global vegetarian regime, people of the world
The Universe is calling u to use your heart %26amp; mind to make a decision, are we here 2 devour nature or live in harmony with her?
Over 50 million animals per day are slughtered 4 human consumpstion world wide. America alone kills 96 million animals per week.
This is a senseless %26amp; unnecessary act, 4 it has been proven that man can live sustainably on a vegetarian diet without the slaughter of all these innocent creatures that pay the ultimate price just 2 B devoured.
The word civil means to live in an advanced, sophisticated, intelligent society. The opposite to civil is uncivil or barbaric. To fuel our society off the back of all these dead animals is uncivilised, so we really live uncivilly not civilly.
The animals are asking you 2 stop killing %26amp; eating them. For if they could talk %26amp; u ask them if u can eat them, what do u think they would say? NO! So please stop eating the animals of the world %26amp; explore a vege lifestyle.Are we here to devour nature or live in harmony with her?
oh please stop it! Humans have been omnivores since the dawn of time. It's what those eye teeth are for in your mouth. As long as you aren't senselessly devouring more than your share, or wasting your meat, there is no reason not to eat a balanced diet that consists of meat, dairy, vegetables, etc. We are part of a food chain that is just like any other animals, except we are at the top. Stop whining and deal with it. Did you ever stop to think that vegetables might not like you devouring them?? Whenever we eat, we are killing something. The exception is dairy. By the way, I'm a buddhist that doesn't believe in purposely harming other beings, but I'm also sensible enough to know my own environment and how we relate to it.Are we here to devour nature or live in harmony with her?
I may be in the minority on this,but I say devour. A resource is a resource and we should use it until its gone. I am not against finding other, longer lasting or cleaner resources, but I feel like, if they are there then let's find a use for them.
Obviously this means attacking the issue of new technologies that will provide a substitute for a dwindling resource or at least a technology to take us some place to finde more resources. I like meat, I like cars and I like pushing forward as a race to solve problems.
Yes that is a lot of animals.
But I would say we are the most deadly species on the planet.
are you going to tell a cheetah to stop eating antilope? It is the circle of life.
But at the same time we are devouring nature... The cheetah eats meat, but the cheetah lives in harmony with his prey, that is the circle, a circle is harmoniouse, so is the circle of life, wich we are only playing into. Where we start devouring nature, when we polute, or when our numbers are getting to high. But no matter what we are still part of nature, so is we get too over populated, mother nature just comes out with a new disease. Just like she does with everyother animal.
In a sense, we are just very progressed animals.
Were not devouring animals because, It is NATURAL to eat meat. I do find it disturbing how the animals in the slaughterhouses are treated. Thats why I only buy organic meat. The process in wich animals are killed is much more humane. We arent herbivores, nature made us omnivores.
we are devouring nature have u seen mars?
If animals are not for eating why are they made out of meat? Life goes on in spite of you my friend.
if animals r not killed in limits then they would take over the world in time of course hehehehe
ok..
We are here as part of a system, that system requires that certain parts devour other parts. Humans have gone beyond the balance in many areas, however this does not mean that they were not designed to eat meat. We are born with canines that are designed to tear meet. Plants are living things as well why is consuming them better than animals.
We can't all be amish!
We are here to enjoy everything around us. Suposeingly, But people want be satisfied untill they destroy everything that grows, breaths, flies. or walks on four feet. They dont ynderstand that we need trees. Our oxygen supply derives from trees and plants. Without them we all would die. Everything was put hear for a reason, Altho, too many people dont think so. I wouldnt want live in a desert, But if people dont stop cutting down trees,and destroying all things we will live in a waste land with nothing .
Both
I would suggest to live in harmony with mother nature. If a person know more about nature you can even eat and live in the forest for quite a while I'm a naturalist.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Anybody living in a hill station out here....is it a transforming experience staying amidst nature????????
please share your experiences with me.... thanks...Anybody living in a hill station out here....is it a transforming experience staying amidst nature????????
I lived at a fire tower in a national forest..
I lived at a fire tower in a national forest..
Where should I live in Dallas if I want to be within a short drive from downtown but have nature around me ?
meaining I want to have the option to swin,jog ,bike and relex aronund the poll? I don't want to be isolated or be too far from my work place?Where should I live in Dallas if I want to be within a short drive from downtown but have nature around me ?
You might try Lakewood - near White Rock Lake for the bike trails and nature aspect. Also, the Katy Trail is a good walking/running trail that weaves through a large area north of downtown. The trail runs through a number of neighborhoods.
You might try Lakewood - near White Rock Lake for the bike trails and nature aspect. Also, the Katy Trail is a good walking/running trail that weaves through a large area north of downtown. The trail runs through a number of neighborhoods.
Is it better to have a government than live by the laws of nature?
Nope, Look at the American Natives, there were VERY few problems, before the white man and his laws came around...Is it better to have a government than live by the laws of nature?
i think a local small government would be ok. Every neighborhood or county can make up their own laws. abolishing a national government is not a bad idea. without a national government there would be much less war. and it would force people to work together like we should be doing instead of being all selfish and isolated. The homeless problem would go away because there would be a huge need for new people to maintain law and order for each community. If you dont like the laws of one county you can move to another that fits your needs. that way there are communities of people who think the same way. the only bad thing is there would be more conflict between counties over resources. but it would be on a small scale and thats much better than what we are doing now. Good people are funding these ridiculous wars that dont benefit our own community in any way. people in the middle east are just trying to live their life as they see fit. We should do the same I would never go to iraq for any reason it makes no difference who wins or loses.Is it better to have a government than live by the laws of nature?
Fact: EVERYBODY has laws. It worked for the indians because they were undivided and in small tribes, however, under a untied nation, a government is a necessary evil.
Yes, because one of the laws of nature is ';kill or be killed';, and I'd rather not have to worry about that 24-7, thanks.
Only if that government stays out of the way...
i think a local small government would be ok. Every neighborhood or county can make up their own laws. abolishing a national government is not a bad idea. without a national government there would be much less war. and it would force people to work together like we should be doing instead of being all selfish and isolated. The homeless problem would go away because there would be a huge need for new people to maintain law and order for each community. If you dont like the laws of one county you can move to another that fits your needs. that way there are communities of people who think the same way. the only bad thing is there would be more conflict between counties over resources. but it would be on a small scale and thats much better than what we are doing now. Good people are funding these ridiculous wars that dont benefit our own community in any way. people in the middle east are just trying to live their life as they see fit. We should do the same I would never go to iraq for any reason it makes no difference who wins or loses.Is it better to have a government than live by the laws of nature?
Fact: EVERYBODY has laws. It worked for the indians because they were undivided and in small tribes, however, under a untied nation, a government is a necessary evil.
Yes, because one of the laws of nature is ';kill or be killed';, and I'd rather not have to worry about that 24-7, thanks.
Only if that government stays out of the way...
Have you ever wanted to abandon modern life and live within Mother Nature?
I love all things 'Wilderness', and frequently hold parties devoted solely to survival aptitude. I would truly enjoy your input. Maybe we could go tribal together!Have you ever wanted to abandon modern life and live within Mother Nature?
I've often thought about pulling a Henry David Thoreau and going off and living in the woods without flush toilets, hot indoor showers, electric lights, central heating, cars, and refrigerators; but then I realize that I would miss the Internet.Have you ever wanted to abandon modern life and live within Mother Nature?
LOL....I can't believe you chose my answer!
I do love nature and the woods and the beach and so forth, though. Report Abuse
I love beautiful, natural scenery. I'm a Christian and when I look at vast natural structures, I think about the power of God and how mighty he must really be to create such magnificent mountains and landscapes.
I'd rather visit these wilderness places now. I no longer want to live in it full-time. I don't like the idea of being out in remote locations, away from people. I'm more paranoid now that I'm older. Women especially cannot just take off and go ';into the wild.'; It's not safe. They've gotten tracked and murdered that way. I think there are too many loony people. I want my security and close friends nearby if I have to yell for help.
Yes.
Somewhere up in Scandinavian countries would be great =]
Waking up in a forest to see the snow covering everything *dreamy eyes*
Or everything green, no yells and shouts or cars honking, or bad air.
We're destroying Mother Nature with our acts, and many aren't even worrying about all this.
No.
I really like my Honda S2000 a lot and like having a house that doesn't let in rainwater when the wind blows strong.
I like camping and I go to parks on all my off days. I spend more time in parks, on beaches, in the woods than I do at shopping centers every year.
But I guess I'm a prude... I like having my niceities.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?鈥?/a>
I like the wilderness, but I don't know about the whole going tribal thing I don't think thats me. I just like getting away from the city.
Yeah sure, sometimes I enjoy trips to my local wood and just camp there for a few days, I think it's awesome!
every day. modern life is destroying mother nature. and without her, we cannot survive.
Sure, but only if Mother Nature gets cable.
no but i heard a guy who has done itLtd
I've often thought about pulling a Henry David Thoreau and going off and living in the woods without flush toilets, hot indoor showers, electric lights, central heating, cars, and refrigerators; but then I realize that I would miss the Internet.Have you ever wanted to abandon modern life and live within Mother Nature?
LOL....I can't believe you chose my answer!
I do love nature and the woods and the beach and so forth, though. Report Abuse
I love beautiful, natural scenery. I'm a Christian and when I look at vast natural structures, I think about the power of God and how mighty he must really be to create such magnificent mountains and landscapes.
I'd rather visit these wilderness places now. I no longer want to live in it full-time. I don't like the idea of being out in remote locations, away from people. I'm more paranoid now that I'm older. Women especially cannot just take off and go ';into the wild.'; It's not safe. They've gotten tracked and murdered that way. I think there are too many loony people. I want my security and close friends nearby if I have to yell for help.
Yes.
Somewhere up in Scandinavian countries would be great =]
Waking up in a forest to see the snow covering everything *dreamy eyes*
Or everything green, no yells and shouts or cars honking, or bad air.
We're destroying Mother Nature with our acts, and many aren't even worrying about all this.
No.
I really like my Honda S2000 a lot and like having a house that doesn't let in rainwater when the wind blows strong.
I like camping and I go to parks on all my off days. I spend more time in parks, on beaches, in the woods than I do at shopping centers every year.
But I guess I'm a prude... I like having my niceities.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?鈥?/a>
I like the wilderness, but I don't know about the whole going tribal thing I don't think thats me. I just like getting away from the city.
Yeah sure, sometimes I enjoy trips to my local wood and just camp there for a few days, I think it's awesome!
every day. modern life is destroying mother nature. and without her, we cannot survive.
Sure, but only if Mother Nature gets cable.
no but i heard a guy who has done it
I saw two guys on tv who raised a lion in the uk but they had to send it to africa to live in the nature,?
after a couple of years they reunited and the lion recognized them, i really wish i could find the video on youtube.com, does anyone know the link?I saw two guys on tv who raised a lion in the uk but they had to send it to africa to live in the nature,?
I cant post a link but i can tell you the name of the video on Youtube. it's Christian the Lion- Reunion! just copy and paste!!I saw two guys on tv who raised a lion in the uk but they had to send it to africa to live in the nature,?
Ellen DeGeneres showed a clip of this on her show today.I've seen it before,too.Very touching.
I cant post a link but i can tell you the name of the video on Youtube. it's Christian the Lion- Reunion! just copy and paste!!I saw two guys on tv who raised a lion in the uk but they had to send it to africa to live in the nature,?
Ellen DeGeneres showed a clip of this on her show today.I've seen it before,too.Very touching.
What is the best site for teaching how to live in nature?
The first link is to a site that is all about ';Sustainable Living'; 鈥?activities and choices that can help sustain your health, your spirit, and the planet. The focus is on positive, constructive things you can do in your home, at work, at school, and at play. From bicycling to organic gardening... from non-toxic home and garden products, to straw bale homes... from co-ops to ecovillages... there's an amazing variety to explore and experience. You will find how to's, tips %26amp; ideas, products %26amp; services, organizations, education, employment and much more. Whether you live in Canada, the U.S. or elsewhere, you should find that link helpful.
The other llinks give additional information.What is the best site for teaching how to live in nature?
surely a terrific site for such a cause.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/various/wheel051.htmlWhat is the best site for teaching how to live in nature?
go to motherearthnews.com a great site for what you are looking for.
The other llinks give additional information.What is the best site for teaching how to live in nature?
surely a terrific site for such a cause.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/various/wheel051.htmlWhat is the best site for teaching how to live in nature?
go to motherearthnews.com a great site for what you are looking for.
Is this normal in nature? I saw a turkey vulture chase a live squirrel up a tree, trying to eat it.?
I thought vultures only fed on dead animals.Is this normal in nature? I saw a turkey vulture chase a live squirrel up a tree, trying to eat it.?
It's possible the squirrel was trying to get a bite of the vulture's meal or had wandered too close to its nest.Is this normal in nature? I saw a turkey vulture chase a live squirrel up a tree, trying to eat it.?
I suppose if they are hungry enough...maybe a sign of global warming?
It's possible the squirrel was trying to get a bite of the vulture's meal or had wandered too close to its nest.Is this normal in nature? I saw a turkey vulture chase a live squirrel up a tree, trying to eat it.?
I suppose if they are hungry enough...maybe a sign of global warming?
What is the best place in the U.S.A. to live if you are semiretired, need a moderate climate, love nature?
trees are a must, prefer little to NO SNOW. No high humidity, no dusty deserts. Western third of continental US if possible. Affordable for someone on pension. ThanksWhat is the best place in the U.S.A. to live if you are semiretired, need a moderate climate, love nature?
WA State, it is beautiful have all 4 seasons and you don't pay income taxes.What is the best place in the U.S.A. to live if you are semiretired, need a moderate climate, love nature?
That sounds like Arizona to me. You can get into certain altitudes where it is cool but little snow.
Oregon around Coos Bay on the southern coast. You'll love it. I'm sitting here in San Jose, Ca which is the best place ever, but rather expensive. Oregon is really affordable and the weather is excellent.
Go to your library. In the reference section there should be a book titled Retirement Places Rated. Great starting point.
Chico, CA
semi retired or retarded? it makes a big difference retired az retarded new mexico hope this was helpful
TN all the way man
no humidity or very little
lots of woods
no desert
mild 4 seasons with little snow
very affordable not like ca
no state tax
My first thought is Ashville, North Carolina.
washingtion state has everything you need
I have heard that San Diego CA has wonderful climate. Maybe a suburb of it would be inexpensive?
I heard San Diego or just outside meets your requirements.
http://www.findyourspot.com/
http://www.retirementplacesreport.com/in鈥?/a>
Either Middle Texas or Florida ;) Texas is filled with retirees and has a bunch of beautiful cities (non desert, no high humidity... try the suburbs bordering San Antonio, Austin, Dallas, etc... or there's always McAllen Texas... still, has quite a bit of tourism. Still, Ive heard Texas it is not very expensive and is weell known for its 'winter texans'...)
You don't want much do you? ( smile) I guess you could say I am semi retired.. I sold Semi trucks and trailers, made enough to retire at 51! I live in a place that is very inexpensive, but I do suffer through extremes in weather! Hot in the sumer and way too cold in the winter. We have snow, and I have a four wheel drive!
I understand there are some American communities in Honduras that are doing well! A lot of retired military people. Very inexpensive to live there. What costs about 2k a month in the states cost about 500 bucks there. I haven't moved because I have an adult son, parents, sister, and grandson here, and I just don't want to be that far away.
Arizona is said to be a pretty good place to live for we how have dropped out! I understand the heat is a dry heat and doesn't feel as bad as other hot places.
Hey, count your blessings!
WA State, it is beautiful have all 4 seasons and you don't pay income taxes.What is the best place in the U.S.A. to live if you are semiretired, need a moderate climate, love nature?
That sounds like Arizona to me. You can get into certain altitudes where it is cool but little snow.
Oregon around Coos Bay on the southern coast. You'll love it. I'm sitting here in San Jose, Ca which is the best place ever, but rather expensive. Oregon is really affordable and the weather is excellent.
Go to your library. In the reference section there should be a book titled Retirement Places Rated. Great starting point.
Chico, CA
semi retired or retarded? it makes a big difference retired az retarded new mexico hope this was helpful
TN all the way man
no humidity or very little
lots of woods
no desert
mild 4 seasons with little snow
very affordable not like ca
no state tax
My first thought is Ashville, North Carolina.
washingtion state has everything you need
I have heard that San Diego CA has wonderful climate. Maybe a suburb of it would be inexpensive?
I heard San Diego or just outside meets your requirements.
http://www.findyourspot.com/
http://www.retirementplacesreport.com/in鈥?/a>
Either Middle Texas or Florida ;) Texas is filled with retirees and has a bunch of beautiful cities (non desert, no high humidity... try the suburbs bordering San Antonio, Austin, Dallas, etc... or there's always McAllen Texas... still, has quite a bit of tourism. Still, Ive heard Texas it is not very expensive and is weell known for its 'winter texans'...)
You don't want much do you? ( smile) I guess you could say I am semi retired.. I sold Semi trucks and trailers, made enough to retire at 51! I live in a place that is very inexpensive, but I do suffer through extremes in weather! Hot in the sumer and way too cold in the winter. We have snow, and I have a four wheel drive!
I understand there are some American communities in Honduras that are doing well! A lot of retired military people. Very inexpensive to live there. What costs about 2k a month in the states cost about 500 bucks there. I haven't moved because I have an adult son, parents, sister, and grandson here, and I just don't want to be that far away.
Arizona is said to be a pretty good place to live for we how have dropped out! I understand the heat is a dry heat and doesn't feel as bad as other hot places.
Hey, count your blessings!
Where in canada would be a place to live without and ppl and near nature?
i love nature and like somewhere where it is more isolated do u thin yukon is a good place
Where in canada would be a place to live without and ppl and near nature?
The Quebec Laurentians.Where in canada would be a place to live without and ppl and near nature?
Just about anywhere. Canada is the second largest country on the planet and only has 33 million people, so even living in a major city you would only be a few hours from ';nature'; as you call it.
I live in Ontario just outside of Toronto, but my choice for living very close to nature and be in a non crowded portion of the country and one of my favourite places on the planet, Vancouver Island, British Columbia and or the many islands just of the BC coast. Some of the smaller islands don't have anybody living on them at all.
New Brunswick! The middle of the province is empty, it has a number of provincial parks and if you miss the city...you can always go to Moncton. (Moncton is trying to be the ';next big city';). Seriously though, I live in Toronto and I am moving back to N.B because I love it so much.
Yup. But it's cold. I think you might like all the snow. Just bundle up : ]
Where in canada would be a place to live without and ppl and near nature?
The Quebec Laurentians.Where in canada would be a place to live without and ppl and near nature?
Just about anywhere. Canada is the second largest country on the planet and only has 33 million people, so even living in a major city you would only be a few hours from ';nature'; as you call it.
I live in Ontario just outside of Toronto, but my choice for living very close to nature and be in a non crowded portion of the country and one of my favourite places on the planet, Vancouver Island, British Columbia and or the many islands just of the BC coast. Some of the smaller islands don't have anybody living on them at all.
New Brunswick! The middle of the province is empty, it has a number of provincial parks and if you miss the city...you can always go to Moncton. (Moncton is trying to be the ';next big city';). Seriously though, I live in Toronto and I am moving back to N.B because I love it so much.
Yup. But it's cold. I think you might like all the snow. Just bundle up : ]
What is mind?what is its nature?is it same for all living beings?
I mean the thinking process. Is it same for humanbeings and animals,birds and other livingbeings. i mean a Dolphin can be given a name and called repeatedly.to do some acrobatics by giving training like animals in a circus. A parrot can recognize persons call them by name.all these actions are due to the presence of mind in them and some maturity also..What is mind?what is its nature?is it same for all living beings?
The organ, which lies in the brain box, (cranium) is called the brain. There is an area in the brain called cerebral hemispheres. This area is the center of intelligence, memory, emotion, and voluntary action. Overlying this part is the cerebral cortex, which is the most developed part in man, and hence man is the most intelligent creature. I would tend to think that this part is called mind. But this area receives the input from all other parts of the brain, and the whole body. Myriads of neuronal networks are there and they get reoriented depending upon the experience and knowledge gained by a person. Once the network gets established this determines the overall attitude. Again, the formation of primary network is the handiwork of genetic endowment. Therefore mind is a complex phenomenon constantly in flux, not the whole of it changes, though. Mind of each individual is different at a certain level. The seat of consciousness lies close to the brain stem.What is mind?what is its nature?is it same for all living beings?
YES
%26gt;+_)(*%26amp;%$$#^*((%26amp;$$^$##$%#^%*(*^^*%26amp;%26amp;(%%26amp;鈥?br>
Isn't it SWEET?
Mind may be called the maker of everythings.It is becoz,it dominate evrythings when we're in free state of mind, means no disturbances around us.the nature of the mind is so kind,loving and always try to understand the unknown things around us.Mind has got different capacity and therefore,all living beings has no the same mind,though there may be certain similarities.
Mind is the ability to distinguish the irrational from rational---animals are always rational--- basic instinct and fulfilment--human beings think--- lawful, acceptable, interfers with others needs, just, truth, etc,etc
both r nature..........only thing v must develop it....
It is the Operating System for the being's biological unit . . . in addition to the search for food and shelter it ALSO searches for socialization and mating.
Any carbon based life form will respond to positive sources of food .
Please note, I do not believe that dolphins in the wild respond to human training to do tricks , only those held in captivity and supplied with food .Ltd
The organ, which lies in the brain box, (cranium) is called the brain. There is an area in the brain called cerebral hemispheres. This area is the center of intelligence, memory, emotion, and voluntary action. Overlying this part is the cerebral cortex, which is the most developed part in man, and hence man is the most intelligent creature. I would tend to think that this part is called mind. But this area receives the input from all other parts of the brain, and the whole body. Myriads of neuronal networks are there and they get reoriented depending upon the experience and knowledge gained by a person. Once the network gets established this determines the overall attitude. Again, the formation of primary network is the handiwork of genetic endowment. Therefore mind is a complex phenomenon constantly in flux, not the whole of it changes, though. Mind of each individual is different at a certain level. The seat of consciousness lies close to the brain stem.What is mind?what is its nature?is it same for all living beings?
YES
%26gt;+_)(*%26amp;%$$#^*((%26amp;$$^$##$%#^%*(*^^*%26amp;%26amp;(%%26amp;鈥?br>
Isn't it SWEET?
Mind may be called the maker of everythings.It is becoz,it dominate evrythings when we're in free state of mind, means no disturbances around us.the nature of the mind is so kind,loving and always try to understand the unknown things around us.Mind has got different capacity and therefore,all living beings has no the same mind,though there may be certain similarities.
Mind is the ability to distinguish the irrational from rational---animals are always rational--- basic instinct and fulfilment--human beings think--- lawful, acceptable, interfers with others needs, just, truth, etc,etc
both r nature..........only thing v must develop it....
It is the Operating System for the being's biological unit . . . in addition to the search for food and shelter it ALSO searches for socialization and mating.
Any carbon based life form will respond to positive sources of food .
Please note, I do not believe that dolphins in the wild respond to human training to do tricks , only those held in captivity and supplied with food .
Isn't it great to live in an age when the laws of nature and human nature and economics can be suspended?
I love this Twilight Zone we're in!!!
.Isn't it great to live in an age when the laws of nature and human nature and economics can be suspended?
The laws of nature, the laws of human nature, and the laws of economics cannot be rescinded, but leave it up to the Republicans/Democrats to try...
In his book ';Principles of Economics';, Austrian economist Carl Menger stated:';All things are subject to the law of cause and effect. This great principle knows no exception, and we would search in vain in the realm of experience for an example to the contrary. Human progress has no tendency to cast it in doubt, but rather the effect of confirming it and of always further widening knowledge of the scope of its validity. Its continued and growing recognition is therefore closely linked to human progress.';
It isn't great that some people think the laws of nature, human nature, and economics can be suspended. Isn't it great to live in an age when the laws of nature and human nature and economics can be suspended?
94% of all Americans have jobs. 100% of households have a car and a microwave. That is great news. This is just a financial crisis. They happen every 20 years. The last one was 1987. We will muddle thru. The laws are not suspended..
Actually, what we've learned here is that he laws of economics CANNOT be suspended, not for long...
.Isn't it great to live in an age when the laws of nature and human nature and economics can be suspended?
The laws of nature, the laws of human nature, and the laws of economics cannot be rescinded, but leave it up to the Republicans/Democrats to try...
In his book ';Principles of Economics';, Austrian economist Carl Menger stated:';All things are subject to the law of cause and effect. This great principle knows no exception, and we would search in vain in the realm of experience for an example to the contrary. Human progress has no tendency to cast it in doubt, but rather the effect of confirming it and of always further widening knowledge of the scope of its validity. Its continued and growing recognition is therefore closely linked to human progress.';
It isn't great that some people think the laws of nature, human nature, and economics can be suspended. Isn't it great to live in an age when the laws of nature and human nature and economics can be suspended?
94% of all Americans have jobs. 100% of households have a car and a microwave. That is great news. This is just a financial crisis. They happen every 20 years. The last one was 1987. We will muddle thru. The laws are not suspended..
Actually, what we've learned here is that he laws of economics CANNOT be suspended, not for long...
In stoicism what does it truly mean when they say live according with nature?
Marcus Aurelius is a good source for Stoic Philosophy. One of the main ideas is that nature cannot give more stress or pain than the body was designed to handle. Everything is in nature just as it was meant to be so worry or distress is wasted effort. In a word, Acceptance.In stoicism what does it truly mean when they say live according with nature?
It would require inhuman restraint. To live as nature appears to do having no emotion towards loss or gain, no affectations from any source, completely indifferent to occurences.
It would require inhuman restraint. To live as nature appears to do having no emotion towards loss or gain, no affectations from any source, completely indifferent to occurences.
Camp Meeting Monday! Is it possible to live victorious over sin, and the sin nature?
How do you do it?Camp Meeting Monday! Is it possible to live victorious over sin, and the sin nature?
Yes it is or God wouldn t command us to do so. Once born again, we are no longer under the old fallen sin nature, WE are now NEW CREATION man with the mind and nature of Christ, and by the power of His shed blood and thru the Spirit we now receive, we can have victory over all sin and live just like Jesus. How did HE live without sin??
By perfectly obeying the Father in all things.
OBedience is sitll the key to all blessing.
Works dont save us, nor does obedience, but wihtout them, we forforfeit our free gift.
There is no other way folks.
WE will hate sin as much as God does, when we are truly born again.
Its not what we do, its what the Holy Spirit does thru us, if we will receive and do as the Spirit says.....
Great question.
Thanks for asking. God bless you.
SFCU
Sister Shirley
God says we already have the victory. we just gotta know it and reach up for it and take it as ours. Already there folks.Camp Meeting Monday! Is it possible to live victorious over sin, and the sin nature?
No. If it was than certainly SOMEONE would have accomplished it by now. The law of Moses was given to show our inability to even live up to 10 seemingly simple laws. It was because of this inability to overcome our sinful nature that Jesus' death and redemption became necessary as he was the first and only one to be able to claim victory over sin. It is then by the grace available to us through his resurrection that we are able to be seen by God as sinless.
To avoid sin..you need discipline..live a well disciplined life regardless of philosophy or religion with a simple concept: Do No Harm.
no, we r not perfect. we try to live the way we know God wants us to and he gives us forgiveness but until we die, or he comes again we will still have sin in our lives.
Jesus
Yes it is or God wouldn t command us to do so. Once born again, we are no longer under the old fallen sin nature, WE are now NEW CREATION man with the mind and nature of Christ, and by the power of His shed blood and thru the Spirit we now receive, we can have victory over all sin and live just like Jesus. How did HE live without sin??
By perfectly obeying the Father in all things.
OBedience is sitll the key to all blessing.
Works dont save us, nor does obedience, but wihtout them, we forforfeit our free gift.
There is no other way folks.
WE will hate sin as much as God does, when we are truly born again.
Its not what we do, its what the Holy Spirit does thru us, if we will receive and do as the Spirit says.....
Great question.
Thanks for asking. God bless you.
SFCU
Sister Shirley
God says we already have the victory. we just gotta know it and reach up for it and take it as ours. Already there folks.Camp Meeting Monday! Is it possible to live victorious over sin, and the sin nature?
No. If it was than certainly SOMEONE would have accomplished it by now. The law of Moses was given to show our inability to even live up to 10 seemingly simple laws. It was because of this inability to overcome our sinful nature that Jesus' death and redemption became necessary as he was the first and only one to be able to claim victory over sin. It is then by the grace available to us through his resurrection that we are able to be seen by God as sinless.
To avoid sin..you need discipline..live a well disciplined life regardless of philosophy or religion with a simple concept: Do No Harm.
no, we r not perfect. we try to live the way we know God wants us to and he gives us forgiveness but until we die, or he comes again we will still have sin in our lives.
Jesus
Give me 5 kinds of colorful fish that has a peaceful nature that can live in a pond?
give me 5 kinds of colorful fish that has a peaceful nature that can live in a pond?
i plan to have a pond but i dont know what fish should i put.
i want some small or medium fish that are colorful that would live peacefully with each other.
my pond will be 6feet wide and 2-3feet deep.
give me some suggestions with the fish and how i should make the pond(size).Give me 5 kinds of colorful fish that has a peaceful nature that can live in a pond?
Hello! The dimensions of your pond sound fine, goldfish would be my first choice, because of their bright colour (And they're relatively inexpensive).
Be careful of herons and other fish eating animals! It's a shame to put a net over your nice pond, i know, but trust me you might have to!
Good luck!Give me 5 kinds of colorful fish that has a peaceful nature that can live in a pond?
depending on where you live there are a lot to choose from. Koi and gold fish are the number one choice because they are colorful and are cool water fish that can live in cooler temps year around. In warmer months and warmer areas where the water won't go below 75F you can use a betta, gouramis, paradise fish and a number of others. White clouds can be used in cool water but are not colorful at all. Personally I would stick to the koi and goldfish.
White Clouds
Red fish, green fish, blue fish, white fish, gold fish.
I hope this helps.
KOI fish
here is a link
they are addicting to have and own...
others are right. Koi fish and Gold fish are the best choices. But, Goldfish can grow bigger than most people think.
i plan to have a pond but i dont know what fish should i put.
i want some small or medium fish that are colorful that would live peacefully with each other.
my pond will be 6feet wide and 2-3feet deep.
give me some suggestions with the fish and how i should make the pond(size).Give me 5 kinds of colorful fish that has a peaceful nature that can live in a pond?
Hello! The dimensions of your pond sound fine, goldfish would be my first choice, because of their bright colour (And they're relatively inexpensive).
Be careful of herons and other fish eating animals! It's a shame to put a net over your nice pond, i know, but trust me you might have to!
Good luck!Give me 5 kinds of colorful fish that has a peaceful nature that can live in a pond?
depending on where you live there are a lot to choose from. Koi and gold fish are the number one choice because they are colorful and are cool water fish that can live in cooler temps year around. In warmer months and warmer areas where the water won't go below 75F you can use a betta, gouramis, paradise fish and a number of others. White clouds can be used in cool water but are not colorful at all. Personally I would stick to the koi and goldfish.
White Clouds
Red fish, green fish, blue fish, white fish, gold fish.
I hope this helps.
KOI fish
here is a link
they are addicting to have and own...
others are right. Koi fish and Gold fish are the best choices. But, Goldfish can grow bigger than most people think.
How is it possible that God created a nature where animals can live only by killing other animals ?
If men kill each other, it is sin; they need not. But, animals cannot live without killing the other animals for food.How is it possible that God created a nature where animals can live only by killing other animals ?
It`s the cycle of life. Kill or be killed. They have to eat some-
where, nobody Is going to feed them. If I didn`t feed my dog she would go out and kill a squirrel or a rabbit or bird. Because she Is well fed she can exist In the same yard as the other animals.How is it possible that God created a nature where animals can live only by killing other animals ?
%26gt;%26gt; How is it possible that God created a nature where animals can live only by
%26gt;%26gt; killing other animals ?
聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽That is not what God created. That is the result of sin coming into the world. Sin caused an imbalance which required the roles of the animal kingdom to change -- some became scavengers and some were required for population control of other animals.
聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽Witness this:
Gen. 1:29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽Thus, man was to eat only fruits, grains, and nuts. You see, originally, not even vegetables were to be part of man's diet -- and definitely not flesh foods (both were added to man's diet only after the Great Flood; Gen. 9:3,4). God created the animals to all be herbivores:
Gen. 1:30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.
聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽Thus, animals were to eat only plants and vegetables.
God bless.
death is a natural process, it is not morally good or bad itself,
Animals kill for food and men can also kill animals to eat, that is not a sin
On the other hand either men kills animals or another men not being necessary it would be a crime / sin (and I'd remark there are few reasons to kill another human being moved by necessity)
Not only animals, but most organisms, plants included, live of of the death of others. Then of the rest, many of them are parasites, only a very few can live without any other organism to feed off of in some way.
Wow...you still sport the MULLET! Join us here in 2008! We will welcome you!
Animals did not, in the beginning, kill each other...this was something that was introduced later, after Noah's flood and after Jehovah gave man permission to eat animals.
Because the whole Creation is in a fallen state, a lower state than what Creator intended. There is a healing that must take place; Creator has a plan in store for the restoration of the creation. That's when the Lion will lie down with the Lamb.
humans don't need to kill each other because we don't eat each other. we are pretty high on the food chain. if we lived amongst lions, you bet we'd be eaten! we ARE animals...we kill other animals...
by the way...this is called evolution
He didn't. There were no carnivores or death until after sin. All animals, including dinosaurs were herbivores to begin with.
Not all animals, only carnivores.
Omnivores really should eat both, but don't have to.
I don't believe in sin though.
Read the Old Testament. It is full of killing, war, rape, plunder and more. That's the nature of god.
The world was perfect, or good, before Adam sinned.
This sin enabled misery, pain, and death.
God bless!
Wake up dude.... Don't you eat meat!!!!
Really - animals hunt/kill for food and that's it. They wage wars, or kill their own kind over religion. Their morals are superior those of the Christian.
It's just another God anomaly!
Simple. Life is a death sentence.
that's life for them. they have to eat in order to survive.
Flesh only died after we sinned
Men killing animals is not sin either.
If you look at the animal kingdom it is a near perfect system. Death itself is the perfect part of it. All things die. If all things did not die the world would become overpopulated. In the animal world it is typically, though not always, the old and weak that are killed as food. Hardly anything in the animal world dies of old age. Death from old age is arguably the worst way to die.
Man is the only animal made ';in the image of God';, and man has the obligation to refrain from acting like an animal. I believe that when mankind was brought out of the animal world and placed under the obligation to act ';human';, man did not, and fell back into the state of being a ';beast';.
Tedi said:
';God gives all His animals a fighting chance even if it is just the ability to run the fastest!';
That has got to be the lamest and most hilarious mix of an evolution and christianity attempt at reasoning yet!!! LOL LOL
By the way, Plants are living creatures and scientific studies show they respond to pain too.
What a god!!!!
Because ';nature'; has a different function for God than what you have decided as what is reasonable in your own eyes.
God has different plans than what you would have had if you wanted to be god.
Romans 11:33
[ Doxology ] Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out!
Rev 4:11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.
God gives all His animals a fighting chance even if it is just the ability to run the fastest!
yeah, but it's not all animals. many animals forage for food and don't hunt. it's only... PREDATORS. i believe there's a human analogy here somewhere...
If you believe in God then you have to remember that God is hard on us, god is not a fluffy bunny, God is both death and life made into one, lets just hope the plans involve good thoughts
animals tend not to kill their own kind, their own kind hold their genes too, but it happens under certain conditions.
it isn't possible, there is no god therefore there is no gods creation.
god created animals for survival of more intelligent animals... our bodies require protein to keep us healthy..............
Humans are also designed to kill or die. Nice plan, god.
evolution...APRIL
Because he was high at the time.
Just like your haridresser.
The stronger kills the weaker, for ANY purpose
';The Food Chain'; seems a Cruel method of 'Living'...!!
It`s the cycle of life. Kill or be killed. They have to eat some-
where, nobody Is going to feed them. If I didn`t feed my dog she would go out and kill a squirrel or a rabbit or bird. Because she Is well fed she can exist In the same yard as the other animals.How is it possible that God created a nature where animals can live only by killing other animals ?
%26gt;%26gt; How is it possible that God created a nature where animals can live only by
%26gt;%26gt; killing other animals ?
聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽That is not what God created. That is the result of sin coming into the world. Sin caused an imbalance which required the roles of the animal kingdom to change -- some became scavengers and some were required for population control of other animals.
聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽Witness this:
Gen. 1:29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽Thus, man was to eat only fruits, grains, and nuts. You see, originally, not even vegetables were to be part of man's diet -- and definitely not flesh foods (both were added to man's diet only after the Great Flood; Gen. 9:3,4). God created the animals to all be herbivores:
Gen. 1:30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.
聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽Thus, animals were to eat only plants and vegetables.
God bless.
death is a natural process, it is not morally good or bad itself,
Animals kill for food and men can also kill animals to eat, that is not a sin
On the other hand either men kills animals or another men not being necessary it would be a crime / sin (and I'd remark there are few reasons to kill another human being moved by necessity)
Not only animals, but most organisms, plants included, live of of the death of others. Then of the rest, many of them are parasites, only a very few can live without any other organism to feed off of in some way.
Wow...you still sport the MULLET! Join us here in 2008! We will welcome you!
Animals did not, in the beginning, kill each other...this was something that was introduced later, after Noah's flood and after Jehovah gave man permission to eat animals.
Because the whole Creation is in a fallen state, a lower state than what Creator intended. There is a healing that must take place; Creator has a plan in store for the restoration of the creation. That's when the Lion will lie down with the Lamb.
humans don't need to kill each other because we don't eat each other. we are pretty high on the food chain. if we lived amongst lions, you bet we'd be eaten! we ARE animals...we kill other animals...
by the way...this is called evolution
He didn't. There were no carnivores or death until after sin. All animals, including dinosaurs were herbivores to begin with.
Not all animals, only carnivores.
Omnivores really should eat both, but don't have to.
I don't believe in sin though.
Read the Old Testament. It is full of killing, war, rape, plunder and more. That's the nature of god.
The world was perfect, or good, before Adam sinned.
This sin enabled misery, pain, and death.
God bless!
Wake up dude.... Don't you eat meat!!!!
Really - animals hunt/kill for food and that's it. They wage wars, or kill their own kind over religion. Their morals are superior those of the Christian.
It's just another God anomaly!
Simple. Life is a death sentence.
that's life for them. they have to eat in order to survive.
Flesh only died after we sinned
Men killing animals is not sin either.
If you look at the animal kingdom it is a near perfect system. Death itself is the perfect part of it. All things die. If all things did not die the world would become overpopulated. In the animal world it is typically, though not always, the old and weak that are killed as food. Hardly anything in the animal world dies of old age. Death from old age is arguably the worst way to die.
Man is the only animal made ';in the image of God';, and man has the obligation to refrain from acting like an animal. I believe that when mankind was brought out of the animal world and placed under the obligation to act ';human';, man did not, and fell back into the state of being a ';beast';.
Tedi said:
';God gives all His animals a fighting chance even if it is just the ability to run the fastest!';
That has got to be the lamest and most hilarious mix of an evolution and christianity attempt at reasoning yet!!! LOL LOL
By the way, Plants are living creatures and scientific studies show they respond to pain too.
What a god!!!!
Because ';nature'; has a different function for God than what you have decided as what is reasonable in your own eyes.
God has different plans than what you would have had if you wanted to be god.
Romans 11:33
[ Doxology ] Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out!
Rev 4:11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.
God gives all His animals a fighting chance even if it is just the ability to run the fastest!
yeah, but it's not all animals. many animals forage for food and don't hunt. it's only... PREDATORS. i believe there's a human analogy here somewhere...
If you believe in God then you have to remember that God is hard on us, god is not a fluffy bunny, God is both death and life made into one, lets just hope the plans involve good thoughts
animals tend not to kill their own kind, their own kind hold their genes too, but it happens under certain conditions.
it isn't possible, there is no god therefore there is no gods creation.
god created animals for survival of more intelligent animals... our bodies require protein to keep us healthy..............
Humans are also designed to kill or die. Nice plan, god.
evolution...APRIL
Because he was high at the time.
Just like your haridresser.
The stronger kills the weaker, for ANY purpose
';The Food Chain'; seems a Cruel method of 'Living'...!!
Me and my husband living seperately due to incompatiblility in nature.?
I am a mother of a son, working in govt. department ........my husband made agreement in 1991 ...The agreement was not process in any court . so we start living seperately due to incompatiblility in our nature, at that time my son is 5 years old . But we have a 3 storage building which is in his name...at that time we both constributed to make that building... now he is collecting money and giving me no share from it... ple. helpMe and my husband living seperately due to incompatiblility in nature.?
Divorce the guy officially and get half of everything he owns. And then, if you meet someone else and fall in love, you can do something with the other person without having to tell them that you are technically married.Me and my husband living seperately due to incompatiblility in nature.?
If you have not enough go to court to get even.
Unless u have proof of your contribution to the building (receipts/statements or written agreement) it will be extremely difficult to prove it in court., as the bulding is under his name. The best advice I can give is to consult a lawyer to determine if u have a fighting chance in claiming your share.
Get a lawyer and get your separation determined in legal terms. Why would you stay such a relationship? If you are afraid due to citizenship problems or abuse, don't be. You have the right to receive legal counsel and not be harrassed over other issues.
go to a lawyer
Get a solicitor onto it fast, you can get legal aid and advice or see citizen advice bureau they have a legal team there that can give you advice and a list of solicitors you can go and see and talk to. It doesnt look or seem right at all especailly if you are legally married seek help asap before things become worse and nasty. He seems a control freak and has done this not out of love but control over you and your life.
You can ask for court relief re: assigning custodianship of the child's property while he is still a minor. Fruits of his property will be governed by a guideline. At least no one can assume rights on the proceeds i.e. how it should be distributed and spent.Ltd
Divorce the guy officially and get half of everything he owns. And then, if you meet someone else and fall in love, you can do something with the other person without having to tell them that you are technically married.Me and my husband living seperately due to incompatiblility in nature.?
If you have not enough go to court to get even.
Unless u have proof of your contribution to the building (receipts/statements or written agreement) it will be extremely difficult to prove it in court., as the bulding is under his name. The best advice I can give is to consult a lawyer to determine if u have a fighting chance in claiming your share.
Get a lawyer and get your separation determined in legal terms. Why would you stay such a relationship? If you are afraid due to citizenship problems or abuse, don't be. You have the right to receive legal counsel and not be harrassed over other issues.
go to a lawyer
Get a solicitor onto it fast, you can get legal aid and advice or see citizen advice bureau they have a legal team there that can give you advice and a list of solicitors you can go and see and talk to. It doesnt look or seem right at all especailly if you are legally married seek help asap before things become worse and nasty. He seems a control freak and has done this not out of love but control over you and your life.
You can ask for court relief re: assigning custodianship of the child's property while he is still a minor. Fruits of his property will be governed by a guideline. At least no one can assume rights on the proceeds i.e. how it should be distributed and spent.
Would you rather live in the city or live surrounded by nature?
City, because it's close to stores/ work/ etc.Would you rather live in the city or live surrounded by nature?
The way my house is set up is that it's surrounded by nature, but is a 5 minute bike ride from the city, so this is way I like it. Hope this helps Danni.Would you rather live in the city or live surrounded by nature?
nature
Surrounded by nature.
Monopoly is good
nature
Only of the nature is a beautiful beach which is close to the basic amenities cities offer(:
Nature. The beach preferably.
cityy
I've always been a city girl trying to get back to the farm. Take me home, country roads.
Citty!! Nature is BORING!! :P
Definitely nature! Who wants to breathe taxi fumes???
nature
I couldn't bear living in the city. I like my peace %26amp; quiet.
I rather have a balance of both. I don think that i will survive living in nature. I have been too spoilt by the modern day lifestyle (Sat TV, Takeouts, Movies, bed with no bugs etc).
But living near a nature area is good, because i can then visit nature and keep in touch.
cityyyy
Portland so both!
Nature. [:
nature, like now
I would love working in city and live with nature
Surrounded by nature...like I am now
I would rather live in a city. I like to be surrounded by others.
i don't know about surrounded by nature, but i love small towns! i hate cities i don't think people were meant to live so close together. i use to be such a nice driver and after two years in Phoenix i wanted to kill everyone on the road. now i live in a small town and i don't want to hurt other drivers anymore.
I am Now surrounded by nature....and luv it....!!
Of course its obvious. Live surrounded by nature. DUH Why would you want to live in a concrete jungle?
CITY CITY CITY CITY CITY CITY CITY CITY!!!!
I HATE IT HERE!!!!
I will live in the city but I will still go where there is nature because I like it. I like the views and be around it.
Surrounded by nature...
I already live in the city. It's bollocks.
Surrounded by nature! Like i am now
I love nature, but I'm petrified of being in the woods at night. So I'd have to say city, It definitely has its advantages.
The way my house is set up is that it's surrounded by nature, but is a 5 minute bike ride from the city, so this is way I like it. Hope this helps Danni.Would you rather live in the city or live surrounded by nature?
nature
Surrounded by nature.
Monopoly is good
nature
Only of the nature is a beautiful beach which is close to the basic amenities cities offer(:
Nature. The beach preferably.
cityy
I've always been a city girl trying to get back to the farm. Take me home, country roads.
Citty!! Nature is BORING!! :P
Definitely nature! Who wants to breathe taxi fumes???
nature
I couldn't bear living in the city. I like my peace %26amp; quiet.
I rather have a balance of both. I don think that i will survive living in nature. I have been too spoilt by the modern day lifestyle (Sat TV, Takeouts, Movies, bed with no bugs etc).
But living near a nature area is good, because i can then visit nature and keep in touch.
cityyyy
Portland so both!
Nature. [:
nature, like now
I would love working in city and live with nature
Surrounded by nature...like I am now
I would rather live in a city. I like to be surrounded by others.
i don't know about surrounded by nature, but i love small towns! i hate cities i don't think people were meant to live so close together. i use to be such a nice driver and after two years in Phoenix i wanted to kill everyone on the road. now i live in a small town and i don't want to hurt other drivers anymore.
I am Now surrounded by nature....and luv it....!!
Of course its obvious. Live surrounded by nature. DUH Why would you want to live in a concrete jungle?
CITY CITY CITY CITY CITY CITY CITY CITY!!!!
I HATE IT HERE!!!!
I will live in the city but I will still go where there is nature because I like it. I like the views and be around it.
Surrounded by nature...
I already live in the city. It's bollocks.
Surrounded by nature! Like i am now
I love nature, but I'm petrified of being in the woods at night. So I'd have to say city, It definitely has its advantages.
Is there somewhere I can go to live in Nature?
There's gotta be open land or forest or mountain somewhere in the U.S where i can jus trek into and pitch a tipi and be undisturbed for a long time. Where is this place? and i dont wanna hear Alaska . .Is there somewhere I can go to live in Nature?
you should be able to stay on government owned property as long as it's not a national park.. if the property is not marked as private.. then you can explore it with that as a good reason..
which btw I must say that I like your way of thinking...I wish I had the time/money to do the same sort of thing..Is there somewhere I can go to live in Nature?
Nope it is all National park or people like me own it. You are way to late.
Idk Montana
you should be able to stay on government owned property as long as it's not a national park.. if the property is not marked as private.. then you can explore it with that as a good reason..
which btw I must say that I like your way of thinking...I wish I had the time/money to do the same sort of thing..Is there somewhere I can go to live in Nature?
Nope it is all National park or people like me own it. You are way to late.
Idk Montana
How do the Inuits live in harmony with nature?
LOL, I always get a kick outta white people/westerns who think that africans and inuits are in the lion king. The truth is they don't they shoot animals, clobber them in the head and skin them and wear their skin as jackets. They chew their intensines as bubble gum and use their fat to make fire.
This is a myth that africans and natives live in harmony with nature and dance with the wolves, this is not lion king. The only difference between the white man and red man is that the white is better at killing than us
This is a myth that africans and natives live in harmony with nature and dance with the wolves, this is not lion king. The only difference between the white man and red man is that the white is better at killing than us
Do you believe that we are living the end of times? so many destruction, wars, the nature...?
No, we're not even close to the end of times. The destruction, the wars and disasters in nature has been happening for a very long time and we're still here. People has been talking about how ';this time is the worst time ever and the world has to be close to the end'; for thousands of years now. Thousands. And we're still here.
There are so many things in this world that is better than ever. Great things that help not only people but also all living things including the nature. Medical treatments that ends suffering, people helping each other globally, technical progress that helps to predict or even prevent disasters ... the list goes on. The majority of the world is good and mostly good things happen. Not that you'd know it from following the news. The news almost always focus on the bad things.
There are so many things in this world that is better than ever. Great things that help not only people but also all living things including the nature. Medical treatments that ends suffering, people helping each other globally, technical progress that helps to predict or even prevent disasters ... the list goes on. The majority of the world is good and mostly good things happen. Not that you'd know it from following the news. The news almost always focus on the bad things.
What is the area to live in when going to LaTrobe uni n partner works in the city? Somewhere with nature close
I'm moving from a town in Qld to Melbourne, my partner is from a city lifestyle and will be working in the city. I'm going to be at Latrobe Uni and want to have a happy compromise with the city life not out of reach for work and play but still with some surrounding wildlife and a decent community. Please help!!! I have no idea where to start looking.What is the area to live in when going to LaTrobe uni n partner works in the city? Somewhere with nature close
bundoora, macleod or springthorpe, lots of parks, near the uni, also the tram into the city in bundoora or the train from macleod, springthorpe is a new estate kinda thing in macleodWhat is the area to live in when going to LaTrobe uni n partner works in the city? Somewhere with nature close
Bundoora, Macleod
All depends on how much you are willing to look for housing and how far your partner is willing to travel to work. Eltham is still nice, Greensborough is too.
Mill Park, Roseanna are nice places too
bundoora, macleod or springthorpe, lots of parks, near the uni, also the tram into the city in bundoora or the train from macleod, springthorpe is a new estate kinda thing in macleodWhat is the area to live in when going to LaTrobe uni n partner works in the city? Somewhere with nature close
Bundoora, Macleod
All depends on how much you are willing to look for housing and how far your partner is willing to travel to work. Eltham is still nice, Greensborough is too.
Mill Park, Roseanna are nice places too
Euthanasia: to live beyond nature or to die with dignity?
It's an important question to ponder as the largest generation in our history are becoming the largest senior citizens population in the world. Technology can take over our natural body functions as they fail but should we let the body fail? Longevity or Quality?Euthanasia: to live beyond nature or to die with dignity?
I vote for quality of life!!! Who wants to be living just to be dependent on someone else for every breath or not even know your breathing. I think Dr. Karvorkian had the right idea. Death with dignity is a treasure. We treat animals better in their later years than we do human beings. As a retired nurse, I can tell you there are alot of things worse than dying. God is good. Thanks for asking this question.Euthanasia: to live beyond nature or to die with dignity?
A truly very profound question indeed. I don't mean to go off the wall here and get people bent out of shape on their beliefs, but modern technology has left us in a great dilema. We do keep older people alive and abort babies. Never did make any sense to me, but we sure are paying for all this mess today. Social Security leads the parade with a cast of thousands more.
Quality!!! I have watched people die of cancer, loved ones, friends, etc. There is no reason people should have to suffer in pain, alive only by machines, just simply ';to be here';. In the event, the person is alert, some effort should be taken to help them if that is their wish, but the majority are just laying in pain, sick, and wanting to die and get it over with.
My view changed greatly on this one. I never believe even in euthanasia for animals years ago, I thought no one should play God and end a life. BUT then I got cancer, got sick, and knew how bad pain can be. yes, I survived but I watched others die in pain, crying out for help, only there was no higher pain meds to help them. They were going to die no matter what, so why not let them die with dignity.
I know now that if I get that bad, I want out, an overdose or something but I don't want to feel pain that bad ever again.
Quality. I don't want to live in the state most of our elder people are forced to live in. I want to live a long full life and when the end comes I want God to handle it.
The problem with the euthanasia debate is the sinister motives of the pro-euthanasia side. They aren't interested in a person's right to die with dignity. What they are after is the wholesale disposal of the aged and sick. This is similar to the pro-abortion crowd. The POINT of their positions is the systematic devaluation of human life.
They are evil and should be resisted no matter how you feel personally about a person's right to chose to die.
Quality. What is quantity without quality? It is one thing to be helped by science, but it is another to play GOD. When it's our time to go, it's our time.
its the body nature to fail. we can do nothing about it.
I would choose qulity rather than longevity. I don't like t live without dignity.
In my opinion I don't think there is anything wrong with euthanasia. What kind of life can someone really have by having machines and feeding tubes keeping them alive? I'm all about the quality of life...longevity means nothing if you can't enjoy it.coolest myspace
I vote for quality of life!!! Who wants to be living just to be dependent on someone else for every breath or not even know your breathing. I think Dr. Karvorkian had the right idea. Death with dignity is a treasure. We treat animals better in their later years than we do human beings. As a retired nurse, I can tell you there are alot of things worse than dying. God is good. Thanks for asking this question.Euthanasia: to live beyond nature or to die with dignity?
A truly very profound question indeed. I don't mean to go off the wall here and get people bent out of shape on their beliefs, but modern technology has left us in a great dilema. We do keep older people alive and abort babies. Never did make any sense to me, but we sure are paying for all this mess today. Social Security leads the parade with a cast of thousands more.
Quality!!! I have watched people die of cancer, loved ones, friends, etc. There is no reason people should have to suffer in pain, alive only by machines, just simply ';to be here';. In the event, the person is alert, some effort should be taken to help them if that is their wish, but the majority are just laying in pain, sick, and wanting to die and get it over with.
My view changed greatly on this one. I never believe even in euthanasia for animals years ago, I thought no one should play God and end a life. BUT then I got cancer, got sick, and knew how bad pain can be. yes, I survived but I watched others die in pain, crying out for help, only there was no higher pain meds to help them. They were going to die no matter what, so why not let them die with dignity.
I know now that if I get that bad, I want out, an overdose or something but I don't want to feel pain that bad ever again.
Quality. I don't want to live in the state most of our elder people are forced to live in. I want to live a long full life and when the end comes I want God to handle it.
The problem with the euthanasia debate is the sinister motives of the pro-euthanasia side. They aren't interested in a person's right to die with dignity. What they are after is the wholesale disposal of the aged and sick. This is similar to the pro-abortion crowd. The POINT of their positions is the systematic devaluation of human life.
They are evil and should be resisted no matter how you feel personally about a person's right to chose to die.
Quality. What is quantity without quality? It is one thing to be helped by science, but it is another to play GOD. When it's our time to go, it's our time.
its the body nature to fail. we can do nothing about it.
I would choose qulity rather than longevity. I don't like t live without dignity.
In my opinion I don't think there is anything wrong with euthanasia. What kind of life can someone really have by having machines and feeding tubes keeping them alive? I'm all about the quality of life...longevity means nothing if you can't enjoy it.
Survey: Would you enjoy being a wild woodland creature living in the forest being one with nature?
do I get one of those leaf bikini's....Survey: Would you enjoy being a wild woodland creature living in the forest being one with nature?
Only if you were the hunter???
lol.
no!
Too many bugs and boy do they love my flesh!!! I can't go on a campout without comming back with at least 20 bites!
I just went to my cousin's wedding... she had it at the zoo, and I kid you not I am covered in mosquito bites, I don't think I could be happy as a woodland creature with no way to rub jungle juice on myself!:DSurvey: Would you enjoy being a wild woodland creature living in the forest being one with nature?
Sure would, do I get matches?
It would remind me of the movie....The Lord of the Rings.
That was kind of scary though.
You mean like Tarzan, now that would be fun! I could be Jane and swing from the trees with Tarzan protecting me from the snakes.
I already am one :-)
If I was a bear or a wolverine, maybe. If I was only a chipmunk or an opossum not so much.
I've always thought it would be exciting to live in nature since I found out that chimpanzees can be serial killers, too.....only there's no chimpanzee jail.
Being one w/nature? Hell yeah. :)
Being eaten alive by another animal? Not so much. :(
yes i would. i love the forest and solitude.
Yes although I would also have to live with the stress of the possibility of a hunter shooting my head off.
i already am
Be very very quiet... Pocket's huntin' beaver.
For a while. Then I would want a nice warm bed.
oh i get it you're mad about what happened on wednesday arent you?!?
yes i would .But i wouldnt enjoy being put in a zoo
Hell
No
Nope!!!
No
I did that as a Special Forces Person?
Only if I was at the top of the food chain.
I really think I would. I already poop in the great outdoors so it isn't such a stretch for me. :)
Will there be cable?
yes,a grizzly bear nobody will mess with %26gt; : )
a wood nymph...ummmmm.....
I'm fairly close to that now.
not anymore.. was that for most of my life... now.. I am a little sea creature..lol..I do get crabby..lol
Only if you were the hunter???
lol.
no!
Too many bugs and boy do they love my flesh!!! I can't go on a campout without comming back with at least 20 bites!
I just went to my cousin's wedding... she had it at the zoo, and I kid you not I am covered in mosquito bites, I don't think I could be happy as a woodland creature with no way to rub jungle juice on myself!:DSurvey: Would you enjoy being a wild woodland creature living in the forest being one with nature?
Sure would, do I get matches?
It would remind me of the movie....The Lord of the Rings.
That was kind of scary though.
You mean like Tarzan, now that would be fun! I could be Jane and swing from the trees with Tarzan protecting me from the snakes.
I already am one :-)
If I was a bear or a wolverine, maybe. If I was only a chipmunk or an opossum not so much.
I've always thought it would be exciting to live in nature since I found out that chimpanzees can be serial killers, too.....only there's no chimpanzee jail.
Being one w/nature? Hell yeah. :)
Being eaten alive by another animal? Not so much. :(
yes i would. i love the forest and solitude.
Yes although I would also have to live with the stress of the possibility of a hunter shooting my head off.
i already am
Be very very quiet... Pocket's huntin' beaver.
For a while. Then I would want a nice warm bed.
oh i get it you're mad about what happened on wednesday arent you?!?
yes i would .But i wouldnt enjoy being put in a zoo
Hell
No
Nope!!!
No
I did that as a Special Forces Person?
Only if I was at the top of the food chain.
I really think I would. I already poop in the great outdoors so it isn't such a stretch for me. :)
Will there be cable?
yes,a grizzly bear nobody will mess with %26gt; : )
a wood nymph...ummmmm.....
I'm fairly close to that now.
not anymore.. was that for most of my life... now.. I am a little sea creature..lol..I do get crabby..lol
Is burning fossil fules recreating the kill or be killed nature that lived here before mamales?
What if the level of subtropic weather gets worse, will nature recreate the beasts that lived here before (through human-kind) and how will we survive ourselves in the years to come?Is burning fossil fules recreating the kill or be killed nature that lived here before mamales?
your face is funnyIs burning fossil fules recreating the kill or be killed nature that lived here before mamales?
interesting point., but somehow i dont think that will be what is the ned of the world as we know it today.. perhaps consider that meteor that is travelling now in earth orbit. it is called NT72002 ? anyway it is destined to hit earth in some time, they have already calculted the years that it will hit if it misses the first time etc.. 2019 - 2035 - 2051/ that is why usa sent up that rocket ship last year2005 in jan it took till june to reach the meteror.. the rocket ship it split in two - one to explode some of the meteror and the other to recorde the damamge as they dont know if it will explode it or will it absorb the explosion as they not sure what the meteror is made of.. interesint really.. so they know something is on its way.....
';Mr Opik calls on Tony Blair to discuss the matter urgently with George
Bush - a naive plan, it seems to me, since it's 75,000-1 against Bush
knowing the difference between an asteroid and a haemorrhoid (';Tony, is
that one of them lumpy things you find on Uranus?';).';
--The Mirror, 26 July 2002
Whether it is an asteroid or burning fossil fuels or an increase in tectonic and seismic activity or nuclear war, the one thing you can count on, if the history of earth as we understand it is anything to go by, is that the world will change, speices will go extinct and new speices will arise as a result of mutation and adaptation. 95 percent of the speices that have lived on this planet are now extinct. Most became extinct long before humanity evolved. The average lifespan of a speices is about ten million years. Our speices is less than a million years old. Will we survive ourselves? Maybe not. But chances are humanity will survive for at least a few more generations. There are six billion of us on this year. Quite a few of us could die off in a radical, rapid climate change, and still leave enough behind for a viable gene pool. What new speices will arise from the climate change? That'll depend on what speices move into the vacated ecological niches. Once all the giant sea reptile died off, it left a niche open for giant sea mammals to evolve, but the whales and reptiles that occupy the same niche seem fairly similar. Will the next giant sea speices evolve from cephlapods? There are already giant squid, so maybe whale size octopi could be in the future. As for the land animals, who knows what will grow larger and what will shrink as new environments are created.
Dammit! That used to be MY theory. If you want a clear answer, look into something called School of the Americas. It's located on an Army base. It's actually a lot worse than merely ';kill or be killed';.
I think the dog-eat-dog mentailty never really went away in the first place.
your face is funnyIs burning fossil fules recreating the kill or be killed nature that lived here before mamales?
interesting point., but somehow i dont think that will be what is the ned of the world as we know it today.. perhaps consider that meteor that is travelling now in earth orbit. it is called NT72002 ? anyway it is destined to hit earth in some time, they have already calculted the years that it will hit if it misses the first time etc.. 2019 - 2035 - 2051/ that is why usa sent up that rocket ship last year2005 in jan it took till june to reach the meteror.. the rocket ship it split in two - one to explode some of the meteror and the other to recorde the damamge as they dont know if it will explode it or will it absorb the explosion as they not sure what the meteror is made of.. interesint really.. so they know something is on its way.....
';Mr Opik calls on Tony Blair to discuss the matter urgently with George
Bush - a naive plan, it seems to me, since it's 75,000-1 against Bush
knowing the difference between an asteroid and a haemorrhoid (';Tony, is
that one of them lumpy things you find on Uranus?';).';
--The Mirror, 26 July 2002
Whether it is an asteroid or burning fossil fuels or an increase in tectonic and seismic activity or nuclear war, the one thing you can count on, if the history of earth as we understand it is anything to go by, is that the world will change, speices will go extinct and new speices will arise as a result of mutation and adaptation. 95 percent of the speices that have lived on this planet are now extinct. Most became extinct long before humanity evolved. The average lifespan of a speices is about ten million years. Our speices is less than a million years old. Will we survive ourselves? Maybe not. But chances are humanity will survive for at least a few more generations. There are six billion of us on this year. Quite a few of us could die off in a radical, rapid climate change, and still leave enough behind for a viable gene pool. What new speices will arise from the climate change? That'll depend on what speices move into the vacated ecological niches. Once all the giant sea reptile died off, it left a niche open for giant sea mammals to evolve, but the whales and reptiles that occupy the same niche seem fairly similar. Will the next giant sea speices evolve from cephlapods? There are already giant squid, so maybe whale size octopi could be in the future. As for the land animals, who knows what will grow larger and what will shrink as new environments are created.
Dammit! That used to be MY theory. If you want a clear answer, look into something called School of the Americas. It's located on an Army base. It's actually a lot worse than merely ';kill or be killed';.
I think the dog-eat-dog mentailty never really went away in the first place.
Me and my husband living seperately due to incompatiblility in nature.?
I am a mother of a son, working in govt. department ........my husband made agreement in 1991 ...The agreement was not process in any court . so we start living seperately due to incompatiblility in our nature, at that time my son is 5 years old . But we have a 3 storage building which is in his name...at that time we both constributed to make that building... now he is collecting money (rent) every month and giving me no share from it... ple. helpMe and my husband living seperately due to incompatiblility in nature.?
Dear Yogita,
You are in a typical Indian male trap set for simple Indian women, I do hope your husband is not involved with another women also ?.
Well you have the following options:
Try and reconcile or Go for a divorce.
Don't go for a divorce but ask for financial assistance for your son, your husband is duty bound to share the expenditure.
If you can prove that the money put in the construction of the house is half yours then you have a right to get the portion of the earnings.
Try and settle this with your husband mutually or alternatively hire a good lawyer (by good I really mean good, not the ones who fleece you) to resolve the issue. Good LuckMe and my husband living seperately due to incompatiblility in nature.?
go get your share. you probably deserve half since you said that you both contributed to make the building
he had the plan to wait for the time to collect all
As I read some of these answers, one has to ask themselves if any of you are old enough to be up this late. Honey after all this time it's get a divorce. I don't know where you live but in my state your entitled to 50% of all material properties. No matter whose name it is in, especially if it was acquired after your union. since there is no record of separation you are still legally married. Unless you have a prenup stating otherwise. gl
this is why you get everything in writing
Help with what? What do you expect US to do? Rhetorical.
Go and find out a good lawyer. he can help you.
All the very best
lin_dcr@yahoo.com
Unless u have proof of your contribution to the 3 story building (receipts/statements or written agreement) it will be extremely difficult to prove it in court., as the building is under his name. The best advice I can give is to consult a lawyer to determine if u have a fighting chance in claiming your share.
im sorry , but i really hope you do not work for the gov,as you really do not make sence.what do you mean making building? do you mean you built the storage ?and what is the age of your son,as my guess he is about 19 . and what does that have to do with the problem? can you rewite it?
Well, ask him for your share of the money. or take him to court. If both of you contributed, then u are equally entitled to your share.
Seek a lawyer's advice.
Yogita u need a good lawyer and I hope that u have some proof about your contributions to the buildings.
talk to him about it, then take him to a lawyer, but i guarentee you he has something up his sleeve. no one does that with some sort of plan or being nefarious.
mind his direct ways and inderct ways.
You need a good lawyer honey....
There is nothing anyone can do to help. You don't have a legal separation agreement so you get nothing. That's why it's always best to consult a lawyer if you're planning on separating.
Dear Yogita,
You are in a typical Indian male trap set for simple Indian women, I do hope your husband is not involved with another women also ?.
Well you have the following options:
Try and reconcile or Go for a divorce.
Don't go for a divorce but ask for financial assistance for your son, your husband is duty bound to share the expenditure.
If you can prove that the money put in the construction of the house is half yours then you have a right to get the portion of the earnings.
Try and settle this with your husband mutually or alternatively hire a good lawyer (by good I really mean good, not the ones who fleece you) to resolve the issue. Good LuckMe and my husband living seperately due to incompatiblility in nature.?
go get your share. you probably deserve half since you said that you both contributed to make the building
he had the plan to wait for the time to collect all
As I read some of these answers, one has to ask themselves if any of you are old enough to be up this late. Honey after all this time it's get a divorce. I don't know where you live but in my state your entitled to 50% of all material properties. No matter whose name it is in, especially if it was acquired after your union. since there is no record of separation you are still legally married. Unless you have a prenup stating otherwise. gl
this is why you get everything in writing
Help with what? What do you expect US to do? Rhetorical.
Go and find out a good lawyer. he can help you.
All the very best
lin_dcr@yahoo.com
Unless u have proof of your contribution to the 3 story building (receipts/statements or written agreement) it will be extremely difficult to prove it in court., as the building is under his name. The best advice I can give is to consult a lawyer to determine if u have a fighting chance in claiming your share.
im sorry , but i really hope you do not work for the gov,as you really do not make sence.what do you mean making building? do you mean you built the storage ?and what is the age of your son,as my guess he is about 19 . and what does that have to do with the problem? can you rewite it?
Well, ask him for your share of the money. or take him to court. If both of you contributed, then u are equally entitled to your share.
Seek a lawyer's advice.
Yogita u need a good lawyer and I hope that u have some proof about your contributions to the buildings.
talk to him about it, then take him to a lawyer, but i guarentee you he has something up his sleeve. no one does that with some sort of plan or being nefarious.
mind his direct ways and inderct ways.
You need a good lawyer honey....
There is nothing anyone can do to help. You don't have a legal separation agreement so you get nothing. That's why it's always best to consult a lawyer if you're planning on separating.
How can I live off of nature peacefully in North Americas' Mountain Forests? (New to the Appalachian Trail)
My husband and I want to make the A.T. for the first time. We are also planning to make the hike with our 20lb. Rat Terrier, Maui. We have found all of the supplies that we will need to take with us and know where we are not welcome with our four-legged son but would really like to have some advice from some experienced Thru-Hikers. How can we hike this trail using the least amount of travel money and focus more on nauture?How can I live off of nature peacefully in North Americas' Mountain Forests? (New to the Appalachian Trail)
It can be done on little or no money other than food. There have been too many people hiking the AT to be able to foriage off the land. Most guidbook say to count on about a dollar a mile apiece to do the trail but it can be done on about 1/2. Try to contact Warren Doyle, he is a professor at Lees-Macrae College and has done about 15 thru hikes and is king of frugalness on the trail.
Just for the information, the dog is not allowed anywhere in the Smokies or at Baxter State Park (Katadin) (heavy fines). Either you have to board him or skip that part.
With that having been said, have a good hike, your way.
It can be done on little or no money other than food. There have been too many people hiking the AT to be able to foriage off the land. Most guidbook say to count on about a dollar a mile apiece to do the trail but it can be done on about 1/2. Try to contact Warren Doyle, he is a professor at Lees-Macrae College and has done about 15 thru hikes and is king of frugalness on the trail.
Just for the information, the dog is not allowed anywhere in the Smokies or at Baxter State Park (Katadin) (heavy fines). Either you have to board him or skip that part.
With that having been said, have a good hike, your way.
As a Step mom I have set boundaries due to the sensitive nature of my teenage stepchild living with us?
Our teen is truly loved and repected however we are havivg problems trying to explain why we have the boundries in place , the mom of this teen thinks that she can just come and go in my home as she pleases because she lives in another state, we try to alternate holidays and school breaks and summer vacation between the two households being equaly divided however for some reason this mom wants to be in my presence when it is not
nescessary after all this is a teen that is a honor student , has a
part time job , and will graduate in may 07 and has been excepted to the college of choice. after all this mom has decieved her teen
about provision and the love of a father . How do we teach our teen that we have her best intrest at heart, but mom most respect
all boundries that are in place.
Terra P.As a Step mom I have set boundaries due to the sensitive nature of my teenage stepchild living with us?
I went through the same thing with my ex. By the time my son was 16 there was more damage done then you would expect. The rest of the story... I stuck to my guns, held my boundaries with no malice, and let the turmoil roll off my shoulders as my ex's problem and not mine. Her not wanting to respect my boundaries was not my issue. I made that clear. My son did give me problems, and it was rough. Take heart... Now he is 22 and doing well. He has even gone as far as to thank me and wife for the stable structure that we demanded around us. Yes, he thanked me for being a Dad and not being his ';buddy';. He's a young man to be proud of now, and I am and tell him so.
You will do fine because you already see the need for fairness and boundaries. The work now is to not to cave. It won't always be easy, but it is the right thing you do. You can explain to the teen now and they may not like it, but they hear you and will appreciate it down the road.coolest myspace
nescessary after all this is a teen that is a honor student , has a
part time job , and will graduate in may 07 and has been excepted to the college of choice. after all this mom has decieved her teen
about provision and the love of a father . How do we teach our teen that we have her best intrest at heart, but mom most respect
all boundries that are in place.
Terra P.As a Step mom I have set boundaries due to the sensitive nature of my teenage stepchild living with us?
I went through the same thing with my ex. By the time my son was 16 there was more damage done then you would expect. The rest of the story... I stuck to my guns, held my boundaries with no malice, and let the turmoil roll off my shoulders as my ex's problem and not mine. Her not wanting to respect my boundaries was not my issue. I made that clear. My son did give me problems, and it was rough. Take heart... Now he is 22 and doing well. He has even gone as far as to thank me and wife for the stable structure that we demanded around us. Yes, he thanked me for being a Dad and not being his ';buddy';. He's a young man to be proud of now, and I am and tell him so.
You will do fine because you already see the need for fairness and boundaries. The work now is to not to cave. It won't always be easy, but it is the right thing you do. You can explain to the teen now and they may not like it, but they hear you and will appreciate it down the road.
What can nature teach us about how we should interact with other living things, both human and non human?
NATURE IS OUR MOTHER, SO EVERYTHING IN THIS PLANET MUST BE PROTECTEED FOR EVERYONE.
EVERYTHING IS PART OF US, IF THERE ARE NO TREES YOU CAN BREATH, THAT'S MY OPINIONWhat can nature teach us about how we should interact with other living things, both human and non human?
You need not look any farther than the degradation oif the planet and disregard for the consequences, to be able to predict our future.
Certainly every living thing ';dies'; How it dies is a major issue, and OUR species is truly in control as well as being out of control in how we should be the Custodians of the planet.
Rev. StevenWhat can nature teach us about how we should interact with other living things, both human and non human?
Hopefully you will see that animals only kill for a reason (usually food, or in self-defense). They kill for no other reason.
Humans kill for other reasons. Perhaps this is something humans could learn from animals. Learn not to kill.
EVERYTHING IS PART OF US, IF THERE ARE NO TREES YOU CAN BREATH, THAT'S MY OPINIONWhat can nature teach us about how we should interact with other living things, both human and non human?
You need not look any farther than the degradation oif the planet and disregard for the consequences, to be able to predict our future.
Certainly every living thing ';dies'; How it dies is a major issue, and OUR species is truly in control as well as being out of control in how we should be the Custodians of the planet.
Rev. StevenWhat can nature teach us about how we should interact with other living things, both human and non human?
Hopefully you will see that animals only kill for a reason (usually food, or in self-defense). They kill for no other reason.
Humans kill for other reasons. Perhaps this is something humans could learn from animals. Learn not to kill.
Have you ever just packed up your stuff and left where you live and travelled round camping in nature?
for months at a time. I am thinking of doing that. I could save up and get a tent and panniers for my mbke then i could just tvl around forests and beachsides for six months. If you have done this. What was it like?Have you ever just packed up your stuff and left where you live and travelled round camping in nature?
Yes I did this in the 60s and I enjoyed myself so much I moved to a remote area of Alaska to live with nature and travel the wilderness.
Be prepared; bring the right gear, clothing etc. And I strongly advise to not go it alone, especially since you are a lady. You may consider packing a gun with a conceal carry permit. And bring a high quality first aid kit.
Wish you the best!Have you ever just packed up your stuff and left where you live and travelled round camping in nature?
No but that sounds fantastic. Go for it I reckon.
One of my personal life mentors did this for a long time, he did it once for 7 months in India, another time in Ireland, and I think once in Norway. Anyway he described it as a very life-awakening adventure, but also more reality-based than he expected. you have to be smart and very resourceful, learning how to say ';laundry'; and packing large amounts of socks were his tips to me. If you're goinginto straight wildlife, you won't be able to do it for 6 months without a hell of a lot of gear and some military training if you know what I mean. Start easy, go for a week backpack, then a two week, and work your way up. After a while I think you'll learn that the best ';pick up and leave'; trips are when you go somewhere you've never been and just travel in and out of civilization- map a path that takes you to a city, then through a forest, ends at a town, etc. You'll enjoy the company you meet more and it won't be a survival game- something that can ruin the best trips for the best of us.
i would love to do that. unfortunately i don't have the time or money for that. i have all the gear i would need, except for food of course, but if there was somewhere i could just survive in the wild i would love to do that. i would love to catch and cook fish over an open fire with no seasons, eat berries and wild fruits and plants. i would love to have to survive on my own. i have no doubt that i could easily do it. i am a minimalist camper anyway. Robinson Crusoe had the most amazing life ever. (yes i know he was fictional) if you haven't read the book you should. that would be the ultimate life. i'm more into the appalachian mountains than the tropics though. if you do go GOOD LUCK, and Have Fun!!!
no and i never would.. i love nature and all, but i only like to look at it and not be out in it. im too much of a girly girl who enjoys the comforts of indoor living and hates dirt and bugs.
well if you decide to do that, be careful and maybe wait until spring so its not as cold out and you wont freeze. and be safe so that no one tries kidnapping or hurting you while you are out by yourself esp. at night.
good luck :)
by just saying 'packed up your stuff where you lived'
kinda makes me think that your house is on wheels
No, and trust me, it is practically the stupidest thing you'll ever do, but if you were to go to Yellowstone or somethin'... Well, I'd only go to see wolves
i have always wanted to do that.i have the tents/equipment.but no one to go with.
sounds great when we leaving
The Appellation Trail that starts at Mt. Katadin In Maine on the north entrance of Baxter state park for the starting point and ends in Georgia. It takes six months to complete the trail.
If you think your in shape think again. It can be brutal on your body because of the weather ever so changing climates. You need to forage for food when you run out of provisions. Can you live like that? Black bears, raccoons, possums, skunks, spiders, snakes, all cause problems when we are not careful. How in tune are you with nature, you can find out on my blog @ yahoo 360/Outdoor Traditions of Maine @ crazy4huntin@yahoo.com
I would love to do this cause I love camping and being outside with all the dirt and bugs! If only someone would go with me, then I would do it...too bad my best friend HATES nature, though I have no idea why...
I would do it, but wait until its warmer, and get a friend to go with you. There are many accidents waiting to happen while you are camping, and it wouldn't be good if you got hurt and there was no one around...
Have fun!
No but close. After my divorce, I bought a brand new travel trailer. I was going to go to my favorite lake for about a month. That month turned into six months, and at that point I figured why go back. (300 miles away.) I moved to the small town at the foothills, and have been here ever since. This happened six years ago.
That is actually one of the things im going to do in my life. Im probably going to go somewhere into canadas wilderness. Just make sure you have all the right skills first
I have all of the gear and know-how to do that, unfortunately I have not had a lapse of employment since I was 15 years old...I'm 33 now. Nor could I have ever afforded to ';split from the whole program'; for months on end.
When my wanderlust gets the better of me I usually try to find a job as a guide or tour leader that will PAY me to go wander around.
Life on the road is so much better when you are getting a steady check in the process. It means you can afford to buy better beer and eat a steak while the other Tourist Kids are sitting in the park eating Ramen noodles on their ';semester off';.
The best food to help sustain you for six months is spaghettio's. Get lots and lots of cans(around 400).
I did it in 2007 summer for 3 months I started in oregon and flew to vietnam. It was a long flight. But when i got there. no car no nothing. except a huge backpack including some food[just in case] and several other things [tents, a lamp...] it was fun. I went with a friend and we just fished and hunted for our food. Hunting was hard to do but we were on an adventure. lol wow it was amazing. you should do it. but it does get tiring and kinda boring at times. so you might want to bring things to do..or plan the trip for shorter then 6 months
Peace out.
Yes I did this in the 60s and I enjoyed myself so much I moved to a remote area of Alaska to live with nature and travel the wilderness.
Be prepared; bring the right gear, clothing etc. And I strongly advise to not go it alone, especially since you are a lady. You may consider packing a gun with a conceal carry permit. And bring a high quality first aid kit.
Wish you the best!Have you ever just packed up your stuff and left where you live and travelled round camping in nature?
No but that sounds fantastic. Go for it I reckon.
One of my personal life mentors did this for a long time, he did it once for 7 months in India, another time in Ireland, and I think once in Norway. Anyway he described it as a very life-awakening adventure, but also more reality-based than he expected. you have to be smart and very resourceful, learning how to say ';laundry'; and packing large amounts of socks were his tips to me. If you're goinginto straight wildlife, you won't be able to do it for 6 months without a hell of a lot of gear and some military training if you know what I mean. Start easy, go for a week backpack, then a two week, and work your way up. After a while I think you'll learn that the best ';pick up and leave'; trips are when you go somewhere you've never been and just travel in and out of civilization- map a path that takes you to a city, then through a forest, ends at a town, etc. You'll enjoy the company you meet more and it won't be a survival game- something that can ruin the best trips for the best of us.
i would love to do that. unfortunately i don't have the time or money for that. i have all the gear i would need, except for food of course, but if there was somewhere i could just survive in the wild i would love to do that. i would love to catch and cook fish over an open fire with no seasons, eat berries and wild fruits and plants. i would love to have to survive on my own. i have no doubt that i could easily do it. i am a minimalist camper anyway. Robinson Crusoe had the most amazing life ever. (yes i know he was fictional) if you haven't read the book you should. that would be the ultimate life. i'm more into the appalachian mountains than the tropics though. if you do go GOOD LUCK, and Have Fun!!!
no and i never would.. i love nature and all, but i only like to look at it and not be out in it. im too much of a girly girl who enjoys the comforts of indoor living and hates dirt and bugs.
well if you decide to do that, be careful and maybe wait until spring so its not as cold out and you wont freeze. and be safe so that no one tries kidnapping or hurting you while you are out by yourself esp. at night.
good luck :)
by just saying 'packed up your stuff where you lived'
kinda makes me think that your house is on wheels
No, and trust me, it is practically the stupidest thing you'll ever do, but if you were to go to Yellowstone or somethin'... Well, I'd only go to see wolves
i have always wanted to do that.i have the tents/equipment.but no one to go with.
sounds great when we leaving
The Appellation Trail that starts at Mt. Katadin In Maine on the north entrance of Baxter state park for the starting point and ends in Georgia. It takes six months to complete the trail.
If you think your in shape think again. It can be brutal on your body because of the weather ever so changing climates. You need to forage for food when you run out of provisions. Can you live like that? Black bears, raccoons, possums, skunks, spiders, snakes, all cause problems when we are not careful. How in tune are you with nature, you can find out on my blog @ yahoo 360/Outdoor Traditions of Maine @ crazy4huntin@yahoo.com
I would love to do this cause I love camping and being outside with all the dirt and bugs! If only someone would go with me, then I would do it...too bad my best friend HATES nature, though I have no idea why...
I would do it, but wait until its warmer, and get a friend to go with you. There are many accidents waiting to happen while you are camping, and it wouldn't be good if you got hurt and there was no one around...
Have fun!
No but close. After my divorce, I bought a brand new travel trailer. I was going to go to my favorite lake for about a month. That month turned into six months, and at that point I figured why go back. (300 miles away.) I moved to the small town at the foothills, and have been here ever since. This happened six years ago.
That is actually one of the things im going to do in my life. Im probably going to go somewhere into canadas wilderness. Just make sure you have all the right skills first
I have all of the gear and know-how to do that, unfortunately I have not had a lapse of employment since I was 15 years old...I'm 33 now. Nor could I have ever afforded to ';split from the whole program'; for months on end.
When my wanderlust gets the better of me I usually try to find a job as a guide or tour leader that will PAY me to go wander around.
Life on the road is so much better when you are getting a steady check in the process. It means you can afford to buy better beer and eat a steak while the other Tourist Kids are sitting in the park eating Ramen noodles on their ';semester off';.
The best food to help sustain you for six months is spaghettio's. Get lots and lots of cans(around 400).
I did it in 2007 summer for 3 months I started in oregon and flew to vietnam. It was a long flight. But when i got there. no car no nothing. except a huge backpack including some food[just in case] and several other things [tents, a lamp...] it was fun. I went with a friend and we just fished and hunted for our food. Hunting was hard to do but we were on an adventure. lol wow it was amazing. you should do it. but it does get tiring and kinda boring at times. so you might want to bring things to do..or plan the trip for shorter then 6 months
Peace out.
Would you like living in the wilderness, surrounded by nature?
I would love it as long as I was safe from humans because the animals won't hurt you. Several years ago, I read that several members of the Mohawk Nation in Upstate New York had returned to the wilderness to be one with nature.Would you like living in the wilderness, surrounded by nature?
it is the best experience that one can have. once a friend remarked to me that how could there be a place without mobile phone connectivity. it took a lot of convincing to put across that even today there are places where the mobile cannot reach you, try visiting such places and if you can help it( finance, family ties, children, social obligations etc) you would never want to return to the tech savvy world that we have all got so caught up in. nature just takes away the tension from your life and one feels calm and fulfilled with God's wonderful creations around you.Would you like living in the wilderness, surrounded by nature?
Didn't you see what happened to the grizzly bear guy? The bears killed and ate him and his girlfriend...
I did it the fourteen months surrounding Y2K. Best time of my life, but I'm a solitary man.
it would be a nice change from the city
If I can derive electricity from nature, then I guess it would be fine to stay away from humans for a while.... but, by the time I be one with nature I would have to attend the exams, which are nearing in fast.
i am in too . sounds perfect
no I don't like bugs!
I feel more relaxed just thinking about it.
When I was younger, I would have loved it. Now, I like having a nearby grocery, doc, and police. As for the thinking that animals won't hurt you, read any newspaper of a suburb and count the number of people gored by deer, mauled by bear or cougar, bitten by everything from bats to foxes, sprayed in the eyes by skunks, chomped by snakes, stung by hornets,invaded by bees, dive-bombed by birds, and cut by a fish, and get back to me on the peaceful world.
That would be nice, animals will hurt you though so you should bring a gun.
Yes I would love that...it is the human animals I fear too...
Sure as long as i had food,shelter, first aid kit.a starbucks nearby with an In n Out next door. As long as i was safe from animals because since i would be in their habitat i would respect them as much as possible by giving them their space and not feeding them so they dont depend on me.and i'll stay my distance
I don't even like to go down to the country to visit my folks!
When in nature your concept of time changes to the natural cycles instead of linear time. Your perceptions become enhanced and sometimes beauty to me is overwhelming.
Continue your idea that animals will not hurt you, they don't want to.
I spend a lot of time alone near Yellowstone, the home of many grizzlies. I don't go trying to make friends with them like that guy and his wife in Alaska, but I feel no fear being out there.
It sounds really cool, but it also sounds like you have been hurt real bad..... I hope it gets better for you.
I would love to..I was like that when I was little. I had not that many friends so I hung out with camels and fish. =]
however I would like to have some human friends with me though
this is why I don't think it's right to lock a bird up in a cage when it wants to be free
This might come as a surprise but but animals will hurt you. Yes though, I do like living in the wilderness, surrounded by nature.
Me too!
most animals wont hurt you. polar bears and grizzly bears are no threat if you dont live where they do. there is a lot of wilderness with no dangerous animals. i grew up at the edge of near-wilderness, and lived in the woods miles from the nearest humans. deer, chipmunks, squirrels, rabbits, ground squirrels all get to trust you, even to like you,l pretty quickly. black bears will rarely bother you, same for cougars, wolves, wolverines.... if you have animals come to visit you, its not lonely. my big problem was walking 16 miles or so to the nearest little town, to get groceries, mail, etc. and in the winter i couldnt do it, it was just too hard.
No. I am more of a city girl.
I love bathrooms, pillow tops, air conditioning, perfume, and designer shoes...
I would love to live out in the wilderness. But, at the same time, I would miss Target...
I visit the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness annually and stay in a cabin. Being out there refreshes my mind. I love it. I don't know that I could live there full time though...I am too high maintenance for that. And interesting story about a woman who did live in the wildnerness for her entire life....';The Root Beer Lady'; by Bob Cary.
I take it you have never met a grisly bear.
I'd do it as long as I had broadband.
I been in the wild. It has bugs. Have you ever been wet and cold for days on end. That's not so fun. Animals are animals, and they will hurt you.
I love nature, and the natural world. I also love my warm house, none the less for having slept on the cold, wet, hard ground. Beds are really nice too. They are made in factories and those are supported by cities. So I guess I like Cities and factories too.
Animals won't hurt you? Are you dense? Yogi bear was a very docile creature, not a real bear. A wolverine will do more damage to you quicker than you can blink, hyenas are the scavengers of the animal world but they still attack humans, and wolves hunt in packs so they can take just about anything down.
More or less I do. I have electricity and modern conveniences though. For many years I got my water out of a spring fed creek. (I have city water now) I live miles from the nearest town of 300. I can not see any body or any building from my place. Sometimes at night I can see the glow from the lights from the nearest town of any size, 30 miles away.
I live in the forest in the mountains. I would not trade it for anything. Often wild animals come in my yard ( I call it yard it is all trees.) and on my porch. I have seen every wild animal that lives in my state here around my house.
It is good to live off the land as much as possible. Gardening, hunting %26amp; fishing.
Sometimes I go for days without seeing any body other than my family.
I don't sleep outside. lol The critters keep me up at night, they are to noisy.
I would love it - I just need my internet and maybe a 7-11 made just for me in case I need some OFF or something. :)
as long as i get to take my refrigeration, electricity, running water......yea! I love the outdoors....:)
Yeah, well grizzly bears will be happy to see you. As their habitat continually disappears, so does their food source and you'd be a tasty morsel. I'd enjoy being out in the woods for a while, but not for long. You should watch the Nature channel more often. You'll see that life in the wilderness ain't a picnic (and sometimes neither is a picnic).
No.
I dont like crap.
it is the best experience that one can have. once a friend remarked to me that how could there be a place without mobile phone connectivity. it took a lot of convincing to put across that even today there are places where the mobile cannot reach you, try visiting such places and if you can help it( finance, family ties, children, social obligations etc) you would never want to return to the tech savvy world that we have all got so caught up in. nature just takes away the tension from your life and one feels calm and fulfilled with God's wonderful creations around you.Would you like living in the wilderness, surrounded by nature?
Didn't you see what happened to the grizzly bear guy? The bears killed and ate him and his girlfriend...
I did it the fourteen months surrounding Y2K. Best time of my life, but I'm a solitary man.
it would be a nice change from the city
If I can derive electricity from nature, then I guess it would be fine to stay away from humans for a while.... but, by the time I be one with nature I would have to attend the exams, which are nearing in fast.
i am in too . sounds perfect
no I don't like bugs!
I feel more relaxed just thinking about it.
When I was younger, I would have loved it. Now, I like having a nearby grocery, doc, and police. As for the thinking that animals won't hurt you, read any newspaper of a suburb and count the number of people gored by deer, mauled by bear or cougar, bitten by everything from bats to foxes, sprayed in the eyes by skunks, chomped by snakes, stung by hornets,invaded by bees, dive-bombed by birds, and cut by a fish, and get back to me on the peaceful world.
That would be nice, animals will hurt you though so you should bring a gun.
Yes I would love that...it is the human animals I fear too...
Sure as long as i had food,shelter, first aid kit.a starbucks nearby with an In n Out next door. As long as i was safe from animals because since i would be in their habitat i would respect them as much as possible by giving them their space and not feeding them so they dont depend on me.and i'll stay my distance
I don't even like to go down to the country to visit my folks!
When in nature your concept of time changes to the natural cycles instead of linear time. Your perceptions become enhanced and sometimes beauty to me is overwhelming.
Continue your idea that animals will not hurt you, they don't want to.
I spend a lot of time alone near Yellowstone, the home of many grizzlies. I don't go trying to make friends with them like that guy and his wife in Alaska, but I feel no fear being out there.
It sounds really cool, but it also sounds like you have been hurt real bad..... I hope it gets better for you.
I would love to..I was like that when I was little. I had not that many friends so I hung out with camels and fish. =]
however I would like to have some human friends with me though
this is why I don't think it's right to lock a bird up in a cage when it wants to be free
This might come as a surprise but but animals will hurt you. Yes though, I do like living in the wilderness, surrounded by nature.
Me too!
most animals wont hurt you. polar bears and grizzly bears are no threat if you dont live where they do. there is a lot of wilderness with no dangerous animals. i grew up at the edge of near-wilderness, and lived in the woods miles from the nearest humans. deer, chipmunks, squirrels, rabbits, ground squirrels all get to trust you, even to like you,l pretty quickly. black bears will rarely bother you, same for cougars, wolves, wolverines.... if you have animals come to visit you, its not lonely. my big problem was walking 16 miles or so to the nearest little town, to get groceries, mail, etc. and in the winter i couldnt do it, it was just too hard.
No. I am more of a city girl.
I love bathrooms, pillow tops, air conditioning, perfume, and designer shoes...
I would love to live out in the wilderness. But, at the same time, I would miss Target...
I visit the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness annually and stay in a cabin. Being out there refreshes my mind. I love it. I don't know that I could live there full time though...I am too high maintenance for that. And interesting story about a woman who did live in the wildnerness for her entire life....';The Root Beer Lady'; by Bob Cary.
I take it you have never met a grisly bear.
I'd do it as long as I had broadband.
I been in the wild. It has bugs. Have you ever been wet and cold for days on end. That's not so fun. Animals are animals, and they will hurt you.
I love nature, and the natural world. I also love my warm house, none the less for having slept on the cold, wet, hard ground. Beds are really nice too. They are made in factories and those are supported by cities. So I guess I like Cities and factories too.
Animals won't hurt you? Are you dense? Yogi bear was a very docile creature, not a real bear. A wolverine will do more damage to you quicker than you can blink, hyenas are the scavengers of the animal world but they still attack humans, and wolves hunt in packs so they can take just about anything down.
More or less I do. I have electricity and modern conveniences though. For many years I got my water out of a spring fed creek. (I have city water now) I live miles from the nearest town of 300. I can not see any body or any building from my place. Sometimes at night I can see the glow from the lights from the nearest town of any size, 30 miles away.
I live in the forest in the mountains. I would not trade it for anything. Often wild animals come in my yard ( I call it yard it is all trees.) and on my porch. I have seen every wild animal that lives in my state here around my house.
It is good to live off the land as much as possible. Gardening, hunting %26amp; fishing.
Sometimes I go for days without seeing any body other than my family.
I don't sleep outside. lol The critters keep me up at night, they are to noisy.
I would love it - I just need my internet and maybe a 7-11 made just for me in case I need some OFF or something. :)
as long as i get to take my refrigeration, electricity, running water......yea! I love the outdoors....:)
Yeah, well grizzly bears will be happy to see you. As their habitat continually disappears, so does their food source and you'd be a tasty morsel. I'd enjoy being out in the woods for a while, but not for long. You should watch the Nature channel more often. You'll see that life in the wilderness ain't a picnic (and sometimes neither is a picnic).
No.
I dont like crap.
Dots and Milk from nature are particularly important for the root of living?
...Dots and Milk from nature are particularly important for the root of living?
yeah only on tuesdays thoughDots and Milk from nature are particularly important for the root of living?
( . ) ( . )
yeah only on tuesdays thoughDots and Milk from nature are particularly important for the root of living?
( . ) ( . )
Please introduce a non-profit source on internet for how to live in nature without damaging and hurting nature?
please introduce a non-profit source on internet for how to live in nature without damaging and hurting nature. my email: forest.servant@gmail.comPlease introduce a non-profit source on internet for how to live in nature without damaging and hurting nature?
go tribal.
go tribal.
How can I live off of nature peacefully in North Americas' Mountain Forests? (New to the Appalachian Trail)
My husband and I want to make the A.T. for the first time. We are also planning to make the hike with our 20lb. Rat Terrier, Maui. We have found all of the supplies that we will need to take with us and know where we are not welcome with our four-legged son but would really like to have some advice from some experienced Thru-Hikers. How can we hike this trail using the least amount of travel money and focus more on nauture?How can I live off of nature peacefully in North Americas' Mountain Forests? (New to the Appalachian Trail)
It can be done on little or no money other than food. There have been too many people hiking the AT to be able to foriage off the land. Most guidbook say to count on about a dollar a mile apiece to do the trail but it can be done on about 1/2. Try to contact Warren Doyle, he is a professor at Lees-Macrae College and has done about 15 thru hikes and is king of frugalness on the trail.
Just for the information, the dog is not allowed anywhere in the Smokies or at Baxter State Park (Katadin) (heavy fines). Either you have to board him or skip that part.
With that having been said, have a good hike, your way.How can I live off of nature peacefully in North Americas' Mountain Forests? (New to the Appalachian Trail)
Is there some reason you have asked the same question five times in the same section?coolest myspace
It can be done on little or no money other than food. There have been too many people hiking the AT to be able to foriage off the land. Most guidbook say to count on about a dollar a mile apiece to do the trail but it can be done on about 1/2. Try to contact Warren Doyle, he is a professor at Lees-Macrae College and has done about 15 thru hikes and is king of frugalness on the trail.
Just for the information, the dog is not allowed anywhere in the Smokies or at Baxter State Park (Katadin) (heavy fines). Either you have to board him or skip that part.
With that having been said, have a good hike, your way.How can I live off of nature peacefully in North Americas' Mountain Forests? (New to the Appalachian Trail)
Is there some reason you have asked the same question five times in the same section?
What might be some advantages and disadvantages of living in a state of nature?
again, MORE geography. god i hate that fat womanWhat might be some advantages and disadvantages of living in a state of nature?
advantages: No rules, you can do whatever you want to do. You don't have to pay taxes. No money wasted on random things that they want to ';Experiment'; with.
Disadvantages: When there are no rules then your town ( or where ever you live) will soon go wild and no one can stop it. Also who will help set up transportation and control all the water and electricity stuff. Who would control the court if there was no rules even the wrong could be right.
Good luck
advantages: No rules, you can do whatever you want to do. You don't have to pay taxes. No money wasted on random things that they want to ';Experiment'; with.
Disadvantages: When there are no rules then your town ( or where ever you live) will soon go wild and no one can stop it. Also who will help set up transportation and control all the water and electricity stuff. Who would control the court if there was no rules even the wrong could be right.
Good luck
Is it human nature for people to want to tell others how to live their lives?
What do you think?Is it human nature for people to want to tell others how to live their lives?
Only certain human beings.
Myself, I never had any desire to. If you ask my opinions, I might venture a platitude or 2. But I can barely figure out how to live my own life. I got no business telling other people how to live theirs.
My spouse is the same way. I could never live with a person who thought he should tell me how to live my life.Is it human nature for people to want to tell others how to live their lives?
People learn as they go threw life. They go threw bad and good times. They want to guide you so you so your life will be all good. The more someone loves you,the more they speak up,so your life will be better then your. I think it is human nature to insist on learning things the hard way! You especially can't talk to those who need it most...Teenagers! They are too excited about becoming adults,they want to slam threw it all and spread their wings and fly. They do not see the predators on the ground if they try to fly before the adult feathers come in.We all know what happens to them. Teenagers only see blue skies.
I feel like people are mostly good and think that if their lives are good they want you to have a good life too. It is human nature to take things as you understand them, so maybe if you don't understand how someone else lives their lives you can't understand how they can be happy. So by telling them what makes you happy, you are just wanting them to be happy.
Here's a great quote:
';Advice is a form of nostalgia. Dispensing it is like fishing the past from the disposal, wiping it off, painting over the ugly parts, and recycling it for more than it's worth.'; ~ Everybody's Free to Wear Sunscreen by Baz Luhrman
Of course it is human nature to do that. We're fear-based animals. I agree with an above statement that we feel we have to be 'right.' The object is to surpass these animalistic features and go on to an evolved nature, which, in the end, will help us tame our human nature and then we will be 'right' because there will be no fear, biggotry, and so on. The answer to your question at this point in our time is yes, I'm sad to say.
No. It is through Divine intervention that makes some people want to warn not tell others how to live their lives. We just know something they don't know and give a damn about them.
Social Nature, so probably
For democrats it certainly is.
no, human nature cares only about itself.
Yeah probably. Like when moms tell their kids what to do. :] It's normal and it will happen forever!!! ^__^
I think it tends to be human nature to think that you are always right.
Are you telling me to think about this question? well i refuse. Stop telling me how to live my life!!
i dont know but it is really annoying
Only certain human beings.
Myself, I never had any desire to. If you ask my opinions, I might venture a platitude or 2. But I can barely figure out how to live my own life. I got no business telling other people how to live theirs.
My spouse is the same way. I could never live with a person who thought he should tell me how to live my life.Is it human nature for people to want to tell others how to live their lives?
People learn as they go threw life. They go threw bad and good times. They want to guide you so you so your life will be all good. The more someone loves you,the more they speak up,so your life will be better then your. I think it is human nature to insist on learning things the hard way! You especially can't talk to those who need it most...Teenagers! They are too excited about becoming adults,they want to slam threw it all and spread their wings and fly. They do not see the predators on the ground if they try to fly before the adult feathers come in.We all know what happens to them. Teenagers only see blue skies.
I feel like people are mostly good and think that if their lives are good they want you to have a good life too. It is human nature to take things as you understand them, so maybe if you don't understand how someone else lives their lives you can't understand how they can be happy. So by telling them what makes you happy, you are just wanting them to be happy.
Here's a great quote:
';Advice is a form of nostalgia. Dispensing it is like fishing the past from the disposal, wiping it off, painting over the ugly parts, and recycling it for more than it's worth.'; ~ Everybody's Free to Wear Sunscreen by Baz Luhrman
Of course it is human nature to do that. We're fear-based animals. I agree with an above statement that we feel we have to be 'right.' The object is to surpass these animalistic features and go on to an evolved nature, which, in the end, will help us tame our human nature and then we will be 'right' because there will be no fear, biggotry, and so on. The answer to your question at this point in our time is yes, I'm sad to say.
No. It is through Divine intervention that makes some people want to warn not tell others how to live their lives. We just know something they don't know and give a damn about them.
Social Nature, so probably
For democrats it certainly is.
no, human nature cares only about itself.
Yeah probably. Like when moms tell their kids what to do. :] It's normal and it will happen forever!!! ^__^
I think it tends to be human nature to think that you are always right.
Are you telling me to think about this question? well i refuse. Stop telling me how to live my life!!
i dont know but it is really annoying
Is there a place to live in nature, out of civilization?
All property is kind of 'owned' thus making vagrancy trespassing and illegal. Is there not a land distant/free enough to live out of nature and nothing else?Is there a place to live in nature, out of civilization?
yeah, I second that.. come up here to Canada and ignore the buildings and ****.
... :T
EDIT:
Like you said... ';all'; land is owned. Unless you want to become a modern day explorer and try to discover new lands in uninhabitable areas, it's sort of impossible.Is there a place to live in nature, out of civilization?
Yes. North of the border in Canada or in Alaska.
amish paradise
under water?sorry.there are many places on earth,where you can live in peace,just look for them.
yeah, I second that.. come up here to Canada and ignore the buildings and ****.
... :T
EDIT:
Like you said... ';all'; land is owned. Unless you want to become a modern day explorer and try to discover new lands in uninhabitable areas, it's sort of impossible.Is there a place to live in nature, out of civilization?
Yes. North of the border in Canada or in Alaska.
amish paradise
under water?sorry.there are many places on earth,where you can live in peace,just look for them.
What brand and where can you buy the sweat shirts that have ';live, nature, love'; on the back?
hollister!What brand and where can you buy the sweat shirts that have ';live, nature, love'; on the back?
Haha not Hollister
They have a lot of those types at Victoria's Secret PINK.
http://www2.victoriassecret.com/commerce鈥?/a>
http://www2.victoriassecret.com/commerce鈥?/a>
http://www2.victoriassecret.com/commerce鈥?/a>
http://www2.victoriassecret.com/commerce鈥?/a>
Haha not Hollister
They have a lot of those types at Victoria's Secret PINK.
http://www2.victoriassecret.com/commerce鈥?/a>
http://www2.victoriassecret.com/commerce鈥?/a>
http://www2.victoriassecret.com/commerce鈥?/a>
http://www2.victoriassecret.com/commerce鈥?/a>
Who had a more civilized approach to life: The Native Americans who lived in harmony with nature?
(until the advent of the gun and horse), and modern man(and woman) who is rapidly outstripping the Earth's natural resources, and perhaps changing the climate forever?Who had a more civilized approach to life: The Native Americans who lived in harmony with nature?
Part of the problem here is that we aren't sure what the word ';civilized'; means in this question. If we took an anthropological/historical approach to this word, a ';civilization'; is simply a culture that is concentrated in cities (latin: civis). However, given the assumption in the question that Native Americans lived in harmony with nature, I think the questioner is taking more of a moral stance rather than a classificatory one.
This issue has everything to do with how WE perceive Native Americans rather than anything to do with how ';civilized'; people are. In the past, many people have either disparaged or romanticized Native Americans cultures. These are the easy options. Objectivity is much more difficult. When ';westerners'; first came across American Indians, not only were American Indian cultures looked down upon, they were often not even considered human. For 500 years, they were brutalized, destroyed and missionized. One common result of the decimation of indigenous people, the world over, is that the decimators come to romanticize the decimated! This is what is called the ';Noble Savage'; syndrome. It is a common irony of the cycle of colonization which occurs not only in this case but in other cases as well.
It is true, as some answerers have pointed out, that Native Americans did over-exploit their environment. The first people to occupy North American in fact wiped out many species that were unused to this clever new predator who showed up with weapons, fire, intelligence, and incredible adaptability. But it is also true that hunting and gathering people in general, not just the indigenous peoples of the Americas, take very, very good care of their environment. Why is this? Sure, their are the oft-cited religious reasons to live in ';harmony'; with nature, but there are also very pragmatic reasons. If you over-hunt and over-fish, your children will not have any food. It's cultural suicide. So, as is always the case, the religious beliefs bolster a culture's economic and political systems. In our newly found ';romantic'; assessment of indigenous peoples everywhere, and in our increasingly over-polluted world, we have come to admire these religious beliefs.
One classic argument that makes the case that people were better in societies with simpler technology is the chapter ';The Original Affluent Society'; in Marshall Sahlins' book ';Stone Age Economics'; (1972). In that piece, Sahlins points to the fact, discovered from the archaeological record as well as from ethnographic studies, that people who live in hunting-and-gathering societies often have better health, better diets, and are less prone to disease and starvation than people who farm and live in settled towns. The reason, he claims, is that farmers depend on fewer crops which are also genetically homogenized. As a result, they are more prone to drought and blight, and since farmers exploit only a few species compared to hunter-gatherers, they are much more affected by it. Hunter-gatherers, on the other hand, can simply move on to a new area and/or exploit different species. Furthermore, the close proximity to animal and human waste products (garbage, feces, and carcasses) in settled towns produces higher rates of epidemic disease, which of course spread faster because people are settled and living in very close proximity to one another. One might conclude that this is a ';better'; way to live as Sahlins seemed to do.
Things are different today for sure, and we can never ';go back';. When humans lived only by hunting and gathering, the world probably had a population of 1-5% of the current population (this is really just a rough guess though). We live in huge complex societies that have made a huge negative impact on the environment and on each other. Does this mean there is no hope to be better? Absolutely not. We can consume less, we can slow population growth, and we can find truly sustainable energy sources. And there ARE some very good things about our society as well, let's not forget. Disparaging ourselves is another simplified trap to fall into.
Finally, let us not oversimplify what we mean when we say ';Native Americans'; either! There was a whole diverse continent of cultures here in 1492. Not all indigenous people of the Americas were hunters and gatherers. Far from it. There were in fact ';civilizations'; (in the technical sense of the term) in the Americas as well. Think of the ancient Maya, the Aztec, the Incas. And the Mayans are a classic case study in how to over exploit the environment.Who had a more civilized approach to life: The Native Americans who lived in harmony with nature?
The Native Americans did it up right, as far as I'm concerned.
The problem is that we think in terms of out-fighting our environment. Becoming on top. Native Americans didn't think like that. They took whatever in necessary and left the rest be. That is one of the major differences probably. This ';approach'; right now may seem as the New Agist, however others might say that this is the only way to survive in the present condition - venerate the Earth, the Sky, and their creations. Look at us as an intertwined part of it all rather then some kind of heterogeneous artificial creations that have no relation to everthing but just use it to achieve its own selfish ends.
Did they do that out of choice or out of necessity? What were their other options???
These were also people that scalped each other, fought regularly with other tribes, practiced slavery, human sacrifice, and in some cases canibalism.
What you're talking about is the industrial revolution and not ';white man'; and indian relations.
There are many indian tribes who have nuclear storage facilities and dumps on their land for stuff that no one else wants.
People are, at the core, greedy. It was indians best interest NOT to kill excess buffalo because there would be fewer of them later. Early industrialists poluted because it cost them more money not too. Both were greedy and it shows from their actions.
Your a fool if you actually believe the nonsense you're spewing. Native Americans were savage - they didn't live in ';one'; with nature. Was that while they were slaughtering both animals and each other or after they started smoking pipes to ';enlighten'; (aka get stoned) themselves.
Your definition of living ';one with nature'; simply outlines the beginnings of all humans, all races, all ethnicities, before they become advanced. Europeans used to be like the native Americans many years ago, so did the Asians. The ';Natives'; (Mongolians actually) weren't the environmental peaceful hippies that you make them out to be.
The idea of the noble savage has no place in anthropology and should be relegated to mythology
Are you speaking about the American Indians that drove the herds of Buffalo over cliffs to get what they wanted, the ones that drove others of their kind off the lands they lived on, slaughtered them without mercy to gain their lands.
We, or they, don't speak about these acts, only what the Whites did to them. Of course their not going to take blame for any sins they committed, are they?
Well, check your history my friend, not just the one in the books, it's a cover up and always has been. I'm not biased, my relatives are American Indian.
So, why blame the whites, most weren't here when they were driven from their lands, they just lost, like the ones that walked before them did.
What would have eventually happen when their own tribes became overcrowded? and were starving for food, disease would have eventually captured them and they would have died off without modern medicine.
Where ever you go whether it's in the Amazon jungle, the deserts of South Africa, the Western Deserts of China and etc. these peoples are slowly dying out, they're becoming extinct due to simply coming to an end, they've gone as far as they can without going any further. They've come to a stand still in time, the Whites have over came them with their knowledge and skills, their modern machinery and tools, we've accepted them but, they've fought mechanization and the future. They lost.
The Native Americans _had_ to live in harmony with nature, just like all other hunter/gatherer and subsistence farming groups. If they didn't, well... Easter Island used to have trees, and the pueblos weren't originally built in the middle of a desert. The only differences between our culture and those earlier cultures that died off are technology and population. Intensive agriculture, like we practise, allows more people to live on less land. Europe also had a lot of technological advances, particularly in warfare. Thanks to those, our culture was able to take over the hunter/gatherers next door when we started to need more land and resources, where your average native tribe couldn't count on that.
Those guys do give us a very clear, scary lesson of what, exactly, is in store for us if we don't learn to live more lightly on this planet.
Define civilized?
civilize- to raise from a primitive state to an advanced and ordered stage of cultural development.
Despite all the technological advances and different culture, it seems that the Native Americans have been forced into a more primitive state. There was method to their madness. They knew where they were from, who they were, and where they were heading. They lived in a close-knit society, although they had their squabbles, fights and divisions within. They still functioned as a whole. They had their own judicial systems, economy, politics, etc. They had respect for the planet and were thankful for whatever they got. They used what the land offered, yet there was usualy no shortage.
Now, with the forced assimilation, there is societal and family dysfunction (alcohol, drug, abuse, etc.).
The greatest thing the Native American got from foreigners, I believe, is the gospel of Jesus Christ. Although it was brought about in the wrong way by some missionaries and educators, the Word itself offers hope for all.
It is up to personal belief of what makes a civilized society. I personally believe that the Native Americans had it right. They were changed b/c Europeans didn't understand that the Native Americans believed in the same God as them...
The Native Americans not only believed in God and cherishing what was free on the Earth like food, water and the world itself, but they strived to live in peace with eachother. By the time that the Europeans came here there weren't savage wars between the tribes.
I am a Christian of European decent married to a Christian of very long line of Cherokee indians, my husband's grandmother was married off the reservation in NC. There were customs like thanking the animal that provided the food on your table and thanking God for the animal.
When you understand the natural world around you, you start to unlock things like world peace. Look at how the animals live together and only kill for food. Even when trying to find the one that is in charge, they maime, but they don't kill.
I also believe that we lost a lot of medication by killing their culture. Look at the homeopathic remedies that are now surfacing that they knew about hundreds of years ago...
The native americans lacked technology. If they had the technology we have, do you think they wouldn't be abusing the earth too? Maybe not, but I think they would. That's just human nature. We all know it's wrong, but we just can't give up our luxuries.
i think the native Americans did . they respected the land %26amp; animals didn't abuse ether. they didn't kill for sport butt for survival,and they thanked %26amp; gave prise to their god %26amp; the animals spirit for giving them life.they took only what they needed for survival. most tribes were nomadic %26amp; lived %26amp; traveled in small bands of usually less than 100 men women %26amp; children to keep from over hunting %26amp; using the land. yes they did drive herds of buffalo %26amp; other large game off cliffs. butt small herds. could you see a hand handful of men %26amp; women running a1000 buffalo off a cliff. and it wasn't something they did everyday. a hundred or so buffalo if they were lucky would probably git them thru the winter. and they wasted nothing, every part was used for something, food, clothing, tools, even the enturnale organs. being over populated wasn't a problem, the elemants,sickness,starvation %26amp; war with rival tribes took care of that.and yes some tribe hated other tribes, just like the musliams hate the Jews, the Zulu's hate the matsui's, some texsons hate Mexicans %26amp; so on %26amp; so on. it;s been that way since the beginning of time and I'm soory to say will be till the end. it's just the nature of mankind. were they savage? the Webster defines savage as to be harsh or uncivilized. they were when they had to be.they lived a harsh environment and harsh times. if you got caught taking something of another mans you died hard.hay if i catch you taking something of mine or trying to kidnap my wife and kid I'm gonna bust ya head in or bust a cap on ya. oh i should be civilized [ oh!!!! officer that arapahoe just snatch my kid.please please hurry and git them back. butt don't hurt him he may just be mentally disturbed] they laughed,played,loved their families and respected their elders.they had their own tribal government as did each band.they had a head man, or chife,elders,police and warrior society or army. sounds pretty civilized to me. butt hey I'm just a dumb halfbreed country boy so what do i know.
Part of the problem here is that we aren't sure what the word ';civilized'; means in this question. If we took an anthropological/historical approach to this word, a ';civilization'; is simply a culture that is concentrated in cities (latin: civis). However, given the assumption in the question that Native Americans lived in harmony with nature, I think the questioner is taking more of a moral stance rather than a classificatory one.
This issue has everything to do with how WE perceive Native Americans rather than anything to do with how ';civilized'; people are. In the past, many people have either disparaged or romanticized Native Americans cultures. These are the easy options. Objectivity is much more difficult. When ';westerners'; first came across American Indians, not only were American Indian cultures looked down upon, they were often not even considered human. For 500 years, they were brutalized, destroyed and missionized. One common result of the decimation of indigenous people, the world over, is that the decimators come to romanticize the decimated! This is what is called the ';Noble Savage'; syndrome. It is a common irony of the cycle of colonization which occurs not only in this case but in other cases as well.
It is true, as some answerers have pointed out, that Native Americans did over-exploit their environment. The first people to occupy North American in fact wiped out many species that were unused to this clever new predator who showed up with weapons, fire, intelligence, and incredible adaptability. But it is also true that hunting and gathering people in general, not just the indigenous peoples of the Americas, take very, very good care of their environment. Why is this? Sure, their are the oft-cited religious reasons to live in ';harmony'; with nature, but there are also very pragmatic reasons. If you over-hunt and over-fish, your children will not have any food. It's cultural suicide. So, as is always the case, the religious beliefs bolster a culture's economic and political systems. In our newly found ';romantic'; assessment of indigenous peoples everywhere, and in our increasingly over-polluted world, we have come to admire these religious beliefs.
One classic argument that makes the case that people were better in societies with simpler technology is the chapter ';The Original Affluent Society'; in Marshall Sahlins' book ';Stone Age Economics'; (1972). In that piece, Sahlins points to the fact, discovered from the archaeological record as well as from ethnographic studies, that people who live in hunting-and-gathering societies often have better health, better diets, and are less prone to disease and starvation than people who farm and live in settled towns. The reason, he claims, is that farmers depend on fewer crops which are also genetically homogenized. As a result, they are more prone to drought and blight, and since farmers exploit only a few species compared to hunter-gatherers, they are much more affected by it. Hunter-gatherers, on the other hand, can simply move on to a new area and/or exploit different species. Furthermore, the close proximity to animal and human waste products (garbage, feces, and carcasses) in settled towns produces higher rates of epidemic disease, which of course spread faster because people are settled and living in very close proximity to one another. One might conclude that this is a ';better'; way to live as Sahlins seemed to do.
Things are different today for sure, and we can never ';go back';. When humans lived only by hunting and gathering, the world probably had a population of 1-5% of the current population (this is really just a rough guess though). We live in huge complex societies that have made a huge negative impact on the environment and on each other. Does this mean there is no hope to be better? Absolutely not. We can consume less, we can slow population growth, and we can find truly sustainable energy sources. And there ARE some very good things about our society as well, let's not forget. Disparaging ourselves is another simplified trap to fall into.
Finally, let us not oversimplify what we mean when we say ';Native Americans'; either! There was a whole diverse continent of cultures here in 1492. Not all indigenous people of the Americas were hunters and gatherers. Far from it. There were in fact ';civilizations'; (in the technical sense of the term) in the Americas as well. Think of the ancient Maya, the Aztec, the Incas. And the Mayans are a classic case study in how to over exploit the environment.Who had a more civilized approach to life: The Native Americans who lived in harmony with nature?
The Native Americans did it up right, as far as I'm concerned.
The problem is that we think in terms of out-fighting our environment. Becoming on top. Native Americans didn't think like that. They took whatever in necessary and left the rest be. That is one of the major differences probably. This ';approach'; right now may seem as the New Agist, however others might say that this is the only way to survive in the present condition - venerate the Earth, the Sky, and their creations. Look at us as an intertwined part of it all rather then some kind of heterogeneous artificial creations that have no relation to everthing but just use it to achieve its own selfish ends.
Did they do that out of choice or out of necessity? What were their other options???
These were also people that scalped each other, fought regularly with other tribes, practiced slavery, human sacrifice, and in some cases canibalism.
What you're talking about is the industrial revolution and not ';white man'; and indian relations.
There are many indian tribes who have nuclear storage facilities and dumps on their land for stuff that no one else wants.
People are, at the core, greedy. It was indians best interest NOT to kill excess buffalo because there would be fewer of them later. Early industrialists poluted because it cost them more money not too. Both were greedy and it shows from their actions.
Your a fool if you actually believe the nonsense you're spewing. Native Americans were savage - they didn't live in ';one'; with nature. Was that while they were slaughtering both animals and each other or after they started smoking pipes to ';enlighten'; (aka get stoned) themselves.
Your definition of living ';one with nature'; simply outlines the beginnings of all humans, all races, all ethnicities, before they become advanced. Europeans used to be like the native Americans many years ago, so did the Asians. The ';Natives'; (Mongolians actually) weren't the environmental peaceful hippies that you make them out to be.
The idea of the noble savage has no place in anthropology and should be relegated to mythology
Are you speaking about the American Indians that drove the herds of Buffalo over cliffs to get what they wanted, the ones that drove others of their kind off the lands they lived on, slaughtered them without mercy to gain their lands.
We, or they, don't speak about these acts, only what the Whites did to them. Of course their not going to take blame for any sins they committed, are they?
Well, check your history my friend, not just the one in the books, it's a cover up and always has been. I'm not biased, my relatives are American Indian.
So, why blame the whites, most weren't here when they were driven from their lands, they just lost, like the ones that walked before them did.
What would have eventually happen when their own tribes became overcrowded? and were starving for food, disease would have eventually captured them and they would have died off without modern medicine.
Where ever you go whether it's in the Amazon jungle, the deserts of South Africa, the Western Deserts of China and etc. these peoples are slowly dying out, they're becoming extinct due to simply coming to an end, they've gone as far as they can without going any further. They've come to a stand still in time, the Whites have over came them with their knowledge and skills, their modern machinery and tools, we've accepted them but, they've fought mechanization and the future. They lost.
The Native Americans _had_ to live in harmony with nature, just like all other hunter/gatherer and subsistence farming groups. If they didn't, well... Easter Island used to have trees, and the pueblos weren't originally built in the middle of a desert. The only differences between our culture and those earlier cultures that died off are technology and population. Intensive agriculture, like we practise, allows more people to live on less land. Europe also had a lot of technological advances, particularly in warfare. Thanks to those, our culture was able to take over the hunter/gatherers next door when we started to need more land and resources, where your average native tribe couldn't count on that.
Those guys do give us a very clear, scary lesson of what, exactly, is in store for us if we don't learn to live more lightly on this planet.
Define civilized?
civilize- to raise from a primitive state to an advanced and ordered stage of cultural development.
Despite all the technological advances and different culture, it seems that the Native Americans have been forced into a more primitive state. There was method to their madness. They knew where they were from, who they were, and where they were heading. They lived in a close-knit society, although they had their squabbles, fights and divisions within. They still functioned as a whole. They had their own judicial systems, economy, politics, etc. They had respect for the planet and were thankful for whatever they got. They used what the land offered, yet there was usualy no shortage.
Now, with the forced assimilation, there is societal and family dysfunction (alcohol, drug, abuse, etc.).
The greatest thing the Native American got from foreigners, I believe, is the gospel of Jesus Christ. Although it was brought about in the wrong way by some missionaries and educators, the Word itself offers hope for all.
It is up to personal belief of what makes a civilized society. I personally believe that the Native Americans had it right. They were changed b/c Europeans didn't understand that the Native Americans believed in the same God as them...
The Native Americans not only believed in God and cherishing what was free on the Earth like food, water and the world itself, but they strived to live in peace with eachother. By the time that the Europeans came here there weren't savage wars between the tribes.
I am a Christian of European decent married to a Christian of very long line of Cherokee indians, my husband's grandmother was married off the reservation in NC. There were customs like thanking the animal that provided the food on your table and thanking God for the animal.
When you understand the natural world around you, you start to unlock things like world peace. Look at how the animals live together and only kill for food. Even when trying to find the one that is in charge, they maime, but they don't kill.
I also believe that we lost a lot of medication by killing their culture. Look at the homeopathic remedies that are now surfacing that they knew about hundreds of years ago...
The native americans lacked technology. If they had the technology we have, do you think they wouldn't be abusing the earth too? Maybe not, but I think they would. That's just human nature. We all know it's wrong, but we just can't give up our luxuries.
i think the native Americans did . they respected the land %26amp; animals didn't abuse ether. they didn't kill for sport butt for survival,and they thanked %26amp; gave prise to their god %26amp; the animals spirit for giving them life.they took only what they needed for survival. most tribes were nomadic %26amp; lived %26amp; traveled in small bands of usually less than 100 men women %26amp; children to keep from over hunting %26amp; using the land. yes they did drive herds of buffalo %26amp; other large game off cliffs. butt small herds. could you see a hand handful of men %26amp; women running a1000 buffalo off a cliff. and it wasn't something they did everyday. a hundred or so buffalo if they were lucky would probably git them thru the winter. and they wasted nothing, every part was used for something, food, clothing, tools, even the enturnale organs. being over populated wasn't a problem, the elemants,sickness,starvation %26amp; war with rival tribes took care of that.and yes some tribe hated other tribes, just like the musliams hate the Jews, the Zulu's hate the matsui's, some texsons hate Mexicans %26amp; so on %26amp; so on. it;s been that way since the beginning of time and I'm soory to say will be till the end. it's just the nature of mankind. were they savage? the Webster defines savage as to be harsh or uncivilized. they were when they had to be.they lived a harsh environment and harsh times. if you got caught taking something of another mans you died hard.hay if i catch you taking something of mine or trying to kidnap my wife and kid I'm gonna bust ya head in or bust a cap on ya. oh i should be civilized [ oh!!!! officer that arapahoe just snatch my kid.please please hurry and git them back. butt don't hurt him he may just be mentally disturbed] they laughed,played,loved their families and respected their elders.they had their own tribal government as did each band.they had a head man, or chife,elders,police and warrior society or army. sounds pretty civilized to me. butt hey I'm just a dumb halfbreed country boy so what do i know.
Dont you think we can just live off nature?
this is just an example like he gave us things we need like a rooster is are alarm clock
can anygive other examples?Dont you think we can just live off nature?
leaves are the toilet paper
the sun is our lightDont you think we can just live off nature?
in present times, i think not.
Not everyone, only a few. Most people have become FAR too reliant on petty conveniences and technology now. I've seen people flip out because they weren't allowed to use their cell phone for 8 hours at work. There's no way people like that could survive out in the rough
A few could though. specifically the dreaded ';greenie environmentalists'; That everyone hates for some odd reason. Naturalists know how to survive and build and use ingenuity.
Here's the kicker though, most of the people that would prefer to live off the land, would have to go back to hunting animals to survive
It would not be possible for today's humans to live off nature there are way to Many people and if we did not have the Agra companies that we all love to hate most of the humans on the planet would die. It would be afield day for the vultures and and animal or insect that would eat meat would. Those populations could grow to become a threat to the rest of the humans that lived. Yes we could live off nature but not like we do now.
Jessie B
Let me start off by saying we (my family and I) live completely, 100% “off of the grid and are completely self sufficient”
The house is built utilizing natures natural elements, in the shape of an octagon with 8ft wide arch doors on every wall to catch every angle of wind (typical 4 sided homes have half the chance as one with 8 sides. A circle being the most efficient design). Woodburning stoves, solar chimney, solar AC, solar heating, solar water heating (pool and home), solar stove, solar power, wind power, hydrogen powered back up generator, hydrogen back up water heater, hydrogen stove, 2 hydrogen powered trucks, 1 EV (electric vehicle) and satellite internet.
We also built many green small cabins on the ranch that we offer to family, friends and our on-site off-grid workshop guests, including one straw bale, one papercrete, earth bag and adobe, one cob and cordwood, one underground and rammed earth, one log and post and beam and one rock. Each one actually started as a test for what the main house would be and were later finished and turned into guest cabins. I later wrote a guide on how to build with alternative materials using alternative methods for next to nothing.
We raise meat and milk goats, chickens for meat and eggs, ducks for meat and eggs, trap havilina (wild boar pig), rabbit, quail. brew our own beer from home grown products, preserve our fruits, vegetables, etc. smoke and jerky the meat, make our own soap, cheese.
There are no utility lines, no water lines, no roads, tv, cell service, etc. on our ranch. EVERYTHING needed is produced here. All electricity comes from 27 solar panels, 2 main wind gens and a back hydrogen generator if needed (typically we can last 9 days with all luxuries of sunless windless weather, hasn't happened yet). Water is caught and storaged from the rain. Hot water is made with solar batch water heaters with an on-demand hydrogen hot water heater as backup. Even our vehicles use alternative energy (2 hydrogen trucks, 1 EV electric vehicle converted). Because of this we have no bills, no debt and no mortgage.
Anyone interested can check it out at..
agua-luna com
Hope this helped, feel free to contact me personally if you have any questions if you’d like assistance in making your first self sufficient steps, I’m willing to walk you step by step threw the process. I’ve written several how-to DIY guides available at http://www.agua-luna.com on the subject. I also offer online and on-site workshops, seminars and internships to help others help the environment.
Dan Martin
Retired Boeing Engineer now living 100% on Alternative %26amp; Author of How One Simple Yet Incredibly Powerful Resource Is Transforming The Lives of Regular People From All Over The World... Instantly Elevating Their Income %26amp; Lowering Their Debt, While Saving The Environment by Using FREE ENERGY... All With Just One Click of A Mouse...For more info Visit:
http://www.agua-luna.com
Stop Global Warming, Receive a FREE Solar Panels Now!!!
I think that if it was a law or something... people COULD survive, but there will always be the people who don't want to go along with the crowd... I simply think that, looking at history, thinks change, and, overall, people kind of like change. I guess... but again, there will always be the people who don't want to go along with the crowd. Period.
~%26lt;%26gt;%26lt;~
Sure if we just all ate berries and dance around the bonfire
people would grow closer and cows could roam free
If I lived in Tahiti......maybe. If I lived where I do now in up-state Naw Yawk.....Not so easy....Gotta kill deer,rabbit,beaver and muskrat. Skin 'em. Then dry the meat for food . All that being no easy task. Tan the hides while keeping the hairs on the pelts . Plus make leather for pants , shirt and moccasins. All this while trying to build shelter. You shure about this ? It is an easy way to die.....especially if it happens to be Winter ..... . I'd say , stick to the Malls and Super Markets , buy wisely , Very few of the ';we'; you mention , would last a week if they had to go 'Survival off the wild' mode. Nature does NOT surrender survival easily.....coolest myspace
can anygive other examples?Dont you think we can just live off nature?
leaves are the toilet paper
the sun is our lightDont you think we can just live off nature?
in present times, i think not.
Not everyone, only a few. Most people have become FAR too reliant on petty conveniences and technology now. I've seen people flip out because they weren't allowed to use their cell phone for 8 hours at work. There's no way people like that could survive out in the rough
A few could though. specifically the dreaded ';greenie environmentalists'; That everyone hates for some odd reason. Naturalists know how to survive and build and use ingenuity.
Here's the kicker though, most of the people that would prefer to live off the land, would have to go back to hunting animals to survive
It would not be possible for today's humans to live off nature there are way to Many people and if we did not have the Agra companies that we all love to hate most of the humans on the planet would die. It would be afield day for the vultures and and animal or insect that would eat meat would. Those populations could grow to become a threat to the rest of the humans that lived. Yes we could live off nature but not like we do now.
Jessie B
Let me start off by saying we (my family and I) live completely, 100% “off of the grid and are completely self sufficient”
The house is built utilizing natures natural elements, in the shape of an octagon with 8ft wide arch doors on every wall to catch every angle of wind (typical 4 sided homes have half the chance as one with 8 sides. A circle being the most efficient design). Woodburning stoves, solar chimney, solar AC, solar heating, solar water heating (pool and home), solar stove, solar power, wind power, hydrogen powered back up generator, hydrogen back up water heater, hydrogen stove, 2 hydrogen powered trucks, 1 EV (electric vehicle) and satellite internet.
We also built many green small cabins on the ranch that we offer to family, friends and our on-site off-grid workshop guests, including one straw bale, one papercrete, earth bag and adobe, one cob and cordwood, one underground and rammed earth, one log and post and beam and one rock. Each one actually started as a test for what the main house would be and were later finished and turned into guest cabins. I later wrote a guide on how to build with alternative materials using alternative methods for next to nothing.
We raise meat and milk goats, chickens for meat and eggs, ducks for meat and eggs, trap havilina (wild boar pig), rabbit, quail. brew our own beer from home grown products, preserve our fruits, vegetables, etc. smoke and jerky the meat, make our own soap, cheese.
There are no utility lines, no water lines, no roads, tv, cell service, etc. on our ranch. EVERYTHING needed is produced here. All electricity comes from 27 solar panels, 2 main wind gens and a back hydrogen generator if needed (typically we can last 9 days with all luxuries of sunless windless weather, hasn't happened yet). Water is caught and storaged from the rain. Hot water is made with solar batch water heaters with an on-demand hydrogen hot water heater as backup. Even our vehicles use alternative energy (2 hydrogen trucks, 1 EV electric vehicle converted). Because of this we have no bills, no debt and no mortgage.
Anyone interested can check it out at..
agua-luna com
Hope this helped, feel free to contact me personally if you have any questions if you’d like assistance in making your first self sufficient steps, I’m willing to walk you step by step threw the process. I’ve written several how-to DIY guides available at http://www.agua-luna.com on the subject. I also offer online and on-site workshops, seminars and internships to help others help the environment.
Dan Martin
Retired Boeing Engineer now living 100% on Alternative %26amp; Author of How One Simple Yet Incredibly Powerful Resource Is Transforming The Lives of Regular People From All Over The World... Instantly Elevating Their Income %26amp; Lowering Their Debt, While Saving The Environment by Using FREE ENERGY... All With Just One Click of A Mouse...For more info Visit:
http://www.agua-luna.com
Stop Global Warming, Receive a FREE Solar Panels Now!!!
I think that if it was a law or something... people COULD survive, but there will always be the people who don't want to go along with the crowd... I simply think that, looking at history, thinks change, and, overall, people kind of like change. I guess... but again, there will always be the people who don't want to go along with the crowd. Period.
~%26lt;%26gt;%26lt;~
Sure if we just all ate berries and dance around the bonfire
people would grow closer and cows could roam free
If I lived in Tahiti......maybe. If I lived where I do now in up-state Naw Yawk.....Not so easy....Gotta kill deer,rabbit,beaver and muskrat. Skin 'em. Then dry the meat for food . All that being no easy task. Tan the hides while keeping the hairs on the pelts . Plus make leather for pants , shirt and moccasins. All this while trying to build shelter. You shure about this ? It is an easy way to die.....especially if it happens to be Winter ..... . I'd say , stick to the Malls and Super Markets , buy wisely , Very few of the ';we'; you mention , would last a week if they had to go 'Survival off the wild' mode. Nature does NOT surrender survival easily.....
Who is that animal that which is unicellular in nature but needs to work in group fot the living.?
Coral.Who is that animal that which is unicellular in nature but needs to work in group fot the living.?
i dont know the answer sorry, buy coral isnt a unicellular organism..Who is that animal that which is unicellular in nature but needs to work in group fot the living.?
You are thinking of slime molds (moulds)
amoeba is the only unicellular
the social amoeba perhaps? Dictyostelium discoideum. the really weird one which exists as a single cell organism until it gets together with a whole bunch of other ones to make a fruiting body with a stalk and spores on the top? i couldnt find a proper movie of it doing its thing, but theres some pictures here ---%26gt;
I only know of unicellular organism that requires other stuffs such as decayed material to survive. Would you consider Euglena as an answer?
i dont know the answer sorry, buy coral isnt a unicellular organism..Who is that animal that which is unicellular in nature but needs to work in group fot the living.?
You are thinking of slime molds (moulds)
amoeba is the only unicellular
the social amoeba perhaps? Dictyostelium discoideum. the really weird one which exists as a single cell organism until it gets together with a whole bunch of other ones to make a fruiting body with a stalk and spores on the top? i couldnt find a proper movie of it doing its thing, but theres some pictures here ---%26gt;
I only know of unicellular organism that requires other stuffs such as decayed material to survive. Would you consider Euglena as an answer?
Organisms in nature are not found living at their experimentally determined (more below in details!)?
continued question %26gt;%26gt;%26gt; frequently, organisms in nature are not found living at their experimentally determined “optimal range” of some abiotic factor. Provide a natural example of this phenomenonOrganisms in nature are not found living at their experimentally determined (more below in details!)?
Humans.
Humans.
How the heart is beating by nature?Do every living beings have current in their body?
The rhythmic sequence of contractions is coordinated by the sinoatrial and atrioventricular nodes. The sinoatrial node, often known as the cardiac pacemaker, is located in the upper wall of the right atrium and is responsible for the wave of electrical stimulation (See action potential) that initiates atria contraction. Once the wave reaches the atrioventricular node, situated in the lower right atrium, it is conducted through the bundles of His and causes contraction of the ventricles.
Yes, even down to individual cells create their own engery and waste.How the heart is beating by nature?Do every living beings have current in their body?
Yes, generated by their own body. The cardiac cells are capable of generation an electrical current.How the heart is beating by nature?Do every living beings have current in their body?
Every Living Being generate
current. The same can be measured
with a 6 1/2 digit Digital Multimeter. The
current will be shown in Milivolt ampere
reading.
This is because of the static charges
created in the body, because of the mo-
vements of various parts, including
the heart.
Take the two probes, wet the skin
of the body and you can see the reading
yourself after touching.
There are a few groups of cell in your heart called Pacemaker Cells. These cells' only job is to contract every so often. In that contraction, the electrical current in and around the cell changes for an instant. The cells ajacent to them detect the electrical changes, causing them to beat as well, creating a domino-like effect.
Cardiology is a facinating subject, but what I've told you is only the begining. There is so much the heart can do, and so much that can go wrong. By the way, when you shick someone (called defibrilation) you are actually stoppign the heart, not starting it.
Yes, even down to individual cells create their own engery and waste.How the heart is beating by nature?Do every living beings have current in their body?
Yes, generated by their own body. The cardiac cells are capable of generation an electrical current.How the heart is beating by nature?Do every living beings have current in their body?
Every Living Being generate
current. The same can be measured
with a 6 1/2 digit Digital Multimeter. The
current will be shown in Milivolt ampere
reading.
This is because of the static charges
created in the body, because of the mo-
vements of various parts, including
the heart.
Take the two probes, wet the skin
of the body and you can see the reading
yourself after touching.
There are a few groups of cell in your heart called Pacemaker Cells. These cells' only job is to contract every so often. In that contraction, the electrical current in and around the cell changes for an instant. The cells ajacent to them detect the electrical changes, causing them to beat as well, creating a domino-like effect.
Cardiology is a facinating subject, but what I've told you is only the begining. There is so much the heart can do, and so much that can go wrong. By the way, when you shick someone (called defibrilation) you are actually stoppign the heart, not starting it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)