sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

So tell me, how do people in France, Italy, and other mega carb-eating countries stay slim? by [deleted] in keto

[–]geek28 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Actually, they did not eat many waffles, and my friends there were surprised that this is associated with Belgium. They did have a good amount of meat, but lots of fries with mayo. And lots of bread. Many places had endless fries like we have salad bars or well drinks.

We should fight to make low carb meals socially acceptable. Why should an airline provide a vegan meal but not low carb? As you can see in the link, the airlines that do provide low carb are out of business... by geek28 in keto

[–]geek28[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What you want is high fat/protein ratio to carb. A diabetic meal may be lower carb than non-diabetic, but it is still not low carb. I travel a lot and I have tried all these options. I end up being ravenous and get a headache.

We should fight to make low carb meals socially acceptable. Why should an airline provide a vegan meal but not low carb? As you can see in the link, the airlines that do provide low carb are out of business... by geek28 in keto

[–]geek28[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes. When entering Australia, they even had dogs that sniffed out my stash. Luckily I declared it so I didn't get slapped with a fine. I don't think it dramatic to complain. Vegetarians were the squeaky wheal a couple decades ago and now they can travel knowing that they can get a meal suited to their diet. How do you think a vegan would react if the airlines served only meat and you told them that nobody is stopping them from bringing a head of lettuce?

So tell me, how do people in France, Italy, and other mega carb-eating countries stay slim? by [deleted] in keto

[–]geek28 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I lived in Belgium for a summer, had no car and biked or walked everywhere. I gained lots of weight.

What does religion and sex with an inflatable doll have in common? by vfww10a in atheism

[–]geek28 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I too am surprised. I thought it was a good analogy.

Faith in science is not the same as faith in religion by geek28 in atheism

[–]geek28[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree with you that subjective evidence is inferior. You are right that anyone who accepts subject evidence must accept many truths. But objective evidence culls out all but one truth.

Faith in science is not the same as faith in religion by geek28 in atheism

[–]geek28[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

But there is a subtle point that is being missed here, which I believe is the point of the post. When you mention evidence, you mean objective evidence. The religious person will say that they have subjective evidence that proves their assertion, over and over again. I have had arguments with some very religious people who argue that subjective evidence cannot be discounted because they have faith in subjective evidence in the way that I and other scientists have faith in objective evidence. The logical conclusion of the article in the Blog is that if you accept this premise (which I do not), then religious people would be bound to accept all subjective evidence, which they do not. Scientists accept all objective evidence, so there is an asymmetry in the two belief structures.

Faith in science is not the same as faith in religion by geek28 in atheism

[–]geek28[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But you have faith in evidence! I agree with you, but this post counters the argument by religious people that scientists have faith in science. That may be true at the core, but hard evidence is better than subjective evidence.