Scholar

You have not really provided what I have asked for, I am aware of Dr. Gregers stance on this. I think you did not quite grasp the point of my post, as Dr. Greger is precisely one of the people I would criticize for what I mentioned in my previous post. For example: Consumption of coffeee and tea boost longevity in a population which gets most it's antioxidants from coffee. To frame that therefore we should drink coffee because it extends longevity is very misleading because there are many other sources of antioxidants. In my opinion you have a very simplistic view of what is healthy and what isn't healthy. For example, coffee can be good at surpressing depression and therefore elevating someones mood, and therefore lowering the risk for suicide. But it is interesting how you do not mention how for such people getting off of coffee is enormously difficult and that it can lead to them never addressing the root issues of their problems. You have a substance here which significantly affects the chemistry of your brain, what about all the effects on consciousness development this might have? Do you have a study on that? Of course you don't, because science today is so unconscious it is not even considering this to be an important aspect of health. With the methodology presenting in the studies you provided it is not possible to map high variance reactions or subtle phenomena which are not looked for or too dfficult to establish. What if different people have different reactions to coffee which have a detrimental effect on their ability to thrive, but do not effect all cause mortality? What if there are things that effect all cause morality positively but yet hinder the ability of the mind, body and spirit to thrive? Why don't you compare coffee to something like Brahmi? You are reading results without any context whatsoever, which I was asking you not to do.

If you were to become One with the Will of God, your Will would be the Will of God, it would be equivalent. All of Creation is already God's Will, exactly as it is. So you as God would do what you as God always did. The problem is that you think that your egoic Will will become the Will of God, when it is the other way around. Your Egoic Will is part of the Will of God. The Will of God is creating everything, including your Egoic Will. If you "become" God's Will, you will deem everything to be perfect as it is, because everything is a perfect manifestation of your Ultimate Will. The Egoic Will might not like that, but even that is part of the Will of God. The Will of God is already manifesting the universe, every particle that exists. If your Will would be aligned with the Will of God, you would do the same thing as God does. Creation. Christ is a manifestion of the Will of God resonanting through itself into itself, a reflection of the droplet within the droplet. The embodiment of God is not the Ultimate Union with God, because the Ultimate Union would dissolve your Form completely. That's how the theory goes, atleast.

If you are so well read, it would be nice if you could actually showcase that what you are saying is true. Show me the studies on all the possible negative effects coffee could have on an individual with respect to different constitutional types and in consideration of more subtle phenomena than all-cause mortality or specific disease occurance. Show me the studies that compare coffee, or general substances with caffeine, with other alternatives that provide similar benefits. Show me the peer reviewed paper which established whether or not there is a bias in the direction or pursuit of results on the current research regarding caffeine. There is nothing scientific about exclaiming that science says coffee isn't bad for you because there is not enough evidence to support that position. A lack of evidence is only relevant if there is evidence of a unbiased pursuit towards a whole picture that includes phenomena which are difficult to study. Imagine if all the research on exercise was to revolve around the negative effects of exercise, would you then conclude exercising is bad for you because there is no evidence to show it is good for you? This has nothing to do with science. You first have to establish that there is no bias within the overall research direction. And with an industry that funds most of studies on caffeine to be geared towards showing positive effects, having no obligation to release studies that would show negative effects, I am really curious what you will find in this regard. Under your epistemological standard, a few decades ago it would have been completely fine to say smoking cigarettes doesn't harm you because the evidence does not support it. And also, don't forget that with the reductionistic approach of the current scientific culture it is extremely difficult to map relationships and subtle phenomena which get lost in the play of averages and reductions. You are operating under the assumption that current western scientific methodology and culture is infallible or the most appropriate tool to map these phenomena. I can tell you when I drink caffeine I have to go take a shit within 5 minutes, no matter at which time I drink it. I don't need any research to tell me this is unhealthy and destructive.

Not sure about bat burgers, but if you want bat burritos instead, here you go:

12 days in, been getting sleepy progressively later these past few days. Today it started around 6pm, I hope that in a few weeks I'll be at 10-11pm sleepy.

Watch the video I linked if you want a different perspecitve.

Yes, but what do you think is the root cause of psychosis and bipolar disorder? How is that different from a spiritual crisis? Watch this, it takes a really interesting angle on the entire field of mental health.

Isn't this what Ayahuasca is known for? It confronts you with your shadow. It's like opening the door to the dungeon where you have locked up all the inner demons. If you are scared of something like this, do thorough shadow work before you take psychedelics. Psychedelics will force you to sit through in a few hours what you usually can work through over the span of years. If there is too much baggage and the ego is too fragile, this is the result.

Not necessary when we can get the same benefits without the negatives from other sources. You can get antioxidants from other sources fairly easily, which is most likely the primary reason why coffee is so beneficial for people who mainly get their antioxidants from coffee anyways. Then you add an entire industry which has no reason to publish studies on the negative effects of caffeine while having an incentive to publish positive results. https://www.foodpolitics.com/2019/01/industry-funded-study-of-the-week-coffee-protects-dna/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10333733 Notice how there is no nuance whatsoever, no dietary ward etc. In the end it's most likely that it is the antioxidants which have created this "DNA protective" effect, no miracle component in the coffee that somehow makes it super healthy compared to vegetables and fruits. Yet, nobody seems to be talking about any of the negative effects, and any such effect is dismissed as insignificant while any positive effect is interpreted as somehow relevant while obviously not comparing them to other food-groups. This is what the meat, dairy and egg industry commonly does. They talk about so called positive effects of meat due to certain nutrients found in said product, yet they fail to mention that there are food groups which contain these nutrients or positive effects aswell, sometimes to a far higher degree, while not coming with the negative effects that come with the consumption of meat. And then the headline is "Meat is healthy because X component is found in it!". https://www.banyanbotanicals.com/info/blog-banyan-vine/details/caffeine-and-your-ayurveda-practice/

Green tea contains caffeine.

Sadly censorship will not work in terms of solving any real issues, it might infact lead to a far greater amplification of the current climate. If people start seeing their conspiracy theories being censored on facebook, they will view facebook as part of the conspiracy and simply find another platform on which these ideas will spread even more easily. This will lead to a further split of society and a greater division in terms of these information-bubbles forming. Rebel Wisdom made some good videos on this lately. What we need is basically a good journalistic process in which all of these ideas are being tested, or some sort of democratic process in which these ideas are actually confronted. Otherwise a person can just choose to listen to whatever they want, they will find or create platforms on which this is possible. Don't forget, Facebook and similar Social Media platforms are the root of this issue, they are designed in a way such as to exploit the more primitive parts of the human mind, like fear, paranoia, hatred, confrontation and so forth. And now instead of solving the problem they decided to hide from it.

No, scientists, professors and Nobel prize winners making nuanced points about possible issues of 5G and Covid-19 policy are not conspiracies. However, theories that claim that Covid-19 was created to control us and to establish a 5g network that subsequently will enslave and depopulate us is indeed a conspiracy theory, which has a tendency to discredit any valid concern about 5G and Covid-19 policies. Nobody will listen to valid concern if everyone who is concerned about it is a complete nutjob. If I go to someone now and tell them about the possible issues with 5G they will dismiss it because of how many conspiracy theories are woven around that topic. The conspiracy theorists achieve the exact opposite of what the seek, they create an environment in which any valid concern is put into the box of conspiracy theory. This is for example true for the pedophile issues in Hollywood or other institutions of power. Nobody takes this serious because there are conspiracies about Mark Zuckeberg and Bill Gates drinking the blood of babies and somehow being part of some satanic cult. This hinders the genuine journalistic effort that would need to be made uncover actual problems that are actually real.

I have multiple family members who think Covid19 is a hoax and that 5g is a tool to enslave us. And when I also then come here and see so many people subscribing to these ideas, I just worry. Maybe it's just my subjective experience, so maybe this irrationality is not as prevelant as I think.

It's also problematic because of how much effort it takes to disprove a conspiracy theory. It doesn't take much time to create one, because most claims are made up from thin air and are not verfied at all, yet for the one who wants to disprove such a theory it can be enormous effort. Don't forget that this is an oppurtinity cost. The more non-sense there is, the more non-sense we will have to dismiss, and the less time we will be able to focus on progress. The amount of time, effort and attention that is lost on a global scale is just absurd.

Somehow it reminds me very much of the Witch-hunts tha happened, although I did not do enough historical research on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch-hunt It would not surprise me if something similar would happen as a result of this loss of foundation. The loss of authority during that time in history seems to be a big reason for why people fell into this kind of completey irrationality.

Loss of Faith in institutions/authority and loss of community is one of the main reasons in my opinion. This is what happens where there is no functional and healthy Stage Blue foundation within a society. As far as I can see this will only get worse, the internet amplifies these effects by a degree never seen before in history. Fundamentally people do not realize that stories are what holds together civilization. This is why stories were so important for constructing and upholding societies, whether it be religion, nation, race, tribe, family or anything else. Now came a time in which we have abandoned a unified story in the face of freedom of speech and freedom from consequence. The furhter and further apart the stories get, the more divided we will become. Because there is no outside pressure to keep us unified anymore. There is no threat to survival which is so urgent as to make community a necessity. And because noone thought it to be important to take this into their own hands, we now have more radically shifting world views, world stories. People are lost because they do not have the epistemic tools to navigate a world without indoctrination and authority. People are susceptible to any story, because they derive the validification of a story by means of emotion and ego. This is a clear regression, and I know nobody who knows how to solve this issue.

Interesting I just had a similar intuition, that reincarnation is basically a process of learning to Love that which one cannot Love. Therefore, what you hate most, you shall become, so that you shall learn to Love it.

The Circle. You will have come to see it yourself.

The Circle!

Exactly my point. But yet you are missing it still.

Again, nothing I said is in opposition to this. You cannot understand me because you have not clearly identified the Circle yet. Your mind is a slave to linearity. When I say you have no capacity to understand this, I mean not that it will be difficult to explain it to you, it will be fundamentally impossible. You have to recognize the Circle yourself. If you do not, you will keep wondering why something in Maya can cause Enlightenment. Why talking 5-MeO-DMT can "reveal" what you call the Ground which causes 5-MeO-DMT. As long as you do not see the Circle, you will ignore this matter. You have reached the end of the Line, but not realized it is merely a point on the circle. You have to clearly see the Circle, travelling forth and back will do nothing for you.

It is very interesting, because what I said does not stay in opposition to what you said here. This is what I mean, there is a fundamental incapacity to see and express the circle.

This is not true, you are expressing the circle as a line. Notice that you have things prior to other things, you have one thing more fundamental than another. This is a story your mind tells. Any story is linear, and this is nothing but a story you tell yourself. Brain is consciousness. There is no ground. What you talk of is spiritual dogma, it is Non-duality viewed through the lense of physicalism. This is the irony of it. You talk of the circle, but you have not developed the capacity to express and integrate it.