Sun gazing (The most efficient diet?)

Vegan message board for support on vegan related issues and questions.
Topics include philosophy, activism, effective altruism, plant-based nutrition, and diet advice/discussion whether high carb, low carb (eco atkins/vegan keto) or anything in between.
Meat eater vs. Vegan debate welcome, but please keep it within debate topics.
zachadamcook
Newbie
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2017 9:33 am
Diet: Vegan

Sun gazing (The most efficient diet?)

Post by zachadamcook »

I recently came across this information. NASA did a study on a man named HIRA MANEK. The study conformed that he was surviving by simply gazing at the sun and drinking small amounts of water and buttermilk. The study went for 100 days and HIRA was monitored 24 hours a day. He had a simple practice of watching the sun during "safe hours" 1 hour after sun rise and 1 hour before sun set. NASA confirmed that he was surviving off of light.


Now I am not sure how true all of this is but I find it interesting. If sun gazing is the most effiecient way to derive our energy which many say it is (of course they might have very biased mindsets) but if it is then that is something I would be very interested in practicing.


The process is something like this

day 1- gaze at the sun as soon as it comes up for only 10 seconds
day 2- add on 10 more seconds or if you have light colored eyes only add 5 seconds
(Keep adding on 10 second increments until you can stare at it for 45 minutes around 9-14 months later)

While you gaze at the sun you should be on level ground so it is easy to see the sun. Also some say to do it barefoot and after gazing shut your eyes look away from the sun then open your eyes. I have not researched the scientific explanation to all of this yet but the basic idea seems interesting.

If done right it is said that you will

-have more energy
-have a dramatically reduced appitite
-have better eye sight
-have a healthy immune system and better over all health
-have a healthy state of emotions and a clearer mind




I will be researching this some more but what I have researched so far makes me want to try the practice. My intuition says much of this might be true. Although I have no first hand experience and I have yet to see actual scientific explanation. If NASA actually conducted the research then that could be proof. heres a couple links of videos I found.

Let me know what you guys think of this. Thanks

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyN9Eh04QPU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_ERDxxzvQE
Dream Sphere
Senior Member
Posts: 356
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2014 7:52 pm
Diet: Vegan
Location: Greater Toronto Area, Ontario, Canada

Re: Sun gazing (The most efficient diet?)

Post by Dream Sphere »

Do you belive people actually get caloric energy from the sun?

Until science shows a mechanism in the human body which is akin to photosynthesis in plants, I'll always be skeptical of that.

Minor health benefits could be explained by the gazers having been vitamin D deficient, and science does show that spending time with your skin (not your eyes) exposed to the sun gives you vitamin D.

For the rest of the plausible benefits, I don't think any are unique to sungazing, and could be gotten through a different, healthier type of meditation/relaxing techniques.

So, I really see no reason to sun gaze. I'm sure others will point out how that study on that one guy was flawed, I've heard of it before, but I don't remember it well.
User avatar
NonZeroSum
Master of the Forum
Posts: 1159
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 6:30 am
Diet: Vegan
Location: North Wales, UK

Re: Sun gazing (The most efficient diet?)

Post by NonZeroSum »

zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 3:20 pm NASA confirmed that he was surviving off of light.
The Scientific Ignorance of Stasia Bliss – Part III: Sun and Moon
https://debunkingdenialism.com/2013/07/06/the-scientific-ignorance-of-stasia-bliss-part-iii-sun-and-moon/
The only time that the Sun can be viewed safely with the naked eye is during a total eclipse, when the Moon completely covers the disk of the Sun. It is never safe to look at a partial or annular eclipse, or the partial phases of a total solar eclipse, without the proper equipment and techniques. Even when 99% of the Sun’s surface (the photosphere) is obscured during the partial phases of a solar eclipse, the remaining crescent Sun is still intense enough to cause a retinal burn, even though illumination levels are comparable to twilight.
[NASA (Chou, 1997)]
In the movie Eat The Sun (directed by Peter Sorcher), Hira Ratan Manek is secretly photographed while eating solid food. When the crew confronts him, he tries to manipulate his way out of the situation by asserting that he was only posing with solid food because some person gave him 100 USD to do it. However, he could not produce this 100 bill upon request and he later sent a letter to the makers of the film admitting to eating solid food and apologizing (shown in the end of the movie).
Unfortunately you can get yourself into some really dangerous territory by believing lots of absurd claims each 'verified' by 1 or 2 studies not submitted for scientific scrutiny.

Sv3rige vs VeganGains
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaEJvtriFns

It'd be nice if all our needs could be met by simple things we tried as kids like looking at the sun but we should try to direct that desire for everything to be easy into movements that actually improve peoples lives. If going without food was easy it wouldn't be a very good protest tactic aha.
Unofficial librarian of vegan and socialist movement media.
PhiloVegan Wiki: https://tinyurl.com/y7jc6kh6
Vegan Video Library: https://tinyurl.com/yb3udm8x
Ishkah YouTube: https://youtube.com/Ishkah
zachadamcook
Newbie
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2017 9:33 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Sun gazing (The most efficient diet?)

Post by zachadamcook »

Unfortunately you can get yourself into some really dangerous territory by believing lots of absurd claims each 'verified' by 1 or 2 studies not submitted for scientific scrutiny.


It'd be nice if all our needs could be met by simple things we tried as kids like looking at the sun but we should try to direct that desire for everything to be easy into movements that actually improve peoples lives. If going without food was easy it wouldn't be a very good protest tactic aha.


Thanks! I actually just came from another posted topic about this and read information how the guy was caught eating a big meal.

Although I am sure there is so much information undocumented about this that may support it just as there is much that will disprove it. All evidence is limited because there are so many variables


I dont think we should believe such a thing is possible but I dont think we should completely cut out any possibility. Reality has a ocean of unopened possibilities and when you believe anything is true (In a biased manner) you automatically cut many possibilities off.

I am not saying we should all go out and stare at the sun. I think it is only logical for professionals and scientists to look into it more because such a thing does have potential as meditation, yoga, and the general consciousness does.

both science and mysticism should work together not try to prove each other wrong.

Through the millenniums if man kind survives and evolves much of our logic might be proven wrong and right again for as we grow we will find out new things that confirm old things then confirm newer things. Everything could possibly be right and wrong at the same time sooo...

My main point is lets not dumb anything down and say it is possibly but lets not shut it out and say its never possible. There is so much to offer from exploring and that is one core aspect to science.
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Sun gazing (The most efficient diet?)

Post by brimstoneSalad »

zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 3:20 pm I recently came across this information. NASA did a study on a man named HIRA MANEK.
I can tell you this isn't true, since it violate physics and if it were it would be on headlines across the world.
Thunderf00t recently explained some of the thermodynamics that make these breatharian claims impossible:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwOX7vOf0_s

When you see crazy stuff like this, try to find the original source. If this is true, there should be something on NASA's website about it, or a scientific journal where this study was published. Ultimately, hoaxers like to make claims about studies that don't actually exist to sell whatever they're peddling. If those studies were real, they'd be linking to them everywhere and it would be easy to find.
zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 3:20 pm The study conformed that he was surviving by simply gazing at the sun and drinking small amounts of water and buttermilk.
The sun does not provide a meaningful amount of energy to human beings (we can use it to help synthesize vitamin D, but that's about it), and certainly not through the eyes.
You could live off water and buttermilk for a while, but it would not be healthy.

I think NonZeroSum beat me to the debunking of this guy in particular. :)
zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 3:20 pm NASA confirmed that he was surviving off of light.
That's definitely not true. Even if you magically photosynthesized all of the UV and visible light (less than 50% of the energy available) touching you at 100% efficiency, you could not live off of that energy. It's not enough to meet your basal metabolic needs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunlight
"the total amount (direct and indirect from the atmosphere) hitting the ground is around 1120 W/m2."
That's at noon, not in the morning and evening hours; then it would be much less. But we'll go with that. The total available to photosynthesize would then be 570 W/m2

The surface area of the human body is under two square meters:
http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=39851

Assuming this man was also naked, and he could unfold his skin to make it all face the sun (which he can not do), that would be 2240 Watt hours a day. That's under 2,000 calories. If he couldn't magically unfold his skin (assuming he could expose a full half of it), it would be under a thousand.

If we take away the other magical power (the 100% efficient conversion):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthetic_efficiency
"For actual sunlight, where only 45% of the light is in the photosynthetically active wavelength range, the theoretical maximum efficiency of solar energy conversion is approximately 11%."

That would be 123.2 Watts per square meter (at noon), and closer to 212 calories for the day. Not anywhere nearly enough. Even if we assume no loss from digestion.

If we start with a BMR of 1,600, we can discount that 160 for a shut down digestive system. There are still 1,440 calories to meet. Assuming we only get 75% of the calories from our food, maybe with a direct energy source we could be dealing with a 25% discount there. Still, 1,040 calories needed there in the least.

He'd need more magical powers to come very close to breaking even.
zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 3:20 pm I have not researched the scientific explanation to all of this yet but the basic idea seems interesting.
It's not scientific, it's magic. Please don't try to do it.
zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 3:20 pm -have more energy
You would die of starvation.
zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 3:20 pm -have a dramatically reduced appitite
This is a symptom of starvation, and can also be achieved by placebo.
zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 3:20 pm -have better eye sight
It will ruin your eyesight permanently. There is no safe time to look at the sun, even during an eclipse.
zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 3:20 pm -have a healthy immune system and better over all health
-have a healthy state of emotions and a clearer mind
No, you would die. I have no doubt that people experience these delusions from the practice, though. It's easy for people to delude themselves.
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Sun gazing (The most efficient diet?)

Post by brimstoneSalad »

zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:46 pm All evidence is limited because there are so many variables
When there are that many variables, it's not science.
zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:46 pm I dont think we should believe such a thing is possible but I dont think we should completely cut out any possibility.
When it risks your health and life, and practices like this are literally killing people? Yes, there are good reasons to discount it and advise against it. Believing pseudoscience is not without risk.
zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:46 pm Reality has a ocean of unopened possibilities and when you believe anything is true (In a biased manner) you automatically cut many possibilities off.
Actually, narrowing the range of the possible helps you learn, and know where to look.
If you tried to investigate every magical claim, you would waste all of your time and never learn anything.
zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:46 pm I think it is only logical for professionals and scientists to look into it more because such a thing does have potential as meditation, yoga, and the general consciousness does.
No, that's a waste of resources. See parsimony.
We only have so much time and resources. How about we spend these wisely on trying things with some evidence behind them that are possible? Work on curing deadly diseases with real medicine. Working on solving the energy crisis and developing new technologies.

If something has a 99.9999% chance of being fake, we can't waste time looking for it.

Imagine you're playing hide-and-seek. Do you look in the closet for your friend, or do you waste time on the clock looking in shoe boxes just in case?
You KNOW your friend can fit in the closet. Even if you believe it's possible that your friend might be able to shrink down and fit in a shoe box, you should go with what you know first.

Once we have exhausted ALL other sciences and reached the edge of human knowledge, and have lots of time to waste, maybe we can spend it on things like this.
zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:46 pm both science and mysticism should work together not try to prove each other wrong.
It's a moral imperative to debunk these mystic notions, because they are literally killing people.

Proving things wrong, specifically scientific theories, is what science is about. You discover something is true by trying to prove it wrong and failing repeatedly, and you narrow down what is true by proving other possibilities wrong. This is how we acquire knowledge. If you are against proving things wrong, or against discounting "possibilities" then you're against knowledge. What is true only exists relative to what is false. Knowing what is only comes in terms of knowing what isn't.
zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:46 pm Through the millenniums if man kind survives and evolves much of our logic might be proven wrong and right again for as we grow we will find out new things that confirm old things then confirm newer things. Everything could possibly be right and wrong at the same time sooo...
No, that's not how logic or science works.
Newton wasn't wrong when Einstein brought relativity around; it was just a different scope. At Newtonian velocities and within the bounds of those measurements, Newtonian physics is still basically true, just imprecise. Relativity is just a refinement of that at relativistic velocities and higher precision. Relativity is very important philosophically, but less so practically.
zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:46 pm My main point is lets not dumb anything down and say it is possibly but lets not shut it out and say its never possible. There is so much to offer from exploring and that is one core aspect to science.
How many lives is satisfying that curiosity worth?
How many people will die because we didn't stand against this stuff and debunk it?
How many people should die of cancer, or other diseases because we decided to spend precious time and money researching this stuff instead of trying to find cures to things we know are real?

Parsimony is also a core of science, because without it we're left wandering directionless. We could be wrong about some of the things we know, but if you studied them and knew why and how we knew them, you'd see how improbable it is for us to be wrong about that much at this point and why we need to focus our explorations into what seems most plausible.
zachadamcook
Newbie
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2017 9:33 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Sun gazing (The most efficient diet?)

Post by zachadamcook »

Actually, narrowing the range of the possible helps you learn, and know where to look.
If you tried to investigate every magical claim, you would waste all of your time and never learn anything.
I agree, but there is a difference of narrowing down possibilities and shutting things out completely in a biased way. I am not investigating every magical claim only what seems to be backed up by logic and reason and if I am mistaken I would like to admit it and move on.


When it risks your health and life, and practices like this are literally killing people? Yes, there are good reasons to discount it and advise against it. Believing pseudoscience is not without risk.

Going into space can kill you but it shouldn't be shut out because one day it may be very beneficial. In the same way we should responsibly open our logic up to many things. I am not saying we should sun gaze because now hearing you I do trust you know what your talking about but I think there are many things that are not being explored that could be beneficial if they weren't shut out. Or simply if people opened themselves up they will be more receptive to life and it doesn't have to be called mystical.

zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:46 pm I think it is only logical for professionals and scientists to look into it more because such a thing does have potential as meditation, yoga, and the general consciousness does.
No, that's a waste of resources.


Those who meditate are more joyful and peaceful than before. There for they have clearer and more focused minds. They get more done in a less amount of time and they feel more joyful while doing it. Isn't that efficiency with a plus to it?
I dont necessarily mean spending money just time and energy because they do have results.

How about we spend these wisely on trying things with some evidence behind them that are possible? Work on curing deadly diseases with real medicine. Working on solving the energy crisis and developing new technologies.
I agree with this. Yoga and meditation do not disrupt these things at all. They can help them because those who work in the medical industry have a high burn out rate. Yoga and meditation can help with this.
If something has a 99.9999% chance of being fake, we can't waste time looking for it.
Yes I agree but meditation and yoga have already proven they are well past that percentage and have been for many many many years




Once we have exhausted ALL other sciences and reached the edge of human knowledge, and have lots of time to waste, maybe we can spend it on things like this.


:lol: you are right in my mind about this but I believe you are undermining the actual benefits yoga and meditation have to offer.

It's a moral imperative to debunk these mystic notions, because they are literally killing people.
You are right here I just was ignorant of this fact. I never new anyone was killed because of these posts. I would like to think if oeople did die it wouldn't be from this post instead it would be from many other variables that had a stronger more assertive influence. But reading your replys is really making me want to second guess my actions. I should word my thoughts in a more cautious manner, If I am going to state keeping a open mind I should emphasize with a skeptical attitude.


zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:46 pm Through the millenniums if man kind survives and evolves much of our logic might be proven wrong and right again for as we grow we will find out new things that confirm old things then confirm newer things. Everything could possibly be right and wrong at the same time sooo...
No, that's not how logic or science works.
Newton wasn't wrong when Einstein brought relativity around; it was just a different scope. At Newtonian velocities and within the bounds of those measurements, Newtonian physics is still basically true, just imprecise. Relativity is just a refinement of that at relativistic velocities and higher precision. Relativity is very important philosophically, but less so practically.
Fair enough I am wrong here no doubt. I am simply expressing a thought that has no place in this post.
zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:46 pm My main point is lets not dumb anything down and say it is possibly but lets not shut it out and say its never possible. There is so much to offer from exploring and that is one core aspect to science.
How many lives is satisfying that curiosity worth?
How many people will die because we didn't stand against this stuff and debunk it?
How many people should die of cancer, or other diseases because we decided to spend precious time and money researching this stuff instead of trying to find cures to things we know are real?
I would like none to die if possible as I am sure you would also. Thank you for pointing out my ignorance and helping me once again
zachadamcook
Newbie
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2017 9:33 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Sun gazing (word of warning)

Post by zachadamcook »

zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 3:20 pm I recently came across this information. NASA did a study on a man named HIRA MANEK. The study conformed that he was surviving by simply gazing at the sun and drinking small amounts of water and buttermilk. The study went for 100 days and HIRA was monitored 24 hours a day. He had a simple practice of watching the sun during "safe hours" 1 hour after sun rise and 1 hour before sun set. NASA confirmed that he was surviving off of light.


I have been educated that this is not correct. I would recommend keeping a open mind for such things but don't hurt yourself because you can derive energy in much more practical and realistic ways.
zachadamcook
Newbie
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2017 9:33 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Sun gazing (The most efficient diet?)

Post by zachadamcook »

I think NonZeroSum beat me to the debunking of this guy in particular. :)
I wouldn't say he debunked me, He debunked the topic I was interested in. For I am not sun gazing ;)

I posted here to see if I should carry on with sun gazing and you guys showed me the facts so THANK YOU for saving my eye sight and possibly others from trying this as well!

I must admit I felt defensive once your replies came in because

I felt vulnerable
I felt mis understood
and so I felt propelled into defending myself in some way. I am admitting this to better myself and to hopefully connect with you.

After reflecting on this the only thing I will still stand by is the claim that meditation and yoga have many benefits. Also meditation and yoga do have scientific facts to back up their benefits. When I said "prana" I meant the information that carries life. Things like blood, electromagnetic aspects of the body, and other things. Doing yoga helps regulate these things and helps the body regulate the channels that carries these things.
Most widely known is that meditation and yoga reduce stress and depression. Have you heared of any of this?

much time and many resources were wasted in the research of these things
Is what you said but, I am sure you meant the more blown up aspects like the chakras, sun gazing, and other pseudosciences. Those of which I do not support. Although a very small select few may have some value to them if they are able to be understood from a scientific and logical point of view but many of them are nonsense.



Also coming on here and seeing you didn't reply made me feel vulnerable once again, then I realized its how I interacted with you may have came off in a certain way where if you replied you might have just expected me to waste your time. Because if you replied I may have shot out more defensive replies that dont have a logical basis to them or any evidence. I want to acquire more logic and sense to my communications and daily life and you helped me realize this weakness. Thanks :)

I want to grow from your perspective so please reply and if you dont want to reply please tell me why so I can better myself. :)
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Sun gazing (The most efficient diet?)

Post by brimstoneSalad »

zachadamcook wrote: Sun Aug 06, 2017 10:36 pm I am not investigating every magical claim only what seems to be backed up by logic and reason and if I am mistaken I would like to admit it and move on.
The problem is that these claims are not backed up by logic and reason.

If you proved, and I mean actually proved using legitimate scientific methodology and it was accepted, that pranic energy was real and could be used to heal a burn or small cut ten times faster than natural wound healing, then it might be reasonable to think maybe this energy could be used to provide fuel for cells instead of food. At that point and only at that point, after you establish that it's a thing at all and that it can be used for biological processes, then you can start saying it's reasonable to speculate on the next step.

At this point, there's not even any good evidence that it's real at all or can be used for even non-biological processes (like just generating crude heat, which would be the simplest demonstration).

You're skipping A and B and jumping straight to C.

Prove Pranic energy exists at all, then prove it can be used somehow in biology, then you may have a reasonable argument to make for the plausibility of the next step.
zachadamcook wrote: Sun Aug 06, 2017 10:36 pm Going into space can kill you but it shouldn't be shut out because one day it may be very beneficial.
There's evidence the space shuttle actually exists, we can see what's out there, and we understand orbit (and understood it long before we sent people up).
If we had no evidence that we could contain air in a vessel with no air pressure outside, or that humans could survive those G forces, then we should not have tried to send one into space. You start small and build up.

Parsimony means being somewhat risk averse; you have to be to use your resources wisely. There are so many things we need to study and discover, we can't risk dead ends when there's no sign whatsoever (and after doing research on it) that these things are real at all.
zachadamcook wrote: Sun Aug 06, 2017 10:36 pm but I think there are many things that are not being explored that could be beneficial if they weren't shut out.
Tell that to the esoterics. They're the ones trying to jump to C D E... Z before establishing A and B. If they demonstrate something, anything very basic, then the whole world of scientists will be with them for the rest. Right now their claims are not reasonable.

Generate just a few joules of extra heat in your body without using your metabolism, and the world will change. It's the tiniest of measurements that change the world, not grand assertions.
zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:46 pm I think it is only logical for professionals and scientists to look into it more because such a thing does have potential as meditation, yoga, and the general consciousness does.
Anybody can do science. If you believe in these things, YOU should do experiments on them rather than telling career scientists to stop what they're doing and experiment on your idea instead when they are probably busy curing cancer at the moment.
I can help you design an experiment if you're serious about this.

Yoga and meditation are not the same as prana. You'r employing a motte and bailey technique here, switching the conversation to a more defensible position:
http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/03/all-in-all-another-brick-in-the-motte/

Nobody is talking about yoga or meditation here. Research on those things is not research on prana.
zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:46 pm Those who meditate are more joyful and peaceful than before. There for they have clearer and more focused minds.
Again, not prana.

Even so, the evidence on this is weak. Relaxation and practice focusing helps, but it can also be achieved by reading or playing stimulating "brain games".
It depends entirely on what you compare meditation to.

None of this has anything to do with prana, though. Meditations pretending to use "prana" are not more useful than secular meditation.
zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:46 pm I dont necessarily mean spending money just time and energy because they do have results.
There is research done on meditation. That is a real thing. People meditate, and there are demonstrable changes in stress hormones, brain function, and other things. It has nothing to do with prana. You would need to do research on prana specifically, or a "pranic" meditation as compared to a secular one.
zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:46 pm They can help them because those who work in the medical industry have a high burn out rate. Yoga and meditation can help with this.
Potentially, but again, nothing to do with prana. Meditations that are researched and practiced today in the mainstream do not claim to use prana anymore. They bear little resemblance to their roots.
zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:46 pm Yes I agree but meditation and yoga have already proven they are well past that percentage and have been for many many many years
Not prana. Also, again, the evidence is limited and does not make them look special when compared to other activities like games and exercise.
zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:46 pm :lol: you are right in my mind about this but I believe you are undermining the actual benefits yoga and meditation have to offer.
You were talking about pranic energy instead of food. Nothing to do with yoga and meditation. The benefits of relaxation, focus training, and exercise have nothing to do with breatharianism or sun gazing.
zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:46 pm You are right here I just was ignorant of this fact. I never new anyone was killed because of these posts. I would like to think if oeople did die it wouldn't be from this post instead it would be from many other variables that had a stronger more assertive influence. But reading your replys is really making me want to second guess my actions. I should word my thoughts in a more cautious manner, If I am going to state keeping a open mind I should emphasize with a skeptical attitude.
That's good to hear. I hope you will find the other times you brought this up or talked about it elsewhere on the internet, and caution people about it. It is very possible that somebody read something you said online, and that was the final argument they needed to try it, or even one of several arguments that convinced them... and as a consequence, they died or were otherwise harmed.

Like you said, there may be other variables, but if ten people work together to kill somebody, are they all innocent or all guilty?

The best we can do is fix our mistakes and avoid making them again.
zachadamcook wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:46 pm I would like none to die if possible as I am sure you would also. Thank you for pointing out my ignorance and helping me once again
Thank you for being open minded enough to change. :)
Post Reply