Lots of people said 'No way David Wolfe would try and sue you man! Your having us on! David Wolfe is a non judgemental spiritual guru that is above any criticisms. He would accept your actions as a freedom of speech..' LMAO.
Well David Wolfe shows his true colours in this letter I got today from his LA lawyers. Dress like a guru and sue like monsanto. All David Wolfe will get from me is a training programme, pair of old joggers and a few boxes of bananas to help melt that superfood gut of his. I dont hate DW even though he is repeatedly trying to sue my ass and bankrupt me. I don't take it personally. Im merely sharing my comments and criticisms and will continue to do so as an individuals right to freedom of speech.
Feel free to share it around the net and express your right to freedom of speech. Be careful though! David Wolfe might get his legal henchmen on to you too! ;)
Hi John. Perhaps you can explain to me why you consider it immature to take issue with someone who advertises themselves as a health guru being overweight or out of shape.
Let's say we're searching for health and we come across both Doug Graham and David Wolfe... we naturally compare the diets and lifestyles they espouse, so why is it an immature little tangent to compare the men themselves? We see Doug thriving past middle age; we see him truly living the example he talks about. And we see David Wolfe looking pudgy, talking about the consciousness of deer eaters and the octaves of food. Is it not worth all our time to perform this comparison as part of our examination of health and lifestyle?
So with this logic we should go by what we see of the messenger and their specific physical condition as opposed to looking at the message and researching if it is correct or not?
I see you have applied your own version of logic to my statement. As I said, we naturally compare the diets/lifestyles they espouse, so why not also compare the results of those lifestyles by looking at the men themselves (given that both claim to be examples of what they teach). So, you see, it's not about going by the messenger as opposed to the message, it's about going by both the messenger and the message. Also, if one claims that they are an example of what they teach (as DW does) then they naturally make themselves part of the message.
So, you are right, the kind of logic you have conveniently applied to my statements would make no sense at all - that is, if one were to only judge by the appearance of the messenger.
You also tread into the realm of obvious fallacy with your absurd statement about Dr. Graham and hair. Dr. Graham has never claimed to have the answer to a full head of hair, so why would we expect him to exemplify that? He has claimed to have the answer to optimal health and we do expect him to exemplify that - and he does. It is a blatant fallacy to imply that because Doug has claimed one thing it ought to apply to another, or that my holding DW to task for his failure to exemplify what he claims is equivalent to holding Doug to task for something quite outside anything he has claimed. I hope you can recognize the absurdity of your line of reasoning.
Lastly, the thing with much of what David claims is that it is unscientific (to say the least) and unprovable/unverifiable by any known means. That's part of his trick. He makes claims about substances that cannot be proven, so you are left to either take his word for it or not, as no independent research is possible. How can one possibly verify that deer eaters have a different level of consciousness or that a certain food is on a certain octave!? Those statements have no meaning and are not verifiable. Where else can one look then? Well, if what David says is true, then naturally he would be living it (why would he have the answers and not live them?). Besides, he does claim to be living it! And, if he is living the example, then his physical and mental condition will show the results. That is a natural conclusion, arrived at through elementary logic.
When on his website he claims to be an example of "peak performance", should we not hold him to that claim? When he claims to be living in optimal health, should we not hold him to the claim?
If a messenger is going to have any power at all they must live their message. And, if they are going to make millions of dollars off of people, they should be held to an even higher standard than most.
So, without the use of absurd fallacies, please again explain why it is that we should not view DW's health as an important factor in weighing his claims, given that one of his claims is that he is a living example?
no you can def see his bowels are a swollen.
It's interesting...I just googled photos of David Wolfe and there's not one shot of him waist down, or with a shirt off, mostly just his head. Most super fit health gurus would be showing a little more of their stuff, wouldn't you think? Or maybe he's just modest.
you honestly think that DW, as shown in the photo above, has the body of a fit man who is also a nutrition guru? i used to have those extra fat bits that he has in the photo, so i can say with reasonable certainty that he is overweight.
David? Is that you?
my thoughts too, hi dw
yes lets make a remix video of all the best of Durrian on Wolfe and repost it everywhere. Anonymous has our back