the book "lights out"

johndela1 · Post by **johndela1** » Thu 05 Jul 2007 19:19

has anyone here read the book called Lights Out by T.S. Wiley?

If not it is really a though provoking book.

It makes a lot of points about why most peoples health is messed up do to how we have altered nature by farming, artifical lights, climate control, etc...

I'd be interested in getting some opinions from some of the people here that do research.

Frost · Post by **Frost** » Fri 06 Jul 2007 03:01

he has some points, but without agriculture, artificial lighting, electricity, power, cheap fast transportation, etc, the human race would be unsustainable. And I don't hear you bashing medicine, cosmetics, and surgery. I dare you to tell a kid who is living today because of a heart transplant that he should have died because medicine is evil.

johndela1 · Post by **johndela1** » Fri 06 Jul 2007 04:59

take it easy,

What do you hear me bashing?

I'm not bashing anything, in this post, I'm looking for feedback

on the other hand I do bash medicine for chronic conditions and I do bash cosmetics

Not surgery when needed.

Why are you 'daring me' to tell a kid who is living he should have died? Why do you come across with comments that suggest I tell a kid to die?

Please read my post again and maybe you'll see that I was simply asking for opionions about this book, not telling children who need surgery they should die.

rischott · Post by **rischott** » Fri 06 Jul 2007 05:39

but without agriculture, artificial lighting, electricity, power, cheap fast transportation, etc, the human race would be unsustainable

Unsustainable!!! did the human race start 150 years ago??
What i think would be unsustainable would be the profit/cash economy. What wouldn't sustain is the illusion of paper money. I think we as humans would return to a more natural way of living. We would must def. be able to sustain ourselves without those things.

Now, those things are convenient no doubt, but they are not necessary. I'm not bashing those things, but i am annoyed that people DEPEND on them to the point in which they couldn't survive without them.
Advancement in medicine is a plus, but again it has been corrupted by the profit economy, so one must try to seperate what is advancement and what is a marketing scheme.

am i way off base here?

Frost · Post by **Frost** » Sun 08 Jul 2007 14:41

rischott wrote:
but without agriculture, artificial lighting, electricity, power, cheap fast transportation, etc, the human race would be unsustainable
Unsustainable!!! did the human race start 150 years ago??
What i think would be unsustainable would be the profit/cash economy. What wouldn't sustain is the illusion of paper money. I think we as humans would return to a more natural way of living. We would must def. be able to sustain ourselves without those things.

Now, those things are convenient no doubt, but they are not necessary. I'm not bashing those things, but i am annoyed that people DEPEND on them to the point in which they couldn't survive without them.
Advancement in medicine is a plus, but again it has been corrupted by the profit economy, so one must try to seperate what is advancement and what is a marketing scheme.

am i way off base here?

"Recent archaeological finds place the beginning of agriculture before 7000 B.C. and animal domestication (mostly dogs used as hunting aids) thousands of years before that. There is some evidence that the people of Shanidar, in Kurdistan, were domesticating sheep and planting wheat as long ago as 9800 B.C."

Frost · Post by **Frost** » Sun 08 Jul 2007 14:44

industrialization happened for a reason. that reason being to meet the needs of a quickly growing population and increased movement of people into cities and sub cities. without what i listed previously, and much more the human race would be devestated at this point in our development.

johndela1 · Post by **johndela1** » Mon 09 Jul 2007 17:42

Frost,

did you read the book?

It doesn't bash lights or technology, just explains how we can better live in sync with natural rhythms.

I don't know how you came up with the idea that this book is anti technology. maybe I missed something, but I got a totally different (and very applicable) message from the book.