BodyRecomposition Support Forums  

Go Back   BodyRecomposition Support Forums > General information > Articles on the Main Site
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Unread 12-22-2009, 07:30 PM
david's Avatar
david david is online now
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,484
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcd View Post
Humans basically suck at all things except one: being very very smart.
Despite daily news headlines offering evidence that that one thing is disappearing from the species at an alarming rate.
__________________
"When I die, if there are no dogs in Heaven, I want to go where they went."---Will Rogers
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Unread 12-22-2009, 07:55 PM
frank yangs left quad's Avatar
frank yangs left quad frank yangs left quad is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,360
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by david View Post
Despite daily news headlines offering evidence that that one thing is disappearing from the species at an alarming rate.
Flynn effect
Wikipedia it if's news to you.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Unread 12-22-2009, 08:08 PM
kereru kereru is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 32
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcd View Post
Humans basically suck at all things except one: being very very smart.
The other things humans don't suck at is eating almost anything they can get their hands on, unlike many other species that have limited diets and thus are more vulnerable to changes in their environment. This of course is something we have in common with rats and seagulls. Just another irony of the paleo mindset.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Unread 12-22-2009, 08:48 PM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,680
Default

Yes, a point I sort of mentioned in today's piece: humans can adapt to just about any diet and if there is a problem with the modern diet it's probably more of quantity (too damn much) than quality per se.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Unread 12-23-2009, 03:48 PM
hehe hehe is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 23
Default

Quote:
But most of the paleo goons seem to confuse what neandertal man (big, musclely, stupid) might have been with what humans evolved from (small, physically pretty poor but big brains).
According to what I've read homo neanderthalensis was not stupid. They were about as smart as our ancestors at that time. (And they had other advantages like being better adapted to the cold climate they lived in, ... .)

The problem was that they weren't as social as our ancestors were. Different groups didn't help each other which was a big disadvantage and finally led to our dominance and their extinction. At least as far as I know that is the current assumption.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Unread 12-24-2009, 12:42 PM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,680
Default

yeah, you're picking nits. They were more physically dominant and homo sapiens, from whom we actually evolved was not. But the paleo guys want to thiink that our ancestors were like tarzan, swinging through the trees and wrestling bears to death. And they were not.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Unread 12-24-2009, 01:29 PM
frank yangs left quad's Avatar
frank yangs left quad frank yangs left quad is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,360
Default

The idea that the neanderthal was as smart as we are, but less "social" makes no sense if you know a bit about cognition, and especial comparative cognitive science (is that even a discipline? I don't know). I know of at least one study where the authors (in their opinion - and I disagree - succesfully) tested their hypothesis that both chimps and orang utan juveniles are just as smart as human ones are when it comes to non-social cognition, and that the main difference IS social cognition. The part of our brains that grew the most in our evolutionary history is the one that deals with, well, other brains.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Unread 12-26-2009, 09:59 AM
bobbylight bobbylight is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 312
Default

There are already people from paleo sites slamming this article and claiming lyle acts like a know it all that thinks every one that diesagrees with him is stupid.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Unread 12-26-2009, 10:28 AM
Nigeepoo's Avatar
Nigeepoo Nigeepoo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Yateley, Hants, United Kingdom
Posts: 344
Send a message via MSN to Nigeepoo
Default

A sh!tstorm has definitely started.
Loren Cordain's Responds To Mercader Paper on Grains in Stone Age Diets.
Response to Lyle McDonald’s comments on grain consumption 100,000 years ago.
Would Including Grains Make You “Better Fed?
__________________
"You lost fat by raising calories. Because of magic and voodoo. Or leptin. One of those." McDonald L.

Blog
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Unread 12-26-2009, 11:14 AM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,680
Default

when Paleo cultists attack!

Cuz remember, science is only valid when it supports your preconceived beliefs. Like the paleo guys who like one of the researchers but not the other, becaue the one is anti-saturated fat. Which the cultists know is good in absolute terms. Because a dentist 50 years ago said so.

such goofs.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.