Misanthrope

"Spring" is definitely a 5-star topic! Though not actually my favorite time of year (I prefer Fall), it sure is a relief to see the filth of winter finally wash away and melt into mud season. In two weeks I'm planting Peas, Swiss Chard, and maybe Spinach. But mostly, I'll be organizing stuff in the spirit of spring cleaning.

"Misanthrope" is just a shortened version of my website handle, "The Enlightened Misanthrope:" a silly figure who makes occasional forays into the world of the everyday. Having descended from some lofty pinnacle of solitude, the Misanthrope bestows the unsuspecting sheeple with "enlightened" platitudes and satirical observations on man's sorry state of affairs.

Apparently Japan’s annual dolphin bloodbath is underway and at it's cruel climax. Every year, the town of Taiji engages in the most heinous act I can personally imagine. They brutally slaughter roughly 26,000 cetaceans, among them dolphins and small whales. International outcry has curtailed the yearly kill to one secluded location, but it’s not secluded enough to keep protesters and video cameras at bay. A campaign is underway to end what is considered the largest annual dolphin slaughter in the world once and for all. Dolphin killers – you can run, but you can’t hide!

Hey Casino - you sound like me when I first started cooking. Honestly, I still don't enjoy it all that much, though I've gotten somewhat good at it out of necessity. I figure, either I cook it myself or I go broke having someone else cook it for me. Not only that, I subject myself to whatever toxic garbage they choose to put in the food. One of the main problems I have with eating out is due mainly to my latter point. I really hate the oil they use in most resturaunts. They're quite fond of "Canola" oil (i.e. Canada Oil), which is actually bad for the heart, even though it's touted as a "healthy" oil. When you're starting out cooking, give yourself all the time in the world to experiment and make mistakes. It will almost take that long to figure it out, unless you're a natural - which I am not. Don't get discouraged when things don't work out the first few or several (hundred) times. The best recipes are developed over countless trial and errors, so be forgiving of yourself. Check out a site called allrecipes.com, and look for the stuff that's been tested out by lots of people and received high ratings. These are usually more fool-proof than cook books, which I've never had any luck with. Get yourself a few cast iron skillets (they'll last a life time), a large stock pot, some good knives, a measuring cup, and have at it. Bon appetit!

Pardon me if I've somehow misunderstood the question as posed, but the best way to avoid skunk spray is to train that stupid dog to stop harassing wildlife. I live in the backwoods and have had firsthand experience with skunks. They're wonderful little creatures who would just assume lick peanut butter off your hand as spray you - or your well-trained dog. Contrary to popular opinion, skunks will not spray unless they feel their lives are threatened. Even then, it's not a given. Not that I condone conditioning wildlife to human presence, but skunk often make their way into backwood human habitat; or should I say, we often make our way into skunk habitat. So, if you're going to live among wildlife, it behooves you to train that darned dog to respect wildlife, especially skunk. The training method would not be unlike training your dog to respect cats...look, but don't chase; smell, but don't lunge; say "hi," but don't hump. How often do you hear of cats getting sprayed by skunks? Dogs...they are such a burden...heavy sigh........

Who in their right mind could resist posting on this topic? Certainly not the inbiber of all, well, almost all things liquid. But the Enlightened Misanthrope will pass on the milk and carbonated sugar water, thank you. Pasteurized cow pus leads to all manor of physical illness, and aspartame soda brings on an early mental demise. No wonder the "Powers That Be" push these toxic products on the unsuspecting, overworked public, while simeultaneousley demonizing fine, traditional drinks that have fortified man for ages. I find certain combinations of beer and fine spirits enhance my cognitive function, aid in digestion, and tickle my misanthropic funny bone, namely - Sierra Pale Ale and Don Julio 100% Agave Tequila. Wine is always a fine accompaniment to a leisurely lunch of lentil soup and sourdough bread, or a dinner of fire roasted vegetable lasagna and steamed broccoli. I've started shunning American wines as they spray fluoride laced chemicals on the grapes. Trader Joe's sells an awesome French Cabernet for cheaper than most American Cabs. I'm still researching this, but knowing how strict France is with their food production and how strong their stance against fluoride is, I doubt I have much to worry about. When not downing booze, I sip on well water, coffee or tea. Unless freshly squeezed and unpasteurized, I don't bother with juice as after they're done pasteurizing it the inherent nutrition is gone. Why do you think they have to ADD vitamins to this stuff after the fact? It's because they've boiled out all the vitamins and minerals. I only do coffee in the afternoon to avoid that whole headache thing associated with morning coffee drinking. I prefer a rich coffee with a vanilla or cinnamon finish, preferably shade grown and organic. I take mine black. My favorite tea (thus far) is Republic of Tea's Earl Grey. Not too crazy about Oolong unless I'm chowing down on Chinese.

Veganism is a perfectly viable, healthy dietary choice which deserves full discussion here, under the health forum, with or without reference to implied spiritual context. That said, I would hate to see members discouraged from posting further on this topic because it has been vilified on this board as a "fanatic" lifestyle. I'd also encourage members to go here for more information on this HEALTHY and humane alternative to the factory farming complex of death.

Yeah, it seems like I've read something about the Omega 3's in fish helping out with brain function . But you can get similar, brain-feeding fatty acids from things like flax oil and avoid that whole, nasty fish experience. Further, the "Lancet Folate Study" shows folic acid boosts memory and overall brain function, especially in old farts who've lost some of their cognitive ability. You can get folic acid in foods like oranges, lentils, broccoli and greens. So you see, it's really not necessary to feed on dead critters over some perceived grey matter enhancement. Heck, if it were, the results of the British South Hampton study would have turned out opposite statistics. Many of the worlds greatest thinkers have practiced vegetarianism, including Albert Einstein, Leonardo Da Vinci, and Benjamin Franklin. As for me, I feel humbled to share in a lifestyle the greatest minds known to man have deemed worthy. Still looking for some stats on that Australian MENSA thing. Chime in if you find something on them - or any MENSA group for that matter...

You may very well find my response completely unacceptable, but it might of interest to someone out there. I don't believe young people should focus on romantic relationships, period. I was lucky in as much I attended strict Catholic schools where that sort of thing was rightly discouraged, thank God. Yes, I know it's portrayed as the "thing to do" on TV and other hypnotic mediums that would see you enslaved the rest of your life, but it will keep you down and potentially hinder your chances of success in life. Right now, you have no (I hope) kids or major responsibilities, and your parents are probably footing the bill. Many people find this time of life is the only chance they have to get a college education, and maybe participate in world travel. Now is the time to learn and prepare for life, not tie yourself down with a "girlfriend." What you do now sets the precedent for the rest of your life.

That's a good link, and I thank you. But for the most part it reiterates what's been mentioned before in this thread. We already know vegetarians are a smart lot, but apparently scientific findings which encompassed all of Brittania leave some of us wanting for more proof. Thus my interest in Australian MENSA. What I'm looking for are specifics regarding what percentage of Australian MENSA members are actually vegetarian (or any MENSA group, for that matter). "More than than their fair share" doesn't do anything for me. I want numbers. If any of you stumble upon something to this end please post a follow up...

A couple posts ago I mentioned what I had researched regarding Australian MENSA society's high percentage of vegetarians, but I can't find the stats anywhere. I'd like to know what the exact percentile actually is, and bet some of you would too. If anyone finds it somewhere, kindly post a follow up. Some links would be great too..

That's great! I want seven cats too. Did you ever think of filing for tax-exempt status? May as well. Sounds like you certainly have enough critters to qualify. I commend you for taking them in and bearing the responsibilty. About the dumping of pets, I have a similar problem in my neck of the woods. It's pretty rural, so eventually dogs end up reverting to a semi-wild state, running in packs and harassing and/or killing people's chickens, chasing deer, and raising general havoc. Then there are the poor kitties that turn feral, sometimes spreading disease to domestic cats that are unfortunate enough to get into a fight with one. Sadly, there aren't any rescue groups helping them up here. And yes, the people responsible for this sad state of affairs should definitely stop breeding themselves!

Interesting observation. I do think one is more inclined to move around a lot more with a pet dog(s) in the house. Although a certified cat person, I really miss my Helga girl. She was a Rottweiler I rescued from a shelter as a puppy, so she was well trained from the cot, and a joy to take on walks around the 'hood. Sadly, she died around age seven, which apparently is not uncommon for a large dog. I did a little research and found out she had been dumped at the shelter by, you guessed it, a breeder. Helga had a tumor growing on her eye and the breeder didn't want the expense of taking her to the veterinarian. And of course, an unsightly growth on her eye would make her harder to sell (yeah - it's all about money for some people). At any rate, but the time she arrived at the shelter the tumor had gotten so bad her entire eye had to be removed by the shelter vet. The moral of the story is she turned out to be a perfectly good dog and did just fine without one of her eyes, but her fate and those like her could have easily been avoided if people would stop putting money above living things. But I digress. It is "cool" to have a pet dog, walk him around on a leash, teach him "sit," "heal," and such. That part of my personality misses having a dog. Since Helga died, I've been taking in foster dogs from a local rescue operation. They only stay long enough to get a permanent home. Dogs are a big responsibility. I would highly recommend fostering to anyone wanting to spend time with dogs but not ready or able to make a lifelong commitment.

From what you've described this sounds like a privately run shelter, which means they are not receiving government funds like city and county shelters do. In fact, they are probably running on a shoe-string, with the lion's share of funding/time/effort coming from the operator herself and whatever volunteers she can drum up. I've done a bit of rescue work and it's an uphill battle against a largely ignorant populace who refuse to spay or neuter their pets, or simply see animals as objects easily discarded. This person is probably sacrificing any personal life she may have for a truly altruistic, selfless purpose. I can think of no greater altruism than service to animals, for this path affords no money, no recognition, and no glory for the benefactor. Imagine turning your home or whatever shanty you can afford into a shelter and how quickly it would fill up with unwanted animals. Imagine your reaction when litter upon litter is dumped at your front doorstep, or the beloved old dog who is abandoned because somebody is moving to an apartment that doesn't take pets. Imagine your disgust at the breeder who dumps a litter of puppies because they don't adhere to AKC guidelines, or the pitbull who was brutalized in dog fights. You are running a no-kill shelter, so you ethically oppose "putting down" a perfectly healthy animal just because some human was irresponsible, and didn't understand that taking a pet into the home is lifelong responsibility.

Although studies based on vivisection (animal experimentation) usually raise at least one of my eyebrows, I do see a fair amount of validity to this particular study. Not that the mad scientists couldn't have come to same conclusion without carrying out cruel, redundant and unnecessary tests on innocent animals. I imagine enough procedures of a similar nature have already been tried out on humans - weather made public or not. Although not completely related, I thought I'd toy with a similar concept so this topic start would be honored with at least one response. My own sister underwent (against my advice) the doctor's knife for a simple bunion on her big toe. The resulting condition (can?t recall the name) cut off circulation to her foot, and caused nerve damage she may never recover from. With the help of a physical therapist, she is gaining ground. But the reason I bring this up in concert with this thread is the therapist mentioned something about helping my sister?s cells and nerves to rebuild/remember their previous state of being, and how they functioned before being compromised by the butcher?s knife. By continually exercising her limb in a fashion similar to its pre-butcher state, it may eventually remember its former functions. Yes, I often refer to surgeons as butchers, as ?modern? medicine still reeks of barbarism in so many ways. Looking at this from a metaphysical stance, one might see a human cell as a microcosm of the human being himself. So, if a man can learn to recall ?lost? memories, why can?t the human cell?

All slugs are slimy, that is, unless they've baked under the hot sun beyond the point of recognition. On my, did I just make a sweeping generalization? To infer a way of speaking is dangerous (in this case, "generalizing") is in and of itself a mammoth generalization, and one worthy of thought-nazi status. But does that make the statement dangerous - I think no. Only if one chooses to be intimidated by grand words backed up by no science, substance or verifiable proof (as opposed to the scientifically sound vegetarian study). The thoughts in the above post have been repeated ad nauseum on this thread and therefore, serve no justifiable purpose (can you say, spam?). The poster takes issue with the premise of the thread, and has made it known over, and over, and over again. That will not stop me from continuing to muse on the subject, and I pray it doesn't intimidate other free-thinking members from doing the same.Another idea I've puttered around with is the impact socioeconomic factors may have on the results of this scientific study. And I think someone else on this thread may have eluded to the fact veg-heads tend to be higher on the general income bracket. So what came first, the higher income (or ability to earn it), or the proclivity toward vegetarianism? Now I'm confusing myself, as a good portion of veg-heads actually gravitate toward a minimalist, almost luddite philosophy -in essence shunning money, material goods and the associated "evils" of modern industrialization (factory farming, of course, taking high ranking on that evil pyramid).

Thanks for intervening with your ethical style of moderating, KuBi. I was starting to fear this thread had been permanently poisoned by all the petty attacks and such. Hopefully, this will be the last time you have to state the obvious. But anyway, back to the topic at hand: I read recently that Australias Mensa society has more than its fair share of vegetarians among its ranks. I wish they would have would have given specific percentiles, as I always feel a lot better with concrete stastictics. But suffice it to say, Australias Mensa group is putting a lot of stock in the British University of South Hampton study cited at the start of this thread. For those unfamiliar with the term, Mensa is an international high-IQ group. To qualify for membership, you must score within the top 2% of an intelligence test (must be standardized, and you must be monitored during the test). Australian Mensa CEO (also vegetarian) had these words to say about the British study: This makes a lot of sense to me. I might site as an example that our own brilliant OpaQue is vegetarian which I just discovered from a similar thread someone started on this topic elsewhere. Think I might have to wander on over there and post a thought or two.

I thought this thread was on veganism. But to respond, individuals learn in different ways. Some people actually enjoy and/or take in information better if they are "preached" to, and actually become offended at more subtle forms of education. And that applies across the board to all disciplines. We should not criticize how others wish to learn. In venues that truly value free speech, these forms of intellectual flow are allowed to flourish. Further, persons who choose alternative diets such as veganism should be allowed to post under Health and Fitness without being labled "fanatic." Where spirituality is concerned, I will post such content under "Life Topics," as a receptive climate for such material has yet to be created in health and fitness.

How convenient to speak of freedom before those whose very freedom we would deny for a taste of their flesh. The "do as thou wilt," flower power mantra of the 60's certainly sounds good on paper. But then reality sets in, and as those rose-colored glasses slowly stain with the blood of innocents, the blind man becomes more blind than he was before he put them on. Even "do as thou wilt" was prefaced with, "and it harm none."

Thank you, Spam Patrol! I would like to reiterate that this thread does indeed concern domestic house cats and dogs, which are kept as beloved companions - not animals who have reverted, for whatever reason, to a wild state, or who were wild to begin with. Folks who are more interested in focusing on animals in their wild state are invited to post on the thread Watermonkey just started under Science and Nature. If you somehow find talk of ?house? cats boring or trivial, by all means, start a thread on wild cats elsewhere, as your attitude will not contribute helpful information to this thread. While interesting, discussion of wild animals is not the topic of discussion here, and has thus far done nothing but detract from the topic and incite antagonism. As topic starter, I would like you to focus your thoughts on domestic cats and dogs, and how you feel your preference reflects on your personality ? regardless of your geographical location. In other words ? please do not post on this thread if you can?t focus on domestic cats and dogs. I've revisited this thread and I see my last post was removed without due cause. This irks me, as it is unethical behavior against Trap policy and it cost me credits. My post was in response to a spam post the author later removed. I have no problem with that, but he had no right to remove my post along with his. To reiterate, the post simply stated that future spam from a specific individual who has repeatedly spammed my threads would be viewed as deliberate inciting/harassing behavior, and would be reported as such to admin. Hopefully, that will not be necessary. I have two beautiful cats as well, both of them rescued from bad situations. One was dropped off at the Humane Society because the original owner thought he was too much trouble for her in her small apartment (whatever - he's the most mellow cat I've had the pleasure to share time with), and the other was rescued as a kitten in Nebraska from a motel, where he wandered from room to room looking for a handout. I just read somewhere that it's better to have cats in even numbers than odd. I'm thinking that would be fine excuse to acquire not just one, but two more kitty cats. We have a rescue group here in my small town called, "Kitten Haven." Not exactly a well researched name in my opinion, but they do the best with what they have. The rescue operation consists of just one woman who houses several unwanted (domestic) cats in her modest trailer home. Yes -the fact I'm considering getting more cats, and don't own one dog, would most certainly "certify" me as an unabashed cat person! I do feel that preference jives with my personality, as I don't care for group activities, can entertain myself for hours on end, and am a staunch independent. As for Kitten Haven, they don't even have a web site. I'm thinking of starting one for them...