At 04:01 PM 4/25/01 -0500, you wrote:
>There are 4 messages totalling 191 lines in this issue.
unsubscribe
>Topics of the day:
>
> 1. State of the list
> 2. What current palaeontology can tell us about Ev Fit
> 3. Super Squats (2)
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 01:37:04 -0400
>From: K M Ma <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: State of the list
>
>Hi everybody,
>
>When I found Art's website last year and learned that his book was still
>forthcoming, I desperately wanted to hear more of Art's thinking. With the
>help of Art, JD Weaver, Rick Boulin, and others, I was able to piece together
>the discussions on the earlier list, and with the generosity of St John's
>University, find a good home for the restarted the discussion list. Online
>discussion forums are a great gift of the modern age: it allows anybody,
>anywhere with a net connection and a command of the shared language to have
>meaningful discourse with kindred spirits; it grants one access to people and
>ideas one might not otherwise have. The gift is also a privilege that is
>easily not recognized as such and taken for granted.
>
>Art's participation, in particular, is also a gift. He is living a healthy,
>robust life and has been willing to freely share the theories and practices
>he's developed over the decades to help us achieve the same. The value to me
>from hearing Art is greater than the value to Art of speaking to me. Since he
>is not being paid, the difference in value is his generosity. While I have
>not for a moment taken this gift for granted, others have, and further, have
>openly devalued him.
>
>Think for a moment about how difficult it is otherwise in the real world to
>get the attention of someone with great ideas. Normally, you would have pay
>him great sums of money, have connections, provide him with the prestige of
>knowing you, or barter your own great ideas or something else of equal value.
>When someone is willing to teach you something great for nothing, you should
>really appreciate him. That doesn't require you to worship him; you merely
>need to try to understand his teaching and show respect. If you don't
>understand something, ask him; if you don't agree, disagree with logic and
>civility. If you really can't stand him, go somewhere else.
>
>I was naive in thinking that everybody else on this list felt as and would
>behave the same way as I do. At least one other person didn't. In the
>future, I will not be so naive.
>
>Art is a highly rational person, and he has told me in private communication
>that with the flames he's received on the list and through direct email, the
>cost to him of participating on list now outweighs the benefits, so he has
>formally "dropped" the list. I will continue to run and administer the list,
>but clearly the value of it is much less without him.
>
>Art said in his last post that he wants to put the episode behind us. At the
>risk of encouraging further needless discussion of it, I will briefly why the
>post was so nasty, so that we can understand why Art is justified in being
>angry and that others may avoid throwing the same type of abuse in the future.
>My first inclination was to simply ignore the post, but then it wasn't
>directed at me, and hence easy for me to do.
>
>This list is for thinking people. Evolutionary Fitness is about optimizing
>our lives through the application of scientific theory, in particular Art's
>understanding of Nature through his work with dynamic systems. Clearly, when
>he commented on the ease with which one can avoid getting fat, he was
>referring to the application of his system. The context is implicit from your
>participation on this list, and a basic understanding of his writings. Art's
>statements betray no ignorance of--or lack of sympathy for--women easily
>getting fat in Turkey or anywhere else in the world. It's not clear that
>those people cared to avoid fat; surely, they haven't applied Art's EvFit
>principles. The poster goes on to suggest, weakly so she can disavow it, yet
>sufficiently strong enough to plant the idea, that genetics determines our
>state of fatness, despite whatever we may do. A logical extension of these
>assertions is that Art owes his leanness to genetics. Then the poster
>concludes by suggesting that by looking at our Paleolithic art that 1) perhaps
>it's natural for women to be fat or 2) fat women should be considered
>beautiful. One logical conclusion is that perhaps it is ideal for women to be
>fat after all.
>
>The poster was welcome to discuss these issues clearly and logically; instead
>she hurled these incomplete assertions as spit in Art's face.
>
>Anyway, the future of this list remains to be seen. Please respect Art's time
>and don't bombard him with private emails. Let's salvage what we have left
>and move on.
>
>Ming
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 10:59:24 -0500
>From: Brad Cooley <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: What current palaeontology can tell us about Ev Fit
>
>On Sat, 21 Apr 2001 04:59:13 -0500, Keith Thomas
><[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> >There is much more in McKie=92s book to fascinate and inform. For me the
> >underlying message is that our modern pre-occupations with weight loss and
> >body sculpting trivialize the most wonderful story in the world. We can
> >get far more out of this story than a reduction in cellulite. Our
> >challenge is to apply evolutionary theory to the scientific evidence and so=
>
> >map out the essential features of paleo life. We can then decide whether
> >our 21st century, Western prejudices, predilections and constraints rule
> >out for us certain features of the full paleo repertoire and how we apply
> >to our lives those features that we do not rule out.
>
>If you haven't already, I recommend that you check out Daniel Quinn's books
>(http://www.ishmael.org/Origins/) and his suggested reading list
>(http://www.ishmael.org/Education/Readings/) particularly The Continuum
>Concept by Jean Liedloff, Limited Wants, Unlimited Means by John Gowdy,
>Stone Age Economics by Marshall Sahlins, and Man's Rise to Civilization by
>Peter Farb.
>
>Happy reading,
>
>Brad
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 11:41:13 -0500
>From: Brad Cooley <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Super Squats
>
>I haven't made time to go workout for about 3 weeks now and am about to
>resume my weightlifting. I have read recently Super Squats by Randall
>Strossen. I am curious whether anyone on this list has tried the program
>and what results they experienced. If I do start the program I do not
>intend to drink the recommended "two quarts of milk" but will consume
>plenty of animal protein.
>
>I have gained about 12-13 lbs of muscle over the last 2 years through
>weightlifting and am currently at 184 lbs LBM at 5'11". Super Squats
>suggests that it is possible to add as much as 30 lbs of muscle over 6
>weeks. At my current size, would it be possible to add even a few more
>pounds of muscle over a 6 week period on this program?
>
>Skeptically,
>
>Brad Cooley
>Houston, TX
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 18:42:37 -0000
>From: Rob Street <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Super Squats
>
>I have followed the super squats program in the past, and really enjoyed it.
> No 30 pounds of muscle in six weeks though. Since then, I occassionally
>add 20 rep squats to my workout. Right now, I am using a twist on the 20
>rep set. Rather than increasing the weight every time, I just go to
>failure. 24x with 225 lbs. Monday. I am also doing something like that on
>dead lift right now. I am doing a set to failure with 315 lbs, stopping for
>each rep. I am at 13, climbing each week. When I get to 20, I will move up
>to 365, and probably less than 10, but work my way back up. My partner is
>doing the 20 rep deadlift just as the 20 rep squat is outlined in the book,
>and progressing quite well.
>-Rob in Lubbock
>
>
> >From: Brad Cooley <[log in to unmask]>
> >Reply-To: Evolutionary Fitness Discussion List
> ><[log in to unmask]>
> >To: [log in to unmask]
> >Subject: [EVOLUTIONARY-FITNESS] Super Squats
> >Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 11:41:13 -0500
> >
> >I haven't made time to go workout for about 3 weeks now and am about to
> >resume my weightlifting. I have read recently Super Squats by Randall
> >Strossen. I am curious whether anyone on this list has tried the program
> >and what results they experienced. If I do start the program I do not
> >intend to drink the recommended "two quarts of milk" but will consume
> >plenty of animal protein.
> >
> >I have gained about 12-13 lbs of muscle over the last 2 years through
> >weightlifting and am currently at 184 lbs LBM at 5'11". Super Squats
> >suggests that it is possible to add as much as 30 lbs of muscle over 6
> >weeks. At my current size, would it be possible to add even a few more
> >pounds of muscle over a 6 week period on this program?
> >
> >Skeptically,
> >
> >Brad Cooley
> >Houston, TX
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
>------------------------------
>
>End of EVOLUTIONARY-FITNESS Digest - 24 Apr 2001 to 25 Apr 2001 (#2001-54)
>**************************************************************************
|