3
Rando_47 3 points ago +3 / -0

Eh. Mean tweets should be written before "abolition of income taxes." The wording makes it sound like abolition mean tweets, ie the introduction of censorship, is being promoted.

2
Rando_47 2 points ago +2 / -0

The Discovery Institute has done a lot of research into this. There's a lot of evidence that, before the fall and introduction of entropy into creation, a lot of animals that are carnivores today were herbivores in the past. Just look at the Panda and the jaws of a lot of current herbivores and you'll find that many have very sharp teeth used for ripping and tearing away at plants.

If I remember right, there's been some 'carnivore' dinosaur fossils with plants in the stomach.

Where meat eating came about is that digestive systems no longer function well enough for carnivore animals to get the nutrition they need directly out of plants. Instead, they have to rely on eating herbivores as intermediaries that can get the needed nutrients from plants.

It's all a symptom of decay and degradation of creation after sin was introduced.

1
Rando_47 1 point ago +1 / -0

I have a different thought. Satan does and demands a lot that is opposite to what God desires or has defined as his law.

God himself provided his son, Jesus, as a blood sacrifice to atone for the sins of man. He demanded the sacrifice of animals as a stand-in/object lesson to impart the understanding that committing sin requires heavy atonement which helps establish the significance of God himself being required to pay the price.

Satan, in his desire to be as or equal to God, demands blood sacrifice of humans and animals to him as worship. Also, it is described and hinted at in the Bible that an altered state of consciousness allows demons, which are otherwise disembodied spirits, to come in and commune with an individual. So, Satanic worship in blood sacrifices combined with sexual abuse (putting it mildly) for adrenochrome production to help facilitate the altered state of consciousness and a high that is reportedly better than cocaine.

As to what 'benefits' can be gained by communing or being open to disembodied spirits? Feats of great strength, divination (likely knowledge being spread among demons about what is going on elsewhere as only God is beyond time), counterfeit miracles in the form of 'magic,' and more. All it costs is your immortal soul.

1
Rando_47 1 point ago +1 / -0

Thanks! That's the kind of resource I was hoping for. Summarizes what's really going on so I don't have to troll through Yandex results.

2
Rando_47 2 points ago +2 / -0

The reason I'm asking is because I already knew that Ukraine didn't stand a chance. I was just accustomed to gleaning regular updates on the war here as people posted things they've heard.

1
Rando_47 1 point ago +1 / -0

What about all the stories of people trying to buy guns, get flagged by the existing system as not being approved, only for a fed to call and tell the seller to go through with the purchase?

2
Rando_47 2 points ago +2 / -0

I tend to dismiss things like this. There's a lot of wonderful applications for AI that can be used to empower creative people, supplement legitimate education, and a lot of other things.

I think where we are is that proper uses of it are still in their infancy, as far as general public use is concerned, so the main thing most people have to go on is hype and hysteria.

6
Rando_47 6 points ago +9 / -3

Not that I necessarily believe it will be the case, but the heck with it. I'll come out and say my off the wall guess.

JFK Jr.

There. Someone said it. Move on.

1
Rando_47 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm still skeptical. There's been too many crack scientists like the idiots who originated the 'coconut oil is bad for you' thing some years ago. They had no science but had lies and an idea and were good at pushing it out for publicity. As a result, one of the healthiest oils there is was pulled from use in popping popcorn as a standard.

1
Rando_47 1 point ago +1 / -0

If it's from a healthy cow, goat, or whatever dairy animal, just drink it straight. As a note, raw milk does start to sour after two weeks or so, but then you can use to make other things like sour cream. Don't know how, just that it doesn't go bad in the same way that pasteurized milk does.

1
Rando_47 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm not sold on that. Many of the things that the site attributes to Vitamin A being the cause of have already been linked to other things through decades of research with solid connections. Many of the things, specifically, are linked to heavy and toxic metals building up in the brain, vaccines, and other things.

I feel like this is entirely missing the mark. It may be that Vitamin A in the body is toxified, but so many other things with known causes seem attributed to this toxic Vitamin A.

2
Rando_47 2 points ago +2 / -0

True, though destroying natural means for people to keep themselves healthy is also part of it.

It's easier to control people who are kept ill, less attentive, and less intelligent.

5
Rando_47 5 points ago +5 / -0

It's actually been established before that, in order to digest pasteurized milk, certain things are leached from your bones. In healthy, raw milk, there are naturally occurring enzymes that do the job of allowing for proper and full digestion.

4
Rando_47 4 points ago +4 / -0

Absolutely. Also, pasteurized milk has another dark side. In raw milk there are enzymes that allow humans to digest it fully. Without that enzyme, digesting milk causes certain nutrients to be leeched out of our bones so the milk can be digested.

So yes completing where your mind may be going, osteoporosis, including in children, can actually be caused by drinking pasteurized milk. At the very least, your skeleton may become more brittle over all.

3
Rando_47 3 points ago +3 / -0

Bigger problem than unsanitary conditions are the health of the cows. A lot of the slop given to cows in feed lots in that era was stuff like spent leftover barley after it was used in beer making. Not exactly fit for proper consumption at that point and resulted in sick animals.

The natural ecosystem within raw milk keeps it sanitary and actively kills bacteria that gets into it, though cleanliness is still an important factor.

4
Rando_47 4 points ago +4 / -0

I think the issues with lactose intolerance are due to two things. First, digestive enzymes occur naturally in raw, healthy milk that play a significant role in allowing the human body to digest it. My wife is lactose intolerant but can drink raw milk without issue.

Another issue are allergies. I've heard anecdotal stories that point the finger at childhood allergies being caused by vaccinations. In other words, kids with few or no vaccinations generally have few to no allergies compared to fully vaccinated kids.

3
Rando_47 3 points ago +3 / -0

Don't recall. I think it was in general. Look up The Milk Book William Campbell He seems to have also written some other books along the same lines. I believe studies are cited directly in them.

5
Rando_47 5 points ago +5 / -0

Been a while since I did the research but here's a link: https://phys.org/news/2013-06-unusual-antibodies-cows-ways-therapies.html

Drinking this antibody milk can effectively inoculate a human against the corresponding disease for about 10 days. It's been well established for quiet some time. So yes, this is the origin of the milk maids during plagues that didn't get sick and had flawless skin.

5
Rando_47 5 points ago +5 / -0

Exactly right. They're not able to label it as for human conception but it isn't regulated if it's just for pets. Just don't tell them it's for human consumption and they won't ask. Loopholes are nice.

5
Rando_47 5 points ago +5 / -0

To clarify, the gallon of milk was about the entire sustenance for the day unless someone needed some additional solid food and they were given fresh bread and or healthy soups.

18
Rando_47 18 points ago +20 / -2

Raw milk is a fully living ecosystem on its own. There is no risk of disease if the cows were tended to properly and are healthy. There's been people who have put living e coli into a glass of fresh raw milk. The enzymes in the raw milk killed the bacteria in around fifteen minutes and was then safe to drink.

In pasteurized milk, the ecosystem has been entirely killed and has left it little more than a rotting petri dish for bacteria. Fully pasteurized milk is cooked, if I recall correctly, up to three times. One thing about pasteurized milk, is there's much less concern about the health of the cows as the treatment process boils, cooks, and kills EVERYTHING in the milk. Also, again providing I remember the stats right, up to 1/4th to 1/3rd of the milk may be PUSS produced by the cows because they are unhealthy and being forced to produce beyond their natural limits. During some of the processing, the puss separates from the milk and rather than remove it, it is put through an additional process that recombines it with the milk and gives it the nice white color again.

56
Rando_47 56 points ago +59 / -3

Raw milk is one of the most healthy foods there is. Studies were done around the turn of the 1900's and found that a raw milk diet, about one gallon a day for an adult for a month, CURED diabetes, crones disease, and more. It resets the immune system while also helping to purge heavy metals from the body. They had people milk the animals themselves which had the added benefit of causing the animals to produce antibodies in their milk for any illnesses the person had within 24 hours.

Some studies even accused raw milk of countering the 'benefits' of vaccinations, presumably because heavy metals like aluminum are used to increase the 'effectiveness' of the vaccines.

Just think of what wide consumption of raw milk would do for a population currently dependent on pharmaceuticals and the companies that make them. Take the same and apply it to independent and regenerative agricultural practices that eliminate the need for chemicals and fertilizers all while restoring the nutritional value in food and resulting in higher profits for farmers.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›