CrossFit Discussion Board

CrossFit Discussion Board (https://board.crossfit.com/index.php)
-   Nutrition (https://board.crossfit.com/forumdisplay.php?f=8)
-   -   Don't believe in Paleo because... (https://board.crossfit.com/showthread.php?t=40807)

Lurene Grenier 12-29-2008 03:00 PM

Re: Don't believe in Paleo because...
 
[QUOTE=C James Barton;481166]Just to be clear, I don't believe the Earth is three seconds old, and I'm not super-interested in other people's religious views. There's very little point in discussing them, it would be against the AUP, and I don't want to talk about them here.

What I do want to say is, maths can't prove anything about the real world. You need science - observations - as well. Maths without data is fascinating, but not directly related to the physical world.

There's nothing logically impossible about the entire observable universe being created, just as we see it now, a millisecond before you read this post. There's just not a shred of evidence for this it, either. All the laws would still work. All of your memories would be consistent (not true, but consistent).[/QUOTE]

This is a very important point: math and logic can be completely internally consistant and valid, without being voracious. That is, it can be totally disjoint from reality. We require observational data and experimental evidence to anchor math to reality, and then when we have a model that can predict experimental outcomes, we call that a theory. It will always remain a model and a theory.

Robert Callahan 12-29-2008 03:06 PM

Re: Don't believe in Paleo because...
 
[QUOTE=Ben Chapman;481068]I am a "show me the money" kind of person, I like to see concrete evidence, Yet still, many folks on here claim that the fossil record is complete, I hear you, but please show me. This idea that most species wouldn't have fossils would be easier to swollow if there wasn't such a darn thorough catalog of almost every current LIVING species already in the fossil record. If the fossil record is incomplete because most intermediary species were never fossilized, how do you explain such a complete representation of the current living species in the fossil record? I'm just saying it doesn't make sense, why would the current ecosystem be so greatly represented, but the millions of years previous be so poorly represented? It's pretty inconsistent.[/QUOTE]

So you think that we should have just as accurate a fossil record for things that died within the last 100 years as things that died millions of years ago???? I don't want to sound condescending or anything, but really? We have a great fossil record for current species because they are mostly still alive or if they recently died out have not been decaying for millions of years. All life is subject to time. The only reason we have a semi decent record of things like the dinosaurs is because of the very extreme and rare circumstances in which they became extinct. As has been said most life is 100% recycled in the environment and never seen again.

I am sorry but that is just a poor argument. It is easy to say, I will believe it when you show me the proof, and then have nothing ever be enough to satisfy you. It takes much more character and critical thought to actually look at evidence provided and give reasonable logical critiques and then when you cannot come up with anymore accept it as a reasonable theory.

-Robert

Frank Dennis 12-29-2008 03:11 PM

Re: Don't believe in Paleo because...
 
[QUOTE=C James Barton;481166]
There's nothing logically impossible about the entire observable universe being created, just as we see it now, a millisecond before you read this post. There's just not a shred of evidence for this it, either. All the laws would still work. All of your memories would be consistent (not true, but consistent).[/QUOTE]


You must have missed the next paragraph in my post. :) You're right, the laws of physics could still work if the universe had sprung into being three seconds ago. However, memories stretching back farther than that, as you pointed out, would be false, and therefore fabrications. So who fabricated them? Without God, the universe can't be 3 seconds old. With God, it can.

That was my point: if you accept what evidence there is for evolution, which works within the framework of our scientificlly gathered understanding of the laws of nature, then the paleo diet may be ideal because it's what our ancestors adapted to over roughly two million years. If you believe God created the the world and everything on it a few thousand years ago, then the paleo diet may be ideal because it's very similar to what food was available to mankind based upon those descriptions of Eden which exist.

In neither case can we be so precisely sure what the diets consisted of that the theoretical model should overrule the inclusion or exclusion of a food from which you get healthy, positive results when you eat it.

Moran Bentzur 12-29-2008 03:43 PM

Re: Don't believe in Paleo because...
 
[QUOTE=Ben Chapman;481158]I'm not arguing against adaptation, but have we ever observed them become anything but another bacteria?

There's plenty of support for microevolution within an organism. You can look at the various breeds of dogs to easily see that. But they're all still dogs.

I suppose I should have made the distinction between micro vs. Macro evolution from the beggining. Micro is not an issue to me, but I only see it within the same organisms.[/QUOTE]

The distinction between micro and macro evolution is made up so that non-evolution proponents can hold up their beliefs in face of the overwhelming evidence for evolution. "macro-evolution" is less obvious than "micro-evolution", even though they are one and the same.
The event that you are refering to is "speciation" (not macro-evolution). It would be silly to expect that speciation events would be so grand and different than what we see with bacteria all the time. The two species downstream to a speciation event would probably look very similar. You might not be able to differentiate between them (but they would). With enough time and adaptation the two species will continue to change until it is clear even to our eyes. Think of how a wallaby might evolve from a kangaroo. Don't expect a cat speciating from a dog.
I recommend reading the wikipedia article for "speciation". It might give you an idea of both how and why this event happens and also some examples of recorded speciation events.

Brad Thompson 12-29-2008 03:47 PM

Re: Don't believe in Paleo because...
 
I don't take any issue with the religion points of view. I don't care if it's a theory or not. If it works, cool. I have used the zone diet, non paleo, and lost 50 lbs of blubber. I eat cheese at almost every meal. I eat oatmeal every breakfast. I eat beans often.

My rationale for the non totally paleo diet is that I don't live outside with no clothing foraging for said paleo items. Now, another issue for me is that I would likely have a hard time finding the requisite ingredients locally. Paleo man didn't post to a message board...

Phillip Garrison 12-29-2008 04:04 PM

Re: Don't believe in Paleo because...
 
[QUOTE=Brad Thompson;481217] Paleo man didn't post to a message board...[/QUOTE]

Maybe they used chisels and granite slabs ala Flintstones?

C James Barton 12-29-2008 04:06 PM

Re: Don't believe in Paleo because...
 
[QUOTE=Jamie J. Skibicki;481172]James,

That reminds me of bonus question from quantum.

"Describe the world if Planks constant was 1".

I still have flashbacks.[/QUOTE]

Not a problem for me. The small amount of physics I managed to learn was quickly forgotten. It's a pity.

Liam Dougherty Springer 12-29-2008 05:12 PM

Re: Don't believe in Paleo because...
 
[QUOTE=Moran Bentzur;481216]The distinction between micro and macro evolution is made up so that non-evolution proponents can hold up their beliefs in face of the overwhelming evidence for evolution. "macro-evolution" is less obvious than "micro-evolution", even though they are one and the same.
The event that you are refering to is "speciation" (not macro-evolution). It would be silly to expect that speciation events would be so grand and different than what we see with bacteria all the time. The two species downstream to a speciation event would probably look very similar. You might not be able to differentiate between them (but they would). With enough time and adaptation the two species will continue to change until it is clear even to our eyes. Think of how a wallaby might evolve from a kangaroo. Don't expect a cat speciating from a dog.
I recommend reading the wikipedia article for "speciation". It might give you an idea of both how and why this event happens and also some examples of recorded speciation events.[/QUOTE]


Though this thread no longer has anything to do with nutrition I am interested in speciation and if it is possible for a fish to become a bird or vice versa PM me with a link if you don't mind.... Please only scientifically backed sources.

Scott Kustes 12-29-2008 05:36 PM

Re: Don't believe in Paleo because...
 
No, a fish will not specialize into a bird. The "Crocoduck" (or rather lack thereof) is a common citation by those seeking to debunk evolution. The part they forget is "common ancestor". Humans aren't evolved from chimpanzees. Humans and chimpanzees share a common ancestor.

Moran nailed it on the micro vs. macro argument. If microevolution is a minor changing of genes, you have to accept that when you change enough genes, you no longer have the same species, evidence of such is a lack of desire or ability to mate successfully.

As for the Paleo Diet...stop getting caught up in the details and try the diet. Try dropping the grains and milk and see how you feel. Try adding them back and see how you feel. That's the proof you want. But you have to actually give it a go before you can decide what is the right diet for you.

Phillip Garrison 12-29-2008 07:05 PM

Re: Don't believe in Paleo because...
 
[QUOTE=Scott Kustes;481298]No, a fish will not specialize into a bird. The "Crocoduck" (or rather lack thereof) is a common citation by those seeking to debunk evolution. The part they forget is "common ancestor". Humans aren't evolved from chimpanzees. Humans and chimpanzees share a common ancestor.

Moran nailed it on the micro vs. macro argument. If microevolution is a minor changing of genes, you have to accept that when you change enough genes, you no longer have the same species, evidence of such is a lack of desire or ability to mate successfully.

As for the Paleo Diet...stop getting caught up in the details and try the diet. Try dropping the grains and milk and see how you feel. Try adding them back and see how you feel. That's the proof you want. But you have to actually give it a go before you can decide what is the right diet for you.[/QUOTE]


What about the jackalope?


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:29 AM.


CrossFit is a registered trademark of CrossFit Inc.