RE: evolution and diet (was: FITNESS: Diet and Exercise)

From: Harvey Newstrom (mail@HarveyNewstrom.com)
Date: Fri Apr 18 2003 - 14:05:25 MDT

  • Next message: Michael M. Butler: "Passenger-Carrying Spaceship Makes Desert Debut"

    gts wrote,
    > literature is already replete with evidence from
    > nutritional science that paleolithic foods are
    > healthy foods.
    >
    > Paleodiet theory states only that those foods have
    > been found to be most healthy *because* they are
    > the foods to which we are best genetically
    > adapted.

    Great. I must have misunderstood you. I was under the mistaken belief that
    you were disputing nutritional science with a diet dictated by paleo
    history.

    > This leads to the approach to nutritional science
    > that Eliezer seems to be suggesting and which I also
    > recommend (in which any non-paleolithic nutritional
    > hypothesis is the competing hypothesis which
    > must disprove the default paleo hypothesis). Do you follow?

    Yes, but I disagree with this method of debate. I think it is invalid to
    choose a default position which does not have to be proven. Established
    theories must become established with evidence and proof. They do not
    become "default" first, with the burden of disproving them falling to
    others. Scientists must falsify their own theories, test them either way,
    and provide the results as evidence. There is no "default" position or
    "burden-of-proof" in science. Such arguments are more often used by
    religions and cults.

    --
    Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, IAM, GSEC
    <www.HarveyNewstrom.com>
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 18 2003 - 14:15:43 MDT