Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
shpongled

Plant/human symbiosis & the fall of humanity

62 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

http://www.grahamhancock.com/forum/WrightT2.php

I'm curious to here what you all think of this new article/interview with Tony Wright that i made, which was just posted on graham hancocks website. Any thoughts/comments/questions are welcome..If you really don't want to read the interview theres a shorter pictorial explanation on the second page ;)

It seems well supported by a lot of evidence from many fields, and oddly many reputable minds seem to be turning on to it; which is strange considering how simple it should be to refute.

The fascinating thing is that if there really is a problem with the develop and fuel of our neural system and we're chronically deficient in very complex bio-chemistry from the loss of plant symbiosis which has affected one side of the brain more than the other, then that implies an easy solution to our all of our complex global problems. A relatively easy fix to the condition would be well within the reach of our current capabilities, and simply bringing the issue to everyone's attention would halt them almost immediately (it'd be easy to prove/disprove)

Edited by shpongled

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

To be honest, I wouldn't read much further than the opening quote from Terence McKenna which reads...

I believe that the lost secret of human emergence..the undefined catalyst that took a very bright monkey and turned that species into a self-reflecting dreamer..that catalyst has to be sought in these alkaloids in the food chain that were catalyzing higher states of intellectual activity.

...and speaks of a profound ignorance of our own neurochemistry. With all the natural opiates that are produced in our brains for any number of reasons, there is no need to presume a chemical catalyser for "higher states of intellectual activity" has to be looked for anywhere outside our own bodies.

Saying that, and forgive my rudeness for not welcoming you first, welcome to UM, shpongled. I hope you will find your stay here entertaining and educational.

Edited by Leonardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest, I wouldn't read much further than the opening quote from Terence McKenna which reads...

...and speaks of a profound ignorance of our own neurochemistry. With all the natural opiates that are produced in our brains for any number of reasons, there is no need to presume a chemical catalyser for "higher states of intellectual activity" has to be looked for anywhere outside our own bodies.

Saying that, and forgive my rudeness for not welcoming you first, welcome to UM, shpongled. I hope you will find your stay here entertaining and educational.

McKenna was hardly ignorant of neurochemistry. The biological mechanisms supporting the scenario outlined are actually very sound and relatively straightforward. And we do know for a fact that the chemicals in food are absolutely vital to the structural integrity, development, and functioning of our neural system. Which is scary considering we were flooding our brains with the most complex assortment of plant chemicals for millions of years in Africa, and now expect to build the most complex and chemically sensitive thing in the known universe out of "junk" and have it work properly.

This is why in the article i cite how these materials can not only influence all this but brain size as well , with the diet of the mother having a huge impact on what develops since this is the most critical stage..These chemicals have many huge affects on our neural/endocrine/immune system but most importantly perhaps is that they are transcription modifiers- meaning that influence how the DNA is read; which drastically alters what develops.

Even blueberries have been shown to improve memory..many improve cognition..the list goes on and on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

McKenna was hardly ignorant of neurochemistry. The biological mechanisms supporting the scenario outlined are actually very sound and relatively straightforward. And we do know for a fact that the chemicals in food are absolutely vital to the structural integrity, development, and functioning of our neural system. Which is scary considering we were flooding our brains with the most complex assortment of plant chemicals for millions of years in Africa, and now expect to build the most complex and chemically sensitive thing in the known universe out of "junk" and have it work properly.

This is why in the article i cite how these materials can not only influence all this but brain size as well , with the diet of the mother having a huge impact on what develops since this is the most critical stage..These chemicals have many huge affects on our neural/endocrine/immune system but most importantly perhaps is that they are transcription modifiers- meaning that influence how the DNA is read; which drastically alters what develops.

Even blueberries have been shown to improve memory..many improve cognition..the list goes on and on

A balanced diet is important for our well-being, but the quote - and by extension, the article - specifically mentioned alkaloids and suggested an unstated, but clear, reference to their psychoreactive properties. The article mentions 'psychedelics' to this very purpose.

We are not human because of drugs, and drugs did not enhance or even significantly influence our evolution - physical or psychological - except, perhaps, for the natural drugs that are produced in our own brains.

You are aware, I would hope, of the guidelines and rules this site operates under regarding the promotion of drug use?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not promoting drug use by any means. This isn't the same as Terences theory but there are some similarities..But its deceiving to label it "drugs" when really we are talking about chemicals produced by our brains and present in all of our foods.

"We are not human because of drugs, and drugs did not enhance or even significantly influence our evolution - physical or psychological - except, perhaps, for the natural drugs that are produced in our own brains."

As i go into in the article, the chemicals in our all of our diets, especially a jungle diet with lots of raw plants, dramatically alter the activity of the chemicals in us that we naturally produce. Not only that but they also heavily influence the development of the very organs and cells that make those chemicals- thus modulating the environment even more

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I'm not promoting drug use by any means. This isn't the same as Terences theory but there are some similarities..But its deceiving to label it "drugs" when really we are talking about chemicals produced by our brains and present in all of our foods.

"We are not human because of drugs, and drugs did not enhance or even significantly influence our evolution - physical or psychological - except, perhaps, for the natural drugs that are produced in our own brains."

As i go into in the article, the chemicals in our all of our diets, especially a jungle diet with lots of raw plants, dramatically alter the activity of the chemicals in us that we naturally produce. Not only that but they also heavily influence the development of the very organs and cells that make those chemicals- thus modulating the environment even more

As I said, a balanced diet is essential to our well-being.

With reference to your association of the chemicals derived from plants and a "fall from grace", you suggest a past connection to a "higher self" as related in some mythologies. I would point out to you it is human nature to refer to the past in glorified terms, no matter what the actual nature of that past was. This is human psychology at work and not any actual evidence of a past "Golden Era".

Even today, we use the phrase "the good old days" in fond remembrance of a past which, if we were honest, was no better than the present.

However, if you wish to disassociate your theory from accusations of promoting drug use, might I suggest the removal from it of the various mentions of those drugs. Until then, I will remain skeptical of the claim this theory is not actually promoting the use of those drugs as a means to "return to a higher state of being".

Edited by Leonardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said, a balanced diet is essential to our well-being.

With reference to your association of the chemicals derived from plants and a "fall from grace", you suggest a past connection to a "higher self" as related in some mythologies. I would point out to you it is human nature to refer to the past in glorified terms, no matter what the actual nature of that past was. This is human psychology at work and not any actual evidence of a past "Golden Era".

Even today, we use the phrase "the good old days" in fond remembrance of a past which, if we were honest, was no better than the present.

However, if you wish to disassociate your theory from accusations of promoting drug use, might I suggest the removal from it of the various mentions of those drugs. Until then, I will remain skeptical of the claim this theory is not actually promoting the use of those drugs as a means to "return to a higher state of being".

I would check out memories and visions of paradise. there are so many complex elements in these stories that are present in groups that occupied totally different parts of the globe. The only reason for this would be that they shared a common origin in the distant past. And is it a coincidence that so many even mention our naked, forest dwelling, fruit eating past?

As far as remnants of a higher self- this is because one hemisphere is more sensitive to the very steroids that fruit flavonoids were inhibiting for tens of millions of years, to put it simply. I elaborate in the article. Basically once the symbiosis is lost we start reverting back to the typical mammalian structure but one side of the brain does so faster than the other. This is why autism has been linked to hormone exposure to the left hemisphere in the womb- the very hormones fruit inhibited for millions of years. This is just an extreme expression of it, which explains why we see remnants of higher functioning all over the place. I.E. savant abilities like speed reading (some can read both sides of an open book at the same time, in mere seconds, and retain 100% of it), photographic memory, amazing mathematical skills, the list goes on and on.

Dr. Allan Snyder, by inhibiting the dominance of the left hemisphere with TMS, claims to be able to allow some people temporary and partial access to these more advanced right hemispheric functions. His research is really astounding. Even Ramachandran, and many others have pointed out that the left hemisphere is stuck in a self-construed illusory story of reality, that it makes up through heavy filtering/processing. Whereas the less dominant right hemisphere experiences reality much more directly and perceptions are less filtered. There is even cases of left hemispheric damage leading to a host of abnormally advanced abilities.

All of your claims are refuted by the information coming out of various disciplines, presented in the book- if you take a look at the .pdf on there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup it worked,well I guess even this primate can learn something new.Cheers jmccr8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting article, thanks.

Did you take a look at the interview?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i am a stupid layman with stupid questions.

Since the interview with Terrence Mckenna concentrates on the shrinking of the Human Brain

1. Does Shrinking of Human Brain liken to shrinking of brain capacity?

2. Does Shrinking of Brain Size in any way indicate any sort of devolution of the human brain?

3. If so, Does the Devolution of Human Brain also link to Devolution of Human Physiology? (i mean if brain shrinks=brain capacity decrease, then the body that is controlled by the brain will also change, am i right ?)

4. If before Shrinking=Devolution of Human Brain occurred (if it did ever), could the humans of that ancient past be very much advanced in all sciences?? (after all before the devolution, the brain capacity was high..am i right?)

5. If so, humans with such advanced capabilities would have built advanced civilizations (of which we do not find any singe remain..am i right?) And Please dont start by linking the Pyramids as a remains of that ancient advanced civilization. let us keep it out of this one. any other? with proper citations/references?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/human-migration.html

I don't know if I did this right as this is the first time that I've tried this.The article is quite long but I did find it interesting,and there is some discussion about diet on pgs3.4.

jmccr8

Hi jmccr8;

That was a good read, thanks..the links in the comments below the main article were good also..in particular the one explaining the need for sleep was "WOW" Ive never heard of that before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

i am a stupid layman with stupid questions.

Since the interview with Terrence Mckenna concentrates on the shrinking of the Human Brain

1. Does Shrinking of Human Brain liken to shrinking of brain capacity?

2. Does Shrinking of Brain Size in any way indicate any sort of devolution of the human brain?

3. If so, Does the Devolution of Human Brain also link to Devolution of Human Physiology? (i mean if brain shrinks=brain capacity decrease, then the body that is controlled by the brain will also change, am i right ?)

4. If before Shrinking=Devolution of Human Brain occurred (if it did ever), could the humans of that ancient past be very much advanced in all sciences?? (after all before the devolution, the brain capacity was high..am i right?)

5. If so, humans with such advanced capabilities would have built advanced civilizations (of which we do not find any singe remain..am i right?) And Please dont start by linking the Pyramids as a remains of that ancient advanced civilization. let us keep it out of this one. any other? with proper citations/references?

heheh..Well, Terence is actually dead, sadly. This is an interview with Tony Wright ;) Forgive the length of this reply! lol

1) Not sure what Tony's thoughts are on this one, but it seems that the two are intimately intertwined to me. These fruit chemicals read the dna (among many other profound interconnected affects) meaning they are directly involved in building not only the brain on a cellular level, but our physiology in general.

2) The shrinking ( along with the mountain of psychological/biological/neurological data coming out of science) definitely seems to indicate devolution.. once you open your mind to the possibility. (The problem is merely doing that! Because we are deluded- its hard). Some claim that it became 'specialized' and no longer needed such size, but that doesn't hold up at all. Less size also = less processing power.. and it isn't just size we're talking about- its the complexity that resulted from the symbiosis. The most complex tissue in the known universe evolved in symbiosis with one of the most complex chemical environments on the planet, and when it lost that the complexity/functions started reverting back to the primitive type. So its not just a mere shrinking..

I mean to put it simply..our brains weren't just expanding in size in the past, they were expanding at a rapidly increasing rate. The fact that the accelerated expansion stalled should be a sign something isn't right here, and the fact that it is actually shrinking should be very alarming!

3) Yes, my answer to your first question vaguely touched on this. The massive loss of chemicals that built and fueled our bodies (at the most sensitive stages of development in the womb, none the less) had a huge affect on how our endocrine system and immune system run, and virtually everything else. Now that the body and its systems are also being run by a dysfunctional brain, the only thing that can logically result from that is less that optimal functioning.

4) Well the mere fact that we have to categorize and create different 'branches' of science indicates how we tend to over rationalize things, since really its all one big interconnected reality. Some ancient groups did seem to have a lot of knowledge, the problem is recognizing it in our current state. What seems advanced to us might not seem advanced to them. For instance- we often hold up our civilization as the pinnacle of evolution, when really in many ways it is more like a loaded gun aimed at the head of this planet, and shows massive signs of species wide insanity. Many who live simpler lives that are more harmonious with natural environmental cycles often regard us as insane. But when we do look into the past we do see many hints of advanced knowledge. Theres many books on all of this so i'll try and be brief.

First you can look at the astounding astronomical knowledge. Long before we knew the earth was round many civilizations not only knew that but were light years ahead of us in mapping these celestial cycles. The mayans come to mind, but the egyptians, and many other civilizations were very very good at this sort of thing, and often aligned they're highly advanced architecture to these cycles and they're mathematical knowledge was very deep. Many texts also point to a profound and intuitive understanding of the natural world and mans place in it, and while many have gotten distorted in recent times (religion/dogma) at they're core they did seem to carry simple, and obvious truths regarding how nature and humans operate. There is also the worldwide myth of this fall, which literally is like a direct diagnosis in many cases. Groups worldwide also engaged in many techniques to remedy it ( shamanism, meditation, sleep deprivation, etc). There was also very detailed and complex medicinal knowledge all over the worlds ancient cultures.

5)This is sort of a misconception with our idea of 'advanced'. Many groups would have established a relatively intact way of life after being forced out of the African jungles due to climate change (and possibly other reasons), and would have migrated to areas that were somewhat similar as the pre-fall jungles. Meaning there is no reason why many wouldn't have lived in tropical areas for a time, where there was no need for shelter and food could be leisurely picked from trees in this state of basically indescribable bliss and atonement with oneself and reality.. which virtually all the ancient cultures dimly recall in one way or another and attempted to re-establish (and the neurological data supports..)

" humans with such advanced capabilities would have built advanced civilizations (of which we do not find any singe remain..am i right?)"

Many of the ancient civilizations we know about today were actually very advanced! We tend to marginalize them of course.

And oddly many of them even claim to be descendants of a more advanced previous civilization. There is even maps that have been re-copied for millenia which show the world as it looked before the last ice age. Graham Hancock has studied this extensively and cited how basically all of these people recall a massive flood. And, go figure, within the past 15,000 years or so the sea level has risen dramatically, some 150meters, and in dangerous spurts. This would totally eradicate much of the land where culture thrives, and where the ancients did retreat we find these "myths" of what happened and recollections of the cities beneath the waters. He's dived in many of these places and there is remarkable pictures of ruins on his website but oddly orthodox archaeologists are to stubborn and self-invested in the current worldview to even bother looking into this. His book underworld goes into this but many archaeologists and other laymen have gone into it before. http://www.grahamhancock.com/gallery/underwater/yonaguni.htm

Edited by shpongled

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting article, thanks.

Did you take a look at the interview?

Hello shpongled,

Yes I did read the interview and as far as brain development through diet I can only say that when hs found a food source that didn't have big teeth as was just as hungry as he was for something to eat,he evolved.As we evolve our brains would physically adapt as well,the new adaptations would develop before others are reduced or deleted.Almost like the catapiller into a butterfly.

With respect to the drug use,if it was used in a medicinal application for the treatment of illness or injury I would be inclined to see some form of critical thinking as having already evolved.For the most part for other uses like ritualism,no Ipad,Ipod,tv,cable,they were just having their version of Saturday Night Live.

In the link I posted it refers to evidence of clearing land by burning and encouraging the growth of roots and tubers,this occurred 55k-75kbp.This to me shows an earlier understanding and manipulating of environment for "agricultural"benefit.I one of the links in that same article there was another about wild barley that had been altered by cooking and found between the teeth of a neadrethal showing that they had at 40kbp being harvesting and pressing a food source.

jmccr8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so you don't think the hundreds of thousands of transcription altering, immune/pineal boosting, endocrine modulating, etc, plant chemicals present in us 24/7 for tens of millions of years would have any affect on evolution? And that the sudden loss of this would have any affect on what develops? Mind if i ask why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is scary considering we were flooding our brains with the most complex assortment of plant chemicals for millions of years in Africa, and now expect to build the most complex and chemically sensitive thing in the known universe out of "junk" and have it work properly.

Well, the people in Africa don't seem to be any smarter then anyone else these days. If biodiversity equals a better brain, you'd expect to see a flood of genius come flooding out of the 3rd world into the modern academic systems and industries. Or maybe... they are just too smart to do so??

I think since so many discoverys and thinkers have come out of temperate zones of the world, that the tropical diet is actually holding humanity back, and it was not till humanity moved into the temperate zones and ate temperate foods that his brain got pushed forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the people in Africa don't seem to be any smarter then anyone else these days. If biodiversity equals a better brain, you'd expect to see a flood of genius come flooding out of the 3rd world into the modern academic systems and industries. Or maybe... they are just too smart to do so??

Just because some groups remained on the continent doesn't mean they still had access to the unimaginably complex assortment of fruit chemistry. None of the groups that remain today in africa flood they're systems with this 24/7, as we did for millions of years. So they would be subject to the same changes in neural structure and function that we know do occur given the scientific data available.

I think since so many discoverys and thinkers have come out of temperate zones of the world, that the tropical diet is actually holding humanity back, and it was not till humanity moved into the temperate zones and ate temperate foods that his brain got pushed forward.

Ok, but we are talking about evolutionary time scales here. We all got separated from the symbiosis around roughly 200,000 years ago when we were forced out due to climate change and loss of forest. How would the tropical diet be holding humanity back? These fruit, these chemical factories-increased brain activity, memory, immune functions, and basically it changes everything , as you can see once you look at the data.. Wouldn't it make more sense that junk food and McDonalds are holding us back more since they are literally damaging to us? And our hormone pumped, pesticide laden, processed food we fill the market with which we know for a fact is bad for us? Don't you find it odd we build(diet) the most chemically complex and sensitive organ known to man out of garbage and expect it to work properly? when in fact it was being built and fueled by the most complex assortment of chemical factories known to ever exist, and it suddenly lost this and was built by foods that literally have the opposite affect on our hormones and all around functioning?

What is your definition of "temperate foods"? The biological data that outlines the affect these plant chemicals would have on our system is very well supported, as i showed in the article. And brushing that all under the rug while clinging to the current paradigm is exactly what the psychological data predicts we'd do

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so you don't think the hundreds of thousands of transcription altering, immune/pineal boosting, endocrine modulating, etc, plant chemicals present in us 24/7 for tens of millions of years would have any affect on evolution? And that the sudden loss of this would have any affect on what develops? Mind if i ask why?

Hi shpongled,

We don't know what the ultimate design is for the evolution of man is,so for me to presume that we are somehow in some state of regression,if I my use the term,is an unknown.If I look at what man has developed as tools of and for his progression in the environment that we live in at present,I would not agree with what has been proposed.The smart phones that we use today compared to the computers that were being used in the 60s the reduction in size has been a benefit as we don't need a pocket the size of a 12 story building to carry it around in,possibility a reflection of our own evolutionary development.

I see the brain as an organ and that we are something more than a collection of parts.For me to delve any further into the subject would inevitably end up in a pointless discussion of philosophical interpretation and serve no purpose in this thread.I agree that diet is key to healthy development but we don't know what purpose we serve in the grand scheme of things and we do not know how much we will still have to evolve in order to fulfull that destiny.jmccr8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because some groups remained on the continent doesn't mean they still had access to the unimaginably complex assortment of fruit chemistry. None of the groups that remain today in africa flood they're systems with this 24/7, as we did for millions of years. So they would be subject to the same changes in neural structure and function that we know do occur given the scientific data available.

Aren't there bushmen, and pygmys that live in equatorial Africa that basically live the same as the first nomadic homo sapiens? These people are not any smarter then their northern vitamen munching brothers.

Ok, but we are talking about evolutionary time scales here. We all got separated from the symbiosis around roughly 200,000 years ago when we were forced out due to climate change and loss of forest. How would the tropical diet be holding humanity back? These fruit, these chemical factories-increased brain activity, memory, immune functions, and basically it changes everything , as you can see once you look at the data..

So what fruit are we talking about here? Obviously not mangos, bananas and guava, as people eat those every day. What kind of exotic chemicals appeared in which fruit? Or are you saying this "Tree of Life" type fruit is gone, like the Garden of Eden?

Wouldn't it make more sense that junk food and McDonalds are holding us back more since they are literally damaging to us? And our hormone pumped, pesticide laden, processed food we fill the market with which we know for a fact is bad for us? Don't you find it odd we build(diet) the most chemically complex and sensitive organ known to man out of garbage and expect it to work properly? when in fact it was being built and fueled by the most complex assortment of chemical factories known to ever exist, and it suddenly lost this and was built by foods that literally have the opposite affect on our hormones and all around functioning?

I'm not saying McDonalds is Nirvana, or it is Mana from Heaven. But it is not our food that is junk. It is rather our healthcare lifestyles. People getting overweight and not getting exercise is what causes problems, not a Non-tropical-fruit diet. The human body knows what the Garbage is, and will filter most of it out. It is only if you are missing important minerals and vitamens entirely that you run into problems.

What is your definition of "temperate foods"? The biological data that outlines the affect these plant chemicals would have on our system is very well supported, as i showed in the article. And brushing that all under the rug while clinging to the current paradigm is exactly what the psychological data predicts we'd do

Temperate foods would include domesticated meat cooked on a fire. Grains and nuts. Fish and Poultry.

And you can point out that they have grains, domesticated animals and fish and poultry in Africa if you want, but those things were not Invented there. Those things migrated there as new inventions from Europe and Asia.

I'd also argue that the human jaw and teeth were not evolved to eat only fruits, or even only plants. Our teeth are clearly omnivorous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi shpongled,

We don't know what the ultimate design is for the evolution of man is,so for me to presume that we are somehow in some state of regression,if I my use the term,is an unknown.If I look at what man has developed as tools of and for his progression in the environment that we live in at present,I would not agree with what has been proposed.The smart phones that we use today compared to the computers that were being used in the 60s the reduction in size has been a benefit as we don't need a pocket the size of a 12 story building to carry it around in,possibility a reflection of our own evolutionary development.

I see the brain as an organ and that we are something more than a collection of parts.For me to delve any further into the subject would inevitably end up in a pointless discussion of philosophical interpretation and serve no purpose in this thread.I agree that diet is key to healthy development but we don't know what purpose we serve in the grand scheme of things and we do not know how much we will still have to evolve in order to fulfull that destiny.jmccr8

Sure we have some nice technology, but at what cost? Around 5% of the worlds population holds 95% of the worlds wealth, we are on the verge of toxifying not only ourselves but the entire planet. Hundreds of species are going extinct everday due to our activities. Pollution, deforestation, overpopulation, increase in disease, all these things show we cannot sustain our downward spiral for much longer before things collapse. You do realize that its recently been shown our brains are shrinking, and that diet affects brain size right? There is so much more to it than that though..If the glimpses of profound states of consciousness that some unique individuals experience, combined with extraordinary immune functions and genius some glimpse is only the tip of the iceberg of what we considere normal then an iphone would be totally unnecessary i think

I too see the brain as an organ and agree that we are more than the sum of our parts, but obviously the quality of the organ and the fuel you run it on will have a monumental affect on our sense of self and perception.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aren't there bushmen, and pygmys that live in equatorial Africa that basically live the same as the first nomadic homo sapiens? These people are not any smarter then their northern vitamen munching brothers."

No, they don't eat even close to what we would have eaten in the african jungles (we wouldn't be nomadic there really?). The forests dried up and the symbiosis was lost. If you see the article it explains how biological data indicated this would turn the positive feedback mechanism that developed into a negative one. Sure there would be some that stayed in the same general area and ate fruit here or there- but the ridiculously complex assortment would be almost entirely gone and it is always at least partially substituted with less optimal foods.

So what fruit are we talking about here? Obviously not mangos, bananas and guava, as people eat those every day. What kind of exotic chemicals appeared in which fruit? Or are you saying this "Tree of Life" type fruit is gone, like the Garden of Eden?

Figs, bananas, many of the fruits people are familiar with but it was likely dozens if not hundreds of species- each with unimaginably complex, hormonally rich bio-chemistry that can read DNA. A tomato alone has 10,000 of these chemicals! Yes basically this new information means that the global myths of a 'paradise' or 'garden of eden' where we were naked, forest dwelling, bliss filled, fruit eaters is actually a recollection of a previous 'golden age'. Any wonder history can be seen as the constant search for liberation? And so many aimed to return to such a state? (dimly reflected in todays religions/mystic traditions.

I'm not saying McDonalds is Nirvana, or it is Mana from Heaven. But it is not our food that is junk. It is rather our healthcare lifestyles. People getting overweight and not getting exercise is what causes problems, not a Non-tropical-fruit diet. The human body knows what the Garbage is, and will filter most of it out. It is only if you are missing important minerals and vitamens entirely that you run into problems.

well if we were flooding our system with hundreds of thousands of these vitamins/flavonoids/phytochemicals etc for tens of millions of years then that DOES mean we are now missing them. Surprising then, that diseases related to deficiencies in such chemicals (like Alzheimer as i pointed out in the article) are on the rise? I have to disagree that mcdonalds isn't "junk". Ever seen supersize me? The guy ate it everyday for a month and his doctors urged him to stop because he could DIE. :unsure:

We know its bad for our stomaches, immune system, mood, etc. Fast food has been linked to depression. http://psychcentral.com/news/2012/04/01/fast-food-linked-to-depression/36798.html And poor food has (not surprisingly) been linked to brain damage http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/31/trans-fats-brain-damage_n_1173487.html Not to mention a new long term study on 20,000 individuals found all read meat shortens life span.

I'd also argue that the human jaw and teeth were not evolved to eat only fruits, or even only plants. Our teeth are clearly omnivorous.

Well our physiology, including teeth and digestive system, was relatively how it is now long before we started cooking, and we simply don't have the teeth or stomaches to eat raw meat. Sure we can adapt on a survival diet, but all we get from this is energy- not the complex assortment of neuro-chemistry necessary to run the neo-cortex optimally. Our closet cousins who still live in the jungles, the primates, eat 95-100% plants! We also don't create our own internal vitamin C internally..meanwhile: all other omnivores and carnivores do! This is because we were getting plenty of it from our plant-based diet. If we were omnivores, then we also wouldn't need to create our won vitamin D from sunlight, since we would have been getting it from the meat. This is just a few things that point towards a fruit based diet.

And there is a link between fruit and complex, big brains. Take primates for example. Or fruit bats, parrots, etc. all very very intelligent compared to similar species who eat differently. Then theres howler and spider monkies ( i may have this reversed)..They are the same size, live in the same environment, and yet one has a brain twice as large as the other. Coincidence that it also eats twice as much fruit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was using the Iphone as an example to illustrate a point.The old computers were large and slow,technology evolves much like ourselves in order to survive,adapt to and manipulate its environment.Just as we can now carry more information in an Iphone than we could process with those old computers,we ourselves have evolved into a leaner more efficient thinking man.We do not evolve in a manner that would reduce our chances for survival,our environment changes and we change with it.It would seem that this system is working quite efficiently as reference I cite the billions of people that exist today as a direct effect of this ability to evolve.jmccr8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

odd to cite that as a mark of advancement, since overpopulation is one of the main things jeopardizing not only the quality of life of our species but the continuation of all life on this planet!

And as i said, its just a left-brained linear bias to assume history unfolds in such a straight forward simple---->advanced way. The geological and cultural data, like the stuff Hancock points out, indicates quite the opposite. It makes more sense that there is cycles, and that there would be times of great progress and times of loss. The massive earth changes that have taken place in the past 20,000 years with the melting of the glaciers and the rapid rise in sea level are also important to take into account since these would have wiped out almost any trace of civilizations on the most hospitable parts of the planet. Although if you really study ancient cultures with this idea in mind it becomes obvious they were very, very advanced and even knew about the condition and tried to correct it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

odd to cite that as a mark of advancement, since overpopulation is one of the main things jeopardizing not only the quality of life of our species but the continuation of all life on this planet!

And as i said, its just a left-brained linear bias to assume history unfolds in such a straight forward simple---->advanced way. The geological and cultural data, like the stuff Hancock points out, indicates quite the opposite. It makes more sense that there is cycles, and that there would be times of great progress and times of loss. The massive earth changes that have taken place in the past 20,000 years with the melting of the glaciers and the rapid rise in sea level are also important to take into account since these would have wiped out almost any trace of civilizations on the most hospitable parts of the planet. Although if you really study ancient cultures with this idea in mind it becomes obvious they were very, very advanced and even knew about the condition and tried to correct it.

As far as I know I have not mentioned any knowledge of any ancient and unknown advanced civilization or any of its theoretical achievements.To do comparative analysis of the brain function of these people would require a preserved brain to perform research on and as far as far as I know the brain matter usually deteriorates and we are generally left with bone,hair and tooth fragments to work with.Neither are there written records of any such research having been done by these ancients that we can use for comparative study.

We don't know where evolution will lead man so for me to suggest that we are not functioning in accordance to the nature of our being would be foolish.They say that we only use 10% of our brains potential,I on the other hand suggest that we use 100% and only understand 10%.I used the example of population to show that we have evolved to the point that we are the dominant species on this planet.The fact that you feel that we are over populated and therefore weakening our chances of survival,for me,may be the next trigger in our evolution,I don't know.I have a tendency to look at the positive effects of change.

Do I believe that there are civilizations that have been lost?Possibly,I dwell on many potential scenerios of the past but try to ground myself in what is known and use that as a point to work from.I am not well versed in scientific knowledge and rely on the resources of those here that share their knowledge and provide links so that I can better understand material presented.I have only responded from personal opinion and am not putting forward any theories.jmccr8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

To do comparative analysis of the brain function of these people would require a preserved brain to perform research on and as far as far as I know the brain matter usually deteriorates and we are generally left with bone,hair and tooth fragments to work with.Neither are there written records of any such research having been done by these ancients that we can use for comparative study.

There are other indications besides a preserved brain that give us an idea on the type of mental life, and level of intelligence that the ancients experienced.

We don't know where evolution will lead man so for me to suggest that we are not functioning in accordance to the nature of our being would be foolish.They say that we only use 10% of our brains potential,I on the other hand suggest that we use 100% and only understand 10%.I used the example of population to show that we have evolved to the point that we are the dominant species on this planet.The fact that you feel that we are over populated and therefore weakening our chances of survival,for me,may be the next trigger in our evolution,I don't know.I have a tendency to look at the positive effects of change.

Well we may not know where evolution is leading..but our brains ARE shrinking, that is known, and simultaneously we are on a trainwreck ride thats ruining the planet, so there are hints at where it could lead if we don't do something drastic. It doesn't matter whether or not you think it would be foolish to suggest we aren't functioning optimally, just look at the data available, its relatively straightforward. Your first sentence is like saying "well, i don't know where my dog max will end up going in life, and therefore i cannot comment on if he is actually healthy at the moment".

This proposal may seem pessimistic but really its the most hopeful news we ever could have heard. If there is a problem with the development of our neural system then that opens the door to immediate treatment. You cannot fix the problems that have arisen in the world from the same state of mind that created them. Even just bringing the news to global attention would cause a massive shift in how we all see and live in the world. Imagine how the world would change overnight if it were conclusively proven that the dominant side of our brain is severely retarded.

Do I believe that there are civilizations that have been lost?Possibly,I dwell on many potential scenerios of the past but try to ground myself in what is known and use that as a point to work from.I am not well versed in scientific knowledge and rely on the resources of those here that share their knowledge and provide links so that I can better understand material presented.I have only responded from personal opinion and am not putting forward any theories.

Basically all of the biological information i've been relaying is very well supported by what is currently known. The problem is that this, along with the psychological info, indicate that if this condition exists then we would be VERY slow to understand the context and severity of it. If there was even the slightest indication it does (and if it didn't there would be no evidence, but there is a lot) , say just a tiny percent chance, then the only sane thing would be to at least look into it and make sure our instrument of perception is actually OK. Theres nothing to loose and through some self-experimentation it becomes self-evident in all those who've gotten into it that i've heard of including myself.

Edited by shpongled

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.