Alan:
>I claim my opinions as opinions. I can have an opinion about what
>is claimed (say in some research report) as fact..i.e. positive
>or negative or indifferent. I claim as fact (or certainly nearer
>to the truth) any similar experiences I have to many others when
>trying out some specific advice.

This must be some sort of superior raw vegan logic because lowly me can not
make sense of it. Could you, perhaps, rephrase it? Better yet, now that you
are part of a larger picture (the internet including the USA, gaff, gaff, I
know) and you have now heard about NON-similar experiences, could you
explain to us mortals how your opinions have been modified?

>> Belonging to a fringe group gives you more credibility?
>
>I would rather belong to this fringe group than to the majority
>group which eats cooked. Credibility to me is irrelevant. It is
>me who is benefitting from what I do..and if anyone else benefits
>from anything I say..then this is merely a secondary positive
>spinoff. Every person should be an egocentric as far as their
>own personal health is concerned.

And belonging to a fringe group gives you more credibility?

>I have never claimed that dogma is truth. But it is generally
>true that statements which have become dogma after being tried and
>tested by many people over many years are more nearer to the mark
>than some of the more obscure claims of freaks and cranks.

How do you differentiate freaks and cranks from yourself, I wonder? You
have stretched out your tendency to state dogma/opinion as fact into two
sentences (granted, one of them being quite long), but you can't fool me:
you are claiming that dogma is truth.

>>Hiding in group anonymity doesn't change that.
>
>Am I hiding anywhere??

Yes, by your claim that you speak for a group of people.

>You sound more dubious to me because you
>spend most of your mails attacking others with mostly what is nothing
>more than childish namecalling rather than providing one iota of
>interesting info or any credible and tangible counterarguments yourself.

You keep coming at me with this particular namecalling yourself, but it
doesn't obscure the fact that you avoid dealing with the crux of my
criticism: that you flippantly post overboard claims.

>I personally have experienced more truths within the NH movement
>than lies. Most of today's NH groups have been infiltrated and
>contaminated by egomaniacs, money manics and dubious esoterics.

Dubious esoterics? My, but you can turn an english phrase, and my hat goes
off to you. But still, you alternatively trash mainstream NH and then seek
solace in its ambiguity. You can't have it both ways, Alan, and more and
more as you post, people see how you simply shift from one tendancy to
another to avoid the basic issues. One of which being that everyone except
you has "been infiltrated and contaminated by egomaniacs, money manics and
dubious esoterics".

>> And don't kid yourself, Alan. We are not pursuing similar goals. Not even
>> close. My goal is to show how short-sheeted your reasoning is by commenting
>> on your more absurd claims.
>
>You will never achieve your goal for two main reasons. Firstly I
>(and countless others) am enjoying good health from what I am
>doing, and secondly, you do not provide any counterarguments which
>may help me (or anybody else reading in here) improve my health
>even further (if that is possible from food alone).

I have already achieved my goal. Firstly, because "debate" with you flushes
out how neurotic you are; and, secondly, you do not provide any
counterarguments which show that your "recommendations" have any merit
beyond your own "dubious esoterics".

>> Your goal seems to be "passing on some info"
>> from a fringe group about your superior thinking on matters of nutrition.
>> You worship your pedistal; I eat them for the minerals they contain. ;)
>>
>I have never said it is superior..merely good for me and a lot of
>others I know.

Hmmm...let's take a look at that. Here is a sampling of some of your
previous posts:

"Hope you are eating raw..and not more than 1.6% raw animals and
1.4% insects..and over 50% raw fruit of course. ;-)"

"Tofu is processed rubbish..and who eats fish bones?..except perhaps
in a tin of tuna or salmon."

" But a healthy cooked diet as opposed to raw I have yet to see."

"Apart from any
other arguments against meat, why should I expend digestive
energy breaking down meat protein to get at the essential aminos
when I can get them pure in fruit (and veggies)?"

" An energy deficiency is caused in the first
instance by not eating enough carbohydrates. Something which a
fruitarian has no problem with."

"Yes...and any vet will confirm. Better to feed them rainwater and
catfood than to give them milk."

"I have been in Internet (and FIDO)
for years and nobody has as yet suffered from my posts (except
perhaps a few dental problems from gritting their teeth to often)."

"As I said in earlier posts, I respect the founders of this [NH] group, and
reject the current lot (i.e. both in Germany and the USA) as a bunch
of money-making phoneys."

"That's why we left them to form a splinter group. Add the Hopi candles,
Bach Blossom Therapy, esoterics and other mumbo jumbo and you have
a fairly accurate description of the way they are now."

" People
do not put on excessive weight by eating too many calories,
but by eating the wrong foods. Any vegetarian who wishes to
hype up his or her consumption of nuts and other oily foods such
as avocados can find this out for themselves."

"Some domesticated (and even some wild) animals can be induced to
drink milk..as the smell is right. This does not detract from
the fact that it is always bad for them (ask any vet or read
any good book on pets) and often fatal."

"Meat (i.e. the
saturated fat in meat) is neither healthy for the human system
and nor is it a good source of energy."

This goes on and on, Alan, and you say that you aren't acting superior?

>To be honest Kirt, I should have stopped corresponding with you a
>long time ago, because it is leading to nowhere (i.e. you don't
>provide any useful food info yourself) and takes up to much of
>my time. So how about it and I will also reply to you in future?

I will be waiting, breathless.

>But there are of course other people, even in your corner of
>the woods, who have benefitted from what individual members
>of our group (such as Guy-Claude Burger in the instance below)
>have said.
>
>
>| The table below (from ªInstinctive Nutrition´ by Severen L.
>| Schaeffer), based on studies conducted over several years with
>| more than 1500 persons, indicates how soon after commencing
>| Anopsology, great improvement or complete relief can be expected
>| from a variety of ailments.

Alan, you have outdone yourself with this. Instinctive nutrition, as
proposed by Shaeffer, has very very little to do with your fundamentalist
NH veganism (it advocates animal foods as desired!) and here you seem to
quote it as proof of same!

But yeah, I know, you are a man of your word (from March 11):

"This is definitely the last post to you (I know I have
said that before) until you come up with some convincing
counterarguments rather than merely letting off (empty)
steam."

Yup. I'm letting off steam. What are you doing?

Cheers,
Kirt




Secola  /\  Nieft
[log in to unmask]