Guest guest Posted July 3, 2006 Report Share Posted July 3, 2006 Hey ALL (and specifically Robert) Just a quick reply to your attack: It isn't me who claims to have a monopoly on the TRUTH and continues to attempt to mislead people on this list: It is the same people over and over again with their diatribes against the germ theory, their fruitarian fanatacism, etc., etc. ad nauseum. The fact of the matter of that each us IS biochemically different, DO have different body types, etc. and must seek out a diet that works for us as individuals...AND FOR THE PLANET! To disregard the enviromental consequences of our choices and buy imported, non-organic fruit when all kinds of local organic fruit is readily available makes the people who do so part of THE PROBLEM for the rest of us. Thanks for your clever reply, though. It was so ingenious! Why keep checking for Mail? The all-new Mail Beta shows you when there are new messages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2006 Report Share Posted July 3, 2006 Hi Chief, I didn't see an attack on you from anybody named Robert. Did he attack you offline, perhaps? But then, I also missed the diatribes against the germ theory, fruitarian fanatics, etc., maybe because they happened weeks or months ago and I forgot them. 99% of what I see here is people trying to help each other. I eat a lot of bananas, grapes, and other fruit that is not grown around here, so I guess that makes me part of the problem in your view. But somehow I don't feel too guilty about it. Maybe I'm dense, but I don't see that somebody eating bananas in Seattle is having much negative impact on the environment. Mark _____ RawSeattle [RawSeattle ] On Behalf Of Chef Sprout Monday, July 03, 2006 11:28 AM rawseattle ; rustrobert [RawSeattle] Monopoly on the TRUTH?! Hey ALL (and specifically Robert) Just a quick reply to your attack: It isn't me who claims to have a monopoly on the TRUTH and continues to attempt to mislead people on this list: It is the same people over and over again with their diatribes against the germ theory, their fruitarian fanatacism, etc., etc. ad nauseum. The fact of the matter of that each us IS biochemically different, DO have different body types, etc. and must seek out a diet that works for us as individuals...AND FOR THE PLANET! To disregard the enviromental consequences of our choices and buy imported, non-organic fruit when all kinds of local organic fruit is readily available makes the people who do so part of THE PROBLEM for the rest of us. Thanks for your clever reply, though. It was so ingenious! Why keep checking for Mail? The all-new Mail Beta shows you when there are new messages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2006 Report Share Posted July 3, 2006 Oops, Chef, not Chief. Sorry about that, Chef! _____ Mark Hovila [hovila] Monday, July 03, 2006 1:34 PM 'RawSeattle ' RE: [RawSeattle] Monopoly on the TRUTH?! Hi Chief, I didn't see an attack on you from anybody named Robert. Did he attack you offline, perhaps? But then, I also missed the diatribes against the germ theory, fruitarian fanatics, etc., maybe because they happened weeks or months ago and I forgot them. 99% of what I see here is people trying to help each other. I eat a lot of bananas, grapes, and other fruit that is not grown around here, so I guess that makes me part of the problem in your view. But somehow I don't feel too guilty about it. Maybe I'm dense, but I don't see that somebody eating bananas in Seattle is having much negative impact on the environment. Mark _____ RawSeattle [RawSeattle ] On Behalf Of Chef Sprout Monday, July 03, 2006 11:28 AM rawseattle ; rustrobert [RawSeattle] Monopoly on the TRUTH?! Hey ALL (and specifically Robert) Just a quick reply to your attack: It isn't me who claims to have a monopoly on the TRUTH and continues to attempt to mislead people on this list: It is the same people over and over again with their diatribes against the germ theory, their fruitarian fanatacism, etc., etc. ad nauseum. The fact of the matter of that each us IS biochemically different, DO have different body types, etc. and must seek out a diet that works for us as individuals...AND FOR THE PLANET! To disregard the enviromental consequences of our choices and buy imported, non-organic fruit when all kinds of local organic fruit is readily available makes the people who do so part of THE PROBLEM for the rest of us. Thanks for your clever reply, though. It was so ingenious! Why keep checking for Mail? The all-new Mail Beta shows you when there are new messages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Bruce (et al), Thank you for your participation on our RawSeattle email list, however we have guidelines set up and wish them to be honored. We (moderators) send out guidelines periodically, so members can be reminded of what behavior is expected on this list. This same information is now sent to all new members. There is also information in the description on the main page of our . Much of this would be considered standard email etiquette (netiquette). These are fairly simple, straightforward guidelines, which allow our members to share their ideas and ask their questions in a welcoming and friendly environment. When the guidelines are not honored the environment can be less then friendly and may seem less than inviting to people. I suspect many hesitate to post when they see attacks from some of our members on others. That is not the environment we wish to maintain. is an extremely large website for sharing ideas. If anyone does not like the guidelines we set forth here, they are welcome to find other groups or create their own. This email list is also a portal for the actual Seattle Raw Foods Community, which includes potlucks, support groups, and classes, etc. With the wrong impression from this list, members may choose to avoid joining our activities, when they likely joined this list for needed support. Now, for some specifics - Spam Warning: Please do not include this eGroup on any other email lists. Do not " Cc " this list. We do not accept bulk emails. To prevent Spam, ALL new members are moderated as a precaution. We, of course, do not allow spam. On occasion people have signed up for the list for the purpose of spamming, so some spam has gotten through. Your moderators quickly and swiftly (if we are paying attention) remove such " members " and have enacted policies to minimize these occurrences. Emails to this list should be individually sent to the list and not just included in a " Cc " or " Bcc " list of recipients. One form of spam is to " Cc " this list when sending and email to another recipient. We request in our guidelines and on our main page, that we not be included as a " Cc " . In other words, we should only be receiving original emails sent to this group. An email was replied to and " Cc'd " to this group today that was apparently sent privately to you (Bruce). That is inappropriate. This list is not here for people to drag issues to and condescend, attack or bash people. I have seen this technique used on this list before and it is not welcome here. Like any list or group of people, we have a diverse/eclectic group and have a variety of backgrounds and opinions. Please share your feelings and opinions while honoring and respecting those of others. Please do not attack the character of others when they believe differently. Please also keep language appropriate for a family list, so we may continue appealing to a broader audience. Please, no condescending or name-calling. Our members should feel welcome to post here. This is pretty straightforward. Some emails recently do not fit into the category of making people feel welcome and comfortable to post. We will do our best to keep the list an enjoyable environment to share questions and ideas about raw foods. We appreciate your doing your best, as well! We do this in a variety of ways. One is to moderate all new member and change the group settings as necessary to match our guidelines. Those who do not honor the guidelines of this list are moderated. When members continue to disregard the guidelines of this list, they will be banned. This list should be a positive place to learn about raw foods. That includes different opinions and beliefs. No members should be touting their view as the only way. Similarly, no members should be putting others down as wrong or liars. No hostility is necessary. If everyone simply shares their own beliefs and insights, the rest of the members can take what they wish from the information. Thank you, Jeff (for the Raw Seattle Moderators) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Jeff, Thanks for the reminder. On a related note, I seem to not be receiving all messages, and I saw that Mark mentioned he didn't get Robert's post. Perhaps Robert sent his mail privately, thinking it was going to the group. It's easy to do. If he cc'd the group by mistake, would you have deleted it? That would explain why the rest of us didn't get it. Thanks so much for your help and work on the list. Nora - Jeff Rogers Raw Seattle Monday, July 03, 2006 7:31 PM [RawSeattle] Re: Monopoly on the TRUTH?! Bruce (et al), Thank you for your participation on our RawSeattle email list, however we have guidelines set up and wish them to be honored. We (moderators) send out guidelines periodically, so members can be reminded of what behavior is expected on this list. This same information is now sent to all new members. There is also information in the description on the main page of our . Much of this would be considered standard email etiquette (netiquette). These are fairly simple, straightforward guidelines, which allow our members to share their ideas and ask their questions in a welcoming and friendly environment. When the guidelines are not honored the environment can be less then friendly and may seem less than inviting to people. I suspect many hesitate to post when they see attacks from some of our members on others. That is not the environment we wish to maintain. is an extremely large website for sharing ideas. If anyone does not like the guidelines we set forth here, they are welcome to find other groups or create their own. This email list is also a portal for the actual Seattle Raw Foods Community, which includes potlucks, support groups, and classes, etc. With the wrong impression from this list, members may choose to avoid joining our activities, when they likely joined this list for needed support. Now, for some specifics - Spam Warning: Please do not include this eGroup on any other email lists. Do not " Cc " this list. We do not accept bulk emails. To prevent Spam, ALL new members are moderated as a precaution. We, of course, do not allow spam. On occasion people have signed up for the list for the purpose of spamming, so some spam has gotten through. Your moderators quickly and swiftly (if we are paying attention) remove such " members " and have enacted policies to minimize these occurrences. Emails to this list should be individually sent to the list and not just included in a " Cc " or " Bcc " list of recipients. One form of spam is to " Cc " this list when sending and email to another recipient. We request in our guidelines and on our main page, that we not be included as a " Cc " . In other words, we should only be receiving original emails sent to this group. An email was replied to and " Cc'd " to this group today that was apparently sent privately to you (Bruce). That is inappropriate. This list is not here for people to drag issues to and condescend, attack or bash people. I have seen this technique used on this list before and it is not welcome here. Like any list or group of people, we have a diverse/eclectic group and have a variety of backgrounds and opinions. Please share your feelings and opinions while honoring and respecting those of others. Please do not attack the character of others when they believe differently. Please also keep language appropriate for a family list, so we may continue appealing to a broader audience. Please, no condescending or name-calling. Our members should feel welcome to post here. This is pretty straightforward. Some emails recently do not fit into the category of making people feel welcome and comfortable to post. We will do our best to keep the list an enjoyable environment to share questions and ideas about raw foods. We appreciate your doing your best, as well! We do this in a variety of ways. One is to moderate all new member and change the group settings as necessary to match our guidelines. Those who do not honor the guidelines of this list are moderated. When members continue to disregard the guidelines of this list, they will be banned. This list should be a positive place to learn about raw foods. That includes different opinions and beliefs. No members should be touting their view as the only way. Similarly, no members should be putting others down as wrong or liars. No hostility is necessary. If everyone simply shares their own beliefs and insights, the rest of the members can take what they wish from the information. Thank you, Jeff (for the Raw Seattle Moderators) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 > Thanks for the reminder. On a related note, I seem to not be > receiving all messages, and I saw that Mark mentioned he didn't get > Robert's post. Perhaps Robert sent his mail privately, thinking it was > going to the group. It's easy to do. If he cc'd the group by mistake, > would you have deleted it? That would explain why the rest of us > didn't get it. Thanks so much for your help and work on the list. No email went to this list from Robert prior to Chef Sprout's post. I checked my own archives, as well as those on our pages. I see that Robert did re-send his original email to the list for those interested. Sometimes, for some reason, does delay some emails, but it does look like Robert's original post went directly to Chef Sprout. Jeff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Since Robert has now sent his message to Chef Sprout to the whole list, I understand Chef Sprout's appropriate response in context. Robert's message does not belong on this list, and I'm wondering how we all received it given the reminders we recently received from you, Jeff, and which I'm now even more grateful for. Thanks, Gael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Chef Sprout (Bruce), I don't " attack " as you like to describe things in your self defensiveness, I make clear, straightforward, precise, well directed, honest comments to those who's manner of expression calls for commenting upon and correction. You state: > It isn't me who claims to have a monopoly on the TRUTH and > continues to attempt to mislead people on this list Point out specifically that person or persons on this list who claims to have a monopoly on the truth and attempts to mislead people on this list. I would like names and quotes of their words in which they state they have a monopoly on the truth and other writings of theirs that verify your claims that they have a monopoly on the truth. > It is the same people over and over again with their diatribes > against the germ theory, their fruitarian fanatacism, etc., etc. > ad nauseum. Please point out these people's names and provide evidence that they are making diatribes against the germ theory, for fruitarian fanatacism, etc. While you are doing this, provide for me a definition accurately describing what fruitarian fanatacism is, not just according to what you believe it is. Define fruitarianism. Define fanatacism. Please do not use your opinion of what it is. What is Hygiene, as well? You mention the germ theory. Are you interested in evaluating the veracity of the germ theory, or are you only interested in going along with it and following it, unquestioned? You've only made a statement against diatribes against the germ theory. Does that mean you are in agreement with the theory, or not? The theory is false. Does your disliking discussion on the theory make the evidence that contradicts the theory undiscussable or non-existent? Doe it make the germ theory true, just because you believe in it, and you dislike criticism of it? Is it the fault of the germ-theory debunkers that endless individuals have swallowed the germ-theory hook, line, and sinker and unquestionably promote their beliefs in the theory in so many words and actions of theirs, including on this board? > The fact of the matter is that each us IS biochemically > different, DO have different body types, etc. and must seek > out a diet that works for us as individuals...AND FOR THE PLANET! We are biochemically different from each other almost to the same degree that the blood that feeds your foot is biochemically different than the blood that feeds your ears. Humans are so remotely biochemically different from each other that to use the idea of biochemical difference when discussing diet is to add confusion, misrepresentation, and irrelevancy to health discussion. An individual seeking health needs to find a diet that works, and what works is that diet that suits the human organism in general, not a random diet that fits each individual according to their appetite, particular belief system, or past unhealthy habits. A general, optimal diet can be ascertained for the human species and it is up to individuals who seek health to move towards that diet, making gradual improvements as they learn more, make corrections, become wiser, and gain experience in the many years that follow their initial pursuit of health. By the way, you made a claim humans are biochemically different than each other. Provide evidence or logic that supports your claim. The fact of the matter is that all evidence and logic supports the fact that humans are practically identical to each other biochemically and that there differences are extremely minute (requiring scanning electron microscopes and decades of research to reveal). The correct solution that is required for humans is also the solution that works for the planet. Humans must eat the foods they are evolved to eat in order to return to a harmonious existence on the planet. Fruit eating is a major component of the dietary aspect of that, regarding human contribution to life on earth. Eating inappropriate foods just because one person falsely believes it is good for the planet does not mean those foods are suddenly good for the human to eat. > To disregard the enviromental consequences of our choices and > buy imported, non-organic fruit when all kinds of local organic > fruit is readily available makes the people who do so part of > THE PROBLEM for the rest of us. As part of the overall problem, humans are eating the wrong type of foods. In fact, it can be argued quite convincingly that the human specie's problems on earth began with its adopting a dietary program that deviated significantly from a frugivorous diet based principally on fresh, ripe, tropical fruits, with very small amounts of other foods. No modern civilized human gets away with causing no environmental problems. Eating a few imported fruits is the extreme least of the worries. Just in our over-population we are, as individuals, a problem. > Thanks for your clever reply, though. It was so ingenious! As is your habit, you are using condescending ways and disingenuous talk, evidenced by this last spiteful remark of yours. Please adopt a peaceful, mature attitude that facilitates thoughtful, intelligent discovery and implementation of truth. Robert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Gael, I originally sent my message (not to mention other messages I sent) to the whole group. Only Chef Sprout recieved it, apparently. Many oddities are happening in the delivery/receiving of emails. I responded strongly to Chef Sprout's careless use of language, a carelessness which leads to propagation of nonsense and that is good to avoid. I do appreciate and admire sensical, logical discussion, be it critical or approving. For those interested in discussing concepts and ideas in a legitimate pursuit for truth, instead of throwing inuendos and backhanded comments around, I'm all ears. Sincerely, Robert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Chef Sprout (Bruce, I think), I don't " attack " as you describe it, I make clear, straightforward, precise, well directed, honest comments to those who's manner of expression calls for commenting upon and correction. You state: > It isn't me who claims to have a monopoly on the TRUTH and > continues to attempt to mislead people on this list Point out specifically that person or persons on this list who claims to have a monopoly on the truth and attempts to mislead people on this list. I want names, and I want quotes of their words that they have written that verify your claims. > It is the same people over and over again with their diatribes > against the germ theory, their fruitarian fanatacism, etc., etc. > ad nauseum. Please point out these people's names and provide evidence that they are making diatribes against the germ theory, for fruitarian fanatacism, etc. While you are doing this, provide for me a definition accurately describing what fruitarian fanatacism is, not just according to what you believe it is. Define fruitarianism. Define fanatacism. Please do not use your opinion of what it is. You mention the germ theory. Are you interested in evaluating the veracity of the germ theory, or are you only interested in going along with it and following it, unquestioned? You've only made a statement against diatribes against the germ theory. Does that mean you are in agreement with the theory, or not? The theory is false. Does your disliking discussion on the theory make the evidence that contradicts the theory undiscussable or non-existent? Doe it make the germ theory true, just because you believe in it, and you dislike criticism of it? Is it the fault of the germ-theory debunkers that endless individuals have swallowed the germ-theory hook, line, and sinker and unquestionably promote their beliefs in the theory in so many words and actions of theirs, including on this board? > The fact of the matter is that each us IS biochemically > different, DO have different body types, etc. and must seek > out a diet that works for us as individuals...AND FOR THE PLANET! We are biochemically different from each other almost to the same degree that the blood that feeds your foot is biochemically different than the blood that feeds your ears. Humans are so remotely biochemically different from each other that to use the idea of biochemical difference when discussing diet is to add confusion, misrepresentation, and irrelevancy to health discussion. An individual seeking health needs to find a diet that works, and what works is that diet that suits the human organism in general, not a random diet that fits each individual according to their appetite, particular belief system, or past unhealthy habits. A general, optimal diet can be ascertained for the human species and it is up to individuals who seek health to move towards that diet, making gradual improvements as they learn more, make corrections, become wiser, and gain experience in the many years that follow their initial pursuit of health. You do not back up your claim that humans are biochemically different from each other with supportive evidence and logic. In fact, all evidence reveals that humans are extremely bichemically similar, not to mention physically similar to each other. To find biochemical differences between humans has taken scanning electron microscopes and other fancy technological gear, plus decades of research. We're all practically and effecively siamese twins, when the evidence is viewed in whole. We all have to breathe air to live, we have blood so similar that we can exchange it with each other, we have the same anatomical features, our brains are all the same size, we all think and act similarly, we do the same things as babies, we relate to each other as if the other person is a human like ourselves that can understand us (try talking to a frog and getting it to relate to you), etc, etc, etc. All those incredible similarities between humans does not come about because we are all biochemically different. Biochemicals are what we are 100% constructed of and what we are only constructed of. There has to be a lot of similarities in human biochemistry between humans for them to be behaving and looking so incredibly similar to each other, despite some personal preferences in behaviours and variabilites in features. The correct solution that is required for humans is also the solution that works for the planet. Humans must eat the foods they are evolved to eat in order to return to a harmonious existence on the planet. Fruit eating is a major component of the dietary aspect of that, regarding human contribution to life on earth. Eating inappropriate foods just because one person falsely believes it is good for the planet does not mean those foods are suddenly good for the human to eat. > To disregard the enviromental consequences of our choices and > buy imported, non-organic fruit when all kinds of local organic > fruit is readily available makes the people who do so part of > THE PROBLEM for the rest of us. As part of the overall problem, humans are eating the wrong type of foods. In fact, it can be argued quite convincingly that the human specie's problems on earth began with its adopting a dietary program that deviated significantly from a frugivorous diet based principally on fresh, ripe, tropical fruits, with very small amounts of other foods. No modern civilized human gets away with causing no environmental problems. Eating a few imported fruits is the extreme least of the worries. Just in our over-population we are, as individuals, a problem. > Thanks for your clever reply, though. It was so ingenious! Your condescending ways and disingenuous talk is evidenced by this last spiteful remark of yours. Please maintain a peaceful, mature attitude that facilitates thoughtful, intelligent discovery and implementation of truth. Robert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Hi Anthony, Perhaps this post might make it through. It's true that most people don't like the smell of durian. I don't like the odorous elements either. A person who goes to Vancouver to get raw durian, obviously loves durian and doesn't mind the odorous parts of durian's normally pleasant fragrances. From my experience, raw, fresh durian, especially right on the tree in the field, does not smell like frozen durian smells. Frozen, and especially thawed, durian can smell horrible and usually does to most people. I've picked raw durian from a durian tree, and it smelled only sweet, though aromatic, like tropical fruit is inclined to be. The sweet smell increased as the durian ripened, was dramatically different than the frozen durian smell, and even different from the smell that raw durian smells like here in the west. Westerners are usually unfamiliar with the aromatic nature of tropical fruits, and are accustomed to fruits with low aromas, like apples, cherries, pears, berries, and so on. Unfamiliarity often leads westerners to regard tropical fruits as odd or unpleasant, even in appearance. Tropical fruit, when ripe, often have quite strong aromas or fragrances. Think of a properly well ripened pineapple, a mango, jackfruit, for starters. Durian's name is undeservingly muddied somewhat due to the freezing/thawing that it's put under. Humans would not smell too good either if they were subjected to repeated freezing/thawing. Those are just some points, and I do not mean to lecture you or anyone. Your comment (question?): > So humans normally should only be living in southeast Asia? I find your question (humans living only in SE Asia) interesting since I did not say anywhere in my post that humans should be living only in southeast Asia. You appear to be trying to make some other point with your question. If that is the case, please state your point clearly and I will respond to it. In one of my previous posts (that didn't post, I think, despite various attempts) I explained the tropical nature of humans to a small degree. It can be determined that humans are a tropical creature. To be sure (and not saying you are making the following claim) this does not mean they normally should only be living in southeast Asia. There are many tropical locations on earth, and these tropical locations have shifted greatly in the past 200,000 years and beyond. Perhaps this may help clear up any misunderstanding around your comment and the topic being discussed, in general. Perhaps you were trying to make a case for an argument that humans should eat locally, etc. Please elucidate your argument if that is the case. Respectfully, Robert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.