Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: r9etb
While I agree that the preponderance of the evidence points to a corellation, it is also clear that diet is not the sole basis of good health.

Evidence points to it being true, all other things being equal.

As you clearly state.

This gives us a high probability of being objectively true.

Just because you can't admit the truth doesn't make it untrue.

The limitation appears to be yours. You can't even admit that a thing is what it is -- the most obvious truth imaginable.

442 posted on 05/02/2003 1:12:16 PM PDT by Dominic Harr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 438 | View Replies ]


To: Dominic Harr
This gives us a high probability of being objectively true.

High probabilities are not objective proof. Indeed, there are plenty of examples -- both ways -- to demonstrate that "good nutrition" is neither necessary, nor sufficient to ensure good health. And of course, the definition of "good nutrition" is itself a rather subjective thing.

Just because you can't admit the truth, doesn't make you any less wrong.

447 posted on 05/02/2003 1:18:18 PM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 442 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson