Cool vids, definitely demonstrating power and agility but I'd argue that brachiating is a different item from climbing per se, since specialized shoulder anatomy is so critical to brachiation, and "holds" are plentiful and large.

bah just more evoligion (evolution religion) show me some hard evidence that I came from apes istead of forcing your unproven theories down my throat...

Much like this PTFTW that will soon be hidden - we won't be able to see it, but I'll still know it's there.

Are you serious? What, are you from Texas, or something?

Wait... You are.

There is plenty of hard evidence, but you will not understand it, since you do not care to understand it.

Do you know what the "Academies of Science" are?
http://www.anubih.ba/...APEvolution17nov.pdf

You should read the brief statement, and see all the National Academies of Science who signed it.


And, there is a similar statement made by clergy, of MANY different religious denominations:
http://blue.butler.edu/...rgy/ChrClergyLtr.htm

You should read that too... BUT, if you do, you will see that you are in a fringe minority of RNJ's who are [wilfully] ignorant of reality.

So, I do understand why you WILL not read either of those, as you just do not care to understand... It's much easier to deny reality when you ignore reality.

So, ummm, do you like, think the Earth is less than 10,000 years old, too?



Sorry for the thread drift, I know this isn't the SB.

I could be talking out of my ass...but doesn't eating lean meat (part. red meat) increase testosterone level which should subsequently give a boost to strength/endurance/aggressiveness on the wall?

bah just more evoligion (evolution religion) show me some hard evidence that I came from apes istead of forcing your unproven theories down my throat...

It will be, it will be.

Heh, rrradam is drawn to topics like this like Nazgül to The Ring.

Jesus, Ma, what was that all about? Dude is doing what he thinks is right, it's not affecting you, he's *not* taking a holier than you approach, and he's living by his principles. Principles that, while not mine, I certainly see nothing wrong with. Hit a nerve or something?

GO

Jesus, Ma, what was that all about? Dude is doing what he thinks is right, it's not affecting you, he's *not* taking a holier than you approach, and he's living by his principles. Principles that, while not mine, I certainly see nothing wrong with. Hit a nerve or something?

GO

Sure, they are the absolute masters of brachiation. But it's not just in the horizontal where they excel. They are insanely good at going up and down too.

They're way bigger than most monkeys, so that works against them, but even lacking a tail, within their realm, I think they'd outclimb many monkeys.

Anyway, the point isn't whether monkeys are better or apes are better. The point is that there are apes (the family shared with humans) who are superb climbers.

GO

Oh and BTW no where in Common Descent does it say that you came from an ape.

I was going to say much the same thing as cracklover, and it's an important and interesting point.

There's a lot of reactionary stuff in this thread, and on the internet at large, calling vegetarians and vegans sanctimonious and holier-than-thou, even when, like in the case of the guy Macherry is rudely attacking, the vegetarian even goes out of his way to state that his moral calculus doesn't necessarily apply to anyone else at all. The resistance to the idea that there could be ethics involved in food choices is massive, and the backlash against such ethical consideration is unnecessarily vicious.

See also - irrational hate for PETA. They do silly stuff that draws attention to some kinds of animal cruelty, and people treat them more or less like neo-nazis. The attacks are out of proportion to any reasonable offense people could have to people in underwear hanging out in cages near city hall.

once again, i'll state that it's lines like, (which i quoted in my response)

"If you feel that your happiness is more important than animals' lives then that's fine, but it's not for me."

i take issue with this kind of attitude.

[T]he vegetarian even goes out of his way to state that his moral calculus doesn't necessarily apply to anyone else at all.

Robx wrote, "If you feel that your happiness is more important than animals' lives then that's fine, but it's not for me," which sounds snide and patronizing. I'm fairly confident from that statement that Robx is pretty certain about the superiority of his "moral calculus."

Jay

But isn't that kind of true?You do not need meat. It is not necessary to your survival. It is somewhat of a convenience that makes us happy. If you eat it, you are making a statement that your happiness is more important than the lives of the animals that you eat. Nothing wrong with that in my book. I'll own up to it.

Robx wrote, "If you feel that your happiness is more important than animals' lives then that's fine, but it's not for me," which sounds snide and patronizing. I'm fairly confident from that statement that Robx is pretty certain about the superiority of his "moral calculus."

Jay

well, you don't need plants either. not necessary for my survival. ask the aboriginal people of northern canada

I was going to say much the same thing as cracklover, and it's an important and interesting point.

There's a lot of reactionary stuff in this thread, and on the internet at large, calling vegetarians and vegans sanctimonious and holier-than-thou, even when, like in the case of the guy Macherry is rudely attacking, the vegetarian even goes out of his way to state that his moral calculus doesn't necessarily apply to anyone else at all. The resistance to the idea that there could be ethics involved in food choices is massive, and the backlash against such ethical consideration is unnecessarily vicious.

See also - irrational hate for PETA. They do silly stuff that draws attention to some kinds of animal cruelty, and people treat them more or less like neo-nazis. The attacks are out of proportion to any reasonable offense people could have to people in underwear hanging out in cages near city hall.

well, you don't need plants either. not necessary for my survival. ask the aboriginal people of northern canada

To call yourself a vegetarian is to label yourself for others to know that you hold that idea so strongly that to criticize the idea is to criticize you.

I would point over to the sudsy box thread of "what do climbers think of me" as another example where peoples self identification clouds their judgment and perception of who is attacking and who reacting calmly. One of the reasons that moderation is different in the green threads is that it can be impossible to separate a personal attack from a strong attack on a deeply held belief. The stronger one identifies with their ideals, the tighter the link between personal insult and comment on the merit of an idea.

Take even in this thread well before ma piped in, WW felt that my leading questions were a disguised attack on her opinion of local, organic farming. Because even snarky question implies derision of ideals, we were off for many a post. Examples like this are why we politely move these topics to a section where it is no holds barred and why many of the same soapy players came to this thread.

This idea/person linkage is magnified because we don't see faces or really know the players. Take me and WW, if she had caught the reference in my first post to the book "Near a Thousand Tables" and knew that my wife writes articles for a local rag about local food and caught my bison reference (the hot new local meat), she might realize that I can talk about local foods because I'm involved in local foods. The problem is that I'm not a believer, and that cynicism come thru loud and clear. To a believer in something, cynicism of a faith is to disrespect the person.

To call yourself a vegetarian is to label yourself for others to know that you hold that idea so strongly that to criticize the idea is to criticize you.

Well, don't paint every vegetarian with the same brush...


But overall, I would say that there is a trend: the more extreme someone's food choices (extreme used here as a deviation from the population mean, in any direction), the more likely it is that their entire lifestyle revolves around this choice, and the more likely it is that it is not just about food choice, it is also about morality, ethics, and self-identification.

With so many things tied togehter, attacking one part feels like an attack on the whole. Substitute food for religion, and it;s the same story, really...