romans holiday Posted October 3, 2011 Report Share Posted October 3, 2011 I might be reading it wrong, but to me, it looks to be right up there alongside your (non-science or philosophical) line of thinking. Were you meaning to say "pseudo-science" line of thinking? As to philosophy, it's always going to supercede science. This is why they study philosophy of science in universities [not to mention the best scientific brains], and not science of philosophy. Philosophy interrogates science: what exactly are its methods.... what do its theories mean... do they describe reality or are they more instruments/ models...is it about truth, or power... or art? Good philosophy rather than being "anti-science", looks to contextualize it, or qualify it.... science is after all our science... it's always a human science. The trouble today is that science has tended to take on the inflated proportions of a cult, where it monopolizes knowledge, where valid knowledge is not seen to exist outside of science. This is also a kind of close-mindedness where reality is thought to be understood only in technical or theoretical terms. The relation between philosophy and science is an important one. Even though philosophy questions the more dogmatic assumptions of a popularized science, it can also in turn provide a firm basis for science. Rational criticism need not entail that science is seen solely in terms of power [whether over our environment or ourselves]. Rather, criticism subverts the potential for that. The issue here is one of freedom, and primarily freedom of the imagination..... and it is a species of this, the scientific imagination, which is able to construct scientific models which provide a handle on the world. These models "work", with the power of technology, insofar as they analogically correlate with a material reality. It really comes down to what open-mindedness practically means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoldAsBrass Posted October 3, 2011 Report Share Posted October 3, 2011 BAB, Excuse me, but why should I trust you more than Graham Hancock or David Wilcock ? In fact, I don't "trust" any one of you. I do listen to many of these videos and keep an open mind about what you so happily call "baloney," but that doesn't mean the I will bet my life on any of it. I certainly take the same approach : listening, but not trusting, much of the information that comes my way on mainstream media. I keep and open, but questioning mind towards all of it - including probably much of what you Trust in. Do you trust in the Federal Reserve, or the promises of government? I think not, and skepticism has grown across society, since these institutions have not delivered. Do you trust in the Gold Gurus and Buy-to-Hold Wizards? Some here do trust the Gold guys, because doing so makes them feel better about their Gold portfolios. I do not, and regularly question their wisdom, and hedge what many here think does not need hedging. What makes you think I am so gullible towards alternative media, when I am so cautious to trust experts, authorities, and self-proclaimed gold gurus? I assure you, I am not trusting they purveyors of what you call "baloney," But i do listen with an open mind. Even to people like Jim Sinclair and Bill Murphy. The questioning comes after the listening. And no one here has yet given a single example of an item from Wilcock's book that they reckon they can disprove, and we are many, many posts into this thread. I'm not asking you to trust me. That's the point. Work it out for yourself. It's what you have to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Doe Posted October 3, 2011 Report Share Posted October 3, 2011 Were you meaning to say "pseudo-science" line of thinking? As to philosophy, it's always going to supersede science. This is why they study philosophy of science in universities [not to mention the best scientific brains], and not science of philosophy. Philosophy interrogates science: what exactly are its methods.... what do its theories mean... do they describe reality or are they more instruments/ models...is it about truth, or power... or art? Good philosophy rather than being "anti-science", looks to contextualize it, or qualify it.... science is after all our science... it's always a human science. Nice succient and elegant as always RH . While I freely admit that I am never going to be able to put things as eloquently as you, I will attempt to respond as best I can. As you know, science was born from philosophy and it still plays a great part (many science departments were originally philosophy departments). Both are built upon reasoning and many scientific theories arise through philosophy. However, science looks to quantify this reasoning, whereas philosophy tends more to qualify the reasoning and (moreover nowadays) the implications arising from the discoveries of science. As in many things, the pupil becomes the teacher, but that’s not to say that each cannot still learn from one another. As such, using the universal language of mathematics, it could be argued that science can be thought to be science of the universe, rather than science of humans (which, I would have thought, would, due to its more subjective approach and being a purely human construct, better describe philosophy?) The trouble today is that science has tended to take on the inflated proportions of a cult, where it monopolizes knowledge, where valid knowledge is not seen to exist outside of science. This is also a kind of close-mindedness where reality is thought to be understood only in technical or theoretical terms. I would counter that this is rather a view perpetuated by a small number of self publicist ego driven “soft” scientists, and the media that courts them, rather than those “at the coal face” so to speak. A great example of the latter is the scientist that recently asked the world for help in understanding their strange results with neutrinos (rather than grand-standing an uncertain result, as others might have done). Hardly the actions of a cult. The relation between philosophy and science is an important one. Even though philosophy questions the more dogmatic assumptions of a popularized science, it can also in turn provide a firm basis for science. Rational criticism need not entail that science is seen solely in terms of power [whether over our environment or ourselves]. Rather, criticism subverts the potential for that. The issue here is one of freedom, and primarily freedom of the imagination..... and it is a species of this, the scientific imagination, which is able to construct scientific models which provide a handle on the world. These models "work", with the power of technology, insofar as they analogically correlate with a material reality. OK, you're stating to lose me here (I'm more a numbers sort of guy), but I would add that perhaps it could be thought of as the scientific imagination (through the same thought processes involved in philosophical thinking) constructs testable models to provide a quantitative description of the reality it finds itself in, from which new technologies can be constructed to investigate further and deeper into this reality. Either way, there is philosophy, there is science, and then there is Dr B’s fringe section Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted October 3, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 3, 2011 I quite like some of these kinds of youtube videos. I think there are enough verifiable ancient oddities present around the world that are not easy to reconcile with the orthodox view of mankinds societal and technological development. Some can be very interesting as ideas, but far too many try to cloak themselves in the "respectability" of science by claiming scientific proof that simply does not exist. That video earlier about RH- genes??? It kicked off with the caption "If man evolved from apes, how come there are still apes around today?" Really, how can you take anything from that point seriously? The conventional theory is that man shares a closer common ancestor with apes than with other living creatures, not that humans are descended from modern Chimapnzees ! Mix in with this material is plenty of nonsense, but that doesn't make it all nonsense. Nor was anyone here pushing that caption as truth. So I don't see what your point has to do with the main discussion here. When I listen to videos like this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_2WnuIBS1U I do not take all of it (or even most of it) as true, but within this material there are some thought-provoking ideas, that suggest the world is far different from what is spoon-fed to us by the mainstream media, which is controlled by a handful of rich folks who want the world sedated and compliant. Rejecting all the material and refusing to listen to any of it, may be exactly what powerful folk would like you to do - so I reckon TPTB feed some of the more bizarre points to BF and DW to help undermine the overall narrative that these guys provide. In the interview, Wilcock does ask many of the questions that an open-minded and inquisitive questioner would ask. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted October 3, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 3, 2011 Were you meaning to say "pseudo-science" line of thinking? As to philosophy, it's always going to supercede science. This is why they study philosophy of science in universities [not to mention the best scientific brains], and not science of philosophy. Philosophy interrogates science: what exactly are its methods.... what do its theories mean... do they describe reality or are they more instruments/ models...is it about truth, or power... or art? Good philosophy rather than being "anti-science", looks to contextualize it, or qualify it.... science is after all our science... it's always a human science. The trouble today is that science has tended to take on the inflated proportions of a cult, where it monopolizes knowledge, where valid knowledge is not seen to exist outside of science. This is also a kind of close-mindedness where reality is thought to be understood only in technical or theoretical terms. ...The issue here is one of freedom, and primarily freedom of the imagination..... and it is a species of this, the scientific imagination, which is able to construct scientific models which provide a handle on the world. These models "work", with the power of technology, insofar as they analogically correlate with a material reality. It really comes down to what open-mindedness practically means. Well said, RH. "A Man's reach should exceed his grasp" summarises what you are saying. Like many here, I would like to reach out for sources of information, which go beyond what I can understand using a pure scientific perspective. Others here may be more comfortable staying with the confines of the mainstream scientific perspective. That may mean believing something like the idea that the speed of light is absolute, and then suddenly discovering that it is not. Such a person will then wait for years to see how the "new science of beyond speed of light speed" changes the mainstream scientific perspective around them. No doubt, hanging around where the crowd is, does make for a more comfortable time. But not everyone is like that. Some want to explore on the fringes, where half-truths get mixed up with imagination and even pure human invention. And if you are going to walk the fringe, you need to be careful about what you believe without proof, if anything. But wandering there does not mean you buy into all of it, most of it, or any of it. JD and others would rather not explore the fringe. They will wait for authorities they trust to tell them what is safe to believe. And they will tell others that they are "safe in science", and the fringe is baloney. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Doe Posted October 4, 2011 Report Share Posted October 4, 2011 JD and others would rather not explore the fringe. Really? How on earth did you come up with that conclusion? Can you read minds now too? Actually I love exploring the fringe, as I love science fiction. All I have ever said is that there is a big difference between science, philosophy and mumbo jumbo, and that those pedalling mumbo jumbo as science are charlatans and snake oil salesmen. Yet you STILL can't see that and you STILL continue with the personal slights and insults, even attacking science itself! They will wait for authorities they trust to tell them what is safe to believe. Nonsense. That once again demonstrates a woeful misunderstanding of science and scientists. As a scientist, one of the first things you are taught to check things for yourself. And they will tell others that they are "safe in science", and the fringe is baloney. As for being safe with science or the fringe, that's a whole different question. The FACT that things are repeatable and testable lets one put their trust in science safely. Fringe requires a leap of faith, does it not? Is that "safe"? For example, would you believe the doctor using the MRI scanner invented by scientists, or perhaps the old lady with tarot cards that tells you she knows better? Would you risk your life making that decision? Really? Tell the truth now Dr B . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoldAsBrass Posted October 4, 2011 Report Share Posted October 4, 2011 Mix in with this material is plenty of nonsense, but that doesn't make it all nonsense. Nor was anyone here pushing that caption as truth. So I don't see what your point has to do with the main discussion here. When I listen to videos like this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_2WnuIBS1U I do not take all of it (or even most of it) as true, but within this material there are some thought-provoking ideas, that suggest the world is far different from what is spoon-fed to us by the mainstream media, which is controlled by a handful of rich folks who want the world sedated and compliant. Rejecting all the material and refusing to listen to any of it, may be exactly what powerful folk would like you to do - so I reckon TPTB feed some of the more bizarre points to BF and DW to help undermine the overall narrative that these guys provide. In the interview, Wilcock does ask many of the questions that an open-minded and inquisitive questioner would ask. Okay, I thought I'd listen to the video. I lasted 3 minutes. I cannot listen to gullible fools spouting conspiratorial nonsense - referring to their 'sources'. This isn't even 4th form debating society level - it is just puerile nonsense peddled by people who are simply deluded. In particular they are deluded that they have an open or inquiring mind - that 'they' are so clever and special they do not fall for the same tricks as the rest of us poor deluded fools. One ludicrous, unbacked, assertion after another delivered in such an irritating manner too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Doe Posted October 4, 2011 Report Share Posted October 4, 2011 Okay, I thought I'd listen to the video. I lasted 3 minutes. I cannot listen to gullible fools spouting conspiratorial nonsense - referring to their 'sources'. This isn't even 4th form debating society level - it is just puerile nonsense peddled by people who are simply deluded. In particular they are deluded that they have an open or inquiring mind - that 'they' are so clever and special they do not fall for the same tricks as the rest of us poor deluded fools. One ludicrous, unbacked, assertion after another delivered in such an irritating manner too. Indeed. "You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time" Anon. One born every minute Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted October 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 4, 2011 Movie Apocalypses – could they really happen? By Ben Skipper | Yahoo! UK Movies Features What we can look forward to in '2012' It’s the end of the world as we know it... and we feel fine! Until we watched Lars Von Trier’s gloomy planet collision flick 'Melancholia' that is (out this week). It’s not the first film to wipe out the human race of course but how likely it is that Hollywood’s doomsday fantasies could come true? We investigated... Alien Invasion In movie land space-dwelling civilisations love invading our dainty little planet to kill and/or enslave us all. See Roland Emmerich’s so-bad-it’s-brilliant ‘Independence Day’ and the many adaptations of both H.G Wells’ ‘War of the Worlds’ and ‘Invasion of the Body Snatchers’. In the real world, or should that be universe, it’s generally thought that Earth is unlikely to be the only life-bearing planet in existence - we are indeed (probably) not alone. But what if we ever do meet little green men? Super-nerd Stephen Hawking doesn’t rate our chances of surviving such an encounter particularly highly, saying in 2010: "If aliens visit us, the outcome would be much as when Columbus landed in America, which didn't turn out well for the Native Americans.” Indeed. Likelihood Rating: Apocalypse Maybe /More Apocalypsii : http://uk.movies.yahoo.com/news/movie-apocalypses-%E2%80%93-could-they-really-happen-.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted October 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 4, 2011 Okay, I thought I'd listen to the video. I lasted 3 minutes. I cannot listen to gullible fools spouting conspiratorial nonsense - referring to their 'sources'. This isn't even 4th form debating society level - it is just puerile nonsense peddled by people who are simply deluded. In particular they are deluded that they have an open or inquiring mind - that 'they' are so clever and special they do not fall for the same tricks as the rest of us poor deluded fools. One ludicrous, unbacked, assertion after another delivered in such an irritating manner too. LOL. Did you really last 3 minutes? - How impressive that is. Clearly you are three minutes more open-minded than I thought. And aren't you quick to form an opinion and review another 40+ minutes that you did not hear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoldAsBrass Posted October 4, 2011 Report Share Posted October 4, 2011 Clearly you are three minutes more open-minded than I thought. Don't be so bloody patronising. Just because I can see - I KNOW - that what you posted is complete drivel - it does not make mean I am not open minded. My mind is open - but not to the ravings of ill-informed fools primed with their own self importance. If this means a ban - so be it. I thought this site was about investment - not about loony conspiracy theories which, if you decide to call them nonsense, gets you called 'close minded'. If ever you want to discuss the true nature of reality - I'm up for that. But not that drivel you posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted October 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 4, 2011 Don't be so bloody patronising.... My mind is open - but not to the ravings of ill-informed fools primed with their own self importance. LOL Ban you? No way. That's a wonder example of unintended irony - It made my night Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted October 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 4, 2011 Really? How on earth did you come up with that conclusion? Can you read minds now too? Actually I love exploring the fringe, as I love science fiction. All I have ever said is that there is a big difference between science, philosophy and mumbo jumbo, and that those pedalling mumbo jumbo as science are charlatans and snake oil salesmen. Great. Why don't you post a link here to something interesting that you have discovered in your explorations? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Doe Posted October 4, 2011 Report Share Posted October 4, 2011 Great. Why don't you post a link here to something interesting that you have discovered in your explorations? Link here http://www.greenenergyinvestors.com/index.php?showforum=37 I have discoved that the vast majority of things here are drivel and nonsence However, far more interesting are the sci fi novels of Iian M Banks http://www.vavatch.co.uk/books/banks/ Great stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted October 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 4, 2011 Link here http://www.greenenergyinvestors.com/index.php?showforum=37 I have discoved that the vast majority of things here are drivel and nonsence However, far more interesting are the sci fi novels of Iian M Banks http://www.vavatch.co.uk/books/banks/ Great stuff. Thanks. You post proved my point, as stated above. If you genuinely like SciFi, I can recommend to you, a work... Joseph Matheny's : Ong's Hat http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ong's_Hat LISTEN to a good interview with him: MP3: http://www.americanfreedomradio.com/archive/Project-Camelot-32k-091411.mp3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kapouillax Posted October 4, 2011 Report Share Posted October 4, 2011 Great. Why don't you post a link here to something interesting that you have discovered in your explorations? Link here http://www.greenenergyinvestors.com/index.php?showforum=37 I have discoved that the vast majority of things here are drivel and nonsence I think to sum up you both agree to disagree. You have radically opposite mindsets. Unless you both enjoy arguing, I believe it's probably better if you acknowledged you are not going to be able to change each other's minds. ... And for that matter, I believe that we can see that these humans' thinking is not changing However, far more interesting are the sci fi novels of Iian M Banks http://www.vavatch.co.uk/books/banks/ Great stuff. I've been meaning to get into them for a while! That's proper hardcore scifi pr0n, like I love. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Doe Posted October 4, 2011 Report Share Posted October 4, 2011 I think to sum up you both agree to disagree. You have radically opposite mindsets. Unless you both enjoy arguing, I believe it's probably better if you acknowledged you are not going to be able to change each other's minds. Us? enjoy arguing? Sir you slight our reputation Besides, it not arguing, it's debating and discussion I can’t help it if he is close minded (and wrong) I've been meaning to get into them for a while! That's proper hardcore scifi pr0n, like I love. Some are really great, some not so (but still good), but I can't tell you which I prefer (5 books in now) as it is quite subjective and others tell me they prefer the ones I would rank lower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philder Posted October 4, 2011 Report Share Posted October 4, 2011 Doctrinaire Science does not hold all the answers, since Scientific beliefs do change I don't disagree, but they change due to experiment, observation, reformulating theory and re-experimenting. I wouldn't mind the fringe stuff quite so much if it at least proposed a way of actually measuring or verifying the claims. If they can't be independently checked, they simply don't count I'm afraid. That's why I'm always rather suspicious of fringe types making claims about conspiracy and suppression, as it just seems like a convenient way of explaining away why their claims have never been verified. Someone has already mentioned about the latest CERN results and the very honest and frank way they've announced them. That's how it should work! The whole point of DOING such an experiment was to find out something like this, ditto the search (or not) for the Higgs. To use a nice Dara O'Briain quote, "science KNOWS it doesn't know everything, otherwise it would stop". As for Elenin...seems to have taken a CME in the face and is now in the process of disintegrating. I have no doubt this "coincidence" is already being reported as "proof" that HAARP is a star wars weapon or other such twaddle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted October 5, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 5, 2011 I don't disagree, but they change due to experiment, observation, reformulating theory and re-experimenting. I wouldn't mind the fringe stuff quite so much if it at least proposed a way of actually measuring or verifying the claims. If they can't be independently checked, they simply don't count I'm afraid. That's why I'm always rather suspicious of fringe types making claims about conspiracy and suppression, as it just seems like a convenient way of explaining away why their claims have never been verified... Here's a Hard-hitting talk by a guy who has made many forecasts, many of them accurate. It touches on many of the conspiracy-related subjects here, but without "going into the Fringe." If you are 30 or younger, this speech is for you - "You have been thoroughly screwed" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbiyCldxG8s "I predict if Ron Paul is not elected in 2012, we will have a revolution in this country." "Until you change the way money works, you change nothing. "The first step in 'cutting the Gordian knot' of debt is universal debt forgiveness." "A massive die-off and reduction in population is inevitable." "We must re-localise food production ASAP." "Anyone who declares that they 'will restore growth' is your enemy." : Website: http://www.collapsenet.com If he is right, then most of us will change the way we live, and the way we think, in the years to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted October 14, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 Accidental Discovery - Is this a "Particle Beam Weapon" or a Transport method ? Sam captured footage of what appears to be a Particle Beam Weapon or some other very sophisticated technology hitting the ground in the mountains around Taos, New Mexico. MESSAGE FROM THE FILMMAKER: A warm & hearty hello to all my fellow questers, I'd like to first say thank you again to Kerry Cassidy...the haven she provides in the form of PROJECT CAMELOT is incredibly vital to those of us who refuse to accept the lies. A big thank you also to Bill Ryan and all the CAMELOT witnesses for blazing the trail before me. As for my story, I'm what would be classified as an "experiencer". I unintentionally captured something remarkable on film while working on a farm just outside of Taos, New Mexico. Over the course of the next 40 days my footage mutated into a short film called "Sudden Porthole". ===== ===== After you have seen the "particle beam", or whatever it might be - there's not much need to watch this. COMMENTS=== Very, very interesting. I think probably the simplest explanation is that it was some kind of black ops testing of an energy beam weapon. Have you thought about going back with a different vehicle, or perhaps hiking overland? (I know it looks like a long walk, but might be the only way.) ClaireSapphyck 10 hours ago I think this was a great production for what you were working with! As well, good presentation! actually when you view the site on Google earth; it appears to be a 'cul de sac' possibly for a feeding trough for someones farm animals, a look out, or a pick up/drop off location. There's no reason for the layouts existence aside from 'Tony's mafia body drop'...I'm not saying there's anything going on... but it appears that way! Go rent a vehicle and try again brother... skottidogg10 10 hours ago Split second of light beam... 37 minutes of, 'shoveling poop'! DaddyNowhere 10 hours ago the nwo supports your belief that aliens are here to help you... they support all facets of the new age movement. they love the fact your consumed by videos like this... because it distracts you from learning about and following Jesus who is your true salvation. nothing else will save you... Jesus is our only hope and salvation. CMTELEGRAPH 12 hours ago A very odd phenomenon. Interesting and entertaining film! raindog951 12 hours ago I really would like my time back. Can I at least bill you for it? spamystyle 13 hours ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted October 17, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 17, 2011 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xq7cQ7ZT2e4 Coast To Coast AM - 13.10.2011 Debate: Science vs. Spiriuality On Thursday's show, Caltech physicist Leonard Mlodinow ...and spiritual leader Deepak Chopra faced off in a passionate but respectful debate, addressing some of the most fundamental questions that have intrigued hu.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted October 17, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 17, 2011 MORE QUASI-"science" : Energy for the future http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9R1PwrKlH_w Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace Posted October 18, 2011 Report Share Posted October 18, 2011 link http://www.pssmovement.org/joomla/images/pssm/press/SpeakingTree-Jun26-2011.pdf The final target is " pyramid jagat " ... i.e., the whole of the world should be covered by meditational pyramids by the year 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoldAsBrass Posted October 19, 2011 Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 link http://www.pssmovement.org/joomla/images/pssm/press/SpeakingTree-Jun26-2011.pdf The final target is " pyramid jagat " ... i.e., the whole of the world should be covered by meditational pyramids by the year 2016 Thanks for that link. I clicked on the Vegetarianism link and it was great to read all the comments by people like Tolstoy, Jesus, Shaw, Besant, Einstein and so on. When I became vegetarian in 1984 I read a lot on the subject but in the intervening years I have just been a habitual vegetarian. But when I first started I was fired up a bit - the start of a spiritual journey (ahem, sorry about that). I became vegan for a while but it seemed to be too much hard work reading every packet and when the kids came along I went back to vegetarian. But reading that makes me want to move to vegan again. I was told I had high blood pressure and high cholesterol a few months ago (probably due to stress and getting into the daft mindset of thinking 'I'm vegetarian so I can/must eat loads of cheese for protein') - so I cut most dairy products out of my diet (still have milk in tea though - find that hard to give up) - haven't eaten any cheese - or chocolate - for about 10 weeks - and started exercising every day (10 minutes on the treadmill, 20 minutes out on the bike). I've lost 20 pounds and feel a lot better. Used to fall asleep over my computer most afternoons, now I'm full of energy. Which seems to have sorted me out on the physical side - which is great. But, again, thanks for the link. Now I need to step up the yoga and meditation and move forwards - and stop eating baby food meant for calves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted October 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 ...still have milk in tea though - find that hard to give up... I just finished reading a biography of Edgar Cayce (An American Prophet.) It is really excellent. But I did note that he said milk in coffee or tea "is toxic" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now