This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Hrolf The Ganger 06 Sep 17 5.51pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Your command won't do anything, but it doesn't mean you will get wet, if your lucky the tide is on its way out. The importance of science is that when you do this, and the events play out, that you don't go away thinking you can control the sea by commanding it. The importance of science isn't that it can tell us what is real or true, but that it can tell us what isn't. Ha ha . Stop it.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
jamiemartin721 Reading 06 Sep 17 5.54pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Ray in Houston
As to beans, you know what I meant while you deliberately went out of your way to obfuscate the issue with your comments. I'm sure if I wrote about how radioactive fallout is bad, you'd tell me that we walk around in radiation every day. Edited by Ray in Houston (06 Sep 2017 5.03pm) Oddly, on an individual basis, its very hard to determine what is good or healthy for an individual, because of the individual differences. What we do know, is that as a species, certain factors bear out as healthy. For example, exercise is generally good for you (as a species wide group) but if you have an undiagnosed heart condition, it will likely contribute to your death. Jogging also involves risk to your knees, as well as some environmental risks (jogging for an hour outside exposes you to more pollution, than staying in bed for a few hours, and if you have the 'wrong genes' that could be a cause of cancer). Its easy to point at things being healthy on an average, but much harder on an individual case for the average person. Its important to understand paradims in science and how they are utilised to construct the boundaries - Health is usually correlational, and statistically defined against a 'norm'.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Hrolf The Ganger 06 Sep 17 6.04pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
I suspect we do have an evolutionary desire for meat, especially white meat, as its a good source of nutrients - and on a primal level, that's a benefit - But our ancestors didn't eat a lot of meat. You can eat what you want, but you'd be absurd to think that because you can, and evolution has left us with a taste for meat, that means its good for you to do so. Its not. Its not 'smoking bad for you', but eating meat on a daily basis (which I do) isn't healthy. Especially red meat. Given that our ancestors would have hunted for meat, it wouldn't have been a very common source of food. Humans are poor hunters, and hunting isn't an overly efficient means of gathering food for humans. Plus of course the food isn't the primary reason why humans hunted - it was the skins of animals. The meat is just a bonus. Anthropological studies of primitive tribes generally bear this out. Meat is a treat. We have a biological drive towards sugar, to the point that its physically addictive, because our ancestors struggled to find sugar and its essential to the function of the human body and brain - That's why sweet things taste so good - But this is a maladaption in the modern age where sugar is so prevalent - to the point that its effectively a slow poison. Problem of evolution, is that society moves far faster. 40,000 years ago were probably weren't even domesticating animals for food. Now the most prevalent species of animals other than insects on earth exist only a species bred for food. Of course, in truth, you, me and the healthiest person alive, are all going to die. I like bacon. I know its not good for me, but f**k it, it tastes great. It can't really be morally defended, its bad for you compared to the alternatives, but I eat it anyhow - because millions of years of evolution where meat is scarce has conditioned us towards finding fat and meat very tasty indeed. Even if it ends up contributing to our premature death.
The question is not whether we should eat meat but how much. Clearly, in a world where food is always available, we will naturally over indulge because our biology is generally designed to make us eat when ever possible and a much as possible. To do otherwise requires a deliberate effort to abstain.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
coulsdoneagle London 06 Sep 17 6.15pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Ray in Houston
As to beans, you know what I meant while you deliberately went out of your way to obfuscate the issue with your comments. I'm sure if I wrote about how radioactive fallout is bad, you'd tell me that we walk around in radiation every day. Edited by Ray in Houston (06 Sep 2017 5.03pm) Awesome word. Not heard it before.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 06 Sep 17 6.21pm | |
---|---|
Bacon....yum. Shame...I quite like pigs.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
sitdownstandup 07 Sep 17 10.27pm | |
---|---|
Man is the most insane species. He worships an invisible God and destroys a visible Nature. Unaware that this Nature he’s destroying is this God he’s worshipping. Hubert Reeves |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.