TaN: Selfies are so pathetic and pitiful – it only shows you feel that no one notices (and gives importance) you so you have to notice yourself. It is so sad to see someone so in need of attention that s/he resorts to selfies so there is at least one person who thinks s/he is not insignificant. It only shows one’s insecurity and low self-esteem.
A word of caution: whatever you post on the Internet is assumed that it becomes public domain. Contrary to the prevailing perception and legal opinion, anything in full view of everyone is or should be considered public domain. To say that one’s post on the Internet is still within the bounds of private property or information, then billboards and all other information in full view of the public should likewise be considered private and viewing them or taking photographs would be considered violation of property rights.
In this regard, one must be very careful and prudent as to what one puts on the Internet. Unless one is willing to have one’s posts become fair game for everybody, one must practice caution and think before posting. Relating to the issue of selfies, one’s photograph can become fodder – or worse, become complicit in nefarious activities and wrongdoings.
For me, I just feel (sorry) for people who indulge in selfies.
TaN: (Epiphanies) – Food enhancers and flavorings are proof-positive that what you are buying (and eating) are processed. Color (intensity) and taste or flavor (intensity) are clues to the nutritional content of food. Processing takes these away. Because of processing, commercial food providers have to “inject or infuse” colors and flavors (and enhancers) back into the food – TO MAKE THEM PALLATABLE!
The mere fact that coloring and flavoring are added is enough evidence that the “food” you are buying (and subsequently may be eating) is un-nutritive and unpalatable – i.e., trash or garbage. Without the added “ingredients”, processed “food” has as much taste – and as delectable to the palate – as cardboard and it is not an exaggeration. The nearest analogy would be a corpse that has been made up – with cosmetics and colorations – to make it look “alive” or at least less morbid and revolting to the viewer/s.
TaN: Among the lessons that teaching has taught me regarding (so-called) modern formal education is that the courses/subjects in the curriculum are not and never for the needs of students. It has dawned on me that I am slowly unraveling and unveiling the true intentions for many of the things “modern (urban)” society has been subliminally indoctrinating me and this is the latest.
At first glance, one can easily be led to believe that the courses incorporated and integrated into the school curriculum are needed by students (especially if one is so engrossed with providing as much knowledge and skills to one’s students to best-prepare them for the challenges ahead) but, in truth, it is not what they need. Instead, the so-called “vital” skills and knowledge are really What BIG BUSINESS Needs – from fresh graduates of formal education – than what the students need..
In truth, we are actually preparing our students to be (modern-day) “slaves” of the corporate and power elites (no different from the serfs and servants of the yore) in order to sustain – if not further boost – their control and stranglehold over wealth and maintain their affluent lifestyle. This, of course, is based on the assumption that none of the students will think of using the acquired knowledge and skills to gain a foothold and establish his/her own niche in the power and economic structure – i.e., to become one of the elites.
As was mentioned in earlier posts, (1) higher education should be (and has traditionally been) intended to elevate man to a higher plane – where s/he becomes a better person (i.e., education should serve the recipient or the recipient must be the end-beneficiary); (2) knowledge is the primary and sole product of education either through discovery of the “wisdom” of nature by intuition or inference of the human mind or by experimentation and this product should be made freely available to the public for the common good – ergo, academics and educators should not be engaged in any form of commercial or financial activity, especially for personal gain, otherwise truth and justice are always sacrificed; and, (3) because business owes its existence and continued survival to society and to environment (through its natural resources), it is but fair and proper that society put people and planet at the top of their priority list – equal to or above the owners’ and stockholders’ interests.
In short, people and environment come first but, unfortunately, that is not the case prevailing globally today and there is little sign that the future will not be the same.
TaN: In an article last Feb 13 from naturalnews.com (titled: “Global cancer rates to skyrocket by 70% over next 20 years as conventional medicine fails“), the implication is that, instead of conventional or allopathic medicine improving our health, it is worsening. Logic dictates that, if modern medicine is successful, there should be less or decreasing rates of diseases and not increasing.
In an news item, a video clip from NBC News on the same day (i.e., aired in the time zone where I am), cancer rates are rising and the AMA (American Medical Association) was reported to continue to encourage women to have mammograms as early as 40 years of age in order to “catch” the disease at its early stages. What they do not tell the public – either intentionally hiding the truth or unwittingly parroting Big Pharma and its high-priced pundits – that mammograms are one of the principal culprits for the rise on breast cancer rates. It has been repeatedly made public (ad nauseam) by reputable scientists and medical researchers that there is no such thing as a safe dosage of radiation – and mammograms make use of radiation to detect cancer (among other things).
Is it any wonder that cancer rates are continuously rising? Those who stand to benefit – especially financially – from cancer claim and argue that early detection means cancer can be treated in its early stages, when they are “highly treatable”. What they do not tell the gullible public – like the famous actress whose father is likewise a famous actor and who had her breasts surgically removed because they can develop cancer in the future, basing the decision on mathematical probability – is that it is the little and regular doses of radiation from mammograms over the years that is a major factor in breast cancer’s eventual development.