It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I think I heard that one years ago. There is some math to it but it sound correct.
I do agree mostly with what you are saying.
Here is an interesting statistic I read - Dont hold me to it though as it may not be truly accurate but does say something true about animal rearing.
It takes 10 x more land to rear animals for food consumption than if that land were used for crops.
Also - In way we have artificially increased the numbers of animals bred for consumption massively
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by brokedown
What have you been smoking all night ?
There are many examples of omnivores on this planet.
Bears, Chimpanzees, Baboons, Dogs, Ravens the list is endless.
So, I take it, from your OP that these animals are not from Earth as well ?
Thats a very good point. We have to remember that there were a lot of things brought to earth that also don't belong here. I'm not sure on the ones you mentioned. It's a tuff call. I know more about humans than the animals. Aside, some of them could just have that type of diet. So it may not be an obvious answer. I would look for target foods.
Well your correct and the obvious points as well, but you failed to realize why it all happened to being with. Your trying to say that we were ok before it was commercial driven, I'm saying we were better off but still not meeting the needs.
Those are the first and obvious, glaring problems with your theory.
You simply lack knowledge and understanding to draw reasonable and working hypothesis to prove your theory so you are taking stabs in the dark due to your own ignorance.
But it does show you have a good imagination with the things you work from, which is very limited when it comes to health and basic nutrition facts.
Originally posted by itsthetooth
If that were true, our processed food would cost less and the natural food would cost more.
You can still sell natural food. Either way, its not our food.
I have allready proven on another channel that those sources don't exisit like you might think. We could eat sardines, but anything lower than that and your not getting the RDA. So are you saying we were suppose to live on a boat, or near a store that sells sardines?
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by havok
I think its important to note that mother is the necessity of invention. When we do things like make a new processed food product, it could be because we feel like something is missing in our intended diet.
If our evolution of food has left you believing it was purly a profit thing, I think your wong. Our need to adapt stems from being dumped on the wrong planet. Granted we might have become calused to the fact that all we do is evolve, while those changes stem from our first placment here.
In your earlier reply it sounded as though you believe that we had a perfect diet at one time, is that correct?
I don't believe we had a perfect diet at all.
The diet was not processed or stripped of it's nutrients by modern techniques like todays diet.
It was more basic, wholesome, and earthly, yes...but not perfect.
I don't believe there is such a thing as a perfect diet.
But I can say that eating locally and naturally grown fruits, vegetables and meats are close.
Not processed junk foods and fast foods, rich with fats, salts and sugars.
Which I don't believe were a beneficial part of our diet, ever.
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by manna2
Well your correct and the obvious points as well, but you failed to realize why it all happened to being with. Your trying to say that we were ok before it was commercial driven, I'm saying we were better off but still not meeting the needs.
Those are the first and obvious, glaring problems with your theory.
You simply lack knowledge and understanding to draw reasonable and working hypothesis to prove your theory so you are taking stabs in the dark due to your own ignorance.
But it does show you have a good imagination with the things you work from, which is very limited when it comes to health and basic nutrition facts.
It's not possible to meet those requirements and farm your own. You can't grow the diverse needs to meet those demands.
So your comments leaves me asking do you believe we were never suppose to ship food, or try to live in multiple places at the same time?
Why couldn't they have been made at the same time?
C'mon tooth,you know the drill.You've been trumpeting this whole dubious target foods proves we don't come from planet earth theory all over the place but where's you're evidence.
I don't mean backing up you claims with more claims,I mean verifiable evidence.
Ok lets run with you ideas a while shall we for the sake of this argument.
The example you provided to 'verlfy' that animals have a target food there meant to eat,the anteater.
The anteater has specialised to eat ants and their larve,i would agree with.
How did that happen,what process or who created the ideal food for the ideal feeder??
What came first ant or anteater??
The understanding comes from the observation of numerous diets. You will see several patterns. The first is that there never is an experimental stage unless the species is starving. Dogs, while they are domesticated, meaning we determine what they eat, don't eat rocks and dirt, much less do they even try them. The fact that they don't try random things as food, is an inportant clue. The other fact is that all species are choosing the same items as choice food, without any experimentation. This is an important clue. On a rare occasion you might find a species that is eating what appears to be his target food. If this includes most of that food group, then he is not eating his target food. This is phase one of hunger. A species might even pick up an additional food group when phase one food is not available, that is phase 2 of hunger. Phase three is eating rocks and dirt, starvation.
When we were hunter gatherers feeding on what we caught and the berries,fruit we found.Also seafood as proven by the huge seashell deposits found by neolithic settlements up and down the West Coast of Scotland.
How do you know that wasnt our ideal diet ,how can you be exactly sure what that diet was to say it wasn't idead ??
But you missed the whole point here, even though its you typing it. Why would we feel the need to control our resources? It's because the resources are not fitting us to the best of our needs. In other words, they aren't our resources.
When we developed agriculture,more out of a desire to take control of our resources all year round rather than rely soley on living within nature we naturally would have traded the 'ideal' diet for all year dependibility.
And you probably missed the point again. If we have to go out of our way to produce food, its no natural. The food was not naturaly meant for us. On a balanced planet, things would automatically be provided as needed. This planet does not provide for us, we manipulate it so that it can produce for us. The reason is simple, its not our food, and its not our planet.
As our knowledge and experience of farming grew we developed a wider and better diet that presisted in it's basic form until the mid 19th century with the advent of canning and the beginning of processed foods.
No, cows milk was to serve a purpose, and it still does today. It offers many things, but the first on the list...
Cows milk would have be drunk as a by product of keeping cows for meat not because of it's calcium content (that's a wife's take just like eating carrots is good for your eyesight) but simply as a safer alternative to water.In those days everybody including children drank a form of beer as the water wasn't safe to drink much like it isnt in the thirld word today.The process of making beer,heating the water etc killed the bacteria making it safe.When people were living the nomad hunter gather life they would have drunk from safer,fresh running water.When they began farming and settled on the same land their water sources often were standing and stagnant becoming polluted
cows milk
•Cow’s milk is highly rich in calcium content. Calcium is essential for the growth and development of bones. It joins with phosphorous to form calcium phosphate, which is an integral element of hydroxyapatite, which in turn provides structure and strength to the bones.
There is a lot more than just that. It's clear in the bible that earth is not our home, thats a quote. There are also multiple instances of proof of intervention in the bible as well. In addition our own DNA has tell tale signs that its been tampered with, best described by lloyd pye on human genetics.
You're 'our food isn't ideal therefore we came from another planet' rests on some fairly large leaps of deduction.
To not believe this means you believe that success of life is based on chance of eating whatever. I'm pretty sure that if someone or something was smart enough to design planets with life, they would also be smart enough to know that life also needs proper food. While thats not proof, the fact that some species, even just one, has been identified with target food, is proof.
1.That every living creature has an ideal diet.
By what or whom, is the million dollar question. A joke was made once by an ATS member that there is a giant celestial squid out there just pooping out planets with life on them.
2.That an ideal world/situation is the norm or the intention in which case was the creature made ideal for their enviroment or the enviroment made ideal for the creature - and by what or who.
Unless our needs changed, which there is no proof of.
3.That 15,000 or 10,000 years ago we weren't eating an almost completely ideal diet.
Aliens have been reported to have been abducting people as far back as we can remember, and there often times isn't a clear reason. Zecariah Sitchen believes (based on documentation) that we were to serve as slaves to harvest gold for the athmosphere of a different planet. There appears to be mention of these things in the bible as well. It appears that we placed in a compromising position, and basically held hostage here. There is nothing that instinctivly ties us to this planet.
4.That aliens or gods actually exist and for whatever reason best known to them decided to gather many,many thousands of hapless humans from their idyllic home planet along with many hundreds of spieces we share part of our genetic make up with also in many,many thousands and transport us all here.A mammoth logistical undertaking - for why ??
Your health will start to diminish rapidly. Keeping in mind that even your testostrone is surly low and you probably need hormone therapy at this point. I suggest you at least get that checked because letting that level get low is a precursor to death. Wow, so you don't even wear glasses at this point, thats amazing, so far anyhow.
Also consider this,in a previous thread you hypothesised that if this was our home why are we weak and kept alive by medicine.Speak for yourself but i'm 40 and perfectly fit,had bad dose of food poisoning once but that was my cooking.That a broken nose is the sum of my health problems.
They also didn't live to be 80 years old.
Also when humans lived in smaller groups moving to follow their prey then elsewhere in winter to exploit the natural resources,they weren't weak and sickly requireing a medical profession to survive which suggests they were strong,healthy and had an ideal diet.
Our food issues was all in hindsight.
The only way you can objectively look at our and animal feeding behaviour and derive that it even remotely let alone plausibly suggests intervention is if you begin with intervention and retrofit the facts to suit
That's not a credible approach.
Originally posted by The Cusp
Bananas! Our target food is bananas. It's the only food that contains every single nutrient the human body needs. They fit perfectly in our hands, we have the fingers to peel them. We're monkeys! We eat bananas!