recovering from the religion of biochemistry

There is the issue of calm, logical THINKING as distinct from reactively defending some ideal. For sake of being brief, I will say that I think of 4 primary ways for the energy of a compound to influence living tissue.

1st is direct digestive absorption.

2nd is absorption through the skin.

3rd is digestion, but indirect- through symbiotic bacteria for instance. The idea that “humans cannot benefit from ingesting the mineral form of _________” is speculative. What if certain BACTERIA can take some stuff and MAKE it in to a new compound (like a B vitamin) and then secrete it/ excrete it inside of a human gut so that the human CAN benefit from the NEW COMPOUND.

It seems to me that Aajonus Vonderplanitz at the same time promoted that idea and then downplayed it in relation to a variety of things (like seaweed or sea salt) that “humans can barely digest.” So what? Bacteria can digest things humans can’t. People, if healthy, should have a few POUNDS of healthy bacteria.

4th is the big one, though. It is about energy.

Sound can shatter glass from a distance. However, is someone still going to suggest that vibrating energy is incidental and matter is fundamental? How can a non-physical vibratory pattern like a sound shatter glass? Because glass is fundamentally a pattern of vibrating energy (composed of atomic vibrations and also subatomic VIBRATIONS- not subatomic “PARTICLES”)!

In fields like homeopathy, the VIBRATION of a certain energetic pattern is the issue, not a physical molecule. What do I mean by energetic pattern? How about light waves!

Does light effect a human body? Do different vibrations or frequencies of light (like different colors)? Do wifi waves produce different effects than sound waves or the vibrating waves of an earthquake or galactic X-ray radiations?

To ignore the 4th issue is like ignoring that a hot candle creates a field of heat (vibration) that produces results at a distance. That field is energetic, not material… like GRAVITY. It can produce chemical reactions (physical outcomes).

This is the KIND of issue that I mention when I say that Aajonus still seemed to be using a 19th century materialist “biochemistry” point of view. That view was conclusively disproven in the early 20th century (if not sooner).

Matter is not fundamental. Not at all. Matter is crystallization of energy. Energy is fundamental.

For one thing, carbon can “change” in to nitrogen (and vice versa), which violates a basic premise of 19th century biochemistry but is well-establish by nuclear physics (nuclear power, nuclear weapons, etc). But that is just an issue of labeling.

There is no THING carbon. The elemental theory of chemistry is a tool for categorizing patterns of ENERGY. The theory is absolutely WRONG (in the way that most people present it), yet also very USEFUL (within a limited range of conditions that happen to be quite common).

So, can a magnetic field influence living tissue? Yes. Do different vibrations of that field make a difference? Yes! That is a major part of HOMEOPATHY!

Again, the entire premise of materialism is a VERY inefficient model (because it contains so much falsehood and leaves so much out) relative to an electromagnetic, plasma-based model. Plasma means liquid crystal. It means that the model of the 3 phases of matter that most everyone was taught is MISSING 33% of the reality (the fourth phase: plasma).

Think about having three-fourths of the information about how to drive from where you are to your destination. If you knew the city, the apartment number, and the zip, but not the street. Would that be an issue?

When people, even on an alternative health group, ARGUE that energy is not important and speak as if matter is fundamental, I consider that complete paranoia. I did it myself for quite a while, but it is still completely closed to learning.

It reacts to new ideas as a threat. It is a state of latent panic.


Tags: , , ,

One Response to “recovering from the religion of biochemistry”

  1. Dan Says:

    “Energy is fundamental” and some of Aajonus’s theories were created in a “material world”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: