Sun-gazing

The earth is flat and we are the center of the universe as the sun you are all talking about orbits the Earth.

merged into existing topic :moogle:

This topic was brought to my attention quite recently and I was just stunned. I thought I’d share this amazing revelation.

In case you are not aware of this, your body is an electrical unit. You need electrical energy to live. Food has electrical energy in it. A chocolate cake for example has approximately 1 Mhz of energy while a couple of green vegetables have 60-80~

If you stick to a diet with foods which are high in electrical energy, after a few days, your energy levels, physical, emotional and mental simply skyrocket. If someone wants to try it, say something and I’ll explain this further, specifically, how to try it for a week or so to see for yourself.

Sun gazing is a daily process in which you gaze directly at the sun at the safe hours , after 9 months, you become a solar being.

There are two safe zones. The first hour after the sun rises, and the last one before it sets are times when UV radiation is minimal and it is safe to gaze directly at the sun. The process is basically gazing at the sun for a limited period of time daily. On the first day, you gaze for 10 seconds, then 20, then 30, etc etc etc… It’s important not to hasten the process to keep the eyes safe. You need to stand on bare foot while doing this, and on bare soil. Beach sand is the best. But soil, without any grass on it is just fine.

The first 3 months , when you reach the 15 minutes mark, your brain starts improving drastically. Mental problems seem to disappear and a general feeling of well-being is replaced. Fears start to go away and you just become a loving and lovable creature. Your whole functioning goes way beyond your wildest imagination.

During months 3-6, as you reach the 30 minutes mark, physical ailments start to go away. Your body becomes practically invincible hence to the profound energy supply your brain receives. Your brain is in control over your body. Without a functioning brain, the body is worthless. With the so few energy we provide our brains, it’s hard for it to take care of the body. When you provide this source of amazing energy, your body gets better and better and better.

In the last 3 months (6-9) as you get to the final 44 minutes mark, hunger starts to drop exponentially. Note, there is no need to let go of eating or anything like that. It’s not about fasting or practicing some sort of spiritual tradition. You should keep eating as long as you want to. It’s just a natural part of the process. When you get to around 40 minutes of gazing per day, your hunger levels just start to naturally decrease . Because you get all the energy you need. Which is a lot more than what you get from eating.

The theory suggests that hunger arises because of solar energy lack. All the food basically have the sun’s energy. If there was no sunlight, nothing could exist. By getting direct solar rays (during the safe hours) , you get everything you could ever get from food, without any of the toxins of course. This leads to an amazing detoxification of the entire brain&body. Which leads of course to a very high awareness, including a perfect , well balanced, mental, emotional and physical conditions.

After the 9 months have been completed, or alternatively when you have reached the 44 minutes mark, you should avoid sun gazing all together, for sake of the eye.
You are already a solar creature.
The only thing left for you to do is to walk barefoot on soil for about 45 minutes a day for a week or so and that’s it. You can keep doing the barefoot walking if you want, it is helpful for your functionality .

for more information:

Sun Gazing

Enjoy :smile:

so how did it work for you, how long have you been doing it ?

i put it on a huge break, and i discern that it is the sunrise which needs to be watched for it is constantly rasiing in amplitude of spirit and purity and clean

the best site i ever saw on this was sunlight.as.ro

does anyone know where it went ?

Hi Everyone at Id4all,

This is my first post and I know the time frames are scattered on this topic but I wanted to post my own experience to help others understand and hear first hand from someone who is following the HRM method of sungazing.

I am now up to 37 minutes a day and loving what it is doing for me. I have severe fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue along with PTSD, major depression, and atrial fibrillation. I started sungazing because of my health problems as it stated that it could heal everything. I wanted to be able to live without food as I have multiple chemical and food sensitivities which kept me on anti-histamines daily for 8 years straight.

I was recently diagnosed with atrial fibrillation, a heart problem, when I became very breathless and it increased my fatigue, which I hadn’t thought was possible. My blood felt like it was thickening up and clotting and I just couldn’t get enough air. Numerous tests were done and the AF was found. When I began sungazing, it started going away, probably due to the electrons in the earth that travel up through the K1 meridian and dissolve inflammation in the body, thinning the blood and dilating the blood vessels. This happens as you earth/ground with bare feet on the earth while you sungaze.

I found sungazing difficult at first because I was super light sensitive and couldn’t even leave the house without sunglasses. Now I never wear them at all and I have no light sensitivities.

I go through periods where I love the sunrise and then I change and I love the sunsets. I have had periods where I sungazed twice, morning and evening and at times I have jumped forward a few minutes. HRM says to do whatever you feel comfortable with and these things have suited me.

I had noticed a few weeks ago that my meals were becoming smaller and I no longer snacked between meals. I cut breakfast as a way of intermittent fasting because I felt like I was just eating too much food and feeling bloated all the time. I still look forward to lunch but by dinner I’m not hungry at all. I eat a small dinner to carry me over to lunch the next day and I rarely snack after dinner at all. I’m loving it and I’ve lost the extra weight I’d acquired from the fibro and fatigue that has plagued me for the past four and half years. I’m having dental work done and working on repairing a cracked tooth so I’ve had to cut all meat and eat just soft foods. I can’t believe how easy this has been. I’m not even missing meat at all. I had to blend up some veges, because I did miss them, but its so cool not to need food. I feel so much more in control.

As for my fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue. This was the best winter I’ve had in 3 years. I also added large doses (8000mgs) of fish oil to my intake which helped to keep most of the inflammation down over winter, along with the earthing/sungazing which I’m assuming thinned my blood and dissolved the inflammation. I have still had trouble with the fatigue, mainly due to EMF’s (electromagnetic frequencies), but yesterday was able to do more than I have in years at one time. I expected to wake up today in agony because I’d done too much but I am recovering faster now and my energy levels are good today. Just to elaborate a little more on EMF’s, they produce positive ions which are low vibrational fequencies that have the capacity to disrupt our bio-electrical fields. To cancel the overload of positive ions, you need to add negative ions. These are abundant around running/moving water such as rivers or the ocean, especially as the salt water in the ocean acts as a conductor. The earth is also abundant in negative ions which is what goes up through the feet and cancels out the effects of the positive ions which most disease thrives on.

Although I still feel socially disengaged most of the time, I have suffered no depression at all. Because the inflammation has decreased in my body, my panic attacks have also decreased making my PTSD much easier to cope with.

This has been my experience with sungazing so far and I am constantly becoming aware of more and more benefits. I would highly encourage everyone to do it, there’s nothing else that even compares, and from someone whose tried diligently cure after cure after cure, I can attest that sungazing is a God-send. :grin:

It seems that I bring nothing but cloudy skies to topics like these (pun intended).

sigh

I really hate to be a downer, but I would just like to re-iterate what I wrote about this stuff a few years ago (which everyone can read in this very thread). I’ll try to be a little more tactful though.

Staring at the sun is not a good idea. Even at one hundred and fifty million kilometers away (that’s a long way away), there is enough of the sun’s energy to heat the Earth’s surface, drive our weather systems, fry an egg on a hot sidewalk, and yes, seriously damage your vision and your skin. People throw around terms like “safe zones” or “safe times” …I’m not convinced about this, and I think it’s risky to go off staring at the sun, even at sunset or sunrise. It puts our vision at serious risk of being damaged. Anyone who knows anything about vision, or astronomy, will tell you it’s just not a good idea to stare at the sun, anytime.

I’d also like to point something out. I’m not sure if anyone has considered this, but here goes. There are rules on this forum against discussing drugs and lucid dreaming. For instance if anyone were to go off and do a bunch of dangerous drugs because they read about it here, that would be awful! I imagine that all of us in this community would feel pretty terrible about that. Shouldn’t the same thing apply to staring at the sun? Now I’m not saying, “We shouldn’t allow talking about sun-staring,” but people need to be very aware that there is a serious risk in doing this sort of thing if we’re going to talk about it. That’s why I’ve been such a hardcase about this in the past, and it’s why I still seem like such a downer sometimes when topics like this come up. So, I might seem like a nasty materialist at times, but it’s because I care.

So to everyone that’s interested in this sort of thing, please be careful if you decide you want to try it.

On a lighter note (no pun intended), to those who claim to have experienced some of the benefits of sun gazing, I issue the following friendly challenge: if you haven’t already, read a little bit about the sun, or how vision works, or about the health of the eye. Not just from new-age or alternative medicine type sources, but other books. You can find a lot of information on wikipedia, in fact. Make sure that if you are going to do this you understand the risks and you make an objective decision. Now, I’m a skeptic…I don’t believe in alternative medicine and I wouldn’t be caught dead staring at the sun unless it was from behind one of these. But people are going to do it, so the best I can do is encourage people to think carefully about this sort of thing. And who knows, you might decide that there are less risky things to do that are still good for you, such as eating less processed foods or making sure you get enough exercise. You can still go outside for a picnic or an invigorating jog and enjoy the warmth and light of the sun…just don’t stare at it. And remember to wear proper protection, like sunscreen and sunglasses. Not only do they protect your eyes, they make you look really cool :cool:

Hi Shaper,

Wow you are the cloudy sky aren’t you. Nice to meet you anyway. I’m afraid I might rain on your parade but I hope I don’t offend you, its not my intention.

I know there is no science to sungazing that can validate its efficacy but the results really do speak for themselves, which is testimonial enough for me to do what I do. You have a right to your opinion, and fear, of the sun and I respect that, as we all have the right to free choice and thinking.

Safe times are validated by UV index measurement however, and it is proven that the decreased UV rays at the hour within sunrise/sunset do not damage the eyes.

I understand your concerns for others about the promotion of safe sungazing, but I don’t think something as natural as staring at the source that keeps you alive and healthy, could be contrasted in the same picture as “dangerous drugs.”
However, you are correct in that it must be done safely and carefully.

If your reasons for being such a hardcase on sungazing are sincere, I do have to wonder why it would seem that you haven’t researched data yourself on the sun? I am an avid researcher and spend quite a number of hours a day sifting through scientific research data on natural health and recently on sungazing. I’ve read as much information as I can get my hands on about the sun and actually just finished reading a book on high doses of vitamin D (which we get naturally from the sun) and how it is curing cancers, Diabetes, and Multiple Schlerosis. Curing? Yes apparently so according to the scientific research in the book. I am very open minded and don’t like to put limitations on my beliefs as I know we are capable of much more than we currently recognize.

You don’t believe in alternative medicine? Are you aware of the dangers of taking prescription medications? They are now listed as the number one cause of accidental death in the world. Each chemically composed tablet contains within it a symptomatic relief and the cause for another complaint. There are dangers hidden within the very scent of mainstream medications that you should probably become more aware of if you intend to use these as method of healing.
I have seen alternative medicine provide more healing and relief than I could ever hope to attribute to convential treatments, but each to their own. I wish you well.

I very rarely eat processed foods and I exercise daily and walk most days too. Its much harder to get your health back once you’ve lost it and I believe the only way to accomplish this is by using unconventional treatments, such as sungazing/earthing/grounding. The effects I’m noticing so far, are verifying that for me.

There are so many benefits we can gain from the sun, when we utilize it in a balanced way. Slapping sunscreens on as soon as we go outside, not only prevents vitamin D from being produced by the skin, but the chemical agents in the sunscreen, react with the heat and produce dangerous carcinogenics that are absorbed into the body and which themselves have been shown to cause melanoma and the accumluation of dangerous toxins in the liver. Sunglasses also stop the beneficial light wave frequencies that prevent depression, SAD, and anxiety. So as you can see, we need to be cautious of much more than avoiding and hiding from the sun. There is so much evidence now to suggest that we should actually spend time in the sun without protection, especially now that the suns production of vitamin D (which is now becoming recognized as a superhormone that directly impacts the immune system) has been scientifically proven to cure 17 different types of cancer.
After sun exposure to acquire vitamin D, there are safe sunscreens on the market. One is Zinc Oxide. Another way to avoid burning in the sun is to take sufficient doses of fish oil and to eat vegetables high in betacartene. These help your body to tan rather than burn. At rivers and pools, organic cocunut oil is fantastic for attaining a tan without burning. It still blocks UV rays and vitamin D so its best to use after at least 20 minutes of mid day sun without protection. Its wise not to use coconut oil at the beach as the porus salt in the air prevents it from doing its job efficiently.

If you’d like to research some information on the benefits of the sun, here’s some links you might find some interesting stuff on:
search.mercola.com/search/pages/ … k=benefits of the sun
undergroundhealthreporter.com/co … z2A5iYHHff
hsionline.com/search
discoveryhealthpublishing.com/is-sunscreen-safe/
articles.mercola.com/sites/artic … -study-sho ws-many-sunscreens-are-accelerating-not-preventing-cancer.aspx

I’ll finish with this statement. We are natural beings, that thrive on natural elements and our innate healing potential is capable of healing everything when we remove obstruction and allow it to do its job. The methods we choose to use to remove obstruction, is where our God given choice lies.
Be well. :smile:

The problem with ‘results’ like those you refer to is that they are unreliable, insufficiently tested and anecdotal. There is the well-known placebo effect for a start. Not to mention people might cite it as a reason for feeling more energetic when they at the same time as starting it, took up walking / working out, for example.

Proven by whom? What research did they do? I don’t want to come across as that annoying guy who pins people to the details, but you are making a scientific claim here, without citing your source.

Horse manure is used to fertilize the plants we eat, it therefore helps keep us healthy and alive. I don’t think that means eating or staring at it will produce any form of benefit. Just being natural doesn’t mean it’s a good idea to stare at it, or consume it.

Research is a fickle thing, it’s not all that is needed to understand something. There is a lot of false data, misinterpreted graphs and faulty reasoning out there. To the layman that sort of thing is not obvious and there can be very convincing arguments made, that are entirely without merit. For example there was a politician who tried to have water banned, because there was a site made as a joke using a scientific handle for it.

There seems to be a constant background chatter about supposed cures for terminal illnesses. I’m a little sceptical at this point and certainly wouldn’t jump into taking supplements, altering my behaviour or citing it as a reason to stare at the sun.

It’s prudent to be sceptical of alternative medication. Some of them may have some basis in reality, others might be placebo. The thing about it is, you don’t have to be qualified to make claims about ‘alternative medicine.’ to prescribe traditional medications, you have to study the human body for many years. As well as be registered, approved and reviewed by a medical council.

There is a reason that when somebody gets seriously injured they go to a hospital and not an alternative medicine clinic. I’m not trying to run alternative medicine down, but it simply isn’t in the same league as traditional medicine and healing techniques. There shouldn’t really be a question of how much faith you have in traditional medicine. To deny that traditional medicine has proven itself or try to undermine it suggesting ‘alternative’ medicine as a more proven alternative is simply dishonest. Traditional medicine is not perfect, nothing is, hence why there are many thousands of people focused on improving it, like with all scientific fields.

This is anecdotal evidence. We have anecdotal evidence which conflicts with itself in other areas, it’s good to be sceptical of anything anecdotal and understandable to refuse to accept it at all.

Many wise people have said, “what you expect, you shall receive.” If you pursue alternative medicines, you need to be constantly mindful of that. With sun-gazing it’s a hard fact that the amount of light coming through your pupil, and being focused on to the retina at the back of your eye is extremely high. Where the threshold is for causing damage is uncertain. If you do it at midday, you can expect to be blinded. If you want to risk it at sunset, that’s your prerogative. As somebody who has used a magnifying glass to start a fire in the past, I know how powerful the sun is. I don’t like the idea of effectively doing that with my retina, I watched the paper burn, I don’t want to feel my retina do the same. Once you’ve done it, you can’t undo it.

Let’s not ignore that humans evolved for a certain climate. There is a very good reason that some people have very dark skin. If you go abroad, you are already not in your natural habitat and must take that into account. The level of UV is much higher than your body is equipped to deal with and wearing sunscreen is the sensible thing to do. Don’t forget we also used to have poor hygiene, dirt forms a pretty complete sunblock. There are many things we have to consider, our current way of living is not in alignment with what we experienced during our evolution. We shouldn’t quest to live how we used to in the dark ages or before, that way of living left us with a life expectancy of around 30 years or less… You again also cite no credible research for your scientific claim, so for me it stays the opinion of another person on the internet catagory for now.

Light wave frequencies? Is this still scientific, or are you speaking metaphysically now?

Just a quick read of the wikipedia article on Vitamin D is enough to show that what you are putting forwards as a growing consensus, is at best on shaky ground. Let alone being a scientifically proven cure for 17 types of cancer.

To be honest what you say seems self-defeating, we are natural beings I agree. Therefore what tools we create, derived from the natural world around us are inherently natural as well.

Very good point. The connotations of nice, natural sounding names versus technical, scientific sounding names only clouds this kind of debate further. I think people in general are given to think that anything with the label ‘natural’ stuck to it is automatically better than something artificial…

“Water?”

“Why yes! Great stuff, this water!”

“Dihydrogen monoxide?”

“Huh? What kind of chemicals are you trying to make me drink, Mr Scientist??”

I’ll say a little more about the natural/artificial dichotomy in a bit…

It’s nice to meet you too Shakanah. And welcome to the forums by the way :smile:
Don’t worry, you won’t offend me with anything you say. And for my part I’m not out to offend anyone either. I’d just like to keep others (and myself as well) thinking. It can be helpful when you’re trying to come to the truth about anything to have a skeptic included in the discussion. And when it comes to something like this, where I think there is an amount of risk involved, it’s best to be certain that everyone is clear on all the information at hand so that they can make good decisions. I’m sure this is one thing you and I agree on.

I’m not sure myself whether sun gazing is as dangerous, or even if it’s the same sort of ‘dangerous’ as certain drugs, if you see what I mean. But I just thought I’d raise the point: we don’t allow discussion about drugs on the forums because if someone were to go and try them, and hurt themselves, then we might share some responsibility for that. I would just hate for someone to damage their vision because of something they read here as well, that’s all I’m getting at. In any case, I’m glad we agree that whatever someone does, it should be done safely.

As it happens, I know a little bit about the sun. I wouldn’t have made the claims in this thread that I have if I did not have some evidence to back them up, after all. In fact I’ve always been an astronomy geek. I loved to learn about stars and planets, even when I was a child. I’ve even had the chance to study a little bit about astronomy in university, and I did pretty well in those classes. So, the sun being a star, I’d say I know at least enough about how stars work to hold my own in a topic like this. Of course I like to keep reading and learning more as well, and I realize that we still have a lot to learn. In fact, that’s what keeps me interested in science, the very fact that we know so little. Of course I’d be happy to read through some of the links you provided below anytime. But as for the reasons I’m skeptical about sun gazing, and about alternative medicine in general, I’ll say a little bit more about that below.

Believe me, I’m well aware of how dangerous prescription medications are. After all, that’s why doctors have to have a license to prescribe them, and pharmacists to dispense them. And that’s also why both of these kinds of professionals have to spend years educating themselves on the uses and effects of different medications. I think all of this makes it pretty obvious that, if used improperly (even doctors can make mistakes when prescribing medicine, after all, they’re only human) prescription medicine can be nasty. But when it comes to western medicine, I have a similar opinion to what Churchill said about democracy…that is, western medicine may be the worst form of medicine there is, except for all the other ones.

Now I don’t want to carry this thread too far off-topic, so if you like we could talk about alternative medicine in another thread. I’m sure we’d have a pretty stimulating discussion! For now, I’ll just say a little more and then get back on track. The fact is, western medicine works. There are some very sad cases that probably could have been helped by western medicine, but weren’t. I’m thinking of Andy Kaufmann, the performance artist, who was diagnosed with lung cancer. He used all kinds of alternative treatment to no avail. Western medicine might not have saved his life, as he did have a pretty aggressive kind of cancer…but it may have given him a fighting chance. Another example is Steve Jobs, who went for months without any treatment on his pancreatic cancer, opting for alternative treatments instead, which didn’t work. His life might have been saved had he chosen to intervene earlier with more conventional treatment. Finally, if western medicine were practised more, and better, in developing parts of the world, we could increase the average lifespan of these populations to a huge degree. The thing is these areas are where more traditional medicine is practised the most. I don’t think it’s a bad thing to use alternative medicine per se, as long as you are getting some kind of treatments that work…but opting for only alternative medicine when we have affective treatments available in western medicine can be awfully wasteful. Now I hope I don’t sound like accusing you of this, because it sounds like you’re taking a both/and approach to medicine…but I just think it would be a shame for anyone to pick something that has no medical value just because it’s “natural” or “alternative,” when we have treatments that we know work. Anyway, back to the topic…

I agree with you, that is, that the sun can be beneficial. But we still have to take precautions in light of damage to the ozone layer, etc. Heck, I think people should go outside more and get their helping of vitamin D as well! But needless to say this is much safer than staring straight into the sun. So by all means, spend some time outside…if you don’t want to wear sunscreen, spend your time in the shade or wear proper clothing on days with a high UV index (although I think people should still wear sunscreen). You’ll get no arguments from me on the benefits of going outside and being active, getting fresh air and sunshine and so on.

But on that note, isn’t sun gazing not only dangerous, but completely unnecessary? Why gaze directly at something that can blind you when you can simply spend a few hours outside? That’s another one of the odd things about sun gazing, to me at least…that there are less dangerous ways to get the same benefits that sun gazing advocates talk about. Why not do that instead of risking damage to your eyes? It just doesn’t make any sense to me.

I might be straying a little off-topic again. If so, I apologize…we could certainly talk about this more in a discussion about alternative medicine too. Anyhow, this is just a quick word about the sort of ‘naturalism’ that’s been brought up a few times now. It’s true that a lot of illnesses that are rampant now occurred much less frequently before we became so industrialized and so consumerist. The fact is, we buy and use a lot of things we don’t need to and which aren’t good for us. But it’s a trade-off, and I for one rather like having computers, electricity, and things like that. But those things aside, we have to be careful about how much power we attribute to ‘natural’ medicine or our natural immune system. After all many illnesses are also natural. My body has a natural capacity to heal injuries or to fight off certain diseases, but a lot of those diseases are natural too…viruses, bacteria, and so on. Just think about how certain diseases have been nearly wiped out thanks to vaccines. Or, how illnesses that were deadly just a few centuries ago can now be treated with simple antibiotics. My point is here is that we should try to avoid a ‘natural vs. technological’ sort of mindset when it comes to medicine, because this is a false dichotomy. Our modern world and the lifestyle that goes with it can be bad for us sometimes…but in a lot of cases, the medicine that goes with it is great! Same goes for natural things…getting out and getting some sun, like we’ve been talking about here, is fantastic…it’s perfectly natural. The hemlock that killed Socrates was also perfectly natural.

You seem like you’ve really given all this a great deal of thought, and that’s wonderful. When I rain on people’s parades I’m only doing so, so that they have something else to think about. I hope that whoever reads this thread takes what each of us has had to say into consideration, because I do think you’ve raised some good points. And of course, if you’re up for a chat about alternative medicine, maybe we can start another topic on it? In the meant time, stay well :smile:

Hi Green Dragon,

Nice to meet you.

.

You’re right, the only tests involved are personal testimonials, mine included and can not be counted as double blind placebos, however, if it leads one into a positive experience, surely it can only be viewed as a working example, after all, the only thing missing, is the scientist to run and publish consecutive testing and results.

Once again, you’re right. I don’t have any evidence to back up the claim that the UV rays are low enough to be safe at sunrise/sunset. I haven’t been able to track any down either, probably because mainstream publications refuse to believe anything other than the current indoctrination that the sun is bad for us at all times. I apologize for citing something without evidence.

On the contrary, quantum physics would have you believe otherwise. Giving energy to fecal matter may increase its potency, not that I would suggest spending time doing this to find out. I think our time is much better spent with our attention on living matter, such as nature, the sun included. There is much we have yet to learn by keeping an open mind to all possibility.

How very true. I have read quite a few accounts on the latest pharmaceutical law suits that are currently running, where research was falsified, or misleading. This in itself is enough to distrust research findings on everything. Unfortunately, if we revert to this level of thinking, we have no measurement to guide our beliefs, and therefore must be reduced to trusting our…instinct. :woo:

I have a passion for alternative healing, I guess it comes through in my communication. :grin:

With alternative medicine, claims are forbidden, even with double blind placebo testing. Now there’s something wrong with that picture. I’m not sure where you are from, but in Australia, naturapaths have to study almost as long as doctors, as well as being registered, approved and reviewed by a council.
I’m not completely against conventional treatment either. I believe there is a place for both, once the pharmaceuticals greedy hands are surgically removed from the motives of modern medicine.
I have been studying natural therapies for over 12 years now. I have read countless testimonials and even created some of my own using natural therapies in the place of conventional ones. A couple of examples include reversing diagnosed Bipolar in my youngest daughter, using a natural chiropractic technique I developed myself to take the pressure off the nerves at the base of the skull that control mood, or putting a man into full remission for his inoperable tumor, when he refused chemotherapy, or there’s the young man who suffered from Bells Palsy, doctors diagnosis was that he would never recover, and yet using just my intention and my hands, he was healed completely within a week. That’s a few of the things I can say about my own experience with natural medicines and healing.
While the pharmaceutical companies sponsor doctors, we will never find cures for our worst diseases, there is too much money to be made from illness. Would you consent to having chemotherapy if you knew that it only had a 2% success rate? Or would you consider a natural product such as Artemisinin that has a 100% success rate against breast cancer and is now showing the same results with other cancers? Like I said, there is much to be learnt if you have an open mind.

I’m sorry that you feel so skeptical and distrusting of so many things. :sad:

Concerning sunscreens and vitamin D you said:

Please read the information in the links below to see all the cited research about sunscreens and vitamin D. Maybe my format confused you. Should I have put it in directly after I make claims? I’m fairly new to forum guidelines.

Once again, please read the links below.

Again, the links below will offer all the research data to confirm this.

[quote]
To be honest what you say seems self-defeating, we are natural beings I agree. Therefore what tools we create, derived from the natural world around us are inherently natural as well.

[quote]

I would agree, but some are self destructive and others life affirming. Judgement of each must inevitably come down to one’s own intuitive beliefs. :wink:

Hey Shaper,

Thank you for your warm welcome.

One of the reasons I was drawn to forums is to keep ideas flowing and people thinking so we have something in common, even if it isn’t sungazing. Lol.
And yes, I do agree, having all the information on something you’re trying is always the best way to ascertain good decision making, and safety.

I too have an interest in the stars and planetary alignments, not as passionate as natural health or quantum physics but still an interest.

I would love to discuss natural/alternative therapies with you on another thread but I’m not sure how you go about starting one. Lol. I’m reasonably new to forums. I only ever used them a couple of times and they’re all different. I’m still finding my way around this one.
I used to believe in western medicine a long time ago. I still believe that it has a place in our lives and who would be without our hospitals and surgeons. In some eastern countries, doctors only get paid when their clients are well, if the clients get sick, they don’t get paid. In western cultures, the doctors only get paid, when their clients are sick. There is no profit in health. Unfortunately, as I mentioned in my previous post in answer to Green Dragon, the pharmaceuticals intentions are not for our optimal well being, and this is who our doctors are sponsored by. Apparently, medications are made by guessing which chemical should go with another and then a strain of living tissue is introduced, and testing begins with these combinations and others until they reach a significant result. The following research and trials are quite often incomplete, and sometimes corrupted to make sure the medications make profit. As I mentioned in a previous post, there are quite a number of current law suits against pharmaceutical companies, some for defrauding research data to promote their drugs. I know it seems prudent to think that western treatments for cancer could help to save someones life, but the truth is, that chemotherapy has been proven to only have a 2% success rate and in research studies, it was only ever proven to work against 11 types of cancer, and these were rare. When patients choose chemo, they are warned that it will only increase their life by up to five years. People use this choice because we have been conditioned to believe that what a doctor says is for our optimal well being, and because we are uninformed of other choices. I’ve watched so many people I know die of cancer in the last year because they all chose chemotherapy. Each one came to me when it was too late for me to help them. If we were educated to empower ourselves with the knowledge we need to heal ourselves, we would have a much better chance of survival. As far as the natural treatments for cancer go, there are specific protocols that need to be followed and if you’re unaware of these, you won’t beat it no matter what you do. Anyway, back to topic.

Being in the sun without clothing or sunscreens produces enormous benefits through just the vitamin D production, and that’s putting all other benefits aside. Sungazing, has its own benefits. The light that enters the eye decalicifies the Pineal Gland and causes it to produce and store the energy taken in through the lens of the eye. This energy is transported into every cell in the body, where it gets grounded in and builds its own charge, until eventually you become a solar powered being. Now I can’t give you any scientific research data on this, this is only the explanation given to explain how the suns energy works in the body by those who have proven it to work. An indian man name HRM, volunteered himself as a research subject to prove that man could live on sunlight. He was under 24 hour supervision 3 times, the first being 211 days, the second 411 days and the third being 130 days. Each time he survived only on sun energy and water. He had numerous tests run on him and he was found to be in perfect health in spite of his lengthened fasts. He has eaten 7 meals in 12 years. Because of his example, thousands of people all over the world (and none have gone blind), have copied his recommendations and become solar beings. I, myself am noticing less and less interest in food and quite often it just doesn’t even occur to me now to eat. I feel satisfied already. Why, you might ask, would I want to become solar powered? I do have reasons. My initial motivation was because of numerous allergic reactions to foods and chemicals being added to foods that have been contributing to my health problems. Now, I feel so much more empowered in myself knowing that I can live without being controlled by my appetite or need for food. There are so many things in our food to keep us sick, and I can escape all of that.

I love computers too and I love my researching and reading on the computer, however, like many other people who don’t even know its happening to them, the electromagnetic frequencies affect us in negative ways. I have to limit my time on the computer each day and sometimes spread it out because it can completely incapacitate me. Its a little like a vampire that sucks all the energy out of me leaving me with severe chronic fatigue. Lol. If they put in the smart metres which have already bugun, for every household in Australia, I’m pretty much done for. Technology isn’t always good for us.
I wish I could agree with you on vaccines but that’s an entirely new topic for debate. I will say though, that one of the major law suits currently running is because data was falsified on vaccines to cover up the dangers so that they could be manufactured for profit. And others are now being proven to be completely ineffective at all. Dr Joseph Mercola publishes all the latest information on his site.
I agree, where would we be without antibiotics.
I also agree, this isn’t about taking sides. There are uses and conveniences in both natural and conventional treatments. If only they would work together and promote one another.

I too hope that our words might help others to make more informed decisions. Thanks for chatting with me, its been stimulating. When I work it out, I might even start up a thread on natural therapies and we can continue the debate there. Lol. :smile:

This is where I disagree strongly. I consider myself to be spiritual, but I understand fully that science is a quest for truth not a quest to find what feels good or feels right.

Thanks and respect to you for retracting it, it takes strength of character to do that.

I’m not sure I agree fully here. A new-age type philosophy (Perhaps something like the works James Redfield produced) would have us believe that giving energy to plants or manure would yield results. Quantum mechanics hints that the world responds to being observed in ways we previously would have dismissed. I am far more interested in the new-age type philosophy than might appear from my apparent pro-science stance. I am just extremely opposed to anything which seeks to undermine or invalidate science. Either directly by attacking it, or indirectly by claiming it says something which it doesn’t. Quantum mechanics does open the door a bit more for spiritual ideas, but it doesn’t back them or state them yet to the best of my knowledge.

This isn’t what I was saying. What I was saying is that it’s a tall order to assert a layman is capable of distinguishing the difference unaided by training or a scientific background. We have to understand our own limitations as non-scientific folk if such a term can be used. We also have to understand that a Geneticists opinion on Quantum mechanics is not necessarily any more informed than ours. We have to be careful that we listen to those who know what they are talking about. That is another reason why peer-review is such a critical part of the scientific process.

It does. :smile: I am really quite positive towards it, I just see it as strictly supplemental and in need of a healthy dose of scrutiny.

There are many questionable issues when it comes to funding with medical research. I’m personally of the opinion such things should be publicly funded and publicly owned. I find it obscene that it’s considered a good idea to patent medicines so that the sick have to pay considerably more for the treatment at the benefit of pharmacy companies, on the unchecked promise to put more money into research. Such a life critical things should be funded publicly. I would be very pro having money I pay in taxes spent researching the best possible cures, for the cheapest cost. For the benefit of all humanity. We don’t need proxy pharmaceutical companies in the mix who are out for a profit. Why should the sick pay for pharmacy profits and partially some new research when we can all pay for research directly and cut out the middle-man.

There are many anecdotal stories about people seeing visions which prove god. Various gods, which conflict. Not to run you down, but there is a good reason that courts do not accept hearsay as evidence, and why science refuses to take it seriously.

I am very sceptical about what can enter the scientific domain. It’s proven usefulness as a tool is beyond reproach. That doesn’t mean I reject everything just because I’m sceptical, or it having no credibility in the scientific domain means I label it rubbish. I do feel that to take science and say that is all there is, everything else is rubbish, is equivalent to religious belief. It’s a defensible logical position, but has no evidential backing. This for me is where somebody goes from being rational, to being irrational. By without giving any leeway denies everything outside the realms of scientific study. Science is constantly growing and evolving, to say it can never have something within it, is exceedingly arrogant.

There aren’t any forum guidelines for how to present yourself above maintaining respect. To clarify my perspective; it’s both our responsibility to try and understand one another and I’m equally responsible if we have a misunderstanding.

I didn’t see anything in your quoted links which referred to Vitamin D. As for the sunscreen thing, I can believe it may have harmful effects, but since I’ve experienced sunburn for myself, and the carcinogenic claims are decidedly American oriented, not for all sunscreen even by the articles own admission and backed by no cited evidence, I dismiss them.

The bottom link you post appears broken, even after manually pasting it into the bar to recover from the auto-space inserted to preserve the layout. (n.b You can use the bbcode tags [ url=#url goes here#]Text to be a link[ /url] to make a link and avoid it being mutilated if it’s too long.

The second one up, immediately read as sensationalist and I stopped reading when they cited the Daily Mail as a source, when the daily mail have knowingly and repeatedly published false information about reports by the met office. Maybe what they cite in this case is right, but it doesn’t bode well for me that they check their sources well. The video I cite here also highlights the problem with people believing false reports. Youtube Video by Potholer54

I find nothing regarding Vitamin D in your links, although one is broken and two link to just searches, not sure what you expect us to do there. Of the other two, I explained above why I dismiss one of them. The other seems to make more unsupported assertions. Whilst colours might have an effect on mood, I find it hard to accept that it miraculously cures things like cancer and the only reason it hasn’t been heard of is because an American association banned it in America. This seems a typical conspiracy theorist tactic to me. What about Europe?

I don’t feel this is entirely true, if I want to know if I can eat a certain type of plant, I don’t rely on my own intuitive feel. I search online and find out what it is, what it contains and if its toxic. Scientific research might be muddied by those who misinterpret it, or misrepresent it, but it works. It’s possible for scientists to find out what the plant is, and tell me what it will likely do if I eat it. Its in the interests of those who support alternative medicines to imply science is inaccurate, unsure and as much a coin-toss as the alternative treatments, that is simply untrue. When you don’t have to wade through the muddy water of misleading reports, it can be very precise and informative.

Woah, hold on there. I have to say “what?” here. How exactly light that enters through your eye can have an affect on a gland in the centre of your brain is a bit of a mind-bender to start with. Let alone that you can make such precise explanations of how the pineal gland functions without citing any form of backing. Calcification also seems to be a rare syndrome and not a normal state of being.

A solar powered being? To be honest it feels a bit like we just went off the deep end here. It’s an incredible claim that you can get enough energy through your eyes to power an entire human body. Not to mention all the minerals you’d need. Where do those come from, do we convert energy into matter internally somehow for it? if so that would be difficult to imagine. We can actually calculate how much energy it would take to create 1 gram of something using E=MC². You would be multiplying the mass by the speed of light squared.

I’m glad we’re on the same page, whether it comes to sun gazing or alternative medicine. Anyhow, I’m going to reply to the sun gazing stuff from here on out. I’d love to continue talking about alternative medicine but I’m going to start a proper thread about that so that we can stay on topic here. If you don’t mind, I’ll just quote from this thread to start things off once I begin the other thread. Anyway, back to sun gazing…

It sounds to me like we could be talking about two different things here, which might be why there is some disagreement about sun gazing, and also why we seem to be approaching it from such different perspectives. When I say ‘astronomy’ I mean the study of the stars, yes, but the scientific study of the stars. For example, what are stars made of? What are their lifespans like? How do they behave, physically speaking? Those sorts of things. When you mentioned planetary alignments, it made me wonder if you’re actually talking about astrology, not astronomy. This stuff used to be a part of astronomy, but now scientists don’t think that the planets or stars influence our lives that way. I think they’re correct. But I don’t want to start yet another debate on astrology, so for now I’ll just re-iterate that the knowledge I have about stars and planets, while it isn’t up to par with a professional astronomer, is about the physical nature of these things. But even if you wanted to talk about metaphysical properties of stars, I think we’d probably disagree as well (I love astronomy, but what I’m actually studying at the moment is philosophy, so I like to get metaphysical every now and then). Anyway my point is that when I make claims like “sun gazing is dangerous,” I’m basing that on the sort of knowledge I mentioned just now; knowledge about the physical properties of stars, etc.

I’m with GreenDragon on this sort of thing. Right now, you’re making a claim about the nature of objects and their properties. Those claims are subject to science because we can go out into the world, observe how things are, do some experiments, and see if the way things are matches up to the way we think they are. Not only that, a claim like we become “solar powered” beings already contradicts a number of things that we know about the sun, about energy, about the human body, and all of that knowledge was arrived at the way I just mentioned: by observing the world, forming a hypothesis about some aspect of it, and then testing that hypothesis very carefully. I’m no physicist, but I do know that we can’t run on sunlight. There are lifeforms that can…they’re plants of course. But we humans just didn’t evolve this way, and there’s a lot of evidence to back up what I’m claiming when I say this.

This is the problem we keep running into. You’re making claims about how things are without proper justification for those claims. The problem with that is people can claim anything, but it doesn’t mean that it’s true. I could claim that there’s a gremlin in my computer. That might even explain a few things, such as why my computer isn’t working properly today. But unless I justify this claim with evidence, it’s meaningless. It also runs counter to explanations for my computer running more slowly which are more plausible, e.g., I haven’t run my anti-virus program in a long time, or, my computer is getting old and I need a new one, and so on.

I can give you examples of scientific, peer reviewed studies that contain the evidence that staring at the sun is bad for your eyes. But to start things off, have a look at this article which is about someone who damaged his vision by sun gazing.

Now this type of evidence here…

…just how rigorous were these ‘tests’?

I’m going to play the skeptic again and ask, when was this study done? Which scientists ran this experiment? Can you direct me to the study so that I can read it myself? I have also heard of similar studies as this but they’ve all turned out to be fraudulent when I’ve looked into them further. And the fact is this sort of thing happens in other areas of science too, not just areas where ‘new age’ or ‘supernatural’ sort of claims are at issue. Science is a human endeavor after all so it isn’t perfect. That’s why it has such rigorous standards, which when unfulfilled, mean that we can’t go and say that a claim like “this man can survive only on sunlight” is true. I’m not just skeptical of sun gazing and neither are other scientists…in fact it’s their job to be skeptical of every hypothesis that they test.
Besides, scientists aren’t really a bunch of old grinches who don’t see any wonder in life or the universe. So if a study like this were to be done, and it really proved that something like this was possible, scientists would be the first ones to tell the world, “Hey, this is amazing! Have you all heard about this incredible thing?” But as Carl Sagan said, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”

One last thing I’d like to say about something you said to GreenDragon (emphasis added)…

This just isn’t how science works. I’m glad that you realize that to make a claim, there has to be evidence. Even my claim, “There is a computer on my desk,” requires evidence to justify it. In this case, the evidence is something as simple as the fact that I’m typing on it and communicating with you. Someone else could also come and visit me, and confirm that there is indeed a computer here. Of course in science the standards are a bit more rigorous than this, but you get the idea. But any claim about the state of the world has to be justified by evidence, or it doesn’t count as knowledge…it’s just words.

The thing is, scientists don’t “refuse to believe” something unless there is no evidence. If there’s no evidence, then there’s no reason to believe a claim! And the burden of proof is on the person who makes the claim. As for the sun being bad for us at all times, scientists know this isn’t true, and they don’t claim that it is actually bad everywhere, all the time. What they do claim is that looking directly at the sun will damage one’s vision, that too much UV radiation can damage the skin, and so on. But again, they aren’t “indoctrinated” into believing this, instead the reason they believe it is because there is evidence that these things are true.

As for the rest, as I was saying, we can continue talking about alternative medicine in another thread. But for now I will say that the same line of thought that I’ve been applying here applies to the claims people make about alternative medicine…so, perhaps we won’t agree about much, but I hope that I’ll be able to show you why I’m thinking the way I am, and how I have reached some of the conclusions that I have.

Green Dragon wrote:

Science is a quest for truth but even science is based on the monitoring of experience and an open mind. All I’m saying here is that we observe our own experiences and make judgments and decisions based on them. Years ago, people were put to death if they contended with the so called “fact” that the world was flat.

Have you heard of Epigenetics? It is being labelled as the “new science.” Dr Bruce Lipton is a Cell Biologist who has been working on the study of DNA for over 25 years and has found through his research, that DNA is malleable, it is in fact programmed by our environment rather than being set in stone as predetermined. He wrote a book called “The Biology of Belief”, one of my favourites and well worth the read.

I totally agree and I like your idea of “publically funded and publically owned.”

Upon checking the links I previously posted, I apologize for not doing this sooner. Rather than trying to repost the list of articles I originally attempted to post, I have individually selected some that might be appropriate.

This link will give you a list of dangerous chemicals added to sunscreens so you can check your own to see if its safe. If you can’t eat it, its not advisable to put it on your skin. The skin is the largest organ in the body and it absorbs whatever we apply to it and sends it directly into the bloodstream: articles.mercola.com/sites/artic … r-out-of-f ive-sunscreens-may-be-hazardous-to-your-health.aspx

I’m not really sure how to do this so I’m hoping the links I’ve used this time work.

Hhmm…understandable why you wouldn’t trust that source.

New links for vitamin D:
articles.mercola.com/sites/artic … -exposure- vitamin-d-production-benefits.aspx

articles.mercola.com/sites/artic … erts-start ing-to-agree-more-vitamin-d-is-better.aspx

articles.mercola.com/sites/artic … entists-ad mit-sun-exposure-benefits-outweigh-risks.aspx

The links I’m providing are from Dr Joseph Mercolas website. He is a respected Physician himself and promotes a lot of information and the latest research on many topics, vitamin D and safe sun exposure included. He is highly respected and admired and I haven’t read any reports of misleading information. I trust what he says and promotes, I hope you can too.

Since we were originally discussing sungazing in the light of my experience and understanding, I will conclude with this link. I hope it answers most of your questions about sungazing:
articles.mercola.com/sites/artic … sting-on-s unshine.aspx

Just checked the links again after posting and I think the problem is happening then.

Maybe the links are too long to post so I’m not sure how else to do it. Sorry.

Shaper wrote:

You might be right here. When you define it like that I’m not sure what my interests come under. Lol. I do a bit of reading on the Mayan predictions and planetary alignments and their affects on us so I guess that must come under astrology.
We could have some good discussions about metaphysical topics too.

I know about Mason Dwinell. I bought a copy of Eat the Sun. Yes in the video the eye test says that he had some damage to the retina and this indeed did throw him off track with sungazing, understandably. However, in spite of the damage, Mason recognized that the other benefits of sungazing were so overwhelmingly evident, that he decided to complete the program.

Feasting on sunshine

I just realized how to post a link on here. Phew!!! I do hope it works this way.

I hope this article answers your questions on sungazing. :smile:

Green Dragon,

I am reposting the links I posted above. Sorry for any inconvenience, I just realized how to do it.
Sun exposure and vitamin D production

Experts starting to agree more vitamin D is better

Scientists admit sun exposure benefits outweight risks

Hope they work this time.

I don’t really see what relevance what you are saying has to what I said here. Science is based on empirical data, not the gut feelings of scientists involved, or at least it shouldn’t be. It’s true that those gut feelings might help them figure out where to look for certain things, or devise tests to test a theory formed from gut feelings, but it’s not a source of data. I’m also not suggesting anything in regards to those who deviate from the current ideas, merely saying to claim scientific validity it has to actually be scientifically valid.

Whilst wikipedia might not be the best scientific source in the world, it doesn’t seem to agree with you.

Wikipedia’s source being This article as well as a peer reviewed paper which has been cited over 100 times. Regrettably though I have to rely on others having checked the citation as I can’t get access to the paper. What you discuss is interesting, I agree, it doesn’t however appear to be exactly what you said though.

I have to be honest, I rarely use sunscreen. In fact I don’t think I’ve used any in the past 7-8 years. I’ve been fortunate enough to inherit a relatively high natural UV tolerance for my geographical location due to having distant relatives who came from very hot climates. I also don’t live in America, I live in Europe. So much of the article doesn’t apply to me anyway since it’s talking about American sunscreens. The only time I use sunscreen is when I go to a hotter climate like Spain.

Reading through the articles. I can see that the author is writing with a strong slant. He doesn’t seem to be flat out misreporting facts, he is however being careful with what details he discusses. Repeatedly discussing why Vitamin D is wonderful and using cases where people are likely to be deficient to promote it. Nobody is making the argument that being Vitamin D deficient is good or even ok. Those who live in Northern latitudes do need to be aware of their Vitamin D intake, just like those who have dark skin and live in less sunny climates or those who turn vegetarian do.

I’d also note that sunlight driven Vitamin D production actually has nothing to do with sun-gazing. It’s discussion here is doing exactly the same as what the person in your quoted article is doing. The retina does not produce Vitamin D like our skin does when exposed to sunlight. It being discussed alongside sun-gazing produces an emotional response in the reader which leads to misappropriation of positive thoughts to it. Basically, we talk about how good sunlight is because it gives us Vitamin D, we then make the internal decision that sunlight is good and healthy. So looking at the healthy and good sun couldn’t be bad could it? As emotional beings we have a problem isolating the positive feel we have and looking at it objectively, our opinions are coloured by it. Sunlight on your skin might have good effects, that does not mean sunlight in your eye is automatically good. It’s like saying all about how we need water to survive, that a massive percentage of us is made of it and it keeps our bodies clean and free from pathogens on a page which advocates breathing it in. We all know how harmful that could be, the two do not connect in reality, but they do emotionally if they are put together in this way.

He does make a convincing argument, but he does it from an emotional standpoint. What he has is personal viewpoint dressed up as science and that can be very dangerous. He’s at least honest enough to state there is currently no scientific evidence to support anything he discusses in the article, but he quickly undermines any doubt by saying how eager the practitioners are to have it tested and proven. Implying that its a new discovery that hasn’t seen the light of day to mainstream scientists. I’m not convinced of that, especially when he discusses the tests done on HRM. If the results are so obviously testable as, not requiring food to survive and the practitioners so eager to prove it. I would expect them to be tested much more readily. There are plenty of scientists out there who would give something like this the time of day, there’s plenty out there investigating the paranormal for example.

When he discusses the statistical analysis used to establish the safety. The data being quoted is being used in a disturbing way. There is a big difference between the amount of people looking at the sun and the time they look at it for, during an eclipse and during non-eclipse times. Yet the conclusion is drawn that the number of injuries from looking at the sun should be a million times more because the sun is fully visible for longer. This is invalid reasoning and ignores the fact the number of people looking at the sun changes very dramatically between the two. Statistics are well known for being a field where you can make the data say near enough anything with the right ‘interpretation’

I have to say that I do feel (no science here I’d like to point out) that we have a good deal of natural cycles which may be regulated by exposure to sunlight. I have actually tried a sort of sun-gazing of my own. I stood in the sunlight on a bright sunny day, facing the sun, with my eyes closed. The wind was strong and clear and it was a wonderful feeling. I was left feeling great as a result of it. My sleep patterns became strongly defined for the next day or so. Although that says little as I have found I can manipulate my sleep patterns with my intention. Including waking up at precise times at will and making myself feel sleepy at specific times using intent. I may advocate science as a wonderful way to understand the world, but I don’t only find delight in the scientific.

What I object to with many of the posts in the topic, is the certainty with which far-out unsubstantiated claims are being made, and the readily apparent anti-science anti-conventional-medicine mentality running through it. We have people who are ill-equipped to make the determination, advising others that it’s a good idea to do something potentially harmful for reasons which as far as I can see, are shaky. I’m not against the spiritual experience, I embrace it.

I just don’t support spiritual exploration at the expense of scientific research and advancement. Given it’s history at pulling us out of the dark ages, I think it deserves the respect, resources and space to take us as far as it can go. At least as long as the end result of where we are going is reversible. If we are really also seeking truth through spirituality like what seems to be claimed, and not just egotistical comfort of nice chemicals we get when we think we understand something, we should welcome the extra data from science and accept that our beliefs may be wrong. It’s already fundamental to science that it accepts its subject to revision based on evidence. I believe in science as much as I believe in the spiritual. I don’t want to see either attacked and undermined.

When it comes to which should take precedent for determining the safety of sun-gazing, I’d have to say it’s always going to be the individual’s choice. Personally I choose to explore other places for my ‘spiritual happy’ and steer away from it because of the very real danger to my vision. I have a tendency to side with empiricism more than gut feeling when it comes to how physical bodies (my eye and the sun) interact. It might become a little more hazy for me when it gets to things like diet, but the interaction between the sun and the eye, at least on a physical level, seems pretty simple. The retina sustains damage from looking at the sun, and we can’t be sure about how much it sustains even during the proposed ‘safe times’

It sounds like astrology, yeah. Don’t take this the wrong way, but that stuff probably isn’t real either. Of course I’m sure it would still give us a lot to talk about. There are probably some other threads here already about the Mayan calender for example. And if you’d like to talk about metaphysics, we could head on over to the Philosopher’s Cloud.

I’m not quite sure I understand…
If you’ve seen the video (I haven’t, I just came across the article about it), how do you reconcile the fact that he damaged his vision with the sun gazing being a good idea? Do you think that the medical tests on his eyes were wrong? Or do you agree with Mr Dinwell, that the benefits of sun gazing outweigh the costs? (Like, for example, not being able to see properly). If it’s the second thing, we’re back at square one: all of the benefits of sun gazing are alleged benefits; as we’ve been discussing, there is no reason to think it works other than that some people seem to feel that it does, and those people are the ones who already believe that it works, without any hard evidence. In fact there is good evidence that sun gazing can damage your vision, but again, that evidence is overlooked by people who simply believe the benefits outweigh the costs.

Doesn’t that kind of reasoning seem circular to you?

My laptop is running out of batteries as I type. Rest assured, I will read this and address it in my next post :smile:

I previously wrote:

Green Dragon replied:

Not to discount Wikipedia, I think they, as with most schools and educational facilities, base their findings on Newtonian Science. Epigentics has been labelled, “The New Science” and as far as I know, has not yet been incorporated into old material. This however, does not dismiss its findings and accuracy.
There’s a short video source here with Dr Lipton explaining a little about his findings:
Dr Bruce Lipton - DNA programming

Gregg Braden is another favourite scientist of mine. He quotes some studies done on the maleability of DNA and how it is affected and changed through emotion:
Gregg Braden on DNA

Somehow I managed to get sidetracked talking about the sun which led to discussion on vitamin D. We have gone off track a bit. I was aware that sungazing doesn’t produce vitamin D and that this isn’t what is responsible for the energy store being produced by it. The sun does have many benefits, when used appropriately. Yours and my perspective of “appropriate” will have to differ for now on the topic of sungazing. It seems irrelevant that I should try to convince you to do something you are not comfortable with. I originally posted my experience as I was hoping to discuss the topic of sungazing with others who had completed or were in the process of completing the HRM program, and although the discussion has been very interesting, I think we’ve stated our positions as far as sungazing goes. The discussion has been enjoyable. Thank you for participating Green Dragon. :smile:

Shaper wrote:

]

Ah probability is what makes life so interesting. I will take a look at the Philosophers Cloud.

Yes that kind of reasoning does sound circular to me. Unfortunately, its not really my reasoning but it does seem like we’re going round in circles on the topic of sungazing. I feel that my own personal experience validates my reasoning. I would have stopped sungazing a long time ago if I hadn’t seen the benefits in it. They are there and they do make it all worth it. Like I mentioned to Green Dragon, I didn’t post my experience to try to convince those who weren’t interested that it was a good thing, I had hoped to talk to others who were doing it so we could share our findings. There are thousands who are/and have sungazed and completed the program without damage. Because one person has damaged his eyes, does not discount the many who haven’t. It is strange though, that the “alleged” benefits are all similar in nature. Having studied Hypnotherapy, I am aware of the inherent power of the subconscious mind to affect belief, and I have considered that these similarities in benefit could be a by product of these beliefs, however, I can hardly justify this as a possibility when faced with material that shows people surviving on sunlight and water without food. There has to be something more to it that has not been considered.