Thanks :) I don't like the picture, but it's what I look like now, so I put it up.

More likely, those phrases mean different things on Melmac. He probably just complimented me and told me that I'm awesome and his hero.

An interesting article that came out today.

Low-carb diet burns the most calories in small study

Show me how my post is begging the question or an ad himinem. Now you'll cry foul, because I asked you to do the impossible.

And we'll take their word for it, because all they have riding on it is their business. If they came right out and admitted to bias, they would lose a large chunk of their visits per month.

And Factcheck is just as left leaning, so why would it surprise anyone that they defend Snopes?

I will still use Snopes, I just know that they won't fact check anything that will hurt democrats. It doesn't matter, because most of the worst stuff they do is done in print or on video.

George Zimmerman Passed Police Lie Detector Test Day After Trayvon Martin Killing



Let me guess...no minds were changed with this information, right?

It's time to face facts, every white man with a guy should be in prison.

The article that the OP posted isn't about how their articles are biased, it's about the fact that Snopes does not fact check anything that is negative about Obama and true. So if a Republican says something negative that isn't true about Obama, they bust it, if a Republican says something negative about Obama that is true, they ignore it.

What's all this "Don't trust YouTube" and "Provide a non-biased source" crap?

If the video on YouTube is Barack Obama saying something (Like when he promised that the Healthcare law would be transparent or when he promised to raise energy prices), why is there doubt? You want the context? Oh, that's easy. Just google whatever you think is questionable and you should be able to find the entire speech.

As for a "non-biased source", the article describes the process the author used to come to his or her conclusions. Why not follow the same process and come to your own conclusion? Why do people need to be spoon fed facts. "I don't want to believe that and I'm too lazy to see for myself, so I'll just close my eyes"? What is that crap? Seriously?

Total weight loss: 44 pounds.

No starvation. No salads. No "diet" food. I'll have a late breakfast of sausage and fried eggs and the last of the pot roast for lunch. Dinner is still up in the air.

Start taking calcium, that should do the trick.

Oh what a load of junk science. Nothing against you, it's just amazing to me that doctors are still for whole grains and against saturated fats, despite all of the evidence being that whole grains are bad for you and saturated fats are good.

I'm not doing Atkins or South Beach, I'm doing a paleo diet, which is similar to what our ancestors ate. It's how our bodies are designed to eat. The very idea that we started farming grain a couple thousand years ago and so we should get most of our calories from grains is ridiculous. The same people will tell you that humans have existed, largely unchanged for 250k years will tell you we should all eat a diet that has been around for 9k years. We aren't adapted to that diet and it's not healthy.

As for the cancer stuff, oh my God they are out of touch! There are mountains of evidence that low carb diets kill cancer. The reason is that cancer can only live off of glucose and most of our body can live off of ketones. So being on a ketogenic (low carb) diet, starves cancer.

Being on the far left doesn't require "courage and convictions" so much as it requires that you be able to ignore human nature, consider yourself superior to the majority of people, be historically illiterate and most importantly, desire to control other people's lives.

Nah, natural fats are good for you. I don't eat oils other than coconut and olive oil. If you can't squeeze the source and get oil out of it, I don't eat it. Like corn oil and canola oil and all the vegetable oils, they are made in laboratory using natural and unnatural parts. That's why they are called "franken fats".

I don't limit my calories or fat and I only had a problem losing weight when I started drinking diet soda. When you limit your calories, you risk your body going into starvation mode. When you don't eat enough fat, you raise your blood sugar and you run the risk of your liver making the heart attack linked pattern B LDL.

I eat until I'm full and I don't get hungry for 5-6 hours. I ate breakfast at 9:30 AM and I'm still not hungry at 2:17 PM.

Personal reasons, which have nothing to do with self preservation.

I agree. John Wayne didn't serve in the military for good reasons, which are documented in the link I supplied. He also tried to join the OSS (precursor to the CIA), but was unsuccessful.

Is that true for you? Are you that much of a slave to your flesh that you can't refuse to have sex with a woman for any other reason than self preservation? I don't have women throwing themselves at me every day, but I have turned down women for reasons that have nothing to do with self preservation.

How do you mean?

I think free will is any action which goes against our primitive instincts. When the 17 year old girl throws herself at you, it's free will to refuse her advance, it's animal instinct to take her.

It's important to note that God cannot do everything, God can only do those things which are possible and do not violate His nature.

Thanks.

I don't believe the "the diet that works for one person won't work for another" line of reasoning. We have have basically the same genes and same evolutionary history. Low Carb, properly and consistently applied, will work for anyone.