(New Book) Cancer Cured: Victory Over The War On Cancer

[Colin Nordstrom]

"We inhabit and share the same reality" is a collectivist notion. I don't subscribe to that ideology. I don't share your reality obviously. I don't want to share anyone's reality. I want to experience my own reality and express/not push my experiences. I want people to interpret their own reality. Have you studied the difference between subjective and objective reality? Everyone perceives the world in much different ways even though we "inhabit" common areas.

 

[meatbag]

"We inhabit and share the same reality" is a collectivist notion. I don't subscribe to that ideology. I don't share your reality obviously. I don't want to share anyone's reality. I want to experience my own reality and express/not push my experiences. I want people to interpret their own reality. Have you studied the difference between subjective and objective reality? Everyone perceives the world in much different ways even though we "inhabit" common areas.

We use knowledge to pursue discoveries and it informs the questions we ask. I can reach out and touch another person, we inhabit the same reality. It isn't an ideology, you can test that yourself. We are being bombarded by the same photons, did you check out that thread I linked to, I think you would like it.Yes I know the difference between objective and subjective, interesting that we need to agree on a definition to discuss the idea, no?

I have to test someone's ideas out on myself and come to my own conclusions. For example, I'm reading an excellent book by an excellent researcher, Dr John Ivy called "Nutrient Timing." He spouts all his science and truth, and says athletes are running on this old carburetor system. The book was written in 2004. Yet Dr Ivy leaves out a huge part of the nutrient timing equation: the difference between insulin-mediated Glut 4 transport and muscle contraction-mediated Glut 4 transport. How could he have possibly have left this out? MC-mediated Glut4 transport has been researched since 1985 (or earlier). However, if I read that book, and didn't know any better, I would just accept his book filled with "scientific references."

How do you know what insulin is?

 

[Colin Nordstrom]

"We inhabit and share the same reality" is a collectivist notion even though you tried to qualify it with "distinct individuals." One truth or one reality is the enemy of individuality and personal spirituality, so you can't creatively include those in the same sentence--that's doublespeak. I don't subscribe to that ideology. I don't share your reality obviously. I don't want to share anyone's reality. I want to experience my own reality and express and share my experiences. And learn from the experiences of others and their separate reality. I want people to interpret their own reality. Have you studied the difference between subjective and objective reality? Everyone perceives the world in much different ways even though we "inhabit" common areas.

Authoritarians, especially in government, have used Science as a tool to influence the collective mind. You cherrypick the good from Science. I see Science in the big picture, and see the good and bad. Everyone defers to science, but it has been used as a lethal weapon to subjugate masses. Look at the saturated fat debate. Ancel Keys twisted science into lethal government policy. Bad science literally kills people. Hell the pharmaceutical companies and big ag companies rig science with BS studies, and get their boyfriend the FDA to protect them.

 

[meatbag]

"We inhabit and share the same reality" is a collectivist notion even though you tried to qualify it with "distinct individuals." One truth or one reality is the enemy of individuality and personal spirituality, so you can't creatively include those in the same sentence--that's doublespeak. I don't subscribe to that ideology. I don't share your reality obviously. I don't want to share anyone's reality. I want to experience my own reality and express and share my experiences. And learn from the experiences of others and their separate reality. I want people to interpret their own reality. Have you studied the difference between subjective and objective reality? Everyone perceives the world in much different ways even though we "inhabit" common areas.

Authoritarians, especially in government, have used Science as a tool to influence the collective mind. You cherrypick the good from Science. I see Science in the big picture, and see the good and bad. Everyone defers to science, but it has been used as a lethal weapon to subjugate masses. Look at the saturated fat debate. Ancel Keys twisted science into lethal government policy. Bad science literally kills people.

You never answer any of my questions

If you remember from the beginning of this discussion I was pretty clear I thought there were some problems in science. But it wasn't the desire to know or share knowledge that was the problem.

Bad science literally kills people.

I'm glad you can see the negative implications of promoting something that isn't true.

 

[x-ray peat]

"We inhabit and share the same reality" is a collectivist notion. I don't subscribe to that ideology. I don't share your reality obviously. I don't want to share anyone's reality. I want to experience my own reality and express/not push my experiences. I want people to interpret their own reality. Have you studied the difference between subjective and objective reality? Everyone perceives the world in much different ways even though we "inhabit" common areas.

You may not realize it or admit it but it is you who is pushing an ideology. The notion that only personal experience is the source for knowledge or that truth is relative sounds more like elite propaganda to keep us stupid and confused.

I am sure that you have heard the Issac Newton quote " If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants." Human progress can be said to be founded primarily on the written word which preserves and disseminates our shared discoveries and collective knowledge. The world is too large and the knowledge too vast to expect to try and experience every thing for yourself. Yes you should always maintain a skeptical mind and question what you read, but what you are proposing sounds like just one more step towards the dumbing down of the populace.

 

[Colin Nordstrom]

I know what insulin is because someone told me about it. I've never directly experienced it. I have to trust someone's opinion on that. You have to trust in life. You couldn't live a functional life if you didn't trust things. However, if you trust something or some idea, it better line up with your sense of reason or common sense. Insulin, as it has been presented to me, seems logical. It won't ruin my day, if down the road someone says, "Woops, we were wrong, insulin doesn't do any of the things we thought." I'm not going to question whether red is green or green is red; because if I don't trust that, then me or another person could be dead (after I mow through a red light intersection).

Interesting how the words truth and trust share the same root. My truth depends partly on my trust of the things I can't directly experience. But its a slippery slope. A blind trust in Hitler is logically not healthy. So you have to make personal moral decisions based on trust throughout life. Insulin doesn't challenge my moral code so I'm ok "believing" what I've been told about insulin.

For some reason Flat Earth seems to bother you at a core level. That's ok. I think it's an interesting debate about our origins. I'm ok with every debate, except for vaccines. Vaccines is a contentious issue that divides people. For me, whatever you want to believe is cool, just don't push it on me. However, with vaccines, the State is pushing/enforcing/criminalizing these drugs with a twist: "If you don't take them you are hurting other people." Wow. Talk about a mind-f.

 

[Colin Nordstrom]

Where did I say "truth is relative"? Have you read anything I've said? I've said the exact opposite: that there is no big, unified truth. I've stated that my truth is based on my experiences which forms my knowledge. From there I can spread my knowledge (with a caveat: that it's just my experience and it NEEDS to be challenged). You can take in my knowledge or reject it if it doesn't agree with your common sense or your experiences. If you decide to accept my knowledge, I hope you would test it on yourself, and either decide to keep it (if your personal experience agrees), or discard it (if you find out later that my experience doesn't match with your experience).

 

[Colin Nordstrom]

Do you know why you can see Chicago from St. Joseph, Michigan, but not the City of Milwaukee from Norton Shores, Michigan? (Hint: It's got something to do with curvature.)

No you cannot. You can only see the tips of the four tallest buildings (Willis, Hancock, Trump, and Aon.)*

*The fifth tallest, 311 South Wacker Drive, is just barely visible.

Try a P900 zoom camera and you would definitely be seeing the base of the buildings.

 

[x-ray peat]

Where did I say "truth is relative"? Have you read anything I've said? I've said the exact opposite: that there is no big, unified truth. I've stated that my truth is based on my experiences which forms my knowledge. From there I can spread my knowledge (with a caveat: that it's just my experience and it NEEDS to be challenged). You can take in my knowledge or reject it if it doesn't agree with your common sense or your experiences. If you decide to accept my knowledge, I hope you would test it on yourself, and either decide to keep it (if your personal experience agrees), or discard it (if you find out later that my experience doesn't match with your experience).

Have you read anything you wrote? You have said over and over again that one person's truth is different than another person's truth and that there is no objective truth. This is what is meant when one claims that the truth is relative.

 

[Colin Nordstrom]

Let me reiterate. Flat earthers cannot logically explain the issue of the lunar eclipse. They throw out crap like a black sun. Whatever. That's garbage. Thus, my mind isn't made up. However, I don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. Flat earthers have done some interesting experiments, some of which I have conducted.

 

[Colin Nordstrom]

@x-ray peat No that means quite the opposite to me. Relative means proportional. Truth is not proportional. Truth is individual. We are all on different trajectories when it comes to our experiences and our knowledge. Personal experience is the enemy of authoritarian propaganda. How do you conflate a person seeking individual truth (outside of authority) with acceptance of propaganda?

 

[Travis]

You can collect all the science you want and shove it into a book and call it truth. But it's not. It's still just a book filled with individual experiments that aren't my reality.

I can't because I can't debate your truth because that's your experience. Your truth cant be falsified.

Where have I heard such phrases before?...Oh yeah, I remember now:
at [02:33]

 

[x-ray peat]

@x-ray peat No that means quite the opposite to me. Relative means proportional. Truth is not proportional. Truth is individual. We are all on different trajectories when it comes to our experiences and our knowledge. Personal experience is the enemy of authoritarian propaganda. How do you conflate a personal seeking individual truth (outside of authority) with acceptance of propaganda?

I don’t want us to get too caught up in semantics but the term relative and relativism when used in this context has a definite meaning and it doesn’t mean proportional. It means that everything is relative to ones’ own experience, culture or knowledge base and that there is no absolute anything. Relativism - Wikipedia

The belief that everyone needs to seek out their own truth and that no one truth is superior to another as well as a strong skepticism for knowledge as given comes from the Post Modernist tradition. If you research their history you would see a strong tie to neo-Marxism and its goal to subvert the West. College kids today are indoctrinated with the Post Modernist belief that there is no right, there is no wrong, there is no truth, all is relative. It is a very dangerous ideology and as intended leads to the moral decay of a society.postmodernism | Definition, Doctrines, & Facts

This is an interesting take on the Post Modernists.

 

[Colin Nordstrom]

Revised the quote: With the institutions of research and education controlled by pharmaceutical, military and industrial interests for their own benefit, fundamental progress in INDIVIDUAL EXPERIENCE is a threat to the system."–Ray Peat

Maybe this is why I don't belong in this forum. I am definitely a black sheep. I don't see Truth as this big, unified, fundamental concept. I also don't see knowledge as that either. When I read the words Truth or Knowledge all I envision is big collectivist governments, corporations, and self-serving entities manipulating the masses to believe via their brand of propaganda.

 

[Colin Nordstrom]

I don’t want us to get too caught up in semantics but the term relative and relativism when used in this context has a definite meaning and it doesn’t mean proportional. It means that everything is relative to ones’ own experience, culture or knowledge base and that there is no absolute anything. Relativism - Wikipedia

The belief that everyone needs to seek out their own truth and that no one truth is superior to another as well as a strong skepticism for knowledge as given comes from the Post Modernist tradition. If you research their history you would see a strong tie to neo-Marxism and its goal to subvert the West. College kids today are indoctrinated with the Post Modernist belief that there is no right, there is no wrong, there is no truth, all is relative. It is a very dangerous ideology and as intended leads to the moral decay of a society.postmodernism | Definition, Doctrines, & Facts

This is an interesting take on the Post Modernists.

Couldn't disagree with you more. Natural rights are a huge part of my individual truth. Those rights bestowed upon us by our Creator. I trust in the principles of the American founding fathers because their ideas sit well with my conscience. Our founding fathers were the kings of questioning authority. College kids today are partially post-modernist. To me they are more like unquestioning drones of the State who want Government to suit their entitlement needs.

Here is what I know based on my experience (and is laid out clearly in my blog). Again, my ideas are greatly influenced by the American founding fathers. The principles of Individual Truth, Humanity, Exploration (because I feel the North and South Poles haven't been properly explored), Freedom (those laid out in the Bill of Rights), and Transparency. These principles should sit well with any logically thinking human being. They should be a central part of any person, organization, or government. None of these 5 principles can be pushed on you by authority. So if that is Neo-Marxist, or could be construed as I don't care about right or wrong, then lock me up, because I am guilty as charged.

If you don't see the entire picture, then you can paint me anyway you want. But you rashly jumped to conclusions and assumed I was a "Neo-Marxist".

 

[Travis]

I don't see Truth as this big, unified, fundamental concept.

Most people here don't, but we can strive to create the most accurate models of reality.

Mathematics describes Newtonion physics remarkably well. The shape of the Earth falls on the same level of truth as something like gravity. It's not like we're trying to describe something nebulous like consciousness or the "meaning of life".

There should be no "opinions" about the shapes of simple objects. Spheres and oblate spheroids are mathematically defined, and so are discs and planes.

Optics are very well-understood. A few things like gravity, charge, and refractive index, can bend light rays. But on the scale of only 60 miles across a lake, assuming that light rays travel in straight lines on clear days is probably fair.

You can only see the tips of the tallest buildings in all of the Chicago from Michigan photos that I've seen (Boston too). This can best be explained by assuming a spherical Earth. Just hand-waving this away by vaguely invoking "perspective" does nothing to change this fact.

 

[x-ray peat]

Couldn't disagree with you more. Natural rights are a huge part of my individual truth. Those rights bestowed upon us by our Creator. I trust in the principles of the American founding fathers because their ideas sit well with my conscience. Our founding fathers were the kings of questioning authority. College kids today are partially post-modernist. To me they are more like unquestioning drones of the State who want Government to suit their entitlement needs.

Here is what I know based on my experience (and is laid out clearly in my blog). Again, my ideas are greatly influenced by the American founding fathers. The principles of Individual Truth, Humanity, Exploration (because I feel the North and South Poles haven't been properly explored), Freedom (those laid out in the Bill of Rights), and Transparency. These principles should sit well with any logically thinking human being. They should be a central part of any person, organization, or government. None of these 5 principles can be pushed on you by authority. So if that is Neo-Marxist, or could be construed as I don't care about right or wrong, then lock me up, because I am guilty as charged.

If you don't see the entire picture, then you can paint me anyway you want. But you rashly jumped to conclusions and assumed I was a "Neo-Marxist".

I share a lot of those beliefs as well. My only issue is with your claim that the truth is individual and everyone needs to find their own truth. I am not saying that you are a neo-Marxist. I am only pointing out the root of the belief in Relativism.

 

[Colin Nordstrom]

I do feel the motto, "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants" is positive. I think a vast knowledge library is important to societies. It just shouldn't be shoved down someone's throat, or be hailed as "The Truth" or as "The Knowledge". No it's a collection of personal experiences, nothing more. Where would I be without reading the works of famous authors or finding a site like this? I would be less fulfilled as a human being. I feel I benefit from the knowledge of others every day. It's just that it's THEIR knowledge until I decide to make it MY knowledge.

 

[Travis]

Again, most of us probably agree with that. But the actual shape of an object is not ambiguous.

What is the shape of a can of Red Bull? Can we agree that it's a cylinder?

 

[Colin Nordstrom]

@Travis, have you watched any of the YouTube P900 zoom videos from shoreline across Lake Michigan to Chicago or from shoreline across Lake Ontario to Toronto? The bases of all the skyscrapers are brought into perfect view from over 60 miles away. That's impossible on a curved earth.

I did my own personal flat earth experiment. I set a Level app on my iphone before taking off from the US. When I landed in Sydney AUS my level app was still showing level. That would be impossible on a globe. Throughout the whole flight, the bubble never left the center ring of the Level app.