PALEOFOOD Archives

Paleolithic Eating Support List

PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Joseph Berne <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 23 Jul 2009 08:36:19 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (56 lines)
Okay, I'm going to regret this, but I just have to ask.  If evolution is the
most likely explanation for all other creatures, but not humans, then where
did humans come from?  Te answer is not just about my curiosity - it has to
do with the very basis of advocating a paleo diet.

By the way, I have heard of the "Missing Link."  Absence of evidence is not
evidence of absence.  The fact that we haven't dug up fossil examples of
every minute physiologically different example of our ancestors between us
and... whatever does not mean that they didn't exist.  There are many, many
fossils of historical creatures that look very much like we do, the same as
for any other modern animal.  Lucy anybody?

One last point (not to William specifically):  We're not evolving anymore.
Modern society does not restrict survival or breeding capacity to our
success as individuals - we make sure that those with relatively poor
adaptations don't die but instead are allowed to live and often reproduce.
In other words, we've ended natural selection (I'm not saying that is a good
or a bad thing, I'm just saying that it happens to be true).  Imagine a kid
born with, I don't know, a mutation that allows him to control an iPhone
with his thoughts or eat all the carbs he wants without getting fat (I'm
trying to think of adaptions that are relevant to the modern world).  With
natural selection, that kid would be a super attractive mate and would
likely have many, many kids, and a few generations later anybody who didn't
have those genes would have no chance of scoring a mate.  In our society
that kid might be super happy, but he wouldn't necessarily breed a lot -
look at successful people in our culture, they often have the same number or
fewer kids than the least successful people.  So evolution (of humans) is
over.

On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 8:20 PM, william <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Kenneth Anderson wrote:
>
>> Mr. Hoggan, your defense of William is an example of tolerant modern
>> liberalism taken to absurd degrees.  This list should at least affirm
>> evolution,
>>
>
> Ron need not agree, because I do. Evolution is indeed the most likely
> explanation, for all other creatures.
>
> Am I the only one here who has heard of the "Missing Link"?
>
> Asking this list to affirm anything is too much.
>
> Negative personal comments are forbidden on all moderated lists.
>
> William
>



-- 
Visit my Training blog:
http://karateconditioning.supersized.org

ATOM RSS1 RSS2