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) >**************************************************************************