>>how often can this happen once in a life time?
>
>If you happen to live in a geothermal area it would likely happen throuhout
>one's life. Forest fires are a normal part of life in forested areas--so I
>would say at least several times in a lifetime for those animals lucky
>enough not to get cooked. You would have to show that animals living near,
>and consuming, naturally cooked foods were in worse health than those who
>never touched a "denatured" morsel to give your idea credence.
I don't know about vegetations around volcanos but i experienced the
yelowstone park where geyser and boiling water are everywhere, never
found
anything cooked , life forms there are either alive and can stand
higher
temperature than the normal range of life ( betwen 0 celsius and 42 )
or not
existent at all if they are not specialized algue .
You must never been in a forest after a forest fire the chances of
finding
something well cooked are very minime most of what is left is
carbonised.
and forest fire are not common .I lived in the pyrennees that is high
risk
for fire created by thunder storms and human activity and experienced
only
one in the 10 years that i lived there in the whole aera square
kilometers
around.
>
>> frozen foods (all along the snowline in both
>>>hemispheres),
>>
>>Species who evolved on the temperate climates do but it is not what they
>>favor and it is not a main source of foods
>
>So? And even if your interpretation is accurate (and I severely question
>the "main source of foods" bit) it doesn't argue that animals will become
>ill when eating frozen/thawed food.
Peoples don't get ill if they eat french fries either . where did you
get
this kind of drastic statement? There is still a gap between eating
occasionally frozen or coked food and make it a daily fare.
>
>
>>mix foods (wadging, going back and forth between foods and
>>>often not eating their foods in instincto-like sequence), even have been
>>>seen to dip foods into the ocean in an apparent effort to salt them. And
>>>all animals seem to avail themselves of natural salt licks where ever
>>>available.
>>
>>all those things are very much self limited and regulated for the other
>>species ,only humans have a capacity now to make it a way of life. How
much
>>mixing can you pratically do without a salad bowl?
>
>You can mix two items which is all it takes to throw instincto theory out
>as the "truth according to nature". And switching back and forth between
>foods is not self-limiting. You report that you raised some grazing animals
>in France so this should hardly be news for you.
That seems so obvious to me that any theory can 't be the truth . they
are
just mind constructions !
You talk often about black and white , do you realise that you still
think
on those terms .
Throwing out the theory because there is exceptions to it is little
bit
excesive.
>
>My point is that the all-or-nothing-at-all tenents of instincto are not
>well-mirrored in nature.
It is why you could be more relax in your judgements against
instinctos .
They are just exploring in a direction that have been inconsciously
blanked
out
>
>>. I personally at time mix diferrent greens while harvesting them but
>>basicaly without the use of seasonning it is very much limited and when i
>>enjoy arugula i take the time to harvest only that, leave by leave
humans
>>have an amazing tool to do that , their hands) despite that all my greens
>>are growing together. I saw horses doing the same , sorting out grass when
>>they want clover( their lips are amazing of ability to do that )
>
>Yes, that is my point I think. They switched back and forth much of the
>time. Shame on them--don't they know that they are not supposed to return
>to a previously eaten food in a single course or else they are risking
>toxic overload.
they must have traumatised you with that at Montrame
> Come on, admit it, your instincto from birth son does this
>quite regularily I'd guess. Or have you taught him better. ;)
oh yes it does at time but the rule is that he eat one thing at the
time
even when his father is demonstrating his boulimic tendancies going
back and
forth and mixing. When he is focus on one food don't bother trying to
divert him with other foods. Often i come with better ideas about what
he
needs trying for example to convince him to eat what i am eating . He
is
always reminding me that he is in charge of what he put in his mouth.
>
.
>
>Most approximate? OK, then don't consider it a naturalistic truth--which it
>is clearly not.
It can't be that you are talking about me .
i think on those terms
this all world is not real it is made up from perceptions.
perceptions have revelevancy only for the perceiver, .nobody else .
yet as humans we share a perception of the world.
>>Instinctive approach is the antithesis of litteral interpretation of the
>>guidelines.
>
>Do you, or have you, eaten too much fruit as an instincto? What litteral
>interpretation were you following when you over-ate fruit? What litteral
>interpretation where you following when you stopped eating as much fruit as
>you really wanted too?
i overeated everything most of my life, beyond what i could
assimilate . I
overate fruits vegetables meats or nuts and seeds . Instincto didn't
change
this fondamental compulsive culture of mine, but it is what made a
huge
break thru that later on got farther by including more animals
products.
fruits had an enourmous contribution for me being able to quit my
former
high whole starchy foods consumption ( grains, potatoes and
chestnuts),
I was following the idea that the body knows best what he want to eat
even
when he get fooled by the denaturation of the food ( and modern fruits
are
denatured a lot thru artificicial breeding)
so globaly overeating fruits have been a stepping stone in my
evolution.
I was in fact attracted to more meats and were thinking it was not a
good
idea so i was not in accordance with the principles of eating
instinctively
and i needed More rational thoughts to cancel those ideas while in the
back
ground i can recognise that my body knew best all along. I just needed
an
authorisation to listen more deeply to my instinct instead of doubting
its
wisdom.
You seems to reason about instinctive eating as if it was a finish
product
that can be litterally passed on ,
again, Instinctive eating is an ongoing question :what should i eat
now?
and that is it . The fact of cooking or seasonning the food for me,
was
allready demonstrating the unwilingness to ask this question. I
decided with
my mind what should be eaten, how it should look and how it was
going to
taste.
I am still struggling with those control issues , instincto didn't
fondamentalement cured me from this tendancy but for sure i am on my
way.to
not indulge on this potential anymore.
jean-claude
|
