Re: [Vo]:Food for thought?
Jones, Is this paving the way to a new kind of doping in sports? To be seen at next Olympic Games! ;-) mic Il giorno 10/nov/2011 17:54, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net ha scritto: Need a break from Rossi madness? Slow slide into crazy? Do you know about the Mental illness happy hour? Well those guys have learned that co-mingling wry humor (or rye humor, if after 5) with pathological science is a good place to start. To that end, here is an unauthorized episode. Start with a provocative science story, not quite pathological yet - and take it from there... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45230351/ns/technology_and_science-science/ The brain requires about 22 times as much energy to run as the equivalent in muscle tissue. The energy required ... comes from the food we eat. Human brains are three times larger than our closest living relative, the chimpanzee... but the two species have the same metabolic rateThis extra energy must be coming from somewhere. The so-called Expensive Tissue Hypothesis (ETH) of the authors tries to answer that, but of course, you will not find LENR or any alternative energy hypothesis considered. After all, they have to protect their phongna-balogna jobs. (as recipients of liberal largess) However, moving further down the slow slide into pathology -- if one suspects that some version of f/H (fractional hydrogen) could be partially involved (in human evolution) to boost the energy level of a standard diet - whether it involves the Mills' hydrino or an alternative hypothesis, then there is a place to search for answers. Look at the role of chemicals in the brain which have been associated with gainful systems in alternative energy, and cross-compare that with evolution and diet of proto-humans. Kind of a positive feedback loop. In this category, a prime suspect would be potassium. And the best fit in the periodic table for a Mills catalyst that does not require a plasma or 3 body reaction, is molybdenum. Molybdenum cofactor is an enzyme intimately associated with neurochemistry. Can we connect the dots? Not really but, speaking of evolution in the context of splitting-off from the line of the aforementioned chimpanzee ... with the realization that a top dietary source of potassium is bananas. Bananas made apes what they are today, so to speak, but there were more choices on the horizon. Voila... we now have our pathological rationale for the 'out of Africa' migrations. They were not an effect of advancing mentality - but instead were partially the cause (dietary cause). A search for more and better f/H catalysts. Say James, when is the BBC going to revive Connections? Anyway, it could be coincidental but hominids really started to evolve rapidly, especially in the cultural context, when they learned about the other prime potassium sources: figs, dates, raisins, apricots, melons and wine. Generally these source thrive further north than ape country. Matter-of-fact: figs, dates, raisins, apricots, melons and wine ... sounds coincidentally like happy hour at a mid-Eastern restaurant, no? Is it five yet? Jones
Re: [Vo]:Food for thought?
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Start with a provocative science story, not quite pathological yet - and take it from there... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45230351/ns/technology_and_science-science/ Not to mention a provocative picture with a provocative caption. Ana's organ measurements appear to be comprehensive. Journalistic joke? Run your brain on hydrinos if you please. I prefer positron thinking. T
RE: [Vo]:Food for thought?
Potassium doping in the Olympics? … well, “Special K” humor aside, it’s remotely possible. Not sure what sports would benefit from a slight mental advantage, but now that they have badminton and ping-pong, who knows what is next? I never thought that “doping” would be such a big issue in cycling, but apparently every small advantage helps at the top level in any sport. Hmmm… might take a few hundred generations for dietary brain nutrients to demonstrate any advantage, but one thing is for sure. You can’t say “potassium” without saying “pot” … g From: Michele Comitini Jones, Is this paving the way to a new kind of doping in sports? To be seen at next Olympic Games! ;-) mic Il giorno 10/nov/2011 17:54, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net ha scritto: Need a break from Rossi madness? Slow slide into crazy? Do you know about the Mental illness happy hour? Well those guys have learned that co-mingling wry humor (or rye humor, if after 5) with pathological science is a good place to start.
Re: [Vo]:Food for thought?
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Potassium doping in the Olympics? … well, “Special K” humor aside, it’s remotely possible. I'd believe anything after learning a caterpillar fungus helped set Olympic records: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ophiocordyceps_sinensis The Western world was largely unaware of Ophiocordyceps prior to 1993. The fungus dramatically caught the world's eyes due to the performance of three female Chinese athletes, Wang Junxia, Qu Yunxia, and Zhang Linli. These athletes broke 5 world records for 1,500, 3,000 and 10,000 meters at the National Games in Beijing, China. T
Re: [Vo]:Food for thought?
Energy is primarly the stuff of dreams, and dreams are not limited by the laws of nature. Harry On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Need a break from Rossi madness? Slow slide into crazy? Do you know about the Mental illness happy hour? Well those guys have learned that co-mingling wry humor (or rye humor, if after 5) with pathological science is a good place to start. To that end, here is an unauthorized episode. Start with a provocative science story, not quite pathological yet - and take it from there... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45230351/ns/technology_and_science-science/ The brain requires about 22 times as much energy to run as the equivalent in muscle tissue. The energy required ... comes from the food we eat. Human brains are three times larger than our closest living relative, the chimpanzee... but the two species have the same metabolic rateThis extra energy must be coming from somewhere. The so-called Expensive Tissue Hypothesis (ETH) of the authors tries to answer that, but of course, you will not find LENR or any alternative energy hypothesis considered. After all, they have to protect their phongna-balogna jobs. (as recipients of liberal largess) However, moving further down the slow slide into pathology -- if one suspects that some version of f/H (fractional hydrogen) could be partially involved (in human evolution) to boost the energy level of a standard diet - whether it involves the Mills' hydrino or an alternative hypothesis, then there is a place to search for answers. Look at the role of chemicals in the brain which have been associated with gainful systems in alternative energy, and cross-compare that with evolution and diet of proto-humans. Kind of a positive feedback loop. In this category, a prime suspect would be potassium. And the best fit in the periodic table for a Mills catalyst that does not require a plasma or 3 body reaction, is molybdenum. Molybdenum cofactor is an enzyme intimately associated with neurochemistry. Can we connect the dots? Not really but, speaking of evolution in the context of splitting-off from the line of the aforementioned chimpanzee ... with the realization that a top dietary source of potassium is bananas. Bananas made apes what they are today, so to speak, but there were more choices on the horizon. Voila... we now have our pathological rationale for the 'out of Africa' migrations. They were not an effect of advancing mentality - but instead were partially the cause (dietary cause). A search for more and better f/H catalysts. Say James, when is the BBC going to revive Connections? Anyway, it could be coincidental but hominids really started to evolve rapidly, especially in the cultural context, when they learned about the other prime potassium sources: figs, dates, raisins, apricots, melons and wine. Generally these source thrive further north than ape country. Matter-of-fact: figs, dates, raisins, apricots, melons and wine ... sounds coincidentally like happy hour at a mid-Eastern restaurant, no? Is it five yet? Jones
Re: [Vo]:Food for thought?
I do not know about this hypothesis, but it is well-established that the human brain takes enormous amounts of energy, and this has had a major impact on human evolution. Having a large brain is a tremendous burden. That is probably why there are few other highly intelligent species. During the evolution of the brain, humans discovered various ways to acquire much more nutrition than they had previously. If they had not, the burden of the energy drain would probably have cut off this line of development. The increased nutrition is generally thought to have come from two developments, both the consequence of increased intelligence. First, people began making cutting tools not much different from the tools that modern chimpanzees use. These tools were probably used to crack bones to eat the marrow. Some paleontologists believe that these bones were mainly scavenged from large predators. That is to say, a lion would kill an animal, and after it left the carcass, humans would come and crack the bones with stones to eat the marrow. As intelligence increased, these tools improved and could be used for much more complicated food gathering activities such as hunting or stripping meat off the bone. Second, people discovered fire and cooking. This gives an enormous boost in nutrition. You get much more nutrition out of the foods you eat when you cook them. Many species, including people, prefer cooked food to raw food. When you feed rats a diet of cooked food rather than a natural diet, they tend to get fat. If we did not have cooking I do not think we would have survived with such large brains. Once we developed cooking, the survival of the species was assured, despite the large energy cost of a large brain. See Catching Fire: How Cooking Made Us Human by R. Wrangham. - Jed
