Gays

warning- mental wanderings -fiction

What would the genes think about gays if genes could think?

Well, you see, we reproduce, but we are not in control, for there are epigenetics fouling up the works. Some day we may adopt some of there changes or not. Oh well, we do not always throw true copies, some are just damages, bent, twisted, reverse twisted, kinked, methylated or acetylated. We try to throw true male and female, but some just are not quite true to their intended type. We could just junk those when we see the error, or we could let them live, and be productive. Some help the survival of the true sexes, and some are just there. It does not matter?

Speaking of junking some, we try, but you humans get in the way and provide care for the defective ones. This produces a burden on healthcare and mental health that need not be there. It is the human choice to expend great effort to salvage the poor, and let some of the good expire due to lack of care. Oh well, that is human doing and is out of our control. We can only influence the headstrong, stubborn, indoctrinated, fixed ideologies type humans among you. You have picked up collective ideas that create issues between you individuals, where minding your own business would be the preferred behavior. There are many humans that have fixed wrong ideas and beliefs that need correction.

Those of you who have not thrown true can live happy any way they want, for often there are more than one issue. Oh well, if we were perfect we would not mutate. Some mutations are necessary for survival under extreme conditions and through population bottlenecks. There is no reason these cannot get together and live in common couples or groups for the remainder of their lives, natural or extended by human interference. Death is inevitable, suffering is not. Each can choose. If it bothers some to see the strange, they can look the other way. We ignore many of the population anyway, what is a few more?

Humans have long been fowling their own environment. Oh well, the gene will survive, not necessarily as humans. Many previous long lines got trimmed off before, but we genes cannot think, so do not care. Erects walked the earth for two million years, and current population is unlikely to beat that record.

We genes have been around for a long time. We came from the last planet that was recycled as planets do. Bits of the previous civilization may have also come, and you may find them as out of order artifacts that make no sense. Some of you say the universe is 13.8 billion years, but that was just the last big bang from a singularity. What happens when two black holes collide at something over light speed, each traveling at something less than light speed? They generate a lot of material and noise so you can hear nothing else until the next happening.

So what does this animal medium fauna really amount too anyway? We genes recycle everything until we cannot, then we become food for oxidation, or other life. What does it matter? change of address, eternity or atoms, to quote Marcus of 2000 years ago. In the end we all just die anyway, but before that happens, get busy and do something. We need exercise.

Sincerly
Your Genes.

Dawkins Question

What would a human gene want if a gene could want? What? Genes can't want, but if they could, what would they want?

That likely tells us more about the future than anything else. If you say so. To reduce the size of the question to a partial answer, what do humans want? More money, power, fame, prestige, and not to be forgotten. Well we cannot all have that, only a few can, and as the population grows, the less people will acheive this success. Our genes do not care about these human concerns, only about survival, as a group, not as individual genes. A steady food supply would help.

Big changes in species seem to occur when the population goes through a bottleneck, which is usually the result of some stress on the population. Some will survive, some will not. Oh well, that is evolution. Then the species, or new species build back up, live how they live, and do it all again. With logic, can we look forward into time and guess which or what will cause the next bottleneck, and when it will occur? My guess is climate change and overpopulation, which since population drives climate change faster will occur quite soon.

My demise scenario goes something like this: carbon dioxide rises, and the sea ice melts, present temperature and 10 years, warmer temperature will do it sooner. The warming allows huge amount of methyl hydrate trapped on the floor of the arctic ocean to melt, which causes a 5 degree C rise in temperature. Fish and food become in short supply, which gets horded in the cool regions. Much effort will be made to correct the problem, but once the sea ice is gone, it will be to late to stop by human means. Too bad, so sad, government did not have the will to act. Methyl hydrate will kill many humans. Oh well, itewajda.

The bottleneck occurs. We must cooperate to survive, or we can kill each other off for resources... That will be the choice of the governments soon. Earth will suffer until the nuclear winter ends... The governments will not cooperate, the choice will be war. Perhaps 1 percent of the population will survive, likely through cannibalism and savaging. After the dust blocks the sun, the temperature will drop 15 degrees, ice and methyl hydrate will start forming in the polar regions. Soon the Earth will be habitat once again, but will the human species have survived?

I am sixty seven now, and I expect that the if I survive to the age of my parents, the methyl hydrate will take me out. Yes, I am saying it will happen that soon. Alternatives : cooperation and cutting green house gasses but not dust into the atmosphere.  Dust has a cooling effect. Burn coal and produce soot to block out the sun. China may be right by ignoring the western clean air methods.

But I digress, but maybe not. The gene may want to reproduce and survive, but to do that we must reduce in numbers, and soon. Our environment is too fragile, and we are too close to the edge. Oh well, itewajda. Growing old is optional, death is not.

    

Fanatics

Are we all fanatics about something? Frankel claims that being a fanatic about something is one of the modern  neurosis or signs of neurosis.

Is a LCHF person a fanatic? Some would say yes.

How about a religious person?

Atheist and the like think so. The like include those like myself who know there is no god. Gods were a hypothesis to explain the unknown, and religions have grown into a series of fantastic stories, many being a hypothesis in there own right. So does that make me a fanatic? Possible, since that is not the collective neurosis.

So what about those who think the Canada Good food guide has some value?

Some value but the recommendations present the food science/food marketing climate of a few years ago, not the science of the day or now.

So with all we know about obesity and its primary cause, overeating, when is there going to be action on overeating? Does that make me a fanatic?

How about my view on overpopulation being the primary cause of carbon dioxide rise, global warming, ice melt, and the like? We need to aim for a population that keeps carbon dioxide below 300 ppm. Does that make me a fanatic?

And so many other views that are not the collective view of society. Society has collective neurosis, and I have private neurosis; no I am just fanatic, a lunatic, a radical. Maybe, but I am in search of truth, that which the hypothesis can be demonstrated if not proven. Oh well, itewajda.   

Spirtual? No. Geist

We do not have an appropriate English word. Spiritual has a religious connotation. Geist is the German word but without religion connotation.

Paul MacLean came up with the triune brain, I did think we actually have a quadratic function, a physical interface primitive, an old automatic emotional portion, a rational part and a geist part where we do not question the stored automatic beliefs. But now perhaps, the geist part, being automatic may just be part of emotional part. The emotional part is more consistent and powerful than the logical/rational part, hence when these are in conflict, the emotional/geist part will always win in the long run. That explains a lot of why diets (rational logical) work in the short run and fail in the long run.

Now what is geist part of the brain all about for a "god does not exist" atheist? (I need to put it that way for there are also "I do not believe in god" atheists.) We do thing automatically that has been encoded into our personality and/or genetic/epigenetic makeup. There is no agreement on where these behaviors are encoded. It is in the automatic unreasoned part, and that causes the problem.

We do not want to overeat, yet all day we are bombarded with eat eat messages in the media. Marketing works, and it is relentless.  We are human, and therefore are generally cooperative with requests for a behavior, especially when we enjoy those behaviors. This cooperation and hedonic satisfaction drives resides in the emotional/automatic portions, which are stronger and more persistent than the logical/ration signal.  There is the problem, as long as  we are subjected to the emotional/automatic messages, we will suffer from overeating, and/or the urge to overeat. How about if we were able to move the "do not overeat" rule to the automatic/emotional portion of the brain and thereby increase the resistance? How does one do this? It it even practical? Is this what groups like Tops do with support, or just increase our investment?

The story hypothesis is a natural human response to wanting to know the why of events. We sapiens would rather have a likely wrong story that no story. Explanations in the form of hypothesis stories were told to us as children; we accepted them, and as we got older and tried to question them, were noted many adults claimed to believe these fanatic stories. Some gave up questioning and believed, others of us called bullshit under our breath, and carried on without ever getting logical answers. But is there something there in reality? The answer is found in the doing. It is easier to stay motivated in emotional belief than in knowledge driven reality. That is the difference; belief vs knowledge, and reason is the weaker force until we realize that motivation can come from truth as well. When rationally, there is no need of doing anything, there is still a need to do something so that we can be in the flow. Activity for no other reason than activity is valuable.      That  is not rationally obvious to some of us.

So where is this going? We atheists may need to create unquestioned emotional "truths" to deal with life where rational is not strong enough. Do not overeat at meals. Do not place ourselves in food rich environments. Do not eat between meals. And those around us who have a problem with these values, or rules will just need to accommodate us. Oh well, itewajda.

existential vacuum

how does one move out of a existential vacuum? there is nothing to push against. there is nothing to pull on.

Who has the right?

Does the government really have the right to tell us what we will or will not do?

We are all equal... well sort of... but not really. Those in power are not superior, they just think they are and lord it over us peons, who are busy doing other things, like making a living and living our diseased lives.

The government has the best of everything, they are the first that get paid through taxes. They have the best of quality of buildings, services, and are the first to screen that they need more, better, new. But what gives the the right to govern in the first place? Well they just take that authority. They govern because we do not resist them.

We need a bit of government, but we do not need as much as we have. We need police to keep the criminals in line, but if people want to self-destruct, we need people to pick up the bodies, but should we be preventing self destruction? We live in an over populated world now. Perhaps we should be teaching people how to overcome depression, frustration, anger, resentment, boredom, apathy, fear, anxiety, lack of direction, and similar "emotional" issues in school, and leaving them to there own devices after that. First, we would need to learn how to do this ourselves. That is the rub.

Schools, and religions are much more concerned about teaching there own philosophy than science, human sciences, and truth. Everything is hypothesis, story, until it is proven. It is teaching hypothesis as fact that created much of the problems that exist.

Once we understand that our expectations are a big part of the problem, and that modern media create these expectations, at the behest of big corporations, we can reduce our expectations. But there are more dream merchants. Religions. These massive organization control masses of people, and some collect up masses of money, much of which rubs off onto the administration, and there lifestyle and comfort. There are other organizations that provide for there people, but the people do not own anything. That is a lifestyle choice. It is the foundation of ashrams, communes, and the like. But do these provide value to the community or just comfort to their people?

So we are free to do or not do much, but not to do other things. What is wrong with doing drugs, alcohol, tobacco, excess food, etc? Do we individual humans still have value to our society? Or is the value in the cash flow required to keep us alive, healthy... well functioning? It appears that this is the real issue, the cash flow required to provide "services". The government is not concerned about humans, but the cash flow, which they depend on. The economy is the first concern, and that is just not the way it should be. It should be the people, next week, next year and for the foreseeable future.

That make sustainable environment critical, population control, and the like issues that the government should be more active in understanding and promoting that understanding to the people. Overeating has a huge impact on the lives of those who are inflicted with this issue; it has a huge impact on health care, and those of us in Canada, the public purse, yet the government does not take the steps necessary to clean our environment even a little bit. So if that is not evidence of where there interests lie, in the cash flow, what is?

 

Who has the right?

Does the government really have the right to tell us what we will or will not do?

We are all equal... well sort of... but not really. Those in power are not superior, they just think they are and lord it over us peons, who are busy doing other things, like making a living and living our diseased lives.

The government has the best of everything, they are the first that get paid through taxes. They have the best of quality of buildings, services, and are the first to screen that they need more, better, new. But what gives the the right to govern in the first place? Well they just take that authority. They govern because we do not resist them.

We need a bit of government, but we do not need as much as we have. We need police to keep the criminals in line, but if people want to self-destruct, we need people to pick up the bodies, but should we be preventing self destruction? We live in an over populated world now. Perhaps we should be teaching people how to overcome depression, frustration, anger, resentment, boredom, apathy, fear, anxiety, lack of direction, and similar "emotional" issues in school, and leaving them to there own devices after that. First, we would need to learn how to do this ourselves. That is the rub.

Schools, and religions are much more concerned about teaching there own philosophy than science, human sciences, and truth. Everything is hypothesis, story, until it is proven. It is teaching hypothesis as fact that created much of the problems that exist.

Once we understand that our expectations are a big part of the problem, and that modern media create these expectations, at the behest of big corporations, we can reduce our expectations. But there are more dream merchants. Religions. These massive organization control masses of people, and some collect up masses of money, much of which rubs off onto the administration, and there lifestyle and comfort. There are other organizations that provide for there people, but the people do not own anything. That is a lifestyle choice. It is the foundation of ashrams, communes, and the like. But do these provide value to the community or just comfort to there people?

So we are free to do or not do much, but not to do other things. What is wrong with doing drugs, alcohol, tobacco, excess food, etc? Do we individual humans still have value to our society? Or is the value in the cash flow required to keep us alive, healthy... well functioning? It appears that this is the real issue, the cash flow required to provide "services". The government is not concerned about humans, but the cash flow, which they depend on. The economy is the first concern, and that is just not the way it should be. It should be the people, next week, next year and for the foreseeable future.

That make sustainable environment critical, population control, and the like issues that the government should be more active in understanding and promoting that understanding to the people. Overeating has a huge impact on the lives of those who are inflicted with this issue; it has a huge impact on health care, and those of us in Canada, the public purse, yet the government does not take the steps necessary to clean our environment even a little bit. So if that is not evidence of where there interests lie, in the cash flow, what is?

 

Overeating, a Collective Maladaptive Behavior

Culture or society has a problem. Collective wrongs in our culture. These produce collective maladaptive behaviors that are learned and not examined by the individual, just learned. Who are we to question our parents? The radio? Television? You can see what era I grew up in. Oh well. These learned maladaptive behaviors and errors cause a collective neurosis or collective problems.

Is overeating at it's start a learned behavior? If our parents were heavy, yes. If our restaurant meals are large, yes. If we are encouraged to intake sugar water, "treats" and the like at every opportunity, and we are, overeating is a collective maladaptive behavior, a collective neuroses, a cultural problem, a societal problem. Oh well.

We as individuals can recognize this, and take action as individuals to redress this behavior, and separate ourselves from this behavior. Other similar collective neurosis include religions, some occupations, some behaviors, some ways of life. Oh well.

Here in Canada, we have a indigenous people culture problem where the young ladies are hitchhiking to get around, and make them prime targets for the predators that do exist. Until the natives realize and accept this, and start protecting themselves, the problem will continue. Our white culture does not take care of such goofy behaviors. This is another collective neurosis, part of a culture.

So to solve these collective neurosis, we need to turn the individual to realize that it is our specific society that causes this problem, and separate ourselves those cultural drivers of overeating. Society is just wrong. We need to step back, and realizing this wrongness, learn to live with truth. We need to live in a god free spiritual level, what Frankl refereed to as noölogic dimension. We need to have a clear and present meaning in our lives. We need to know the our culture has some wrong parts, and know what those parts are, and correct for those in our current life, the only one we get. Oh well, itewajda (in the end we all just die anyway).

and on another note: when we like doing something we are not good at, change happens. Managers get promoted on the basis of performance, and luck, timing of retirements, deaths, company growth. So the next in line is not good at handling personnel, or at project management involving many more people. Now what, a big unhappy staff. Stress, distress. Fountain Tire, are you listening, I have heard has a staff problem at some branches. 

      

Collapse

Collapse is occurring, and so far the changes made effect is about equivalent to rearranging the chairs, but also many are aware of the problem, and how much must be done to prevent the worst case possibilities.  

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/mel-wilson/are-we-simply-rearranging_b_12449078.html

The carbon dioxide levels have been going up since the 1960's so long term we must return to that level of Co2 production or figure out how to fix that much.

The obvious solution is return to 1960 population. Oh well, itewajda. 

Rant

http://www.drsharma.ca/when-the-risk-of-treating-exceeds-the-risk-of-not-treating-then-dont

But Sharma never says clearly "identify and deal with the causes". The overeating will continue if the causes of overeating are not removed.

It is a continual fight to live clear of bullshit, aka false hypothesis presented as fact by a person who does not care, know, or capable of separation of fact and false hypothesis.

Lots of people have a specific purpose in there life. Trump is self promotion and a search for power and money, both as ego boosters. He is all about building his ego. Trump is a great one for making statement that he cannot know to be true.  "I am the greatest."

Sharma does not have that issue, but is only interested in treatment that will generate revenue for him. His specific purpose in life has become to make money off obesity. He is not looking for a cure, but a treatment that will generate revenue.

I am in search of a cure, to cure myself, and to release that cure into the wilds of the internet, to perhaps cure or help others.

Noncompilance

http://www.drsharma.ca/total-ignorance-about-obesity-does-not-stop-doctors-from-preaching-about-it

http://thelowcarbdiabetic.blogspot.ca/2016/10/on-tim-noakes-and-bullsht.html 

My first experience with the medical system. "Cut your intake in half." and when we are unable, we are labeled noncompliant. And that is where any help ends. Nobody ever bothered to figure out why I was unable to comply.

Food knowledge and quantity is only one part. It is essential but not sufficient for recovery. 

The why of overeating is essential for recovery. Each of the following are real and separate issues that must be addressed and resolved.

Food addiction must be addressed and overcome.

Similar to food addiction is insulin overshot which causes premature hunger, repeated hunger. this is a physiological issue and can only be managed, long term. This can be addressed through low carb diet, and should not be confused with either food addiction or emotional overeating.

There are physical issues that cause hunger. These must be addressed before recovery can be realized. Ulcers are bacteria/virus/germs/nasty buggers/ that cause hunger and the antibiotic cure is not any better.   

Emotional overeating, eating over stresses, abuse, indecision or out of habit in our youth can lock in an epigenetic switch, and that make recovery impossible. The cause of the emotional issue must also be resolved, for it may be ongoing even into adulthood. We may be living in bad situation, and are unwilling to resolve it, unable to resolve it, or similar issue.

I do not want to listen to the sarcasm and negativity toward me or others anymore. That is the introduction to personality issues as a cause. Cultural/society/family behavior can make recovery difficult/impossible. Many of us need to be able to stay on a diet while living in a sea of good food.

Oh and lest we forget a chemical called glyphosate that destroys our ability to taste. As a result we need more sugar to taste good, and leads to a physical desire for sweet things, and there is traces of this in all grain products now.

It is all just hypothesis anyway. Nobody knows for sure much.  Oh well, itewajda.