Page 13 of 15 FirstFirst ...
3
11
12
13
14
15
LastLast
  1. #241
    Quote Originally Posted by nyc81991 View Post
    I wouldn't call our front teeth sharp. It would really hard to eat an apple if all of our teeth were like our grinders. We only have 4 semi pointed teeth and they aren't even big enough to say they are for meat.

    Look a lions teeth for example. Those are sharp pointed teeth.
    Lol. Have you ever seen a horse eating apple? I fed horses many times, they don't need sharp pointy fangs to consume apples and alike.

  2. #242
    Quote Originally Posted by Prokne View Post
    Our teeth are designed to eat meat and plants. Thats why we have sharp front teeth, to tear flesh, and large back teeth, for grinding plants. If you look at pure carnivore teeth, they are all sharp and pointed, even the back teeth. Herbivore teeth are all wide and blunt for grinding.
    Yes but our teeth ended up that way through natural selection because of the abundance of meat. As I was saying, if the meat supply dried up, over generations our teeth would become wider and blunter because of all the grinding we were doing.

    I'm not even trying to weigh in on the debate, I'm taking issue with the use of the word "designed" (while hopefully avoiding a religious debate!). You can't use teeth shape to argue that nature has an "intention", it's purely reactive to our circumstances. When circumstances change, we will change.

  3. #243
    Quote Originally Posted by nyc81991 View Post
    Look a lions teeth for example. Those are sharp pointed teeth.
    Lions are carnivores with no capability of COOKING, allot like my exwife. Most people in the last several dozen thousand years have learned how to heat food which makes it more tender.

  4. #244
    Quote Originally Posted by theunit187 View Post
    Lol. Have you ever seen a horse eating apple? I fed horses many times, they don't need sharp pointy fangs to consume apples and alike.
    Do you know how much bigger a horses teeth and jaws are than a humans?

    ---------- Post added 2012-05-05 at 01:47 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Gerrin View Post
    Lions are carnivores with no capability of COOKING, allot like my exwife. Most people in the last several dozen thousand years have learned how to heat food which makes it more tender.
    So what you are saying is because we are capable of using our inventions to over come things that other species in the wild can not that makes us optimized meat eaters? I think that just makes us able to skip the part most people would pass on if they had to choose.

  5. #245
    Quote Originally Posted by Jackdemenzes View Post
    Yes but our teeth ended up that way through natural selection because of the abundance of meat. As I was saying, if the meat supply dried up, over generations our teeth would become wider and blunter because of all the grinding we were doing.

    I'm not even trying to weigh in on the debate, I'm taking issue with the use of the word "designed" (while hopefully avoiding a religious debate!). You can't use teeth shape to argue that nature has an "intention", it's purely reactive to our circumstances. When circumstances change, we will change.
    Evolution isnt always reactive though. Sometimes organisms mutate for no specific reason(radiation, limited gene pool) and if that mutation is beneficial or leads the organism to excel in a different niche it will propagate. This is not probably what happened with humans though since it would be a pretty big mutation to suddenly have sharp front teeth.

    I think what the previous post was saying was that 2 different groups of human ancestors had different jaw/tooth structures that suggested they ate different diets. The one that was not like us died while the other lived so it concludes that being able to eat meat and plants is better for survival.

  6. #246
    Epic!
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    lurking in the bushes outside of your window.
    Posts
    1,566
    never been able to wrap my head around someone going vegetarian. I love meat way too much. I'd give up sex before i'd give up bacon, then again. I guess giving up sex lately hasn't been much of a choice. Still, I love me some bacon.

    Good luck to you though, i hope it works out for you.

  7. #247
    I couldn't imagine going vegetarian.

    Why fight one of natures most basic ways we have evolved?

    I think it's hilarious that people try to fight the fact humans can/should eat meat. Make all the decisions about your own lifestyle as you want just don't twist reality to try and convince/lie to other people to try and lord your opinions on others.

  8. #248
    Quote Originally Posted by Orangetai420 View Post
    There isn't enough testing for me to trust it.

    I'm not saying it should be banned, if it can feed third world countries I'm all for it.

    And I never said all pesticides were bad, but I sure as hell don't want to ingest synthetic chemicals.

    However, GMO foods are killing our honey bees. Without bees to pollinate flowers the eco system is in trouble.
    http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=25950
    You do know that you're made of genes right? And meat contain genes, plants contain genes, anything that is/was able to reproduce contains genes. The only way genetically modified food would be dangerous for you is if someone specifically made it to be dangerous for you.
    Intel i7-2700k quad-core @ 3.50GHz (no OC)
    MSI P67A-GD65
    GeForce GTX660
    16GB RAM
    120GB SSD (for games only)
    Windows 7 Ultimate x64

  9. #249
    Quote Originally Posted by nyc81991 View Post
    I wouldn't call our front teeth sharp. It would really hard to eat an apple if all of our teeth were like our grinders. We only have 4 semi pointed teeth and they aren't even big enough to say they are for meat.

    Look a lions teeth for example. Those are sharp pointed teeth.
    You could eat an apple perfectly fine if your front teeth were like your back teeth. You would just crush the apple flesh off of the core and move it to the back to grind up. Our front teeth are wide and not pointed but they are sharp like scissors.

    Also if you look at big cat teeth, they look a lot like ours but they have huge canines and tiny incisors.

  10. #250
    Quote Originally Posted by nyc81991 View Post
    In your mind maybe, But you can live off plants just fine.
    Nope ... I cannot, I have no sources of protein available to me personally except through meat. It isn't in the mind, rather in the allergies I have to other sources of protein.

  11. #251
    Do you know how much bigger a horses teeth and jaws are than a humans?
    Of course, because horses alot bigger and weight 500 kilos. And still they don't eat big apples. They eat mainly small ones, which fit in their mouth. Even your horseman instructor will tell you never ever feed big vegies to the horses. In nature the horses obviously eat bigger apples and even without sharp fangs they manage to bite pieces of the apples and eat them piece by piece. Alone that makes me thing that sharp front teeth don't have anything with eating vegies.


    So what you are saying is because we are capable of using our inventions to over come things that other species in the wild can not that makes us optimized meat eaters? I think that just makes us able to skip the part most people would pass on if they had to choose.
    Thats interesting topic to discuss though. When humans developed weapons and such, our evolution basically stopped. We are very crude, not finished inventions of evolution. Our minds overcome the power of evolution. We cant run and hide properly, cant kill, cant even eat veggies like more developed creatures.

  12. #252
    Field Marshal Missdirect's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    76
    Whoever said fats don't make you gain weight is rather foolish. If eaten in great quantities bad fats can be really horrible for you. 1 gram of protein or carbs equals about 4 calories. 1 gram of fat is 9 calories. You obviously need some good fats, but don't fool yourself into thinking that eating a ton of fat is healthy/will make you lose weight. Low carb diets often allow you to eat as much fat as you want because it promotes feeling sated and because you're not eating any carbs your body is forced to burn fat for fuel so the calories don't matter as much because you will lose weight faster than you will put it back on. Meat also has a higher thermic effect than other foods, causing you to lose more weight. As soon as you stop that no carb diet and go back to eating bread you're going to put all that weight right back on if you're still piling on the fats and calories.

  13. #253
    Quote Originally Posted by nyc81991 View Post
    So what you are saying is because we are capable of using our inventions to over come things that other species in the wild can not that makes us optimized meat eaters? I think that just makes us able to skip the part most people would pass on if they had to choose.
    Never said anything even resembling the remark. In fact I've neither been denigrating nor advocating vegetarianism as 'the best diet'. I think they can both be healthy. What I was saying is that humans were able to overcome the disadvantages less developed omnivorous species have with processing meat. However, I might have to revise my statements and suggest that people who are not able to understand basic text are on the level of celery or truffles and would be best sauteed with some onions, margarine and pepper.
    Wikipedia is not a reference for anything.

  14. #254

  15. #255
    Quote Originally Posted by Barbaedoslim View Post
    Hey guys! So a friend of mine was ranting how after a month of being a vegetarian she was feeling better and had more energy. Now my question is, it better than an all around balanced diet?
    You can have a balanced diet only being a vegetarian, assuming you get supplements from things like pills and shakes.

    I could never be a vegetarian. You can show me all the sad cow videos you want, but they taste too good. Now, I'd never eat it if you slaughtered and cooked the animal right in front of me, but that's more because I'd feel sick rather than any moral reasons or pity. Yeah, it's bad things have to die. Not my problem though, that's the way the world works. I hope the animal has as a humane death (if that even makes sense) and lives the happiest life possible, but I won't shed a tear if it doesn't.
    Last edited by Larynx; 2012-05-05 at 07:18 AM.

  16. #256
    Quote Originally Posted by theunit187 View Post
    We are very crude, not finished inventions of evolution. Our minds overcome the power of evolution. We cant run and hide properly, cant kill, cant even eat veggies like more developed creatures.
    Which creatures are you speaking of?

  17. #257
    Quote Originally Posted by theunit187 View Post
    Thats interesting topic to discuss though. When humans developed weapons and such, our evolution basically stopped. We are very crude, not finished inventions of evolution. Our minds overcome the power of evolution. We cant run and hide properly, cant kill, cant even eat veggies like more developed creatures.
    We're precisely so dominant because we could do those things(run, hide, etc), and better than most animals to date. The fact that even the weakest most pitiful humans among us are able to survive easily in my parts of the world is only a testament to our evolutionary progress or depending on how you view our current actions future downfall.

    Most of the problems you are pinning on evolution are more likely the fault of the system we've developed, which by the way has been a huge part in what has allowed us to flourish. Just because not everyone could survive 2 weeks in the woods anymore doesn't mean evolution stopped, especially since for most of us they're completely irrelevant skills. The path of human evolution has changed and while it may be different had someone not had the bright idea to stab a buffalo with a pointy stick it's still not entirely dissimilar to anything we'd see in a more natural world.

    Our minds didn't overcome anything other than our environment and our fellow creatures that cohabitate it with us. Our minds are a direct result of evolution and arguably one of the better things it's come up with to date in terms of a creature's survival.
    “Logic: The art of thinking and reasoning in strict accordance with the limitations and incapacities of the human misunderstanding.”
    "Conservative, n: A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal who wishes to replace them with others."
    Ambrose Bierce
    The Bird of Hermes Is My Name, Eating My Wings To Make Me Tame.

  18. #258
    Quote Originally Posted by Gamdwelf View Post
    have you tried seitan, its supposedly got better flavor and texture than tofu, and its made from wheat.
    Hail seitan!

    Sorry, couldn't resist.

  19. #259
    Quote Originally Posted by Harthmut View Post
    Hail seitan!

    Sorry, couldn't resist.
    LOL haven't heard that in a while. ^^

  20. #260
    Quote Originally Posted by Gerrin View Post
    Calories in always equals calories out. I'm not trying to sound condescending but you're the one being to simplistic. A calorie IS a unit of energy, its finite, defined, and unchanging. What food PROVIDES as far as calories changes based on everything you very wisely mentioned. The number on a label does not represent the calories an organism will gain but whatever the regulating agency obtained from a calorimeter or another device able to measure biological samples. I really think we're on the same page on this. A calorimeter cannot determine what an ORGANISM will do with food only what heat energy is generated from that food. This is why I tried (maybe I failed) to specify that an organism needs to moderate it's intake based on it's caloric needs regardless of almost arbitrary numbers.
    I'm not the one being simplistic because I'm not the one stating calories in = calories out. Potential calories in/individual metabolisms, biochemistries, caloric source, etc - potential calories that are instead used for growth, repair, anabolic and catabolic reactions = calories out. Maybe. There's a whole lot of complicated stuff that goes on in between and a lot to consider about how efficient or inefficient one's body is at using energy. What may be be a calorie to be might be .5 calories to another person. A living being is not a bomb calorimeter and cannot be considered as such, esp given all the biological processes that determine energy expenditure vs storage.

    A basic tenant of biology is that enzymes can modify the heat (energy!!) or pressure needed to break molecular bonds thus increasing the rate of these reactions. Processes that in a lab would take temperatures that would burn us to a crisp are occurring right now in our bodies at a balmy 98.6 degrees, give or take a few. Our bodies are full of enzymes that "do" nearly every single biological process in our bodies. It's ridiculous to think that what goes on in a simple calorimeter can accurately predict how a potential unit of energy will be processed by each and every persons body. If you and I both eat 1000 calories as determined by a calorimeter I may be more efficient and actually use 800 for energy while you only use 700 and vice versa. The balance going to growth, repair, breakdown, etc.

    The rest of the food, along with it's potential calories, is used for other biological functions I've already described. What about if I eat an 800 calorie meal and then go climb a mountain for six hours burning 5000 calories? Did my calories in = calories out? Nope. What if you climb the mountain with me but are in better shape and more efficient at using energy and you burn 4800 calories? Yes, these are simplistic examples but they serve to show the calories in calories out model is innaccurate.

    A calorie IS a unit of energy, its finite, defined, and unchanging.
    In the context of a bomb calorimeter, yes. In the context of a human body or any other animal, no. And most definitely not within the context of fat storage vs burning.

    I think maybe we're both saying the same thing, just arguing semantics. lol

    ---------- Post added 2012-05-05 at 12:22 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by theunit187 View Post
    Thats interesting topic to discuss though. When humans developed weapons and such, our evolution basically stopped.
    So you're saying we are the exact same as our paleolithic ancestors who also used tools? We haven't evolved at all? I disagree and so does Science.

    We are very crude, not finished inventions of evolution. Our minds overcome the power of evolution. We cant run and hide properly, cant kill, cant even eat veggies like more developed creatures.
    The implications in your statement is that Evolution's goal is perfection. It's not. It's simply a natural process that occurs without direction or plan. Sometimes it improves fitness (genetic fitness not physical fitness) sometimes it doesn't. I would argue that our minds are a beautiful example of evolution rather than something that overcame it. We use our brains other animals use their brawn. It's all because of Evolution, for better or worse.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •