On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 23:58:07 -0600, Brenda Young  
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> And I am just wondering why EVERYBODY gives Snopes such credibility???   
> Doesn't everyone know that it is a married couple....so what, in the  
> scheme of things, but it is TWO PEOPLE       that you are basing your  
> whole knowledge on??? 

In the larger scope of things, isn't that how we gain a lot of our  
knowledge?   When we don't have firsthand knowledge of something, don't we  
generally turn to someone else who is more expert in the subject matter?   
Sure, it may be just two people, but if they have built their reputation  
on having accurate facts and doing thorough research, why should I be any  
less inclined to believe them than if I were to go digging through news  
archives myself?

And to put this back on topic, this bears directly on the paleo diet.  I'm  
not living in the paloelithic, nor do I know anyone who did.  So if I want  
to know what they ate, I have to either do a ton of research and  
speculation for myself, or I can refer to others who have done it already,  
and see what I think of their conclusions.  If others have investigated  
the paleolithic period and found that nobody ever ate a twinkie, and they  
never had a cavity, I might therefore conclude that if I eat twinkies I'll  
get cavities.  Or I might decide to eat a twinkie myself, and see whether  
I got a cavity (and if I didn't, I might conclude that twinkies are fine,  
and the only reason paleolithic people didn't eat them is because Hostess  
didn't have good distribution back then).

The point is, that's part of how we expand our knowledge, by using the  
work of others -- whether it's a team of scientists, or just a married  
couple who like to investigate urban legends.  Sometimes it's right,  
sometimes it's wrong.  That's the price we have to pay for skipping the  
direct experience.

-- 
   Robert Kesterson
   [log in to unmask]