I'm curious, may I ask why this bothers you? If information is pertinent, isn't the manner in which it was delivered or listened to by certain individuals secondary, or even tertiary concerns?

It's not just about the style. A person who's views are not open to criticism, revision, or correction is not a teacher or a guide, in any positive sense of those words. And a large shadow of doubt is cast over the message when it is propped up by errors.

If the carnivorous diet is worth espousing, it's worth defending rationally. But that path is foreign to theBear. He made it clear that he would tolerate no questions not based on complete assent and devotion.

This is the same error that other people have used here. Most of the people who were interested in what Bear had to say saw through his flaws, and took away what they thought was valuable. They aren't looking for a "guide," per se, just a sounding board. There were, at most, 5 people who could be considered "disciples" of Bear, and three of them gave up on the "carnivore" diet within a short period of time, as they were just fad dieters, anyway.

As I have said throughout this thread, most people who were interested in this plan just don't like vegetables, and were happy to find someone who had gone for a long period of time without eating them and was still alive to tell the tale. Somehow, Ian and others have hysterically taken those 5 or so people and turned them into a third of the population. As bad as Bearism is, the knuckleheads wringing their hands about these non-existent sheep, and breaking their arms patting themselves on the backs for not being one of them, are worse. Essentially, what you people are doing is using the existence of a phantom group of people to attack Bear, because you don't like him, and because it's entertaining. If Bear baiting is how you want to entertain yourselves that's perfectly cool in my book; I just wish you could do it without the plain hypocrisy, and without insulting people who chose to eat all meat after actually thinking things through, or people who made the decision despite Bear, not because of him, which is the vast majority of them. If you want to deflate Bear and protect all these dumb sheep, just point out the errors in what he says, which is certainly easy enough to do. The attacks do no one any good, especially when you consider the number of people (2/3 of the population???) being attacked in posts like Superhero Ian's.

This thread taught me volumes about human nature and the tribal instincts that we cannot erase from our personal DNA. It taught me about patriarchal figures and how they galvanize those seeking father figures, whether via love of music or meat, and those who must destroy them at all costs.
The young wolves have circled the aging bear and brought him down. The archetypal prototypes are so deep and mythic, no one can act or speak neutrally. The hubris of the hero figure torn to shreds by jackals and wolves? Or modern reason overcoming the dark slavery of superstition?

Another archetype easily insinuates itself: We have the Joseph Conrad-like hero abandoning modern European sensibilities for his heart-of-darkness primal life in the jungle tropics clashing mightily with over-educated nerds of academe who must make house payments in suburbia. He lives among the birds cawing in the dense growth, keenly aware of the nuances of nature, his audience live in up-the-minute nuances of change and relativism from every side as they drive their car down the highway, passing the occasional tree.
Yet truth and transparency must be the heroes, despite our powerful tribal instincts.
Adieu as I eat my meat bleu. I have learned much from each.

If you really like to analyze group behavior you should visit some of the fan celebrity websites. On some of them there are middle-aged groupies who have been following their "star" for 30-40 years and will almost kill people who diss their favorite celebrity. I have also been on some message boards that feel the same way about Dr. Atkins and his diet.

And that's Ms Knucklehead to you

You get to name yourself. Personally, I think of you as the Superfriend "Hysteria," whose power is the ability to find great humor in any situation.

And notice what I said:




None of these sweeping assertions about 2/3 of the population, or 1/3 of the population, no inanities about dictatorships -- and I had the decency to restrict my criticism to my journal where it should have remained, not thrown out in the public where it would piss off large numbers of people. But when you're desperate to score points, class goes out the window.

Sorry I am late coming back, my cape was at the dry cleaners.

For those who took my assertion as 'chest beating' (and I must say that doing that while patting myself on the back was, I think, an heroic feat in itself), that was not the purpose.

It's hardly news that some people bridle at autocrats, others worship them. It's remains worrying that so many are prepared to buy into any old cult-like crap that comes their way.

Yup, I don't have much time for sheep, nor for wolves come to that, they are both dangerous.

Oh, I suppose I should respond.

The figures aren't generalisations, they are rough approximations.

My comments weren't about dieters, they were about a micro-society - not sure what your point was in mentioning that.

I'm not clear in what way referring to someone as dictatorial is an 'inanity'. If some one does not accept 'dissent', attempts to stifle opposing views and dismisses (rather than addresses) evidence which contradicts their views that sounds pretty dictatorial to me.

I have edited my post as you're right, it wasn't cricket to quote your journal in here. My apologies for that.

I have to say tho, that just because you kept your comments to your journal doesn't make you any less of a hypocrite.

According to the Encyclopaedia Galactica, it [the earth] was the mice's design.

cjl (7x7=42)

I don't think you get it there, Hysteria. My criticism was about a mindset, which I restricted to my journal. I didn't attack Bear, or any individual, for that matter, as have you Superfriends. I mentioned other diets, as an example of the mindset. The people who are now attacking Bear are using their alleged concern for the masses, and nonsense about dictatorships (a dictator on a message board???) as an excuse to do it, and are doing it out in the open, where many, many people, some of whom do an all meat approach to eating, will see it. Perhaps you can use your super powers and see the lack of humor in that situation? Or does it only work one way.

Even us non-superheroes have two arms and hands.







The few, the proud, the neither-wolf-nor-sheep.




I don't even know what this means, sorry, don't have your super-intellect.



Of course they weren't:



If these people weren't dieters, who in the world were they? You can name names. We're all friends here. How did they "adopt the role of disciple/follower" if they didn't adopt Bear's diet? I'm looking forward to a super display of rhetoric in this answer.




It's a message board. There's no way to dictate anything. Bear, in his own flawed way, put forth his opinions, and people are free to refute them, believe them, reject them, or ignore them, which happened.

I can assure you that it's easily found in various vending machines I have had to deal with over the years. There have been mentions of this over the years with regard to computer programmers working in odd environments/odd hours with only vending machines containing what is described as "pre-stalled food" meaning junk food that tastes the same whether it is 3 days or 3 years old. The stuff doesn't go bad [or at least doesn't get any worse!] and is just as [in]edible at any point in time.

cjl (Real programmers don't program in Pascal)

theBear was insulting, arrogant, cultic, and intransigently wrong about a lot of things. In a forum dedicated to the exchange of ideas for mutual benefit, he deserved what he got and more.

ANYONE who comes onto a nutrition forum proclaiming that theirs is the only correct diet for the human species, dismissing all criticisms as the result of "addiction" and "acculturation", refusing to provide scientific support for allegedly scientific claims, telling people whether they should or shouldn't post--shouldn't pretend incomprehension at getting nailed to the wall. No one should have to put up with that crap and no one should regret having called him on it.

I'm just trying to figure out why it would have taken any more valuable time to abandon this thread to the "parasites" and take up the support thread where debating isn't allowed?

Good God Kwik, you are the man!!! What you typed here is what was in my head, but I couldn't put it to words.

At least Bear finally figured out that it's too much trouble to try and continue in this thread with all the conflict. Do you think we'll all be so lucky as to see all of the self appointed diet and nutrition police go away or will they just find new threads/posters to bash in the effort of protecting all of us dumb*sses?!?!

Every word of this is true. But there was a lot more than just Bear involved, and people weren't attacking Bear just to "give him what he deserved;" there was clearly quite a bit of mental masturbation going on, particularly in some of the latter posts.

Here's the way I look at it. Bear is what he is. The man's 70-odd years old, has lived an aggressively "F--- you, I'm doing it my way" life from the day he was born, and isn't going to change. This was obvious by about his third post. The question then becomes, how best to handle it? Challenging his assertions, which you and others did ably, brings about discussions that everyone who cares about proper diet can benefit from. Attacking the guy with irrevelancies brings about this mess, and attracts people who are interested in the attacks for their own sake, and whatever ego gratification and "attaboys" they can get (look around at some of the journals, if you want to see thinly disguised ugly behavior re: this subject). It does no one any good, except the few, the proud, the neither-wolf-nor-sheep. At least one of Bear's most vociferous challengers doesn't even diet, but this individual sure seems to care a great deal about what other people do with their diets. And that's the kind of person you bring out of the woodwork when it becomes a mudslinging contest.

Again, Kwik you are the man! Well said!!

Cheers and a tip of the hat to Kwik & Paul who get it. A wag of the finger goes out to the diet and nutrition police. I doubt the all-meat police will go away but....there's always the support thread

I would love to answer Potato's question but I'm afraid it it can't be answered on the public boards. What happened to this thread was intended to exactly happen this way, the only undecided factor was how long it would last.

Here here! I'll drink (a cup of blenderized meat gruel) to that!

Yeah, and I'm still trying to figure out why defending himself on a thread debating eating meat vs. meat + vegetation stopped Bear from doing the really "important" things he wanted to do. I didn't think participation on this message board was mandatory. LOL

Can some of you so offended by the prospect of an all meat diet (short or long term) please provide some information about the paleo fruits and vegetables that you eat? Since everything in stores today is a product of fairly recent artificial selection and specifically crafted to appeal to our collective "sweet tooth" or not provoke our "bitter" response (spitting it out), could you please tell us about your f & v?
In my native NW, we still have wapato and camus about (two plants Indians ate at times), but I have never seen any available in any store. Is there something else going on in other parts of the country? What is the nutritional content of these foods? How much of them do you eat? How do you get them?

Any information on the subject would be most welcome.

Nope, YOU are the one who doesn't get it. It wasn't all about being "diet and nutrition police." Several of us had nothing against the "path." We just didn't like HIM coming onto this board and trying to persuade us that HE was "the way, the truth and the light."

Thank you, Ubizmo, I couldn't have said it better myself.

This post should probably be over on the Paleo forum, but of course that is up to the moderators. However the ongoing debate on this subject has already been discussed at great length. The posts are all still here for you to read if you like. Just start on post 1. If you are new to the forum--WELCOME!

And we all owe you and others like you a HUGE thank you for standing up to the Bear. Without you and others like you can you imagine how this thread would have gone?!?!? We may have had an exchange of information (although sometimes questionable) instead of meaningless insults thrown back and forth!

No, it hasn't been answered properly; that's why I brought it up. Doing so might alleviate some of the more obnoxious attempts at debate perpetuated on this this thread.

Bye Bear Thank you so much for sharing your time and experience with us. Thank you Thank You Thank You!


*BIG BEAR HUGS*


Barb