CureZone   Log On   Join
Re: Acids, alkalis, yeast/candida
 
Hveragerthi Views: 53,312
Published: 12 years ago
 
This is a reply to # 1,484,586

Re: Acids, alkalis, yeast/candida


 Have YOU recovered from these conditions with the ideas you are advocating??? Otherwise, do you belong in the Support Forums for them????

Hmmm... You just got done saying that you have Candida among other issues. So according to your own argument you should not be posting in a support forum as you have not recovered. So as you leave why don't you take Justin with you since all he ever psots is bashing rants.

Particularly bad to have you here since you are contradicting the experience of those who DO have the conditions and are experiencing remarkable improvement, strongly implying we are stupid, misled or lying??? Please explain exactly how that is SUPPORT????

What you interpret is not always as it seems. I gave you sound advice on how to get rid of your problems since you admit to still having them. So it is clear that what you have been doing is not working. So I gave you an alternative that will work. That is support, unlike your arguing here and trying to suppress other people's speech. Do you really think that only people who say what you want to hear are allowed to post here? If you don't want help then keep posting on the ML board and stop posting on open forums.

Most if not all your posts belong in the Debate Forums . PLEASE keep them there! This is WHY you are BANNED at Ask Moreless forum, perhaps others as well.

I was banned from the Moreless forum because I PROVED him wrong!!! Just like so many other people that have been banned from his forum. His overinflated ego just won't let anyone question his claims. If you pay close attention to his postings you can see he reads my forum regularly, and he is even changing his claims to coincide with what I have been saying all along. Instead of just admitting to how foolish his claims are though he just subtly changes his wording to try and quietly cover up his errors.

 

Bottom line is that IF he really knew what he was talking about, and IF he really believed in what he was saying then he would stand up for what he believe in by presenting real evidence to his far out claims. Instead when backed in to a corner he goes on his whacko religious rants to try and scare away those proving his wrong. How many people other than myself has he called the Devil for proving him wrong? So if you want to follow someone that is clueless then that is up to you. But don’t try to suppress the REAL FACTS being presented by others as that is not support!!!


Bumblebees aren't supposed to be able to fly, according to modern aerodynamics. So, do we pull off their wings to prove we are right???? Call those who see them flying liars, no matter how many reports there are??? Call the bumblebee themselves liars, if they could speak for themselves???

No, instead I would look up the REAL SCIENCE rather than rely on another myth like those so predominant in the Morless forum. Look how easy this is to do:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bumblebee

"Myths

Flight

According to 20th century folklore, the laws of aerodynamics prove that the bumblebee should be incapable of flight, as it does not have the capacity (in terms of wing size or beats per second) to achieve flight with the degree of wing loading necessary. Not being aware of scientists 'proving' it cannot fly, the bumblebee succeeds under "the power of its own ignorance".[25] The origin of this myth has been difficult to pin down with any certainty. John McMasters recounted an anecdote about an unnamed Swiss aerodynamicist at a dinner party who performed some rough calculations and concluded, presumably in jest, that according to the equations, bumblebees cannot fly.[26] In later years McMasters has backed away from this origin, suggesting that there could be multiple sources, and that the earliest he has found was a reference in the 1934 French book Le vol des insectes; they had applied the equations of air resistance to insects and found that their flight was impossible, but that "One shouldn't be surprised that the results of the calculations don't square with reality".[27]

Some credit physicist Ludwig Prandtl (1875–1953) of the University of Göttingen in Germany with popularizing the myth. Others say it was Swiss gas dynamicist Jacob Ackeret (1898–1981) who did the calculations.

In 1934, French entomologist Antoine Magnan included the following passage in the introduction to his book Le Vol des Insectes:

Tout d'abord poussé par ce qui fait en aviation, j'ai appliqué aux insectes les lois de la résistance de l'air, et je suis arrivé avec M. SAINTE-LAGUE a cette conclusion que leur vol est impossible.

This means:

First prompted by the fact of aviation, I have applied the laws of the resistance of air to insects, and I arrived, with Mister Sainte-Lague, at the conclusion that their flight is impossible.

Magnan refers to his assistant André Sainte-Laguë who was, apparently, an engineer.

It is believed that the calculations which purported to show that bumblebees cannot fly are based upon a simplified linear treatment of oscillatingaerofoils. The method assumes small amplitude oscillations without flow separation. This ignores the effect of dynamic stall, an airflow separation inducing a large vortex above the wing, which briefly produces several times the lift of the aerofoil in regular flight. More sophisticated aerodynamic analysis shows that the bumblebee can fly because its wings encounter dynamic stall in every oscillation cycle.[28]

Another description of a bee's wing function is that the wings work similarly to helicopter blades, "reverse-pitch semirotary helicopter blades".

Bees beat their wings approximately 200 times a second, which is 10–20 times as fast as nerve impulses can fire. They achieve this because their thorax muscles do not expand and contract on each nerve firing, but rather vibrate like a plucked rubber band.

Unfortunately there are those people who cannot think for themselves, so they instead they hang on the word of anyone who can speak in ramblings and riddles so they can pick and choose what they want to hear. Same principle used by cults like the run that Jim Jones ran. People followed blindly because they did not or could not thik for themselves so they needed someone to tell them how to think. To seek out the truth was forbidden, so the cult folowers made sure that no other followers could hear the truth either. And of course the other classic way to spot a cult mentality is that the cult followers go out and try to recruit other followers. Why does all this sound familiar? Hmmm.........

By the way, I see you are using the Moreless follower lie of I called his followers liars. Once again, I never called Moreless'  followers liars. Moreless misinterpreted what I said, and despite explaining to him and his followers NUMEROUS times what was really said and meant they still INSIST on spreading this lie. So what does this say to the honesty of Moreless'  followers? I can understand the original mistake. But when the mistake has been explained and they still insist on using this misleading information then this is deliberate lying!!!

Better to discover WHY our ideas are partial, inadequate and need adjustment, maybe????

Hoping and praying that you may come to your senses soon!

Hopefully you were singing  "I'm looking at the man in the mirror" as you wrote that. You need to wake up before you seriously hurt yourself or direct others to the same fate.

 

 
Printer-friendly version of this page Email this message to a friend

This Forum message belongs to a larger discussion thread. See the complete thread below. You can reply to this message!


 

Donate to CureZone


CureZone Newsletter is distributed in partnership with https://www.netatlantic.com


Contact Us - Advertise - Stats

Copyright 1999 - 2021  www.curezone.org

0.578 sec, (9)