this falls into my argument of 'lets pick specific examples because otherwise this discussion has no sense'..

so in your argument, yes I definitely preffer eating an apple than drinking artificial sweetener, but thats quite an odd comparison I must say..

I would also generally preffer eating some organic apple than some GM monsanto-made apple, to make a bit more leveled comparison... I dont want to give money to such companies as monsanto, im in doubt whether GM food is so inocuous, and I much rather support sustainable practices that avoid soil-leeching chemicals and so on, than some food that was specifically engineered to withstand huge amounts of fertilizers/agrotoxic (traces of which may very well be in my food)

Now, if we talk about Datura or LSD, then my choice changes and I dont go for the natural stuff... Because to me datura is poisonous, and offers no fun , as well as no benefit to my self development, and its unhealthy.. LSD, on the other hand, has been around long enough, IMO of course, and plenty of scientific investigations, to have an idea that its reasonably safe and my own experience/feelings/intuition dont go against it (this considering of course good lsd connections, not unknown RCs being sold as such)

Does that mean that datura is objectively bad? no, I wouldnt say so, for some people in some cases in some specific doses it may have some value, I guess, but mostly I see negative aspects of it and specially for myself I see no positive aspects at all. The same with LSD.. do I think its objectively good? No, I can only make my own choices and decide what I personally find to be of benefit or not..

I have a great love and respect for nature and natural things, I think each to there own on this issue i just personally far prefer anything that comes from the earth. I just reinforce my connection with the earth by choosing natural over unnatural and i cant see how this is a bad or negative thing.


Much Peace Always

I thought this thread was about "how" to determine if something is natural or un-natural. under what circumstances are you dealing with an "un-natural" substance. its now turned into a "why" debate. obviously its a GOOD thing to SAY that something is "UN-NATURAL" when its bad, and not proven to be safe or what-not. there are many many factors that contribute to something becoming BAD in someones view.

In general i have to disagree that there are un-natural chemicals, substances, objects etc. on this earth. everything needed to create these things came from nature. but in more of a political correctness sense, or to fullfill ethical responsibilities, I agree with you ron, some things are "un-natural" >>> in regard to where it is, how its used or by whom its used. its foriegn.

HOWEVER, in MY opinion using "un-natural" as part of an argument against something is arbitrary. use something like, "foriegn" or "un-tested" because using the term for some things, without acknowledging others makes it difficult for people to see where you are really coming from with the definition.

Big statement!
Couln't be put in words better.
If some people still insist, that a natural product can be impure or toxic...
can't be helped.

These chemicals out there including LSD MDMA or DMT-Derviates ...
i don't care about them.

If theres the "original", why wasting time with the chemical copy.

Because its not a "waste" of time. molecules with different chemical structures have a different effect on the body, though i agree that its bad to force ones oppinions on others. and it sucks that this worlds population is being dosed with relatively (and for the haters, i do mean RELATIVELY) untested chemicals.

You're actually supporting my argument Endlessness. Because datura is natural and has been part of this planet for thousands of years, we know it's toxic. There is no question about that. It's not an RC. It has a very long well known history of being toxic. A new chemical that was just engineered, who knows? That's another point in the natural vs. unnatural argument I'm making. Natural things like datura, destroying angels, and other such toxic things have been around mankind for thousands of years. We know they're unhealthy. But something like NutraSweet or the next new RC, we have no idea until it's been around for many years.

It can take several decades before some long term health effects are known. Some chemicals are thought to be safe until children are born with birth defects. Plants that cause birth defects are not eaten by people. We've learned apples are good, bananas are good, etc. This took thousands of years to learn. We have healthy meals everyday because many people long ago tried all the plants and found which ones are good for us. With a new chemical that just hit the market, it's going to take a long time to know exactly what it does to people.

The other argument is that if there is caffeine that is synthetic vs. coffee, which one is healthier? The coffee is, because it's a natural product that contains vitamins and minerals not just drugs.

Another argument is what is better for you, natural wine, or distilled hard liquor?

Another argument is what is better for you, white sugar that's been modified by man and purified to such an extent that all the vitamins and minerals are gone or eating a fruit to get your sugar? Of course, eating a fruit is healthier.

There are countless examples of this.

I've got another point to add to the discussion.

Just try 1 month to nuritate yourself from artificial vitamines and proteins and carbohydrate etc.
I bet you will get some serious health issues!

It feels wrong because its not natural.
The energy is missing.

Maybe I should actually try a chemical substance. This is a thing which i didn't do until now. I probably would change my mind... maybe
Maybe I even did it one time unconciously (smoking some strange joint from an idiot), I don't know.

But, after all, i'm always focused on natural products, because i know there is energy in it.

Energy and information are needed to make nuriture work. That's one reason, why natural extracted vitamins work a lot better then the chemical counterpart.

I don't see any problem in making the transition to drugs!

To be honest...

There are numerous examples from both sides where the natural or the unnatural is safer. Per substance we have to take a look at what is safer, the natural or the synthetic equivalent.

Just saying that per definition one is safer as the other is like saying a car from one certain company is always safer as the other. Yes, some companies do have a better track record but new car designs evolve. For example: nowadays one French carmaker has safer cars as Volvo, nobody would have guessed that 20 years ago, they would declare you insane if you did...

What I like to say with this is that picking out examples to prove one sides point doesn't work simply because the other side has them as well. Yes, the current trackrecord for natural entheogens is a good one but it's never final.


So it's better to make a list of entheogens that are known to be safe, or even better compile a list of entheogens and order them on known safety, the most safe entheogen on top. And even then it's the question what the parameters for safety are, e.g. smoking cigs doesn't kill you right away but give a much higher chance for dying prematurely and some people aren't affected by them at all, others can not only be harmful to yourself but also to other people (PCP unpredictability).

Mr_DMT

This energy presence is vital for me personally to feel completely human and connected to nature.

An excellent example which really explains quite clearly what i mean is extracted mescaline vs cactus tea for me there is something important missing from the extract, there was nothing wrong with the experience which i had during my journey with the cactus extract, there was just a magic and a very specific energy missing. Which was definitely and completely present in my cactus tea experience.


Just some of my thoughts on the situation.


Much Peace and Understanding

Got a source for your claim that synthetic vitamins are less effective? Preferably from somewhere that isn't selling natural vitamins or using terms like "energy" in a non-scientific sense.

"energy" is what it's all about. You can even measure your own energy! There are plenty of scientific approaches! For example Kirlian photography is a way to make a picture of your energy-field!

Fresh fruits and natural products contain so much more then just the nutrition. Especially the fruitwater of fruits is very very healthy and has the right concentration of salts and has therfore a very high bio-usability which most water you can buy has not!

What most people don't know about water, that every water is unique. Not just minerals etc. no! It's the structure of the water of which a japanese researcher made pictures of! You can even influence the structure and the "energy" of the water by insulting the water or saying positive things to the water. This sounds totally nuts to an ordinary mind! I know. But it has been proven already.
No esoteric blabla.. It is REALITY!!
This is all alternative knowledge. Officials don't have much interest in that, because it would mean that their products are unhealthy stuff which should be forbidden to sell!

Actually, it has been know for some time now that the experiment you speak of was BS.
The Asian fellow who reported those results admitted to only releasing the photos of the ice formations that supported his claims.
Also the results have been unrepeatable by other people, so in other words, it is esoteric blabla.

Can't trust anything that internet says....he is a big fat liar.

WS

guys can I just say, I do think this debate is rather redundant... it's a distraction... the fact of the matter is that plants share our chemistry because they are related to us, those molecules have an effect on us and they have been around as long as we have... throughout history humans have developed a better understanding of these molecules, the molecules in our body, the molecules in the plant, how they work, how they get into us, how they effect us... in the old days the people that understood (to some degree) these plants were people like shamans, shamans predate scientists, I wouldn't be surprised if scientists share genes with these people because shamans had that same attitude towards trying to understand things, experimentation, etc. those guys would've been interested in safety as well.... what I'm trying to say is that it's not synthetic vs natural... you have natural molecules and the synthetic part is just humans attempt to understand those better... nobody here would disagree that we need to continue researching these molecules and synthetics are the product of that research... when we debate this we're really arguing whether humans should try to understand things (which is risky, but rewarding) or stay static and take what we're given, don't tinker with things, don't experiment, but you gotta remember this gets rid of your natural usage as well, because one day someone tried a plant to find it's effects and that's no different in my eyes to a chemist doing it synthetically in a lab.

Pseudoscience doesn't help anyone. You're clinging to a viewpoint rather than having an open mind and researching things for yourself. If you actually would look into Kirlian photography you would see that nothing conclusive has been discovered about humans having 'auras', and in fact studies tend to show that people who claim to be able to detect such things are frauds.

TSS of course. Even here people are that materialistic. No offense I surely can understand your point of view.
I was once the same...
OF COURSE the human aura exists. There is NO doubt about it, as well as Chakras and energycenters.

Why should acupuncture work if there are no energy points?
Why should anybody affect your being by his pure presence. Where is this bridge, where does this transition of energy come from.

IF you are in a room with nervous people or relaxed people. It affects your mood even if your blindfolded!

These water experiments are a bit controversal.
But did you read much about the experiment?
To me it is very convincing!

Once water is freezed, the photo is taken and the crystals form different shapes.
Why should Dr. Emoto fake the results?
Make money?
Maybe... but the idea is too extraordinary and i bet that somebody of his grad could earn money otherwise.

Big companies wouldn't pay much for his results. Big money cooperations have no interest in such things.

the aura thing that's another redundant thing... I mean, we're beings made out of dense energy, our atoms resonate, humans working in labs discovered that many years ago, in my mind that's a more distinctive cooler thing and kinda makes an aura look a little lame... this is just another example of lack of understanding and humans taking known facts for granted.

E=Mc2 =much cooler explanation than an aura

Just because you don't know the exact mechanism by which something works, does not mean that you can attribute the effects to anything you like. What ancient Chinese practitioners of acupuncture might have called chakras, we can now understand as nerve clusters. A person can react to those around him at an emotional level, but if there was no way for him to hear, see, smell, feel, or otherwise sense that the other person was there, he wouldn't be able to pick up on some mystic radio signal for anxiety.

Looking into the Emoto "experiments" for even ten seconds reveals that it was never a scientific experiment, but an art project.



Following up on the sources linked in the article shows that Emoto's work was featured in the film "What the Bleep Do We Know!?", which should be enough to make anyone extremely skeptical.

"What the Bleep Do We Know" was a very shoddy and deceptive piece of work designed by a Christian organisation to convince people that somehow quantum mechanisms proves that prayer works... there should be laws against that kind of thing.

I know i won't convince you.
That's why i give up now.
But let me tell you this:

These acupunture points exist in the human body. They are NOT muscular tension point or whatever you think!
They react even on different light.

There is a technique with light-acupuncture!

If you think that is nonsense too i can calm you. This technique has been developed by Peter Mandel, a german alternative practitioner.
He's considered one of the advanced of his occupation group and is considered a master of his trade.

This knowledge about aura, chakra's and energy centers is very old knowledge.
It's not a recent invention of some greedy idiot who wants to make some money!

What these water crystals concern.
Thanks for making me wonder!
I read a bit on the subject and now i'm a little sceptic
Thanks for that!

Burnt and 69ron you guys are both putting up wonderful arguments and I'm glad to see both of you posting.

This thread was not intended to stir up drama, please don't get angry with one another.

I enjoy hearing both sides.... and keep in mind... nobody is ever going to "win" this debate...