william wrote:

>On Thu, 2003-12-04 at 12:00, Todd Moody wrote:
>
>
>
>>Again, from my perspective the leap from possible to believable is a
>>long one.  While it's *possible* that there is something to those
>>stories, I'd need more than mere possibility upon which to base belief.
>>I simply can't think of any good reason to believe that life on this
>>planet was one age-free and disease-free.
>>
>>
>
>Belief is not a consideration.
>A working hypothesis makes paleofood worthwhile, and the results might
>support a theory.
>
>

Perhaps so, but I don't need the Eden hypothesis to make paleofood
worthwhile.  There are more believable hypotheses on which to base it.
Belief *is* a consideration.  It's an elementary point of logic that
false premises can easily entail true conclusions.  All dogs drink
beer.  All beer-drinkers are quadrupeds.  Therefore all dogs are
quadrupeds.  The fact that dogs are in fact quadrupeds doesn't give a
shred of support to the premises of that argument.  Similarly, even if
paleofood turns out to promote longevity, that fact in itself would do
nothing to support the Eden hypothesis.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]