My Current Paleo Anarchist Landscape; The Ancestral Health Symposium 2012 and the 21 Convention

Yea, I maybe want to blog more about fat bread and applications, including mayonnaise making, tuna salad and all sorts of cool such things which, quite to the contrary of motivating me to go hog wild with neolithic foods, has had quite the opposite effect. More on that later.

I'm dashing to finish up V2.0 of the book, now with plenty of pressure to get 'er done. But I kinda blew myself out a couple of days ago with it and have dreaded getting back to it. I'll get it done, but my mind is so elsewhere at the moment. Some bullets:

  • After just shy of 20 years at it, I have decided to close the company I started in a bedroom in 1993 with a coupla hundred bucks to my name (definitive decision Tuesday last). I grew it to a few dozen employees. I've hated it for years. Why do something you hate? For money?
  • I have not only four other books in the works with Hyperink, but I spent all afternoon up in their offices Wednesday shooting video for a beginner's course on Paleo. This, I love. ...Though I didn't love the 2-hr drive back down to the South Bay in "rush" hour traffic.
  • I have two other primary initiatives, one as an adjunct to the business I'm shutting down—the part I like—and one as very Paleo related. More later.

What this means is that I'm going to move more and more into this landscape as a livelihood...because I love it, because I likely can, and because I really have a sense of how to do it far different than others—which is perhaps the most passionate aspect of it. And let's face it. All the blog posts I've done are here. There's a ton of them. In essence, every time I write a new one, it's like competing with myself. How can someone make it truly better, in perpetuity? The reality is that it's not possible in an ever increasing sense, and so you have to figure out different channels, new subjects, and so on. Look: how many times can I call dietitian morons fuckheads, and have you laugh?

Yawn. See?

So in less than a week I head up to Hat Creek to fly hang gliders for a few days. Videos of all that here on YouTube, the 4th, 5th and 6th on the list. This will I be my 15th or 16th consecutive year of flying that amazing site. I've lost count.

The day after I get back, it's off to Boston and the Ancestral Health Symposium: #AHS12. Did you see the posts I did about last year's event?

I actually just surprised myself at how much that event meant to me, realizing how much I blogged it. My presentation is going to be unique amongst all other presentations...I hope. I intend to demonstrate that diet and nutrition aren't the only thing grains and agriculture fucked up beyond reason and recognition. Mine is: Paleo Epistemology and Sociology. Looks like the schedule has Ron Rosedale, MD and I at 20 minutes each, going up against Terry Wahls, MD, with a 40-minute presentation.

When I get back, it's but a few days until I head off to Austin for The 21 Convention. I'm basically delivering the same presentation, only far more detailed, an hour vs. the 20 minutes I have at AHS. Other speakers include Keith Norris, Skyler Tanner, Doug McGuff, and Dave Asprey. Robb Wolf was on the schedule as well, but at last I heard he had to cancel. Greg Swann, the guy I've been featuring chapter-by-chapter for his book Man Alive! got a gig speaking there too, as a direct result of that series. He goes up right before I do.

Well that's it for now. Sorry that my blogging has so sucked rancid dog semen this week. I ate something that didn't quite sit right a couple of days ago and am just getting back to feeling human again.

Comments

  1. J Squared says:

    Richard is giving up the pursuit of money? Dude, the liberty-minded folk across the nation will be turning in their graves.

    First thought that came to my mind is: why didn’t y0ur employees offer to buy you out of the business? Surely the American entrepreneurial spirit isn’t that hard to find amongst a few dozen employees.

    • J squared. It’s very complicated and I dont care to delve into particulars. It involves tons and tons of new governemt regulation and such, and enforcement. I’m a small business that does business in 50 states. The increase in the fed and state level regs over the past 10 years (imitiated during “pro business” Bush) has been such that the $250k I have to spend on attorneys every year saps not only any profit, but all joy out of it.

      I was a pioneer in the industry but always wanted to keep it boutique, for me, so that I could always know and service clients. Then the mortgage industry crashed, those liars all moved into my space, and lie to people to get business and lobby to set up laws to both make it overly costly for me, protect themselves from the lies they tell every day, and the wheel turns.

      People who moch my anarchism have no idea of what they are talking about. They have no real experience. Let one of them tell me how they have been nvestigated by numerous State Attorneys general, always with a dropped case, bit after hundreds of thousands in legal fees. Or, how about fed and state tax audits? Yea, on revenues of over $12 million they got me for 12 thousand dollars. I figure that about covered their costs.

      I’m disgusted and resigned, and I care not to play the game anymore.

  2. ComeOnRichard says:

    I can’t believe they’re actually letting you speak at the AHS again. Hasn’t anyone here noticed that after years of different LC and Paleo combinations, you still haven’t reached your goal weight? It’s like Jimmy Moore on the LC cruise. This whole thing is a scam and you guys know it’s not working but you keep it up to sell books and other crap. Lame.

    • Actually anonymous, I’m looking pretty decent these days. But people can judge that for themselves when they see me in Boston.

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        I may be anonymous, but at least I’m not selling anything. And anyway I’m not sure how being anonymous disqualifies any of my points.

        This fake populist trip you’re on where macho cross-fit dudes dip themselves in icewater to “increase brown fat” and defy years of nutrition research eating high fat and thinking “that’s what our genes need” to get ripped and lean and healthy has not been thought through.

        I urge you to look through the evolutionary science literature and check your facts. We are not “made” for anything. We did not evolve “for” a certain diet. We survived by adapting to what was around us, for better or worse. We can survive on a lot of foods for this very reason.

        There is no optimal diet and there was never a utopian world where we were all ripped and lived to 120 without suffering any ailments. That’s why anyone who studies paleobiology knows your whole trip is a fad based on false interpretations of the science.

        Yeah yeah, you don’t give a fuck what I think. That’s your gimmick here as the independent maverick who tells it straight up.

      • “I’m not sure how being anonymous disqualifies any of my points.”

        Then let me show you.

        “I urge you to look through the evolutionary science literature and check your facts. We are not “made” for anything. We did not evolve “for” a certain diet. We survived by adapting to what was around us, for better or worse. We can survive on a lot of foods for this very reason.

        “There is no optimal diet and there was never a utopian world where we were all ripped and lived to 120 without suffering any ailments. That’s why anyone who studies paleobiology knows your whole trip is a fad based on false interpretations of the science.”

        Me, about a hundred times: ‘Paleo is equator to arctic, sea level to 16,000 ft, and everything in-between.’

        There’s these as well, and many more:

        http://freetheanimal.com/2009/12/the-paleo-principle-is-neither-authoritative-nor-dogmatic.html

        http://freetheanimal.com/?s=starch

        http://freetheanimal.com/2012/02/synthesis-low-carb-and-food-rewardpalatability-and-why-calories-count.html

        http://freetheanimal.com/2012/06/synthesis-guyenet-colpo-calories-count-food-quality-matters-macronutrient-ratios-are-qualitative.html

        So, perhaps you could, at minimum, at least familiarize yourself with your subject matter, first. Which obviously you have not.

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        Yeah, I saw those posts when they came out. So how come a “liquid fat bomb smoothie” is somehow something that’s good for us? Why is super fatty bread somehow something we’re supposed to eat?

        Why would any of your ideas be better for the human body if you yourself admit there is no one way for the human body to be? Shouldn’t we focus ourselves on what real research right NOW says about our bodies instead of inventing needs for our bodies on the savanna somewhere else in a time we don’t really understand?

        This paleo-bodyhacking thing and the LC thing is underpinned by lazy armchair weenies who don’t read the science and really want to be someone else. I don’t mean we should all be fat and I don’t think modern life is making us better at all, but encouraging people to eat lots of animal fat just because Colpo and Masterjohn and Weston Price say so is really irresponsible.

        And BTW, lots of animal fat means lots of land lost to animal grazing or factory farming, which in turn destroys the atmosphere and causes massive pollution problems and mass extinctions of plants and animals who live in forests that are cut to make grazing lands. Even if eating lots of fat were good for you, which isn’t proven, it is unsustainable.

      • But you didn’t address the macho xfit thing, Richard.

        How’s your fucking Fran?!?!

        How about your kipped pullups?

        How many bumper plates you using?

        BTW, what’s ‘fake’ populist even mean? As opposed to real populist? This blog is really popular, but where does the fake part enter in? Because you published an ebook? Or perhaps anonymous thinks you aren’t sciencey enough. But then where does the fake part come in?

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        A fake populist is a guy posing as a leader of some kind of grass-roots movement of people “taking back” their power, independence, etc. when in fact he’s really just a guy saying he’s doing that. His interest is in making $$. It’s no coincidence that usually those are guys who want to sell books.

        I have nothing against real revolution, but before telling people to eat loads of fat, why don’t you make sure it even works on yourself first? I’ve seen your blog pics Sean and goes for you and Richard.

      • This paleo-bodyhacking thing and the LC thing is underpinned by lazy armchair weenies who don’t read the science and really want to be someone else.

        Say what you will about bodyhacking n=1 one types, armchair weenies is about the last thing that comes to mind. I’m not a huge fan of Tim Ferris, but I certainly wouldn’t characterize him as a pussy, and I doubt he’s spends much time leaning on the arm of a chair.

        What’s the polar opposite of n=1 biohacking? Listen to your superiors and don’t question their judgement. Pay no attention to the insidious lipid/diet-heart/cholesterol hypotheses in the corner, eyes over here: listen to your betters!

        Even if eating lots of fat were good for you, which isn’t proven, it is unsustainable.

        Oh yeah, and even if you are right, utilitarianism, blah blah blah.

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        “Even if eating lots of fat were good for you, which isn’t proven, it is unsustainable.”

        “Oh yeah, and even if you are right, utilitarianism, blah blah blah.”

        Not caring about the environmental consequences of your eating habits is even dumber than eating mostly fat without really knowing what it does to your body. Even if it makes you healthier, it destroys the planet. What good does that do? Even if it adds years to your life, how would it matter if the planet doesn’t survive around you? It just shows how limited you guys are.

        Do any of you macho idiots even think about these things? Or do you just hate anyone who isn’t some kind of ape-like brute who “tells it straight up” and doesn’t really think about anything except getting visible abs?

      • ComeOnRichard, please post the most compelling information you have regarding animal grazing contributing to global warming (especially good if best practices are taken into consideration, i.e. Joel Salatin type farming).

        May I ask, what other sacrifices besides omitting meat do you recommend for saving the planet? It sounds like it’s your main concern, so you should put up some other good suggestions, you know?

      • Or indeed any type of sustainable agriculture livestock of monocrop, they don’t exist. I have worked in agriculture for years, agriculture is a total war on nature whether you grow beef or wheat.
        Anyone who thinks we are going to eat our way out of our environmental problems is naive in the extreme.
        “Comeonrichard” you read like you don’t have any idea about anthropology, archaeology or agriculture but are in fact a vegan/vegetarian propagandist. The paleolithic diet of humanity is well understood by archaeology as is the modern diet of foraging peoples.
        Fot the record I am not a climate change sceptic and am unimpressed that Jimmy Moore is the “face” of a diet movement.

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        Here you go Andy:

        http://www.worldwatch.org/files/pdf/Livestock%20and%20Climate%20Change.pdf

        It’s just to start. I’m not trying to convince you of anything. Just read it and if you’re compelled after that, the research is all on the net.

      • King Crimson says:

        I was tempted not to click your link because of the domain, but I did anyway just so I could see whether you really had a point.

        Industrial farming? Really? When this whole blog is about the paleo lifestyle and grass fed farming? Richard Nikoley isn’t eating the crap pictured in your link. Stop setting up straw men and then tearing them down.

      • “So how come a “liquid fat bomb smoothie” is somehow something that’s good for us? Why is super fatty bread somehow something we’re supposed to eat?”

        Oh, I get it, the old heads you win, tails I lose shtick. That is, no matter what I put up on the blog as something to eat, it’s a prescription and thus I’m peddling a dogma.

        As a matter of fact, the last time I had a fat bomb smoothie was over 6 months ago. In fact, I’ve had one or two smoothies of any kind in that time. As for fat bread, the last loaf I made was just about a week ago, version 3 once I got the recipe worked out. Takes my wife and I several days to eat one loaf. Calculate the daily fat intake and then tell me you have a clue what you’re talking about.

        I’m offering people choices. That simple. You offer then nothing at all. You never have.

        “lots of animal fat means lots of land lost to animal grazing or factory farming,”

        In fact, you desire to see their choices removed on the basis of spurious pseudo-science. But the billions the enviro /carbon credit industry rakes in, along with all these weenies in suits flying all over the world in perpetuity to attend climate conferences in post setting and lodgings is just a-ok with you.

        Well, at least I know what you’re all about.

      • “His interest is in making $$.”

        Oh noos.

        You’re damn well right it is. I’m proud that I can, too. My book is closing in on 10,000 sales and guess what? We’re doubling the price to $7.99 with the release of version 2. There, that oughta downright give you a case of the vapors.

      • I have nothing against real revolution, but before telling people to eat loads of fat, why don’t you make sure it even works on yourself first? I’ve seen your blog pics Sean and goes for you and Richard.

        You mean the blog pics where I’m playing chess and drinking beer? Yes, I’m not afraid to put myself out there instead of posting drive-by criticisms as an anonymous coward. I’m also not afraid to admit I eat a lot of stuff I shouldn’t. That doesn’t mean I don’t have a pretty good idea of what I should be eating. But to paraphrase your own words, anonymous coward: “And anyway I’m not sure how not being at 5% bodyfat disqualifies any of my blog.”

        Do you not find it ironic in the slightest to anonymously bitch about “armchair weenies” or to try and argue that your argument should be judged on it’s own merits while attacking people like me and Richard personally for not being apparently ideally fit?

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        10,000 more chubby guys with a chip on their shoulders then? Fine by me. If they really think man-made climate change is “spurious pseudo-science” like you, then they deserve their love handles and heart disease.

        “In fact, you desire to see their choices removed…”

        No, actually I desire for there to actually be a planet to have choices on. Can you libertarians ever hear the word “no”? NO Richard, you cannot have anything you want anytime you want it. The planet cannot handle it indefinitely. Seriously, you guys are spoiled kids. You are unwilling to make any sacrifices at all and instead try to discredit the science proving how wasteful you are. Anything not to change your own behavior or face your own responsibility.

        It’s amazing that climate change is pseudo science to you while you sit in a cold tub to lose fat, or starve yourself for 20 hours and then eat like a pig, all because some guru on the internet said so. What’s the deal man? Get your shit straight.

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        Sean, I attacked Richard because he’s selling books on theories that are unproven and haven’t even panned out for him. You got all in a huff to back up your pal and got the same treatment because you’re advocating shit that doesn’t work. And you’re even lamer because you’re backing a guy whose backing other guys who half-understand science and sell books based on it. Get lost.

        And because I dont’ have a blog I’m somehow a coward? It doesnt’ seem to bother Richard one bit if I give him my money anonymously when I buy his ebook.

      • Can you libertarians ever hear the word “no”? […] Seriously, you guys are spoiled kids

        Okay, my irony meter just broke, can anyone tell me where to get it fixed at a decent price?

      • You got all in a huff to back up your pal and got the same treatment because you’re advocating shit that doesn’t work.

        Well, if I’d known I was going to get the full treatment I wouldn’t have backed up my pal. Friendship is one thing but that sort of searing truth is just too biting. You certainly have a way of speaking truth to power.

      • “10,000 more chubby guys with a chip on their shoulders then?”

        Yea, like this guy, and thousands like him.

        http://www.stevengrayblog.com/2012/06/free-the-animal-review/

        In fact, you have little to no real idea of who purchased my book. I, however, have good metrics on the demographics and it’s about 50/50 men and women, and mostly in their 20s.

        Otherwise, you need a good dose of George. He’s dead on, too.

        http://youtu.be/eScDfYzMEEw

        “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed—and hence clamorous to be led to safety—by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” — HL Mencken

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        If you wanna stay fat, at least stay quiet.

        And you are anything but power.

      • “10,000 more chubby guys with a chip on their shoulders then?”

        This is the intellectual dishonesty at its most naked, I think. Vegans are often quite thin, and I’d be the first one to acknowledge that. Many paleo ex-vegans admit to feeling fantastic for the first six months or so when living off their own SFAs. I’m willing to acknowledge the efficacy of a vegan diet for short term weight loss, and the fact that it eliminates a lot of unhealthy processed food, but anonymous coward can’t acknowledge any sort of efficacy of a paleo-ish diet.

        And what exactly is a chip on the shoulder? Not trusting the government to be our omniscient guide and savior? Being willing to speak one’s mind? How about being open to dissenting opinions? If anonymous coward were to have its own blog, what are the odds that it wouldn’t delete dissenting opinions, even if they were couched in a fairly civilized manor as it has done?

      • If you wanna stay fat, at least stay quiet.

        These are definitely not the words of an anonymous armchair weenie.

        And you are anything but power.

        More truth to power.

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        You are so worried about being swindled by the Big Conspiracy Against Us that you’ve forgotten to actually read any literature about climate change.

        “My rights! My god-given rights!” Gimme a break, what are rights on a dead planet? Can you think a bit farther than yourselves?

        My comment to Sean likewise applies to you. Stay fat and quiet. Don’t spout bullshit just because someone who seems really cool and smart on the internet says so. And there’s no reason for you or Sean to even have an opinion about climate change when you obviously have no interest in actually reading about it before you shoot your mouths off.

      • “what are rights on a dead planet?”

        Begging the question. You do that a lot, by the way.

        “Stay fat”

        That’s not the case. I’m nowhere near fat. I’m not sub 10% body fat, but I’m not fat by any means. But you’re got the premises upon which you started this, you’re already been shown to be less than honest by myself and Sean, so what’s new?

        ” when you obviously have no interest in actually reading about it”

        Yea, again, if I disagree with you it’s “obviously” because I’m ignorant of it. Wanna guess how quickly I can list sites I’ve been reading for many years on different sides of the issues, including RealClimate?

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        I have no opinion on vegans. My point is that if the goal was to be in shape, the crap sold here isn’t working for either of you.

        No one is saying you should trust the government for everything. And speaking your mind is great. This started as a comment about SELLING your freak-ass-shit-that-isn’t-working for money. And if you’re so open to dissenting opinions, why are you so in a hurry to back up your boy when someone calls him on his BS?

        Yeah, go on with the anonymous=coward thing. Yes you are very brave because you have a blog.

      • And if you’re so open to dissenting opinions, why are you so in a hurry to back up your boy when someone calls him on his BS?

        I’m open to dissenting opinions being aired, doesn’t mean I have to agree with them. Is it really that hard for you to understand the difference?

      • “I’m open to dissenting opinions being aired, doesn’t mean I have to agree with them. Is it really that hard for you to understand the difference?”

        Yes, it’s stock in trade. One of the things I’ve received the most compliments in comments on this blog over the years is the ability to change my mind on things (such as starch, such as calories count, etc.) and post about those changes in view.

        But an anonymous coward, already shown to be a liar, dishonest and disingenuous, will characterize that as weakness, not strength because, you see, he’s ideological and the most important thing is that you come to Jesus in metaphorical terms, and because you were lost and a sinner. You don’t agree because you’re ignorant, or lazy, or have just simply turned your back on the one true word and its redeeming enlightenment.

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        Me ideological? All I’ve been doing is asking you to look at facts this whole time, which you can only ignore and try to deflect by painting me arrogant, because the facts implicate YOU in global warming, something you desperately hate to face.

        If there is one true word, it is this: All you want to do Richard is confuse the global warming issue. You don’t want to see the consequences of anything you do. Not surprising you are a wasteful, fuck-if-I-care, ex-military twat then. Just the types that are running the world (into the ground).

      • “Me ideological?”

        Of course, but naturally, liar you are, you want to deflect that just as much as creationists do by coming up with “Intelligent Design.”

        But it’s the same boring schtick. Hell is upon you. Exercise precaution. Repent. You can go to Heaven if you just “accept the facts.”

        Same bullshit, different day.

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        I love that I’m the one deflecting when it’s you that continuously focuses on me somehow being a coward because I don’t have a public blog. Not surprising, since the only peeps you seem to believe in here are bloggers with all kinds of crazy ideas, but hey they’re all INDEPENDENT, HUH? Not slaves in the Matrix, no sir.

        The only person deflecting is you. You cannot admit your responsibility in global warming, so anyone who shows it to you is a liar, a coward, an arrogant bleeding heart liberal greenie, etc.

        It’s all very childish Richard. Just read about global warming and you won’t have to result to ad hominem when someone asks you to talk science. It’s about all you can do on this blog.

      • “when it’s you that continuously focuses on me somehow being a coward because I don’t have a public blog.”

        A liar is as liars do. I have not one single time mentioned anything about a blog. I merely note that you’re an anonymous pussy. apparently, you can’t deal with either the bare truth or my characterization, now claiming that the focus of my criticism is that you don’t have a blog. What’s new?

        “You cannot admit your responsibility in global warming,”

        Quantify that. …And just so you know, I’m just a basic muti-variable calculus guy, so please make sure I can grok your formulas.

        “Just read about global warming”

        Just another lie. I don’t agree with his conclusions and thus, I haven’t “read about it,” in spite of giving him links to the contrary which he’s already acknowledged.

        But this is your only avenue, isn’t it.When you lie, when your premise is a lie, you have only to pile one on top of the other, hoping people don’t notice.

        Good luck with it.

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        Then allow me sum up your argument against man-made global warming:

        1) I lie.
        2) I’m anonymous.
        3) I’m a coward.
        4) You are a vicitm of an attack by those who want to limit your freedom and/or control you.
        5) Somehow everyone shows that I’m lying.
        6) It’s so obvious that I’m lying I have to lie more.

        Do you want to actually address ONE thing I’ve said about global warming or would you like to go back to number one and start over again, as you’ve done from the beginning?

      • “allow me sum up your argument against man-made global warming”

        Another lie. That’s my rough characterization of you.

      • “SELLING your freak-ass-shit-that-isn’t-working”

        And there’s another lie. I have received many hundreds of emails unsolicited over the years, many of which have been published, a lot with pictures, and I’ve done a number of interviews.

        http://freetheanimal.com/2010/04/real-results-austin-from-singapore.html

        I’ve got bunches more just waiting to be published. Of the 23 reviews on Amazon for my book, 20 are 5-star and 1 is 4-star. And these 19 ratings and 4 reviews at good reads seem to think it’s cool with an average 3.68 of 5, with the lowest rating being a 3-star. That’s quite a high percentage of average folks who don’t think they’re being swindled.

        http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13454583-free-the-animal

        And of course there’s Wolf and Sisson who have tons of success stories and their advice is pretty to similar to mine.

        Finally, I was the first to admit that the idea that Paleo or LC is somehow magic was false. It lost me the first 60 pounds and that last 15 has been tough. But since employing forced caloric restriction over the last 8-10 weeks, beyond the spontaneous caloric restriction is making things pretty simple and obvious, and weight is coming off nicely without hunger problems since I focus on highly nutritious foods. This was, of course, a prime motivation in doing version 2 of the book, in order to remove all vestiges that may have existed as to the magic. Paleo is good because it’s real meat, fish, fowl, fruits and veggies that will nourish you and make it that much easier to eat less to lose fat. Other things like fasting, CT, etc. can be fun and perhaps contribute, but I’d put the contribution under 10%, if even 5%.

        So, I guess the only question remaining is why the anonymous coward has to lie like that.

      • My comment to Sean likewise applies to you. Stay fat and quiet.

        I’ve never felt the need to try order people around on the internet, anonymously or otherwise, I just state my case. Thanks for showing us your innate fascist nature, anonymous coward. You have a great career awaiting you in the government.

      • “Yeah, I saw those posts when they came out.”

        Cool. Thanks for exposing your basic dishonesty then, as per your previous comment I quoted. I’d given you the benefit of the doubt, assuming ignorance, not dishonesty.

        So thanks for clearing that up.

      • “….you’ve forgotten to actually read any literature about climate change.”

        Support that assertion. Yea, I know, it’s just like the Bible. If I disagree, I haven’t read it or understood it.

        Heads you win, tails I lose, once again.

      • And if you’re so open to dissenting opinions, why are you so in a hurry to back up your boy when someone calls him on his BS?

        Richard is a big boy and he can fight his own battles. I’m just doing this for fun. The more you whine, the more I enjoy it.

      • “I’m just doing this for fun. The more you whine, the more I enjoy it.”

        Me too. In fact, I was a bit miffed when Mountain Lion took far less time to download than I figured and I had to put my answers aside for the install.

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        Let’s just say I read your posts about as thoroughly as you read the climate change literature. And the nutrition literature.

        And Sean, the coward thing’s working for you. I guess anything I say can be discredited now because after all, you do have a blog.

      • You are welcome to argue your points and when I see a valid one I will be happy to refute it. Are you seriously going to whine that I address you as anonymous coward instead of ‘ComeOnRichard’?

        Come on Anonymous Coward..

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        “Support that assertion”

        Richard, as far as I can see, you’ve been saying you don’t believe in anthropogenic climate change since around 2008. All the links you refer to are all from climate change skeptics, not from non-aligned and objective sources. This is the problem with your nutrition science too. Do you ever read stuff that DOESN’T support your crap?

        Here’s a good place to start your education:

        http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.shtml#1

        and here:

        http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/1605/ggccebro/chapter1.html

        Otherwise there’s no point in arguing with you. You and Sean don’t even really understand what you’re taking a stand against. But of course that doesn’t stop shoot-from-the-hip guys like you. Why consider the facts first? You’re aligning yourselves more with people like George W than true independent thinkers…

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        I think you’re forgetting Sean that no one was even addressing you at the beginning. So there is no argument. You popped up just to lick your pal’s ass. I’m not sure where you get the idea that anyone’s seriously interested in your views. If that’s what you call your comments.

        Once again, you are really, REALLY impressive having a blog and really bearing it all for the needy masses. Perhaps you’ll grow up and have an ebook someday too. But for now you’ll just have to be Richard’s guard puppy.

      • You and Sean don’t even really understand what you’re taking a stand against.

        And what stand would that be? You take umbrage being libeled an anonymous coward but you enjoy tarring your opposition with a broad brush that you can’t be bothered to explain.

        From what you’ve written so far, anonymous coward, I’m not going to grant you much credence on the subject of true independent thinking.

      • So there is no argument. You popped up just to lick your pal’s ass. I’m not sure where you get the idea that anyone’s seriously interested in your views. If that’s what you call your comments.

        I love it when the paper thin veneer wears off and it has to revert to childish insults.

        *smooch*

      • “anthropogenic”

        There’s your key word right there. There is simply nothing but associations over a minuscule time period. It is not in any way been shown causal and I’m not a fan of “the precautionary” principle” is this, or just about any other context.

        Also, this. The entire Co2 debate is predicated—seriously—on the premise that Co2 doubling will set up a…get this…POSITIVE FEEDBACK mechanism. All the alarmism is based upon that being true.

        http://www.forbes.com/sites/warrenmeyer/2010/10/15/denying-the-catstrophe-the-science-of-the-climate-skeptics-position/

        “To understand the skeptic’s position requires understanding something about the alarmists’ case that is seldom discussed in the press: the theory of catastrophic man-made global warming is actually comprised of two separate, linked theories, of which only the first is frequently discussed in the media.

        “The first theory is that a doubling of atmospheric CO2 levels (approximately what we might see under the more extreme emission assumptions for the next century) will lead to about a degree Celsius of warming. Though some quibble over the number – it might be a half degree, it might be a degree and a half – most skeptics, alarmists and even the UN’s IPCC are roughly in agreement on this fact.

        “But one degree due to the all the CO2 emissions we might see over the next century is hardly a catastrophe. The catastrophe, then, comes from the second theory, that the climate is dominated by positive feedbacks (basically acceleration factors) that multiply the warming from CO2 many fold. Thus one degree of warming from the greenhouse gas effect of CO2 might be multiplied to five or eight or even more degrees.

        “This second theory is the source of most of the predicted warming – not greenhouse gas theory per se but the notion that the Earth’s climate (unlike nearly every other natural system) is dominated by positive feedbacks. This is the main proposition that skeptics doubt, and it is by far the weakest part of the alarmist case. One can argue whether the one degree of warming from CO2 is “settled science” (I think that is a crazy term to apply to any science this young), but the three, five, eight degrees from feedback are not at all settled. In fact, they are not even very well supported.”

        ~~~

        Nature is absolutely dominated by negative, correcting mechanisms, not positive, multiplying feedbacks.

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        “I’m not a fan of “the precautionary” principle”

        This is the problem right there. First off, I’ll say thanks for taking the time to write on this here and link to the articles. But not agreeing with the precautionary principle when the planet may or may not be on the line is just really the other side of idiotic.

        There are many confusionists in the blogosphere and press that would love for you to say what you just said above. Why help them? Because you don’t like the government or people telling you what to do? Fair enough, me either. But my pride should take second place sometimes, when it’s the species’ survival at stake. Why play with that?

        Yes you have several arguments against anthropogenic climate change. But why let that override the tons of evidence showing the opposite. After all, following the precautionary principle will definitely save us, while following the skeptics will definitely not. I’m asking you not to let climate confusionists give you and excuse to do nothing!

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        Sean, don’t flatter yourself, insulting you is a wasted effort because you don’t know how dumb you seem already:

        “Gee I heard he has your very own blog. Czech Republic an’ shiz, too cool. How interesting the life of an obnoxious twat who can talk shit online from thousands of miles away. He can even have lots of opinions on stuff. I heard he lost like 10 lbs by acting like a caveman. What an intrepid, trailblazing soul…”

        love,
        AC

      • Precautionary actions are the province of individual, acting on their own values with prudence. As practiced and applied now by means of government force, there’s too many practical problems to name, even beyond my objections on principle.

        This is a decent overview.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle#Criticisms

        Beyond the fact that it generally shifts the burden of proof (very bad), it’s self contradictory.

      • Galina L says:

        I know it is too late to say something, but just for kicks – I remember reading a while ago some alarmist posts on Russian-language internet web-site about global cooling.

  3. Looking forward to your 21 Convention speech this year. Last year’s was a hit out of the park and gave me a new perspective on voting. The line “I wouldn’t do that to you” has become a subject of great and lively (but polite) debate at family dinners since I dropped it one afternoon over coffee at my parents’ house. It is one the phrases that helped clarify and condense my anarcho-capitalist leanings, since I can’t align with the LP and don’t think libertarian quite captures my feelings on matters.

    All the best with the new book and the AHS presentation.

    • Amy, wait until you see what I juxtapose voting with this year. Though, it won’t be a huge focus of the presentation.

      • ouch! I forgot the “blogspot.com” portion of the URL in my website address! I don’t have a raw food website.

        Whole focus or not, I find your views and attitude refreshing and that’s why I’m a daily FTA reader. Gives me hope that not all are lost to the suckitude and fuckery that I see in the MSM and coming from academia.

  4. ComeOnRichard has so much to say, someone should teach her how to start a blog.

    • ComeOnRichard says:

      Then maybe I can aspire to ebook stardom someday. Or just licking my fellow e-seller’s ass. Either one would make me feel great since then I’d finally show the world just how much I don’t give a fuck.

      • “I’d finally show the world just how much I don’t give a fuck.”

        You misunderstand. It’s _you_ I don’t give a fuck about. Let’s add psychological projection to your list of faults identified so far.

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        You say you don’t give a fuck so much, forgive me if I lose track of exactly what or who you don’t give a fuck about. Let’s add an ex-militaryman’s random obnoxiousness and pointless bravado about Nuffin In Particular to your list of lame-ass techniques for selling e-books. You go girl.

      • “forgive me if I lose track of exactly what or who you don’t give a fuck about.”

        I already told you. So, dishonesty for effect once again.

        “Let’s add an ex-militaryman’s”

        I got out in 1992. That was 20 years ago, and I got out for reasons which I’ve blogged about. I think it makes you silly and…again…dishonest to bring it up without at least mentioning it was one fuck of a hell of a long time ago. Or, to state it another way, I’d never presume to be dishonest or pathetic enough to put stuff out about you from 20 years past as though it was a current event; that is, of course, if you weren’t an anonymous coward with presumably much to hide.

        “You go girl.”

        More dishonesty. Another outright lie. That was said about you because you’re anonymous and have not clarified your gender.

        So, you’re not even willing to go with reasonable costs of being anonymous. Pretty much stock in trade because it looks to me like you’re basically reluctant to sustain your own costs of life in general. What’s new?

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        The entire quote was “You say you don’t give a fuck so much, forgive me if I lose track of exactly what or who you don’t give a fuck about.” Where is the dishonesty in not understanding you because you always don’t give a fuck? You only used half the quote so you could misrepresent me and call me dishonest. That’s called being dishonest.

        Does getting out of the military 20 years ago make you NOT an ex-military man? Again, you’d love to paint me dishonest if you could…just…reach…your…utility…belt and somehow make THE FACTS GO AWAY. You were a military man. That makes you an EX-military man now. Deflect away by calling me anonymous and a coward and yadda yadda, but these are facts.

        You obviously didn’t get “you go girl”. Another kneeslapper wasted on you then. Sucks.

        You’re too easy a target, chubs. Can you duck and weave a bit maybe to make this fun?

      • “You only used half the quote so you could misrepresent me and call me dishonest. That’s called being dishonest.”

        Nope, you’re on record. I blog here. The quote is merely for reference. You have not yet dealt with _any_ of the accusations of lying, so I’m not overly concerned that you lie even more to shoot back. People can see the entire context of comments if they care and I’m confident they’ll see what’s what.

        “Does getting out of the military 20 years ago make you NOT an ex-military man?”

        You lie by context and implication just as much as you lie directly. You’re a liar. That’s what you do. It begins with your anonymity which is meant to deceive, because people can’t size you up.

        “You’re too easy a target”

        You wish. Again, the whole thread is up there and I doubt you are fooling anyone, though it’s possible, I suppose.

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        ROFL. I haven’t dealt with any of your accusations of lying because not one of them is true. And weren’t we talking about man-made global warming?

        You’re one and only defense against ANY argument is that the commenter is anonymous. Therefore somehow he’s a coward. Ergo, he’s somehow dishonest and a liar. Can you possibly see how childish you are?

        Anyway, did you read the PDFs I gave you on global warming?

      • ComeOnRichard says:
      • ComeOnRichard says:

        And more, from the NYT (but of course, they probably represent those who want to control your god-given maverick freedoms):

        http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/30/opinion/the-conversion-of-a-climate-change-skeptic.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        And here’s the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature analysis and and data showing how humans are definitely the main cause of global warming:

        http://berkeleyearth.org/

        Queue Maverick Slayer’s Rebuttal: “But, but but… YOU’RE AN ANONYMOUS LYING COWARD!”

      • “I haven’t dealt with any of your accusations of lying because not one of them is true.”

        Another lie. Plainly obvious to anyone with reading comprehension.

        “You’re one and only defense against ANY argument is that the commenter is anonymous.”

        Another lie. Plainly obvious to anyone with reading comprehension. You even already thanked me for shooting you the link about how Co2 increase beyond a degree C or so is predicated upon a presumed positive feedback mechanism where nature it totally dominated by negative feedback (unless you’re talking nuclear fission, which takes one hell of a lot of precise human intervention to kick off).

      • Yea, yea yea. The inevitable link train. You toss up links, I toss up links. The only thing that such appeals to authority mean is that some people might be thinking for themselves. I can just as easily toss up links to Patrick Moore, Bjorn Lomborg, Freeman Dyson, Richard Lindzen, Nils-Axel Mörner, Garth Paltridge, Philip Stott, Hendrik Tennekes, et cetera, et cetera.

      • “And here’s the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature analysis and and data showing how humans are definitely the main cause of global warming”

        What we do actually know is that humans are responsible for heat islands. I’ll bet you’ve never looked into the data of ground temperature measuring stations that were originally in open space, now surrounded by development. Or, haw about the documented evidence of various stations mounted in the middle of an asphalt jungle, and in some cases, feet away from an AC unit tossing out hot air.

        This is all very easily shown, but I always resist tossing pearls before swine.

      • OK. regarding the ground surface data from Berkley (dare you post satellite data that paints a different picture? Doubt it, because you’re a liar at heart), I’ll toss you a bone. Just out yesterday:

        http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/29/press-release-2/

        But, you know, don’t let any facts or advancement of science and prudence get in the way of your catechism.

      • ComeOnRichard says:

        “dare you post satellite data that paints a different picture? Doubt it, because you’re a liar at heart”

        Wow, you got me good. I’m just trying to hoodwink you into giving up your god-given right to stuff yourself on animal fat and drive your retrofitted camper around the world. Aren’t all the ones saying global warming is man-made attacking YOU personally? We couldn’t possibly have something a bit more important than stealing FROM YOU in mind. You’ve gone to the well too many times now with that defense.

        Still you send me data on US warming trends, which doesn’t address this question at all. I’m talking about the entire planet’s warming trend, which clearly shows its acceleration when we started burning fossil fuels and then started burning down forests to make grazing land for your overpriced grass-fed beef.

        “What we do actually know is that humans are responsible for heat islands”

        Meaning you’re not sure which side is right, because apparently the data isn’t in yet (that is, unless you’d like to click on it). But since one side is clearly stepping on your kill-em-all-let-god-sort-em-out freedoms by asking you to consider your actions in what could or could not be the end of mankind, you’re going to accuse climate science itself of trying to hoodwink you into sacrificing something they’re gonna have to pry from yer cold, dead hands (whatever that is). OMG, you’re being attacked…! Tell me Richard, do you own a gun also?

        You are deathly afraid of something and I’m not sure what it is. I don’t understand why the precautionary principle when it comes to the planet is so threatening and radical to you.

      • “I’m just trying to hoodwink you into giving up your god-given right”

        I’m an atheist. Long, long time. My simple derivation of natural rights needing no supernatural power is on the blog. You can search, unless you prefer ignorance. I always resist casting pearls before swine.

        “retrofitted camper”

        Another lie.

        The rest of that paragraph is plain incomprehensible. No surprise there.

        “I’m talking about the entire planet’s warming trend, which clearly shows its acceleration when we started burning fossil fuels”

        Thanks for the concession. Now, map out those numbers. What do _you_ actually believe and why are you alarmed like a teenage girl 2 weeks from the prom without a date?

        “Meaning you’re not sure which side is right”

        No. I only know which side is purposely fudging original data or is derelict in being honest.

        “Tell me Richard, do you own a gun also?”

        Oh, of course. Now the gun thing. So predictable. I guess you didn’t check my blog. See, here’s the funny thing about me because I’m not a liar and don’t operate from catechism (for 20 years, now—you ought to check into it, really).

        I grew up with and around guns. One of the ones you’re going to see my shoot in the video i post was owned by my grandmother, and that thing was loaded and on her bedside table my entire childhood. My parents and grandparents in the midst of many hunting and fishing trips taught me never to fear guns, but to understand them, know them, feel them and always treat them as loaded until you know for sure they’re not.

        I was trusted to carry loaded weapons around others at the age of 9 or 10. And I did and so did my brothers. I later did much stuff in terms of marksmanship.

        Much later, it became a bit of a fun thing with me when having over 1 or a couple or our many of our gay/lesbian friends. They’re all commies, to a man/woman. I would tell them: I have 4 loaded handguns in this loft, 2 loaded rifles, and 1 shotgun. I can get to any one of them, no matter where I am, inside of 6 seconds (I’ve timed it). I would always do this when there were at my place and had known me and Beatrice for a while.

        SHOCK!

        I’d fill in the blanks, but I don’t toss pearls before swine.

        After they got over the vapors, I’d then explain to them that when I’m with fundamentalist baptist christian family and tell them I have tons of gay friends I love to death, they go into convulsions of disbelief.

        While I don’t generally toss pearls before lying swine, the denominator is this:

        Fear. Fear of the unfamiliar, what you didn’t grow up around. I grew up with guns all over. I later lived in a place (urban lofts) with about 10 times the national average of gay folks and after about a year I realized: I have more gay friends than straight friends here.

        Fear.

        Here’s the video, moron.

        http://youtu.be/y8AhMjr0jWE

        “You are deathly afraid of something and I’m not sure what it is.”

        I’m just about done with you. Haven’t banned anyone in a while, you’re too fucking stupid to even read how much you look like a moron, so you’re really in troll territory.

        Yep, done with you.

  5. ComeOnRichard.

    What is your point? Are you arging the fact that a high fat diet is unheathly or is killing the planet? LMAO You haven’t proven either

  6. ComeOnRichard says:

    Both. LMAO you can’t read, or don’t know what a link is pasted for.

  7. Robert Ve says:

    ComeOnRichard wants to have to last word. He’s just going keep posting until everyone has grown bored with this topic.

    I wonder what made ComeOnRichard such a know-it-all dogmatic close-minded gullible twat. Bad genes, bad childhood, strong government indoctrination?

    • He got his chance and can’t complain he didn’t get a say. But when a liar never, ever makes even a hint of coming clean, it’s just time to toss him in the toilett. Now, he’s on notice. Watch him try to defeat the simple ban I put up.

      I always love it when that happens.

  8. I am one of those fat paleo guys Richard. I seem to be stuck at 8% body fat, recovered from years of crippling psoriatic arthritis, perfect blood numbers, got rid of my allergies and sinus issues and never seem to tire since I went paleo almost a year ago. I am 6’2″ and 172 pounds of pure muscle and good health. I basically dropped 20lbs of fat and added 5 lbs muscle. Your blog had a lot to do with it admittedly.

    I eat around 2 pounds of fatty meats a day. If not fatty enough I have grass fed beef tallow, sugar free bacon drippings, ghee, butter and coconut oil to add fat. I eat 3-4 ounces of pemmican daily and I actually put ghee on it (so damn good). I make an “oatmeal” out of coconut flakes, coconut milk and coconut butter with a handful of berries (talk about fatty). I eat 1-2 dozen eggs weekly. Plus so much more. I have never felt better. Ever.

    Keep up the good work.

Trackbacks

  1. […] for the first time since the last Troll Virus months ago (and only one or two prior, ever), I've had to ban a girl who didn't seem too trollish at first, but turned out to be…and then proved herself a troll […]

  2. […] to blog and tweet the whole thing blow by blow, I just didn't have it in me like I did last year (here's the list of posts about AHS11). Instead, here's the 30,000 foot view from my […]