Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
WBraun
climber
|
|
The ultimate of this is yogis who eat only nuts and fruits that have already fallen off the tree which is the ultimate in ahimsa - harmlessness.
Not the ultimate, but one step below.
What you described is the impersonalists method.
The real reason is God does not want onions, leeks, mushrooms etc in his offerings to him, prasadam, which is free from all karmic reactions.
The Vaisnava devotees only offer him food in the mode of pure goodness.
Onions, garlic, mushrooms are foods in the mode of passion and ignorance which will check one's spiritual advancement.
Gross materialists are clueless to this knowledge as they operate mostly in the modes of passion and ignorance .......
|
|
eeyonkee
Trad climber
Golden, CO
|
|
With respect to the term relatively highly evolved. Although evolution has no pre-defined plan that could possibly rank the "absolute" evolved state of two evolutionary states -- say, two individual organisms on completely different branches of the mother tree; there is another thing that can be measured, independently, that is a measure of the total number of branches from the root to the individual organism node. It might not seem obvious, but some branches evolve at greatly different rates than others. Any random individual may have evolved along a line involving many more levels than another.
Actually, let me say this more correctly. For any of the myriad of behaviors and properties that make up an individual, the path taken for an individual behavior may have involved more or fewer levels depending on the exact course of evolution.
|
|
jogill
climber
Colorado
|
|
Onions, garlic, mushrooms are foods in the mode of passion and ignorance which will check one's spiritual advancement
I wonder about Zen in this regard. Maybe the Wizard could clarify. Is empty awareness contingent on avoiding these foods?
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
Quack Quack
|
|
i-b-goB
Social climber
Wise Acres
|
|
Oh Behave!
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
Oh my, that looks yummy! With a little olive oil, and anything else that is.. but we're off topic. Think I'll start the BB-Q🦐
🙂
|
|
Wayno
Big Wall climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
Okay, all of this blather is kind of fun, but let's get make to the central question...what the fricking snakes-on-a-mother-f#king plane is mind?
Greg, how dare you call our blather blather. Food. How could you take that out of this process of evolution you seem so focused on? The search for and the preparation thereof of food has a lot to contribute to not only the evolution of our genetics but our culture too. To you it might be an interesting side-note but to me it is a thread that connects a lot of things on a lot of different levels.
I can see the humor though. At some point in the Food Service industry if you work hard enough or Too hard, you come across the notion that food is the enemy. Absurdly funny and ironic but sadly true in some circumstances.
|
|
jogill
climber
Colorado
|
|
Food for thought.
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Southern Arizona
|
|
Duck: What you described is the impersonalists method.
A common complaint from you. Beginning to sound like doctrine. I guess doctrine can be truth.
Gross materialists are clueless to this knowledge as they operate mostly in the modes of passion and ignorance .......
Well, yes. “Gross” materialists. We might want to take some solace in the evolution of consciousness. Anyone can find his or her way to ultimate understanding. It happens all on its own when it decides to. I know of no special path that leads to enlightenment, and I know of a great many people who have a real interest in it. There is no causality for it, not really.
Keep your eyes open. It’s just you.
|
|
i-b-goB
Social climber
Wise Acres
|
|
It's SUPERCALIFRAGILISTICEXPIALIDOCIOUS!
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
you can read the papers on which the NYTimes report is based online. The first on a common animal ancestor:
https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(15)01177-X
Uncertainty in the Timing of Origin of Animals and the Limits of Precision in Molecular Timescales
Mario dos Reis, Yuttapong Thawornwattana, Konstantinos Angelis, Maximilian J. Telford, Philip C.J. Donoghue, Philip C.J. Donoghue, Philip C.J. Donoghue, Ziheng Yang, Ziheng Yang
Summary
The timing of divergences among metazoan lineages is integral to understanding the processes of animal evolution, placing the biological events of species divergences into the correct geological timeframe. Recent fossil discoveries and molecular clock dating studies have suggested a divergence of bilaterian phyla [greater than] 100 million years before the Cambrian, when the first definite crown-bilaterian fossils occur. Most previous molecular clock dating studies, however, have suffered from limited data and biases in methodologies, and virtually all have failed to acknowledge the large uncertainties associated with the fossil record of early animals, leading to inconsistent estimates among studies. Here we use an unprecedented amount of molecular data, combined with four fossil calibration strategies (reflecting disparate and controversial interpretations of the metazoan fossil record) to obtain Bayesian estimates of metazoan divergence times. Our results indicate that the uncertain nature of ancient fossils and violations of the molecular clock impose a limit on the precision that can be achieved in estimates of ancient molecular timescales. For example, although we can assert that crown Metazoa originated during the Cryogenian (with most crown-bilaterian phyla diversifying during the Ediacaran), it is not possible with current data to pinpoint the divergence events with sufficient accuracy to test for correlations between geological and biological events in the history of animals. Although a Cryogenian origin of crown Metazoa agrees with current geological interpretations, the divergence dates of the bilaterians remain controversial. Thus, attempts to build evolutionary narratives of early animal evolution based on molecular clock timescales appear to be premature.
Node ages are plotted at the posterior mean for the calibration strategy 1, one partition, IR, and LG + Γ analysis. The node bars are composites extending from the minimum 2.5% HPD limit to the maximum 97.5% limit across all analyses (excluding results from calibration strategies 3 and 4 and from alternative topologies). Cen, Cenozoic; K, Cretaceous; Jr, Jurassic; Tr, Triassic; Pr, Permian; Carb, Carboniferous; Dev, Devonian; S, Silurian; O, Ordovician; Cam, Cambrian; Ediacar, Ediacaran.
and the recent paper:
http://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04136-5
Reconstruction of the ancestral metazoan genome reveals an increase in genomic novelty
Jordi Paps & Peter W. H. Holland
Abstract
Understanding the emergence of the Animal Kingdom is one of the major challenges of modern evolutionary biology. Many genomic changes took place along the evolutionary lineage that gave rise to the Metazoa. Recent research has revealed the role that co-option of old genes played during this transition, but the contribution of genomic novelty has not been fully assessed. Here, using extensive genome comparisons between metazoans and multiple outgroups, we infer the minimal protein-coding genome of the first animal, in addition to other eukaryotic ancestors, and estimate the proportion of novelties in these ancient genomes. Contrary to the prevailing view, this uncovers an unprecedented increase in the extent of genomic novelty during the origin of metazoans, and identifies 25 groups of metazoan-specific genes that are essential across the Animal Kingdom. We argue that internal genomic changes were as important as external factors in the emergence of animals.
Novelty in ancestral genomes. a Proportion of Novel HG in the Ancestral HG for different holozoan ancestors. b Percentage of Core HG that are novel, and percentage of highly preserved genes among the Novel HG across different LCA. c Number of Protein Class GO hits for the fruit fly representatives of the Novel HG for the various phylogenetic nodes
|
|
yanqui
climber
Balcarce, Argentina
|
|
The cactus videos were pretty cool too.
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Southern Arizona
|
|
Jim,
That "fresh air" can be a little thick.
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Southern Arizona
|
|
jogill: Food for thought.
You got me thinking about this.
“Food for thought” might be anything ingested that would give rise to thinking. Generally what tends to generate thinking are entities that one has an attachment to or an aversion to.
So, the Duck would be right: those foods that are passions for us. What do we love or hate?
Yeah, so for us, onions and garlic would be that. Add olive oil.
And Go-B, aren’t Italians especially passionate about almost everything? (Good for tantra practices, though.)
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Generally, the gross materialists eat all kinds of nasty food with heavy Karma attached like dead meat (food in the mode of ignorance).
The gross materialists have almost no real clue about food itself because they don't even know what life itself is to begin with ......
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Colorado & Nepal
|
|
Back to the article on animal genes, this sentence leapt out at me.
The new genes also proved to be remarkably durable. Of all the genes in the human genome, 55 percent were already present in the first animal.
So humans have a kinship with all animals and eating meat is a form of cannibalism it seems.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
eating meat is a form of cannibalism it seems
No, it isn't.
Eating meat is just plain animal consciousness.
A human being doesn't ever eat meat ......
When human being eats meat then is not a human being anymore, but an animal.
The gross materialists with their silly so-called academic material science are light years away from any real knowledge.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!