb, high fat or low fat, carnivorous or vegetarian, Primal is about making food and health decisions based upon science and evidence, even if it isn't the mainstream science. I am not aware of any particular neurological benefits of soggy grain. We all know this, so I guess we all just wanted a stupid excuse to argue about a bunch of stupid irrelevant nonsense.

    Eat what you like and what makes you feel healthy, just like Tesla probably did. Arguing on the internet is rarely conducive to inventions that change the world.

  7. #247
    eKatherine's Avatar
    eKatherine is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Portland
    Posts
    5,425
    All apes kill smaller animals to eat. Redefining established terms in order to try to reframe an argument is the hallmark that the argument has been lost.

  8. #248
    Kochin's Avatar
    Kochin is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Horsham
    Posts
    918
    Quote Originally Posted by Derpamix View Post
    Actually, you're a scavenger. (...) The people you actively model your diet after didn't even consume such copious amounts of meat, because they mostly just ate whatever leftovers they found.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zach View Post
    Humans have always been more scavengers then anything else. We are more like hyenas then lions.
    That's why humans so easily develop a taste for bone-marrow, cartilage, chicken feet, ribs and subcutaneous fat. Think about it: what predator glorifies ribs?
    I read somewhere that the "higher quality" of modern sausages (read: more muscle meat, less gristle and sinew) as opposed to the cured foods of years gone by may be contributing to increased levels of arthritis and skin problems. In other words, we may need to eat gristle and sinew to be in top form. I think there's plenty of value in eating the "bad" cuts.
    --
    Perfection is entirely individual. Any philosophy or pursuit that encourages individuality has merit in that it frees people. Any that encourages shackles only has merit in that it shows you how wrong and desperate the human mind can get in its pursuit of truth.

    --
    I get blunter and more narcissistic by the day.
    I'd apologize, but...

  9. #249
    Derpamix's Avatar
    Derpamix is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    5,370
    Quote Originally Posted by Kochin View Post
    No, as the pressure to work and the availability of condoms increases, human population declines. Think of the baby-booms, China's population surge, France's post-war welfare program... All created a state of wealth WITHOUT the need to choose "career or family" and WITHOUT a culture where contraception is the norm. Result: babies. Once we're past the stage where anyone who wants a career or money has to opt-out of having a family, we'll start seeing population surges.

    That's pretty much sci-fi. What I suggested is where we're headed:
    -taller and taller buildings
    -denser and denser cities
    -larger and larger population
    -wild ecosystems slowly disappearing, year by year
    -people buying the most economical, most intensively produced foods
    The natural steps up:
    -larger cities
    -denser cities
    -decline of agriculture
    -loss of wild ecosystems to the cities, only parks and some farms remain
    -people buying the (now cheap) lab-grown food over the (now artificially expensive) natural food
    -(eventually) people thinking lab-grown food is normal and protesting the waste of space used for agriculture or parks
    To move to other planets would be expensive. To preserve the rainforests when we need more housing would be expensive. To farm traditionally would be expensive. I'm not talking about money, either, I'm talking about resources in general. If society remains plutocratic and income-driven, we will remain the same. If society remains plutocratic but resources are evenly spread, then we'll see a population explosion due to the removal of poverty and pressure. If society returns to true capitalism and fordism, then we'll see a return to almost tribal patterns, just on a slightly larger scale, where centralized government slowly loses its influence and meaning and where we start reversing the damage done to the planet through urbanization. I think we're headed toward the latter, but another industrial revolution of sorts would start pushing us into a more permanent form of plutocracy.
    I like you
    nihil

  10. #250
    Gorbag's Avatar
    Gorbag is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    4,649
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    Only fake predator wannabes eats vacuum-packed bacon and drinks bulletproof coffee for breakfast!

Page 25 of 28 FirstFirst ... 152324252627 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •