Morpheus

Cool.

You also perceive yourself to be Josh........ Who's he then, or are there now two of you, like Hugo Weaving in The Matrix?

Hi, what timezone are you in?

Superb shot mate! Straight in there! Brilliant! Obviously a very talented player. You've really opened up the balls for me to slam into them and send them flying in all directions! Cue Lbm for the next shot, as I see a real frame coming up Oh the fun never ends!

Hi Ian!

Praise The Lord! Christian by any chance or just extracting the proverbial??

Oh, don't worry about him, he's my spirit guide Are you clairvoyant? Describe what he looks like?

Nowhere yet everywhere. I cannot hide, for I would be in one place and not in another, which is impossible.

Your break!

Wow! I'm not normally prone to make such far fetched claims but I think you may be onto something there!

You'll never wipe out cancer completely. We all have it as an ongoing natural part of our metabolism. It's just that we deal with it like any other 'toxin'. Sorry, what I meant was, that relative to today, it was practically unheard of. I'm quoting the 67 year old farmer as he was then and upon who's land we had our workshop when I was an apprentice in 1985 saying that sure, when he was young, practically a century ago now, they knew what it was but people rarely got it. We were discussing the death of a friend of the partners for whom I worked. What are the figures now? Half of us can expect to get it? When I was younger the ratio was 1:3. Hmmmmmm, what might have happened since? Where do I start? It's ok, I don't eat crap! Hehe!

Thank you for another considered and intelligent reply. My apprentice at work has mentioned a tyre that has been developed that infact never wears out. Now I can't see it myself as it would have to be surfaced with diamonds or something but he's adamant that a much longer lasting one exists but was shelved as it would indeed eventually kill the Golden Goose, so to speak. Same argument with cancer, as eventually you'd do the same. Now my point is that it's obvious that there has been no effective effort to prevent it or to cure it given the vast sums of money thrown at it. People will only continue to develop it if they refuse to or cannot take steps to prevent it or environmental toxicity/radiation keeps causing it. You've probably not seen the effects of D.U. on the newborns of Iraq and Afghanistan? You don't want to, trust me. Convert cars to hydrogen (generated on demand from water, not stored) and clean up other energy producing methods, ban GM crops, pesticides etc. etc. and you'll find that the rates decline from then on out. I've read reference after reference to various plants having anti-cancer properties, one of which is a favourite of mine eaten raw for decades; http://www.healingdaily.com/detoxification-diet/broccoli.htm

Regarding my posts, I could do it all day long, every day. I also realise that people prefer one liner's but it's tough to make my point that way. I don't copy and paste anyone's material except when I say so or pics or vid links and I still haven't got that down. I could do it realtime by PM if you like? Name a subject that I've commented on or anything to do with politics or religion or money or health or the afterlife or extraterrestrials or computers or cars or healing or .......just not Maths! To repeat, my older brother is a Physics Professor and I got grade 1 in school myself, though 'only' a C.S.E as they were then. I'm the stupid one! (Nods allround ). He's so clever that he even taught me algebra. Superb teacher. Very proud of him, even though we don't get along because he won't listen to a word I say!

The cure lies in the prevention as well so the market would eventually dry up, all things being well. Then where's the money? Cancer was practically unheard of a hundred years ago and a clue might be to study 'Indigenous People's' who rarely get it. All old news. I mean, how many people smoke or eat crap everyday? You just can't help some people. Honestly, I don't even know what a Troll is except from the Three Billy Goats Gruff story at school. Seriously. I've heard the term of course but disrupt? For what? You don't need my help to disrupt anything from what I've seen!

Sorry Mate, you did warn me!

Misplaced perhaps yes. Wrong because others disagree? What sort of logic is that? At the risk of sounding trite, "Even when you are in a minority of one, the truth is the truth." Ghandi.

Sorry

That's their right. "If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people whom we despise, we don't believe in it atall". Noam Chomsky

OOPS! Sorry but if using the correct terminology is a fault, then I'm guilty as charged. Am I supposed to be stupid? Did I miss a meeting? Sorry. Of course, I'm unique in having an educated opinion. I should really avoid those. It's a bad habit, I know. Negative? What could be more positive than revealing the truth, in the face of such universal deception? It's self-evident. Also, I never said that you did work for a drug company but it sounded like it and my comments were not aimed at upsetting you Charlotte but to answer the questions that you asked me. Is that also being too clever? It's an emotive subject, though off topic, sorry.

Win? Who's talking about winning anything? My goal is simply to be understood. That would do for me but the will doesn't seem to be there!

Prove it.

Blimey, that sounds like something out of Lord Of The Rings! The trees have had enough! In that case, I'm done for, as I'm a Joiner/Cabinetmaker!

I'm sure I would learn something Charlotte. Trialling what precisely? Dietary supplements? Detoxification protocols? Diagnostic equipment? Double blind research studies to find the most effective cures from all the known substances/methods/healing arts etc. for each ailment? No, I rarely ever drink alcohol as it's a chemical solvent and fuel and certainly never at home, nor am I under the influence of anything else but coffee, hence the late nights! I am stone cold sober, though in the context of the complex principles and ideas that I am trying to explain and the fact that I'm constantly misunderstood, I feel that too much is not enough, as proven again here. If you re-read the bit where I said "Please don't take me to task" etc. it was clearly in relation to the information in the book that I read and the possibility of misquoting it from memory. The more controversial statement, was entirely a seperate matter and I was not asking not to be held to account for that. I see it as utterly self-evident that finding a cure for cancer is just about the last thing that the Pharmaceutical Industry wants. Ill health is a bigger earner than good health. The cure for cancer is like the war on terror or my posts, i.e. never-ending! A cure or an effective 'lifestyle based' prevention regime would put them out of business, plain and simple. They'd have to come up with something else like 'Aidswinebirdsars'. All man-made. You ain't seen nothin' yet. Just look after your immune system is all I can say. Infact, as if I needed to spell it out, drug companies only exist because of ill health so what possible motivation have they for finding a cure? That's like saying that Kwik-Fit have developed a tyre that never wears out or gets punctured, (infact......). That's not to say that one or more effective methodologies for dealing with cancer as an example, don't exist, as I believe that they do. Businesses exist to make a profit for the handful of individuals who founded it or run it. Let's call them Shareholders. They may start out with altruistic goals but to compete, they will be forced or inclined to 'compromise' those principles sooner or later, if anyone else has already done so, as it tightens the profit margins. It's a downward spiral of cost cutting and market chasing and as we all know, ethics go out the window. Before you know it, Smithkline becomes Smithkline Beecham, then Glaxo becomes Glaxo Wellcome, then they merge into Smithkline Glaxo Wellcome and then you're left with The Wellcome Foundation or whatever . as a hypothetical or actual scenario. My point is that drugs are seen to be the only option in practically every ailment. Your Doctor is now just a State funded Drug Rep. sitting there with his prescription pad and a financial incentive to issue prescription drugs. If ever there was a conflict of interests.............. How about Pfizer and Tamiflu that cost us £2 billion was it? Swine Flu, Bird Flu, H1N1, H5N1 respectively if I recall. Anyone see a pattern here? I remember Mayor Ken on the radio saying that "When the pandemic hits etc." in regard to Tamiflu 'vaccines' (which don't exist for our consumption) for 'Birdflu' or SARS a few years ago. Pandemic? Turned out that it faded away and didn't cause many deaths compared to regular flu which kills thousands every year. Then came Swine Flu. Same talk of Pandemic, no pandemic to speak of. Meanwhile, we're billions in debt to drug companies. Feck me, how does this work? Remember Sars before Bird and Swine? It was genospecific to Asians, in most cases as they were the only ones dying in Canada. When they got wind of this, if you'll forgive the pun, guess what the Chinese and Japanese did? They bankrupted The United States by selling their Treasury Bonds to stop them trying to kill everyone! That kickstarted this whole global crisis. The world is now run by a virtual monopoly of criminals who have a stated intention to reduce the population and the last thing they want is cures for anything, while you or your colleagues work hard to develop them. Sorry but feel free to correct me.

No worries, I was talking about the book I read 20 years ago and said I was into weights like you appear to be now, back when I was younger, so no, not referring to your age atall.

This one's a monster too so it's going to seriously annoy some of the A.D.D. ones so just skip the post or delete the email notification or unsubscribe, PLEASE! You have been warned! Ian, I know that this was a general gripe with me so all I can say is that evidence means nothing on here it seems, so long as it conflicts with accepted wisdom or lack of. Click on Bertrand Russell on my signature for one of his quotes to the effect that, if something doesn't agree with your instincts, you'll reject it and vice versa. Of course, you'll turn it round on me and use it as evidence that I'm the one who refuses to listen to reason. It works both ways ala 'theory of relativity', more on that with Lbm's reply later. Sorry for not multiquoting, as I do it all from memory and it will appear as tangential as ever to everyone else, I'm afraid. The thrust of my posts here is that belief affects/creates reality, as no amount of evidence will be accepted by a professional skeptic (my definition = active denial, selective memory or one who's income depends on maintaining their current belief system etc. like my Physicist/Scientist brother) or indeed someone who doesn't know what they're talking about or simply dislikes someone or their car. That's all it takes. Same as racism and misplaced trust is all it takes for Government/Big Pharma to get away with genocide, 9/11 etc. It's all a click away but knowledge brings the burden of responsibility, hence denial ad infinitum of the provable and obvious. Trust in authority figures is key. That's literally all it takes if people can't or won't think things through for themselves as it replaces the need to do so. That is why Government exists; clever, organised people plan everyone else's life for them from cradle to grave to save them the effort of being self-sufficient/responsible. It's called Socialism. For this to be workable/stable, you need compliance. A Status Quo. Very simple but I wasn't taught this at school. I am a born skeptic. I question everything (within reason). That's why I'm so convinced about David Icke's work etc. He's spent 20 solid years of fulltime research into the origins of civilisation and I've done my own along side, which includes but is not limited to 'his' mostly referenced material. He questions everything and he's not the only one saying all this 'controversial' stuff about shapeshifting etc. If I am 'wrong' about something, as I've been told many times on here, usually in blanket statement form, people should be able to correct me with specifics, since you (and others) are obviously 'right'. Logical enough? Yet I get slandered and told to prove everything with evidence, which then gets ignored anyway, since few seem to have understood a word I've said so far. We are not born equal in our ability or more importantly our desire to understand things. Where there is a will, there is a way. Do I literally have to spell this out? Why do you think my posts are so long? Do you think I enjoy staying up until 4am to explain stuff that I've already covered, just in a different way, in an attempt to home-in on an explanation that 'makes sense' to a trained skeptic? Next I'll be accused of going off topic when I didn't even mention cars, like I didn't mention David Icke until Tannhauser did, as I said I wouldn't, except in my defence (against cheap jibes usually). I was told that this is primarily a car forum elsewhere by Lbm (like, hello? 'Off Topic' anyone?) but even on off topic threads I am held to account. I'm not on here as a 'sounding board for my beliefs' anymore than anyone else. I'm just confident enough to publish them, that they may help someone else. Take it or leave it. What's the worst that can happen? They waste ten minutes. Oh dear me, I'm sure! Try several weeks! As for Mr. T..... I respect your methodical approach and agree with most of your comments but you even (deliberately?) misunderstand obvious intended meanings because of your genuine inability perhaps, to see so much in the context of the worldview of the speaker/poster. The aim seems to be to score points, rather than understand someone's underlying point. My Bro does this and even keeps score. This is what happens when you are inexperienced in dealing with people who don't write or think with scientific discipline and rigour. It just doesn't work with most people because they're not logical! They have their own way of expressing themselves as best they can. One needs to have the good grace to allow them that privilege. Lack of presentation skill doesn't necessarily mean they're wrong, though I'm the first to complain about it under my breath. We can all disect eachother's sentences and too many do it themselves and don't clean up afterwards by the look of it but words are the least reliable form of communication. What are words if not individual symbols to represent mental images or beliefs? What are beliefs? Experientially derived or borrowed jigsaw puzzle pieces. When you sort them out, they form a big picture. If they don't sit well with eachother, they're in the wrong place or the wrong puzzle. I have a totally coherent worldview now although I can quite understand anyone laughing at that statement, given their worldview. Everything can be seen in context for me. I've been around the block a few times, maybe. "Can't you see? It all makes perfect sense, expressed in Dollars and Cents, Pounds, Shillings and Pence." as the Genius Roger Waters put it. What a song! It goes a lot deeper than just money though (another classic). That reminds me, must check tickets for O2 concert. Hope there's still some left! Sorry for the stupidly long posts but when I think I have something to contribute, I say so. When I don't, I don't. I see everything and everyone in context, myself included, as the sum total of their experience so far. Sorry, what was the question? Oh, there wasn't one, just another cheap jibe about me not knowing some guy called Jack Schitt. Lbm, it's still called 'The General Theory of Relativity', I believe, not 'The General Law of Relativity' as in 'Boyle's Law' or 'Newton's First Law of Motion' where a high powered Deer with it's legs blown off ( ) will travel in a straight line until an unbalanced force acts upon it, like a car bonnet for example. (From another thread). To whomever asked me to clarify regarding cancer and cures being withheld; yes, that's what I meant. Please don't hold me to task about this next bit as I'm quoting from memory from a book I read twenty years ago called 'The Calcium Diet'. I was heavily into bodybuilding, nutrition and fitness like Tannhauser appears to be when I was at that age. 41 now. I did more reading than training though, due to back problems trying to do what he's doing in his Avatar. Just not built for it. Scoliosis. I digress. Forgive the pre-amble but it's important to my point. This is a serious subject and anyone can succumb to it these days it seems. Cancer is apparently the out of control multiplication of cells when one cell dies for whatever reason, as they do all the time, and the surrounding cells 'take a vote' and one reproduces to replace it. This is dependent upon sufficient Calcium etc. in the area, for the electrical communication to be effective, since every cell communicates with atleast those around it through calcium bonds, so it says. You need sufficient Magnesium to utilise/absorb Calcium and this is the main deficiency so I'm told, atleast in my case. Without sufficient Magnesium, the body stores calcium, which can cause other problems in the joints etc. Due to poor diet or food quality, metabolism, genetic faults etc., this routine repair process sometimes, though rarely becomes a runaway problem because the replicating cell doesn't receive the signal to stop and next the immune system attempts to stop it by killing it, if it knows about it in time and functions properly itself. Now, I beg the obvious question; given that the entire Human Genome (DNA blueprint) has been mapped, after how much money and time does the collective World 'Scientific' Community not ask themselves, "What is the difference between a healthy individual and one with cancer?" "What causal factors may affect this differential?" Do you think that this hasn't been established by now, or are all cancers so unique, as to send researchers back to square one without passing 'GO' in each case, as you'd be forgiven for thinking, like they haven't learned the basic causes or atleast methods of prevention by now by a process of elimination or trial and error? This is to say nothing about listening to those who 'claim' to know the solution/s. I know it messes with many people's comfort zones but it makes sense to me and I'm not afraid to consider the implications, uncomfortable as they may be. Cue Roger Waters again......... I believe that Ghosts are real, though I've never seen one. Felt one, yes (ooer!). A workmate said today when told about this thread, that he gets the same feeling at the bottom of his stairs, except that it's "Satan behind him, or an old woman". I kid you not. There, back on topic. P.S. Heavily edited before posting to get it under 10,000 characters. Probably to be told it's all rubbish anyway. Go ahead, knock yourselves out.