The Populations Going vegan is going to eradicate us – Anthropocentric much?

Do you know, it’s very interesting.

A lot of these companies are now moving over to this vegan meat alternative. basically because of costs. you know they don’t have the people qualified to work on the farms, to look after the animals, to herd, to cull.

you know all of these things require skill but also provide food and sustenance, and if this meat is healthy then whoever eats the meat will be healthy, more or less.

-  - The Populations Going vegan is going to eradicate us - Anthropocentric much? - I am Mahir - puc / @puccaso

The only reason the population of the world is at what it is at right now, is because of a doubling, which is happening because the caring capacity of the ecosystem we live in is off-balance. it has been tipped and it is falling my friend. once we will not be limited by the caring capacity of our ecosystem and we can make our own fake meat, then we will have enough humans to turn the whole of a large mammals on Earth into hominids and then the only real option is cannibalism

This vegan Revolution is going to permit for this culture to continue to run the world like it’s its own and we will have even less chance to escape it.

At least, at the moment, we’re limited by the food or the meat we can eat, because they’re actual real animals. the moment that we start to produce fake meat, which looks like real meat, to a populous who is more or less addicted to it, this is going to do nothing but just boost the population rise.

From another perspective, I wonder why people think there are so many chickens on Earth. and so many cows, and so many pigs, but not so many gorillas, or wildebeests, or rhinos?

-  - The Populations Going vegan is going to eradicate us - Anthropocentric much? - I am Mahir - puc / @puccaso

the reason is because we don’t eat them. there is no market for them. we haven’t commodified their existence, and thus we don’t need to keep them alive. because it doesn’t really affect you and me in Rfkae, because these animals don’t exist around us. so what difference would it make if no animals exist around, you because you’re able to eat fake animals.

Would you care about the Conservation of all of these animals, who are on a borderline extinction list? No, you wouldn’t.

because you can get a impossible burger from McDonald’s and Nando’s



There’s something about nostalgia.

it’s not what you think it is.

So i’ve written a couple of things on similarities between our Taker culture and a culture of bacteria in a petri dish.

There’s something about the way that we have organised our societal structure that creates the nostalgia. It only exists because of the cultural differences between each generation is my current hypothesis.

It only exists because of the cultural differences between each generation is my current hypothesis.

There’s something about the way that we have organised our societal structure that creates the nostalgia.


Similarity of this Culture and Bacteria – part 3/3

So doing some more work on the connection between our culture and bacteria.

I was thinking today that there are so many empty shops where I live, and because of those empty shops there are less people coming here.

This phenomenon I guess is valid for everywhere right now.

Such as citylife or towns or villages, where one finds a community of the people of our culture, it is dependent on the people who live there, like any other community of life.

Right now, the shop that used to sell really good chicken and chips is now closed, so there are less people coming here because they won’t find that thing they needed. The entity that provided the function that replaced hunting and gathering, its no longer there. 

That is food. Life or death stuff. Understandable.

But, what about clothes? There are certain clothes and accessories shops for young adults, and most of them are closed or empty.Therefore that too means that those young adults don’t come either.

Well how may survive eating one box of chicken and chips a week, how many bracelets or t-shirts do you need? Either way, if those shops were open, it was because people needed some aspect of whatever they bought from those stores.

the bacteria in the petri dish would prefer a more nutrient-rich environment, 

the bacteria that are on the side of a nutrient-dense petri dish, I guess, would grow better or faster.  

So then, does that mean these shops providing these products or services, in some way that I can’t figure out right now, have some biological benefit to this organism, in this case – the collective organism of the peoples of our culture. 

I’m not only talking about the clothes, or the chicken, There’s also the physical transaction between the buyer and seller. The customer, and the teller. The provider and receiver. 

In an environment where something like that is required, if the necessity for somewhere like that to exist, the actual where and the how of the interaction taking place, is it as important for the survival of the organism, as the more nutrient dense substrate is for the bacteria inside the petri?

If this is an acceptable analogy, then how does the internal culture of the people providing that service or product, shape its use and function upon the people availing of those services or consuming their products.

certain cells are energised by x-rays and other Radioactive energy. So the heightened energy affects how and what cells do. their DNA using whatever is around them as their own substrate, is going to have different results depending on the type of energy it itself consumes or is subject to.

The nucleus of cells get energy just from being part of the Universe. There are neutrinos and loads of stuff happening around us, whether or not we are conscious of them visually.

how does the energy of the people providing the product or the service affect its user. 

and it has to be cyclical. 

Otherwise you would have small patches of places of just a blanket of individuals, instead of clumps of communities, villages and towns. 

People go to the places that are successful or trustworthy, or close, for it is one of these things that the customers return, like a colony of bacteria in a petri dish.


Life on Venus – Similarity of this Culture and Bacteria – part 2/3

let’s just take the bacteria analogy a bit further.

so we as one whole Petrie dish, we are now moving into the territory of what may be another Petrie dish.

because Life on Venus is going to be their own colonies of probably multiple cultures of a Petrie dish.

Culture only changes in proximity.

As numerous as the cultures are on this wet rock, or Petrie dish, we still have a common denominator, that we’re all let’s just Homosapien. however most likely whatever awaits us that we call Life on Venus, is not Homosapien, nor hominid, nor mammalian, and with no interest in being identified as anything anthropocentric.


Similarity of this Culture and Bacteria – part 1/3

Tn previous articles I’ve found certain similar aspects between our culture – the way that we as an organism have structured our culture and society to cancer, but this time I want to think about something different.

Is there something similar about us and bacteria?

I don’t mean this in a kind of toxic way. It isn’t to say that we are not necessary, dirty, or that we should be eradicated. I’m thinking about this from biological sense.

When you see bacteria split the bacteria split, and split again, from two to four, then to eight, exponentially, that bacteria becomes a colony.

There is a culture of bacteria in the colony.

monochrome photo of city during daytime
Photo by Thomas Svensson on

Bacteria grow and divide, then they grow and device again. they feed of the Nutrients of their environment, and they divide again. And unless there is some cannibalistic types of bacteria that I am not aware of right now, in order for the bacteria to continue growing, they will not eat each. number one will not eat number two, otherwise they will never be a number two. bacteria that behave this way would never create a colony.

That is that, bacteria don’t consider another homogeneous type of bacteria as a nutrient to feed off in the Petrie dish. they may however feed off of the bacteria heterogeneous types of bacteria in the Petrie dish because they’re fighting for territory, for their colony.

That’s what we do, no?

we grow, we become one and two, and have families, and have children and offspring, and biologically cats to this too, dog do this, flies do this, every kind of animal that lives as not one single entity – does this.

Now obviously we aren’t bacteria. however there is something about this and the lack of death and killing in our culture that is similar to bacteria.

One pack of Wolves will fight another pack of Wolves for territory, so that they may feed of the nutrients in the ecosystem. the pack of Wolves will not feed off their own colony, the members of that pack of wolves, because otherwise they would not be a pack of wolves.

Packs of wolves full fight to protect that territory because that territory is technically their Petrie dish. However once the pack of wolves comes to a size or capacity that cannot be maintained by its own interhent internal organisational structure, one pack of walls may divide, may fragment.

The Alpha may fall in love with an omega and splinter off to create their own pack of Wolves. now, one packs of wolves have become two packs of wolves. they will fight after they have been significantly differentiated in their culture

Two packs of Wolves, will fight after they have been significantly differentiated from one another, in their culture.

This also makes me think about how we differentiate each other. the idea of race comes into play here. How do bacteria differentiate themselves each other in order to or not to attack another bacteria in the Petrie dish?

If differentiation is required for the second pack of wolves, to be a tactical opponent or open to attack now from the first, then time also in play here.

Culture only changes in time.

So maybe the bacteria don’t kill each other because they divide so fast, and these types of changes are less visible when you’re constantly inundated with them. Similar to the frog in the boiling water scenario that we are all acquainted with. the change happens so slowly for the frog it just sits there and boils, so maybe bacteria, because the changes the observe or the lack of changes in the number of multiple divisions, makes them blind or more sensitive, relatively speaking


Anthropocentrism – part 1

Anthropocentrism -  - Anthropocentrism - part 1 - I am Mahir - puc / @puccaso

It just is beyond me how anthropocentric these peoples idea of life is.

so, vegan leather made from mushrooms is a vegan because an animal doesn’t get killed ?

I guess the problem is with the word animal, the root being anim – meaning moving and therefor; alive.

Problem is, we are the ants to the trees, so we don’t see them move. And because we don’t see them move we think they aren’t alive. When I say we – I mean foolish people.

I was foolish once too.

people who think like this just don’t understand what life is and on which their whole life is based upon.

40% of soil is fungi.

Anthropocentrism -  - Anthropocentrism - part 1 - I am Mahir - puc / @puccaso

We are closer to fungi than we are to plant, because we are offshoots of ancestral fungi.

Some x billions of years ago, there was this fungus that decided it would start to digest its food with the help of bacteria in a closed sack call the stomach. they eventually became humans.

the rest of them are still doing what they do best.

Why do people just talk crap? Like in this article?