New high-end Indian restaurant to open in Chelmsford

New high-end Indian restaurant to open in Chelmsford

New high-end Indian restaurant to open in Chelmsford restaurnt 0 comment A RESTAURANT in Chelmsford is reopening as a whole new business.
Bridge Street Bar and Grill in Writtle, which specialised in British cuisine, is about to become a high-end Indian restaurant.
It will be called Pakwaan at Bridge Street and will focus on offering a wide variety of Punjabi dishes.
Punjabi cuisine is one of the most popular types of Indian cooking and is known for its spicy and buttery flavours, with a wide selection of both meat and vegetarian dishes.
Examples of Punjabi cuisine include butter chicken, masala channa, paneer tikka and chole bhature.
The owner of Bridge Street, Piotr Ulewicz has joined forces with fellow director Rajesh Chouhan, who owned the famous Pakwaan Pujnabi restaurant in Ilford for 25 years.
Mr Chouhan moved to Writtle three years ago and fell in love with Bridge Street and he and Mr Ulewicz are now friends and business partners.
The pair decided to change the cuisine of the restaurant as serving British cuisine at Bridge Street worked well at the weekends, it didn’t attract enough customers in the week.
Together they want to make Pakwaan “the best restaurant in Essex”.
Mr Chouhan has brought in some top chefs from Michelin starred restaurants in London to run the kitchen, including a new executive chef, a head chef and sous chefs.
Seven chefs are working together to create a Punjabi menu for the restaurant’s relaunch today, February 7.
There will be a grand opening for invited guests including the mayor of Chelmsford, and it will then be open to the public from Friday, February 8.
Although the focus is on quality, high-end Punjabi food.

Read More…

Vaishali Bambole:This Mumbai Professor Just Discovered A Way To Keep Your Idli Fresh Even After Three Years – Indiatimes.com

> This Mumbai Professor Just Discovered A Way To Keep Your Idli Fresh Even After Three Years This Mumbai Professor Just Discovered A Way To Keep Your Idli Fresh Even After Three Years SAVE
Mumbai University’s Physics professor Vaishali Bambole has come up with a top-shelf idea. She and her team of professors and scientists have discovered a technology to preserve steamed food like idli and white dhokla for three years without adding any form of preservatives. The technology is efficient to keep intact the softness, taste and nutritional value of the food.
The discovery is a much-needed breakthrough in packaging food for the armed forces, as well as for mass distribution in case of a natural calamity.
The food packets given out during disaster management last for only 90 days.
Dr Vaishali Bambole, 48, turned the concept into reality. She is now in the process of patenting the innovation. Mumbai: Physics professor at Mumbai University, Dr Vaishali Bambole, says her department has discovered a technology to preserve Indian cuisines like idli, upma & white dhokla for 3 years without adding any preservatives or impacting its taste and nutritional value. #Maharashtra pic.twitter.com/HmJHFzqShh — ANI (@ANI) February 7, 2019 Dr V Bambole: I’ve been working on this since 2013. This is electron beam radiation technique. We’ve used this technology for the 1st time on cooked food. It can be used in packaging food for armed forces, astronauts as well as for mass distribution in case of natural calamity pic.twitter.com/RbIELcyPN4

Read More…

Travel guide to Mumbai and Chennai: what to see and do in city of dreams and the Detroit of India

The buzzing financial capital of Maharashtra as well as the heart of the Bollywood film industry, Mumbai is home to 24m people. It’s hard to get your head around but, like any big city worth its salt, Mumbai is a mass of contradictions and conflicting realities, the city of dreams that India’s most wealthy citizens call home, but also home to Dharavi, one of the largest slums in Asia. But it’s also a place of great physical beauty – looking out over the Bay of Bengal – and old fashioned charm.
The Taj Mahal Palace Hotel in Mumbai embodies that old world grandeur in every brick and marble slab. I got there on Dutch airline KLM’s new direct route from Amsterdam to Mumbai, which not only knocks an hour off the flight but probably an hour off your life once you’ve had a few Heinekens in the lounge. In business, the salt and pepper comes in tiny plastic clogs and, in what can only be construed as a challenge to the world’s baggage handlers, you’re given a collectable china house to take with you.
Mine arrived shockingly intact at the Taj Palace Hotel, a building as palatial as its name that’s owned by the Tata Group. The story goes that when the industrialist Jamsetji Nusserwanji Tata went to stay in Watson’s Hotel, at the time the grandest hotel in the city under the British Raj, he was refused entry and directed to a sign on the door that read ‘No dogs, no Indians’. Outraged, he opened the Taj Mahal Palace Hotel around the corner and built it as a celebration of his city’s multiculturalism. In an example of perfect karma, Watson’s is nothing but a crumbling relic now and its ballroom is used as a rubbish dump.
The Taj Mahal Palace, on the other hand, is thriving, despite being bombed “as a symbol of Indian wealth and progress” by a terrorist group in 2008. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have visited it since, calling it “a symbol of strength and resilience of the Indian people.” Pictures of royalty and foreign heads of state line its corridors and its restaurants exemplify its defiantly inclusive hospitality, ranging from the health-focused traditional Indian cuisine at Masala Kraft, Lebanese food at Souk to Cantonese food at Golden Dragon.
The Taj Mahal Palace hotel in Mumbai
Getting to grips with such an enormous city in a few days is nigh on impossible, but you can cut right to the underbelly by getting up at 5am for a tour with No Footprints, set up by Mumbaikars Adi and Harsh who met as engineering students. It dives right into the deep end starting at the fish market, an intense olfactory experience, where koli – the matriarchal fishing community – stride purposefully carrying huge baskets of fish on their heads.
Of all the varieties that come in, pomfret were particularly popular with the British who tried to send them back home in the Bombay Mail or Bombay Daak in Hindi. Even now Indians say their friends ‘smell like the Bombay duck’ if they need a shower, after the train with all the rotting fish on it.
Luckily, the smells improve as the tour goes on, working through the world’s largest outdoor laundry, the newspapermen cycling off with tottering stacks of The Hindu strapped to their bikes, the incredibly efficient dabbawalas off to deliver lunch to the office workers, then finishing at the flower market, a riot of colour and pungent aromas.
Kapaleeswarar temple in Mylapore
For some serious grub and a look at the trendier side of Mumbai, head to Lower Parel, a run-down cotton mill district turned fashionable neighbourhood. Bombay Canteen, designed to look like an old colonial bungalow, serves up sharing plates of modern regional cuisine with a side dish of pumping music and craft Indian ales on draft. If you picked it up and dropped it in Soho, no one would notice (well, apart from Mumbaikars, obviously).
The thing is, Mumbai’s quite far to go on a city break, so you’re probably looking for peace and quiet at some point during the trip. If the proliferating resorts in Goa and Kerala are anything to go by, the southern coast is a popular alternative. If you’re not a beach person though, Chennai in Tamil Nadu is a real cultural and manufacturing hub, known as the Detroit of India for its car industry. My base was a sister hotel of the Taj Mahal Palace called the Taj Connemara. If the name sounds familiar, that’s because it’s a picturesque coastal region in western Ireland.
The pool at Taj Connemara
The five star hotel, thought to be the oldest in Chennai, is named after the Irish Governor of (what was then) Madras, Robert Bourke. Word is, he was a bit of cad so Lady Connemara moved out of their house and lived in the hotel until the next boat to Europe arrived. In another example of perfect karma, Lady Connemara remarried the doctor who treated her for a venereal disease on her return.
Chennai is less populated than Mumbai – only 10m people! – and is known for music and dance. Every year from mid-November to January, thousands of Indian classical music fans – specifically, fans of a sub-category called Carnatic music found in South India and Sri Lanka – descend on Chennai from all over the world. An astonishing 350 albums a day are released in the Tamil region and over 3,000 performances are given over the festival, many of them for free and easily booked through a hotel concierge. Storytrails, another fantastic tour company, is a great way to learn local traditions on foot, while sampling street food from cafes.
If you’re up for a bit of road trip, the UNESCO World Heritage site of Mahabalipuram is an hour and a half away down a hair-raising motorway. Once there, though, all is serenity. It was Diwali so the temples were full of worshippers in their best clothes with flowers in their hair; this vibrant display threatened to upstage the seventh and eighth century temples, over 400 of them depicting the Hindu gods, mainly Shiva, the destroyer and creator carved mid-dance.
It’s also the site of the Descent of the Ganges, one of the largest open-air rock reliefs in the world and Krishna’s Butter Ball (a shaky translation, I suspect), a naturally balancing rock that looks as though it should tip over, but importantly, doesn’t. Like the Abbey Road of Chennai, there’s a whole afternoon’s entertainment to be had just watching bold children and insecure men try to push it over.
And based on what I saw, it’ll be there for centuries to come.
NEED TO KNOW Palace wing rooms at The Taj Mahal Palace, Mumbai start from £213. Colonial rooms at The Taj Connemara, Chennai start from £202. Visit tajhotels.com . KLM operates 10 daily flights between London Heathrow and Amsterdam and 4 flights a week between Amsterdam and Mumbai. Return economy fares from London Heathrow airport start from £610 including taxes and charges. Business class fares start from £1,509. Passengers can book online at klm.com or by calling reservations on +44 20 76600293. Jet Airways offers flights between Mumbai and Chennai starting at £55 one way in economy class. Visit jetairways.com

Read More…

Mumbai University discovers technology to preserve food for 3 yrs

Mumbai University discovers technology to preserve food for 3 yrs 12:59 Technology to preserve Indian cuisines Mumbai: Physics professor at Mumbai University has discovered a technology to preserve Indian cuisines like idli, upma and white dhokla for three years without adding any preservatives or impacting its taste and nutritional value. Physics professor Dr. Vaishali Bambole said, “I have been working on this since 2013. This is electron beam radiation technique. We have used this technology for the 1st time on cooked food. It can be used in packaging food for armed forces, astronauts as well as for mass distribution in case of natural calamity. ” “We selected food items that contain less amount of oil and protein. Yesterday, we opened idli after 3.5 years and that was still fresh. We experimented on several food items but got the best results in these 3 food items (upma, idli and white dhokla)”, she added. With inputs from ANI.

Read More…

Burmese-Inspired Chicken Braised in Coconut Milk and Turmeric with Sweet Potato

This is one of the most delicious curry-type dishes that I have tasted in quite a while and I have eaten a lot of curry dishes. It is also the first Burmese-style dish that I have tried and, while I have never been to Burma, the confluence of spices and ingredients seems to be a great reflection of Burma’s geography and history with its neighbors. Burma is neatly tucked in between India and Thailand so it is not surprising that turmeric and coriander, two of the stars of Indian cuisine, and the Thai staples coconut milk and fish sauce are main ingredients in the fragrant marinade. The ingredient list is extensive for sure but, step-wise, this is a pretty un-complicated dish to endeavor, and your effort and time would be well worth it.
Burmese-Inspired Chicken Braised in Coconut Milk and Turmeric with Sweet Potato (Adapted from Sara Jenkins ) Serves 4-5
1 1/2 lbs organic, free range chicken legs 1 tbsp ground ginger 1 tbsp turmeric powder 1 tbsp ground coriander 1 tbsp vegetable oi 2 whole garlic cloves 1 one-inch piece of fresh ginger, peeled 1 shallot, peeled 1 dried chili 1 bunch fresh cilantro 1/4 cup coconut oil 1 cup cubed sweet potato 3 cups chicken stock 1 up unsweetened coconut milk 2 tbsp spoons fish sauce 1 lime, juiced salt to taste
1. Marinate the chicken with the ground ginger, turmeric, coriander and vegetable oil. Ideally, marinate over night but, if pressed for time, half an hour in the refrigerator would do. 2. In a food processor, mince the garlic, fresh ginger, shallot, chili and cilantro. 3. Add the coconut oil to a heavy-bottomed pan set over medium heat, then add the sweet potato cubes and fry until golden brown on at least two sides. Remove from the pan and set aside. Add the chicken to the remaining oil in the pan and allow to brown. Season with a pinch of salt. Add the shallot-ginger-chili-cilantro mixture and cook for about two minutes until it starts to look a bit grainy. Do not burn. Add a couple tablespoons of the chicken stock and let reduce until the mixture is soft and cooked. Add the rest of the chicken stock and the reserved sweet potato and bring to a simmer. 4. Simmer the soup for about half an hour until the chicken and sweet potatoes are cooked through. Stir in the fish sauce, lime juice and coconut milk and bring back to a simmer. Stir in a quarter cup of cilantro leaves and salt to taste before serving.

Read More…

Turmeric, Cancer, and Inflammation

Turmeric, Cancer, and Inflammation
Turmeric is a common spice and looks like an unassuming root, but its vibrant orange yellow color draws you in. It is so ubiquitous that some have labeled it as the new kale. Turmeric’s popularity has soared so much that even Starbucks in the UK are now selling turmeric lattes. It’s common to see vendors selling golden milk, golden honey, turmeric capsules, turmeric nuts, turmeric popcorn, oral spray, soaps, ghee, juice, tea, face masks, and even entire cookbooks devoted to the bright spice. Compounds in this root, called curcuminoids, are responsible for turmeric’s beautiful color and are often used to color foods and cosmetics. The golden powder is everywhere! Besides its aesthetic appeal, why is this spice suddenly so common?
The spice has been around for centuries and is quite popular in Asian and Indian culture, so if you’ve eaten these cuisines, it’s likely you’ve consumed it. Overall we know that spices are a great source for phytochemicals (or plant chemicals). But more recently, curcumin (a type of curcuminoid), found in turmeric has been studied by scientists. In some lab and animal studies it has reduced inflammation and has been found to regulate genes that promote tumor growth—so it is suggestive it may prevent cancer or slow the spread of cancer. Since many diseases, such as cancer, are associated with inflammation it has become a hot topic. Because curcumin is thought to have anti-oxidant properties, it may help reduce inflammation. It’s also strongly promoted in the alternative medicine field as a cancer treatment and there seems to be a lot of attention online about how different spices can “kill cancer.”
However, an important finding revealed that when orally consuming curcumin, it isn’t absorbed well. So it doesn’t necessarily lead to these health benefits because of its poor bioavailability due to poor absorption, rapid metabolism, and rapid elimination. However, there are several things that have been found to increase the bioavailability, such as piperine—the major active component of black pepper. When black pepper is combined with curcumin, it has been shown to increase the bioavailability by over 2000%. Also fats are shown to help with absorption too, so you may see many protocols or supplements with black pepper or types of fats and oils for consuming turmeric and curcumin.
So how did the potential benefits of turmeric and curcumin get so widespread?
The benefits of turmeric were majorly influenced by a highly published biochemist researcher named Dr. Bharat Aggarwal . He studied the role of inflammation and cancer and the anti-cancer effects of spices and herbs, mostly those of curcumin. He was a professor at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. But unfortunately in 2012 he was found to greatly over hype his research and was charged with academic fraud on 65 of his papers. Aggarwal thus far has had 28 of his papers retracted due to manipulating his data. But despite his retractions, his work is still highly cited. This is because once a paper is published (even if it’s retracted) it’s always out there. A statement is issued when a paper is retracted, but that is it. So this leaves room for people to continue citing the paper thinking it’s a legitimate resource.
Why would Aggarwal mislead everyone with his manipulated data?
Aggarwal was the author of the book Healing Spices : How to Use 50 Everyday and Exotic Spices to Boost Health and Beat Disease and he cofounded a company called Curry Pharmaceuticals to develop drugs based on synthetic curcumin analogs and is the founder of the Inflammation Research Institute in San Diego, CA. Thus it appears he had many conflicts of interest that probably prevented him from producing evidenced based research findings. He is now on the retraction watch leaderboard of researches with some of the most retracted papers. It doesn’t mean that other findings on turmeric aren’t credible though, but it’s important to make sure any websites or persons making claims using his retracted research should give you pause.
Current research
At the moment there is no clear evidence in humans to show that turmeric or curcumin can prevent or treat cancer. Few clinical trials have been conducted and have not yet been confirmed in humans. Additionally, the claims made for curcuminoids to help reduce inflammation aren’t supported by strong studies . Overall, it’s an exciting area, but we need further investigation to learn more about turmerics role with cancer. The research is ongoing as studies in people are still in the early stages and clinical trials are underway.
New research is investigating curcumin in combination with anti-cancer drugs. It’s possible that curcumin may help with reducing some cancer side effects like hand-foot syndrome or may improve cachexia (wasting of the body due to chronic illness) and the general health of patients. There is also some evidence that it can lessen some side effects from radiation therapy, such as radiation induced dermatitis, but at this time we will have to wait until the research is more conclusive.
A word of caution
People taking anti-coagulants (blood thinners) may want to be cautious consuming the spice regularly as it can increase the risk of bleeding . Curcumin is also known to interfere with the Cytochrome P450 enzymes needed for certain medication metabolism, so any medications or chemos that use this system (like Cytoxan and Doxorubicin) may interfere with them or some diabetic medications. High intakes of up to 12 grams per day can cause diarrhea, skin rash, headaches, and yellow colored feces. To put this intake into perspective, on average those living in India consume about 100 mg per day. Always check with your pharmacist before taking high amounts of any spice or supplement to make sure there aren’t any potential interactions.
Due to gaining the knowledge of turmerics poor bioavailability, some people have reported taking high doses over a short period of time by delivering it with an IV. But unfortunately, there is no evidence to support the benefits of high doses of IV turmeric. And in fact it’s been shown in rodents to become a pro-oxidant instead of an anti-oxidant, thus it can promote cell damage rather than preventing it. This is much like that of IV vitamin C which I talk about here . There was also recently a reported death from using IV turmeric sadly so please don’t try this!
What can you do?
It appears that most people who live in India consume a small and consistent amount of turmeric over their lifespans. There are reports that reveal they have lower rates of cancer and it has been linked to turmeric consumption, but there are no long term trials demonstrating this yet. For more information, you can check out Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center’s Herb and Spices Database here . Healthy diet patterns, exercise, and not smoking are likely to be far more important than turmeric on its own for health outcomes however.
Until we know more, it’s best to consume turmeric or curcumin as a spice, as part of a healthy and balanced diet. Curcurmin has a long and well established safety record of about 0-3 mg/kg of body weight per day. Turmeric is safe to consume in amounts you would normally have with food, but at this time it is not recommended to supplement with it in amounts that you would not normally eat on your plate. In the meantime enjoy this delicious spice in your food! You can buy turmeric on the spice isle at your local grocery store or online and there is some evidence that the spice is better absorbed when it is cooked. If you want to enhance your meals, try adding it to couscous, rice, chicken (or other lean meats), scrambled eggs, frittatas, tofu, roasted veggies, soups, smoothies, salad dressings, or curries. One thing is for sure, it will make your meal a stunning and tasty one!
For more updates, you can follow Survivors’ Table on Facebook. Thanks for joining me on this journey! – Danielle Share this:

Read More…

Talk:Atheism and obesity

43 Susan Gerbic and Perry DeAngelis Opinion from a Christian
After skimming through these discussions, I can’t believe the arguments going on and which are not going on. I enjoy conservapedia, and always check for an article here first, and go to Wikipedia if I cannot find it here. I was telling my friend at work (She’s a Christian female also) two days ago about this site as a great Wikipedia alternative in response to a question she had, and was rudely interrupted by another of our coworkers (this ones NOT a Christian, he’s a liberal smart aleck immature boy in his 20s) who shouted “Conservapedia? HAH have you seen their page calling non-christians fat? Not sure if that’s going to pass as a Scholarly source” or something similar to that. He then pulled up this page and started reading it out loud. I have never been so embarrassed in my life. Fat jokes? I skimmed and found the main argument on this page concerning studies and whether it’s true or not, but do I really have to explain this?
It doesn’t matter whether or not it’s true, because considering the number of people in both groups (millions of Christians! Even atheists I’m sure are 100,000 in the US. There are going to be a whole lot of obese Christians, thin Christians, obese atheists, and thin atheists. The immature kid at my work is thinner than I am, which is natural considering the sample sizes involved. Even if it’s true, that means that in real life situations the reverse will happen (the atheist coworker would be fatter than me) slightly more often. Well in case the person or persons who made this page are so out of touch from Christians in the real world, it makes us seem petty and childish calling the fat guy fat! And in the 40% or whatever times that the Christian is fatter than the atheist (my situation at work), it makes us seem petty, childish, and just wrong because the fat girl is calling the skinny guy fat ! What purpose is this page supposed to serve other than being embarrassing?
I’ll spell this out even simpler: two situations. Situation 1: Fat atheist, the article seems true, and the fat atheist gets sympathy bc Christians are making fun of his weight. Situation 2: Skinny atheist, and Christians putting forth this site as a better alternative to Wikipedia looks delusional.
Until this filth is removed i will most certainly not be putting my personal recommendation (and by extension, reputation) to this site. So angry, it feels like my son back in middle school when I’d get calls from his teacher and I’d have to apologize for his behaving like 2 year old in class. NOT Christian-like and NOT helpful -Patty
Those are some very interesting poll findings! I have not seen those reported or discussed ANYWHERE in the media, thanks for getting them out there. Hopefully many people will now realize the dangers of choosing an atheistic lifestyle. PS I really enjoy the satires based on these findings. There very funny but also deliver a very serious message.
What’s with this article? I’m an atheist, I’m 5′ 9″, 160 pounds, I bike to school almost every day, I eat healthy food, I hike, I work out from time to time and I know at least a couple of other atheist (I don’t know many people all together) who have similar life styles. What gives? JamesTimmons 23:04, 1 January 2011 (EST) JamesTimmons, why didn’t you cite the journal articles and other relevant data in the article. That should have put the matter to rest. Conservative 04:21, 15 June 2014 (EDT) James, are you familiar with the concept of “sample size”? Assuming “a couple” means two, as it does in proper American English, you know three people who are supposedly atheists. Thousands identify as atheists. Is three out of thousands really a sample size worthy of any consideration? (Especially coming from an online anonymous source of school-going age) ???–ADW
I’m not changing the article here, so I don’t need any outside sources for anything I’ve said here, I’m just stating an observation. JamesTimmons 23:11, 1 January 2011 (EST) You are proposing a major change to this article and challenging basic scientific findings. Where are your sources?– AnthonyDW 11:05, 2 January 2011 (EST) I would also like to point out that I live in a predominately atheist area and very few people I know are overweight. I don’t doubt that atheism is a worse lifestyle choice – I just don’t see that it has any correlation to obesity. Furthermore, I don’t think ad hominem attacks on a few overweight famous atheists is going to convince anyone, and it also seems horribly unprofessional. RkWilko 23:08, 2 January 2011 (EST) There sure are a lot of atheists who are thin skinned about the subject of fat atheists. conservative 17:05, 3 January 2011 (EST) RkWilko, Gallup’s study takes into account geographic to create a more ceteris paribus study in terms of what they studied. Do you have a ceteris paribus like study concerning atheism and obesity? Also, did you see the pictures of the American Atheists board of directors? What are your thoughts about how fat or thin they are generally speaking? conservative 14:15, 8 January 2011 (EST)
This section: “While all atheists are non-religious…” is provided without citation. It’s pretty obvious why it has no citation. It’s false. There are plenty of atheist Buddhists and Humanists, for example.
Furthermore, providing a few examples of overweight atheists does nothing to prove the article’s truth. That’s just bad inductive reasoning. If I were to show a few skinny Hindus, would that prove that most Hindus are thin? Of course not.
Given Conservapedia’s dedication to providing information that is as accurate as possible, I’m sure that someone in control of this article will make the necessary corrections. Thanks in advance. — Tylero 16:54, 6 January 2011 (EST) Fixed. I wrote: While many Western atheists are non-religious, not all non-religious people are atheists. I did this to avoid the contentious debate on whether Western atheism is a religion. I believe it can be easily argued that Western atheism is a religion and that is probably going to be incorporated in the atheism article at a future date. conservative 22:48, 7 January 2011 (EST) The elephant in the room
Until the atheist community practices more of what medical science and exercise science recommends to do in order to have a healthy lifestyle, the issue of atheism and obesity will continue to be the elephant in the room. Shockofgod is entirely correct – atheism is madness . conservative 21:16, 11 January 2011 (EST) You are absolutely correct. Thank you very much for being brave enough to publish the link between atheism and obesity – I’ve not seen it mentioned in the lamestream media or on liberal sites. In fact I tried to add such to the article but was reverted for not having a cite for it, do you have a good cite that shows a lack of MSM coverage of the link between atheism and obesity please? DanielG 21:27, 11 January 2011 (EST) The MSM is losing market share as a whole and the internet is taking away their market share. Feel free to spread the word about atheism and obesity far and wide and with great alacrity across the internet and in your community as I think the slow moving overweight and obese atheist community will not be able to effectively compete with you. conservative 21:37, 11 January 2011 (EST) Wow!
I just read through nearly half of this article and fact-checked every claim it made, and there wasn’t so much as one single error. To whoever the authors are, this is quite the article!– AnthonyDW 18:27, 19 January 2011 (EST) Daniel Dennett and coronary bypass surgery
Picture of overweight Daniel Dennett: http://www.flickr.com/photos/7230309@N05/3708479160/ Daniel Dennett and coronary bypass surgery: http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/dennett06/dennett06_index.html Stephen Fry
Hey, reading through this article I see many people have been mentioned, but I feel it is a bit unfair to mention Stephen Fry. To his credit he has lost a lot of weight recently, as illustrated here: [2] RodgerW 08:34, 19 March 2011 (EDT) As an extra note I just found a daily mail article on it: [3] RodgerW 18:07, 19 March 2011 (EDT) Thanks. I just added this to the article: “In 2009, the Mail Online reported that Stephen Fry went from being “appallingly corpulent” to having a weight where he can “at last bear to look at himself in the mirror again”. However, in March of 2011, Stephen Fry appeared to be once again overweight. [4] conservative 04:05, 27 March 2011 (EDT) video of Michael Nugent
The overweight atheist activist Michael Nugent said that for technical reasons the video of him I cited made him looker fatter than he actually is. Accordingly, I used slimmer looking video of the overweight atheist Michael Nugent that does not make him look more overweight than he actually is. conservative 20:05, 3 July 2011 (EDT) NorthWestern University study
Since I’ve always thought the whole “atheists are fat” thing was quite childish and bordering on out-and-out name calling, I thought I would share this- http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42256829/ns/health-diet_and_nutrition/ Now can we drop it and start writing about more intelligent viewpoints? We have economically and socially superior ideas, and it pains me to see this site get bogged down by petty insults. EricAlstrom 12:35, 25 March 2011 (EDT) I hope you don’t expect people at this site to take a study like this done by liberal atheist professors at its word. It’s probably the most blatantly defensive study I’ve seen in years, and a clear attempt to whitewash clear evidence linking atheists like them to obesity. The only question is did they concoct this phony study as a direct response to Conservapedia’s own Atheism and obesity article? I would not be in the least surprised if they did. AngusT 14:15, 25 March 2011 (EDT) Eric, what is truly childish is you trying to compare the enormous Gallup study in terms of sample size and geographic diversity in the United States (a study which used Generalized linear model analysis with very relevant variables) and other data Conservapedia has brought forth and you trying to show equivalency with your much smaller NorthWestern University study. Also, Eric were the participants of the NorthWestern taken from all across the United States or does the study merely reflect the behavior in a much smaller locale? Also, please compare the sample sizes of the respective studies and report them here. Next, did the NorthWestern study report on the “very religious” like the Gallup study did? In the book of Revelation, Jesus did say not to be lukewarm and he would spit lukewarm people out of his mouth. As far as I am aware, there are no reports of Jesus or the apostles being overweight like some of the modern apostles of atheism such as PZ Myers . And if you want to play the geography game like some atheist “blag hag” , I would remind you that most Christians are non-western today and most non-westerners are quite thin plus the Gallup study used generalized linear model analysis (using very relevant variables) in relation to religiousity and health practices. 🙂 Also, if the NorthWestern University study participants were exclusively from Illinois, they very well could have used plenty of abortion loving “faux Christians”. Bottom line Eric, I could see you trying to use the NorthWestern study and not discussing the much larger Gallup study and other data Conservapedia brought forth if you were an overweight atheist blogger at scienceblogs.com who had his brain impaired due to being overweight , but please do not do it here. conservative 04:57, 27 March 2011 (EDT) By the way, it appears as if some atheists have taken offense to the above data I cited and are trying to use the style over substance fallacy to criticize me. Of course, this provides additional data that atheists are often illogical. Atheism is madness! Evolutionism is madness as well . conservative 12:39, 27 March 2011 (EDT) Conservative, how can you complain about style over substance when you’re trying to prove atheism wrong by calling people fat? Do we need to point out the fallacies involved? DGibbs 12:45, 27 March 2011 (EDT)
The Conservapedia atheism article describes atheism and related matters (effects, causes, prominent figures current in atheism and atheist history, etc.). I realize that some people may become upset if Conservapedia mentions various facts about atheism and matters relating to atheism, however. The Conservapedia atheism article certainly does not say the atheist community has some problems with obesity, therefore atheism is not valid. I would suggest reading the atheism article a few more times if you have reading comprehension difficulties. conservative 17:46, 8 June 2011 (EDT) Setting aside the issue that no internet atheist has beheld/confirmed my form nor has proved my identity/gender etc., you neglected to indicate who you are referring to as “we”. I hope you are not a member of a website whose atheist leader has height/weight proportion challenges. 🙂 Next, where have I ever said that because various atheists are fat and the Gallup survey indicated that being very religious is associated with people being more trim, therefore atheism is wrong? I most certainly have not. While I do find there is some humor associated with atheism and obesity , the existence of various atheists ignoring medical science and exercise science and engaging in gluttony does not prove atheism is wrong. By the way, please provide proof and evidence that atheism is true . Christendom has certainly provided a great amount of evidence indicating its veracity despite some slothful atheists at a website headed by an overweight atheist claiming the contrary because they are too lazy to click some links in the external link section of Conservapedia’s Christian apologetics article. conservative 13:44, 27 March 2011 (EDT) Your form? Come off it. I know you’re not aware of just how obvious you can be, but you are no man of mystery. And as far as membership goes, I have no interest in those people and call none of them my leader. It’s a very boring place, they’ve been doing the same thing for years. Yes, you’re using certain people’s obesity as an argument against atheism. And that’s indefensible, both logically and ethically. You keep coming back to this Christian apologetics thing. I have no personal interest in atheism. Make an argument and I can be convinced. I want to know how apologetics proves anything about the existence of God. Can you do that, or are you just quotes and links? DGibbs 14:21, 27 March 2011 (EDT) DGibbs, For a person who supposedly has no personal interest in atheism, you sure do sound very much like an atheist. I am certainly not convinced of your sincerity at this point.
Conservative, I have read your article Atheism and obesity as well as the Gallup study which it is based upon and which you have referred to above. While the article is perfectly valid in discussing the findings that “Very religious Americans are more likely to practice healthy behaviors than those who are moderately religious or nonreligious” you have gone beyond what the evidence indicates.
The Gallup study does not mention obesity, Body mass index or even weight in the summary of its findings. It does not say that any one group is more or less prone to obesity than the other. Indeed, if you look at Gallup’s methodology you will note that obesity is not one of the things measured under ‘healthy behavior’. While it is measured under ‘physical health’ this category is not utilised by the study in question.
Certainly, ‘eating healthily’, ‘weekly consumption of fruits and vegetables’ and ‘weekly exercise frequency’ are all important factors in a person’s susceptibility to obesity. But lower levels of these three criteria most certainly cannot be interpreted as signalling that someone is obese, nor that any one group is more obese. The way the study presents the data means that we do not know exactly how much healthy food people were eating or for how many hours they were exercising etc.; we only know relative values. Therefore, all groups measured might have been considered healthy, but some may simply have been more healthy. Given this and the difficulty in inferring obesity from these variables, it is not valid to conclude that obesity was higher or lower for any group; the study did not measure obesity at all.
You also point out a major flaw yourself in the article: The Gallup study gives some insight into the above average health habits of the very religious and not necessarily the health habits of atheists. The reason is that the Gallup organization defines a non-religious as a person where “Religion is not an important part of daily life and church/synagogue/mosque attendance occurs seldom or never. This group constitutes 29.7% of the adult population.”[5] While many Western atheists are non-religious, not all non-religious people are atheists. It is therefore not possible to say that atheists are more obese, both given the fact that atheists are not specifically the focus of the study, and the fact that obesity is not measured in it. As you concede in your article, there is no way of knowing what proportion of the non-religious group were atheist. WilliamB1 14:19, 27 March 2011 (EDT) I don’t see any valid objections to the atheism and obesity entry in the comments above, and the MSNBC-reported study would get a poor grade if turned in to me as a high school science teacher. Church “functions” include dinners that attract and generate obese people! It is patently absurd to combine church “functions” with attendance at church prayer services, where all one need do is look around and observe a less obese culture than what one sees among college professors and in train and bus stations. As to the resistance to equating atheism to non-religious people, there is an undeniable overlap and continuum. Let’s not claim that lung cancer would depend entirely on which brand of cigarette someone smokes!– Andy Schlafly 15:13, 27 March 2011 (EDT) It appears as if some atheists want to engage in the fallacy of exclusion and not address the non-Gallup data that Conservapedia provided . It also appears as if someone wants to engage in the slothful induction fallacy and not give due weight (pardon the pun) to the very obvious tie between diet/exercise and obesity. Also, to date, no atheists has found a single factual error in the Conservapedia atheism and obesity article. Next, it is apparent that at least one member of this discussion is an unreasonable atheist and have no desire at this time to wrangle with an unreasonable atheist. If others want to continue the discussion, however, I would not be opposed to this. By the way, by the end of today, there will be approximately 300 less atheists in the world and approximately 80,000 new people describing themselves as Christians. 🙂 Perhaps, if atheist leaders addressed the atheist communities’ problem with obesity with greater effectiveness, the numerical decline of the atheist “herd” ( some of whom are obese and subject to a greater chance of succumbing to their mortality} might be reduced somewhat. conservative 15:44, 27 March 2011 (EDT) Stop repeating yourself already. The whole accusing other people of logical fallacies thing doesn’t really work when you’re entire argument is based on one big non seq and ad hom. And I’m being unreasonable expecting you to be able to articulate your own beliefs instead of just spamming links to an article about Christian Apologetics?
I don’t deny that there’s an overlap between atheism and non-religiosity, indeed the former is a sub-group of the latter. But the point that the two are not exactly the same is taken from the atheism and obesity article itself. WilliamB1 16:00, 27 March 2011 (EDT) Why do I not find it surprising that liberals and atheists are more concerned with a website highlighting the obesity problem among atheists, rather than with the obesity problem itself! MichaelOL 16:07, 27 March 2011 (EDT)
I haven’t found any news organizations that linked to the actual obesity study conducted by NorthWestern University/Matthew Feinstein relating to some religious activities. I did find this credible source which says Feinstein did statistical analysis to rule out other factors such as race: http://www.uamshealth.com/HealthLibrary/Default.aspx?ContentTypeID=6&ContentID=651145 Can anyone provide the actual study to see what variables they did statistical analysis on to rule them out as being the causal factors? conservative 22:17, 27 March 2011 (EDT) If anyone wants to contact this science editor http://www.northwestern.edu/newscenter/stories/2011/03/religious-young-adults-obese.html , she may be able to direct someone to actual study. conservative 22:24, 27 March 2011 (EDT) Perhaps you could write the lab and ask them to Release the Data. Martyp 22:30, 27 March 2011 (EDT) The Gallup people used a random dialer and had a much larger sample size. I read some place online that the primary places the NorthWestern participants came from was the cities of Chicago, Minneapolis, Birmingham, Alabama and Oakland, California. I am primarily interested in whether the researchers took into account income and education. It does appear as if they might not had enough geographical diversity. The study seems big city oriented if the reports of the cities and the study are true. That certainly could make a difference. For example, at an upscale suburban church they might have a booth for premium coffee, fruit, and fruit smoothies after a service while at a less well heeled church they could be serving donuts and coffee after the service. Martyp, since there appears to be some new atheist editors at Conservapedia who take exception to the Conservapedia atheism and obesity article, I have a feeling that they might attempt to present the actual study. In the meantime, I am going to attend to some personal matters. conservative 22:48, 27 March 2011 (EDT) NorthWestern U study new data
Here is what I read before:
“But researchers have also found signs that people who attend services put on more weight. In the new study, which will be released Wednesday at an American Heart Association conference in Atlanta, researchers sought to follow people over time to see what happened to them. They examined a previous long-term study that tracked 2,433 people who were aged 20 to 32 in the mid-1980s.
Most of the participants were women, and 41 percent were black.
After adjusting their statistics to take into account factors such as race, the researchers found that 32 percent of those who attended services the most became obese by middle age, Feinstein said.
Whatever the case, he said, the study points to the role that places of worship could play in reducing obesity.
“They can become part of the solution,” explained Dr. Daniel P. Sulmasy, a professor of medicine and ethics at the University of Chicago, perhaps by increasing awareness of obesity and holding health fairs.
“Pastors, especially those in poor neighborhoods, could champion programs for more fresh produce and less fast food in their neighborhoods,” Sulmasy added. [5]
It does appear that there are some church people in less affluent areas that are starting to become part of the solution:
The study tracked 2,433 young men and women for 18 years in Chicago, Minneapolis, Birmingham, Ala., and Oakland, Calif.
In the study, “frequent” religious participation meant attending at least one event per week. Most, but not all of the participants, were Christians — reflecting the dominant religion in the United States, Feinstein said.
Courtney Parker, the catering manager for the 20,000-member Apostolic Church of God in Woodlawn, said he’s not entirely surprised by the study’s results. Parker suspects there may be a historical connection between over-eating and going to church. In years gone by, so many things were taboo — but not eating, Parker said.
Years ago, “church services ran long,” Parker said. “So the first thing you do is go eat, and then you go to sleep.”
Parker said Apostolic has made a point in recent years of serving healthy food at church events. So you’re more likely to see baked fish or chicken, rather than pizza, on the menu [6] – cited from Chicago Sun Times, March 25, 2011
Of course, what I wrote above still applies:
Eric, what is truly childish is you trying to compare the enormous Gallup study in terms of sample size and geographic diversity in the United States (a study which used Generalized linear model analysis with very relevant variables) and other data Conservapedia has brought forth and you trying to show equivalency with your much smaller NorthWestern University study. conservative 16:05, 19 April 2011 (EDT) And addition reason occurred to me why the NorthWestern U study is suspect and why the abundant data I cited in the article is a more accurate picture of the current state of affairs. It appears that they picked poor inner city churches in the USA. Research indicates that a lower socioeconomic status is related to higher rates of obesity. [7] Therefore, the overall culture/practices of those churches would tend to be more prone to obesity inducing practices (donuts after church instead of a yuppie, suburban church juice bar; fatty foods at frequent church gatherings, etc. etc. Please see the very relevant comments of Courtney Parker above related to church gatherings in his particular city. So even if the researchers tried to use regression analysis to limit the effect of an individual’s socioeconomic status as far as the overall analysis, the overall cultural practices of the inner city churches they seemed to predominantly pick would still creep in. Plus, most Christians are not in the Western World and quite slim plus I cited a wealth of other data such as researchers finding that religious faith increases a person’s amount of self-control, the Gallup data, religious people living longer, etc. etc. Conservative 00:40, 24 August 2014 (EDT) Additional content
While I feel obesity is a Western culture phenom, there are many more examples of obese atheists to add. Try a search for celebrity atheists and you’ll be quite surprised. — Jpatt 22:31, 20 April 2011 (EDT) As the East gains more access to processed food via global markets and gains in prosperity, obesity is spreading to the East as can be seen in this report on India. [8] However, unlike atheists, Christians have lots of songs including dance music. Indian Christian dancers seem to be fairly immune to obesity. Please see: Penn Jillette’s walrus slide vs. thin Christian lady dancers Conservative 08:16, 16 July 2011 (EDT) Relation to obesity
Can we get a study that directly relates to obesity? These seem to be generalized studies about health practices without any physical data. A proper study should confirm the results, but it would be better to use an obesity-specific study or at least one with obesity-specific conclusions than to use this one and make assumptions about obesity.
I’m also not that comfortable with these more questionable anti-atheism arguments because they trivialize the importance of religion. It’s trivial whether you look good or lose a few inches off your belly, it’s much more important how you define yourself as a member of this world and the next. I know lots of slightly pudgy Christians (while I’m not obese, I could lose a few pounds) who are nonetheless more spiritually healthy than all the skinny atheists out there.
Make fun of me all you want, but I would like to see less of this kind of article and more on the matters of substance. KingHanksley 22:37, 3 May 2011 (EDT) The article offers a lot of data and studies plus over 130 footnotes with relevant information. Some individuals, such as PZ Myers, don’t appreciate being a data point and poster boy. 🙂 Second, faith without works is dead and the Bible says by your fruits you shall know them. The Bible also says that the Holy Spirit empowers people to have more self-discipline and that gluttony is a sin. The Gallup study and the world wide population of Christendom is very favorable to Christianity as far as health practices/slimness especially when you compare it to the American Atheists board of directors and the make up of the New Atheism leadership . conservative 10:12, 5 May 2011 (EDT) But let’s be realistic. This is just anecdotal evidence (obese individuals out of millions nationwide) and one study that, while large in sample size, isn’t about obesity. The reason obesity is chosen is because it’s a) funny and b) reverses a stigma that liberals like to attach to conservatives. I get it. But the case is weak. It’s quality of evidence, not quantity. This is the kind of thinking I see in the most foolish of liberal college students and is too childish for us to engage in. We are better than that. We should strive to be. To say that all overweight people are gluttons (or sloths) is a generalization. Some hard-working Christians eat just to relieve hunger, but find our bodies change as we grow older and do less work on our feet. Do you not see any hefty people with your church, or among your neighbors? When I do, I do not assume they are bad Christians. And I do not assume that atheists are flawed in any way besides their lack of faith and morals. The Bible has a lot to say about talebearing too. Back to the topic at hand – if the hard evidence is there, let us find it. This Gallup study is not about obesity and the anecdotal evidence is meaningless (just as libs try to use anecdotal evidence to attack Christians and Republicans).
KingHanksley 12:28, 5 May 2011 (EDT) The article merely gives evidence relating to atheism and obesity/being overweight. Although some atheists on the internet have tried to deny that I cited instances of overweight and/or obese atheists, such denialism was unwarranted. The article does not say the extent of the problem of obesity within the atheist community. It also gives data relating to the very religious and health practices, obesity, health practices of various populations, and related matters (Mayo Clinic data). The reason why the article gets under some atheists’ skin (particularly those whose skin are on the thicker side), is that atheism is all about denialism (such as denying the abundant evidence for Christianity , atheism and mass murder , etc.). The evidence I did present was accurate and had some relevancy. People can make their own conclusions based on the accurate and relevant data I presented concerning the extent of the obesity problem within the atheist community. conservative 08:42, 10 May 2011 (EDT) By the way, Jesus said, “Be ye perfect…”. Unlike PZ Myers , Jesus was perfect and had no problems with being overweight. Jesus was a carpenter. Perhaps, PZ Myers should consider getting into carpentry and spend less time pursuing sedentary activities such a blogging about atheist nonsense. conservative 10:02, 10 May 2011 (EDT) Obese atheists wax museum I am considering opening up an obese atheists wax museum. 🙂 Any thoughts? 🙂 conservative 10:45, 5 May 2011 (EDT)
What would the entrance fee be? WilliamB1 11:00, 5 May 2011 (EDT) Pretty steep to cover the amount of wax that would have to be used. For example, if I had an “Overweight and obese atheists wax museum”, take a look at the amount of wax that would have to be used HERE . I would feel sorry for the bees having to do that much work for the wax that would be needed. conservative 14:26, 5 May 2011 (EDT) My intentions.
This was supposed to be a message to user:conservative but I cannot edit his page for some reason so I’ll mention it here. I am a Christian and have been interested in learning more about creationism (which is how I found Conservapedia). However I find your obesity and atheism series to be purile at best. This is no indictment of you as a person , conservative, merely that I think this is the wrong way to attack atheism. Let us fight on what we know are the logic failings of atheism instead of sneering about a biologist that appears slightly overweight. Remembering that the latest statistics state nearly half of the population in the US are overweight….as far as I know atheists are in the minority in the US hence obesity afflicts people indescriminate of religious belief (yes, I classify atheism as a religious belief). Let us have an intellectual victory, this isn’t a beauty contest. I am hoping to create a rebuttal essay, my intentions are to bring forward a dissenting view. Please feel free to engage me in debate or throw any questions my way. MaxFletcher 00:56, 28 May 2011 (EDT) MaxFlethcher, what makes you think that the User: Conservative account is edited by merely one person? No true skeptic believes this. Second, you provided no evidence that this article is an attack on atheism. Obesity is an important societal problem in the Western World and in many other parts of the world. This article provides data that help people better understand the issue of Atheism and obesity and it cites data from a wide variety of relevant sources. Conservative 04:13, 15 June 2014 (EDT) A helpful tip. I would recommend using the Firefox browser to edit Conservapedia as it has a spelling checker which would aid you in the spelling of words such as puerile. Second, the Conservapedia atheism article describes atheism and related matters (effects, causes, prominent figures current in atheism and atheist history, etc.). I realize that some people may become upset if reality “attacks” atheism, however. Next, is this picture a picture of someone slightly overweight? Next, how do you know that different worldviews affect rates of obesity equally? For example, the very religious, the moderately religious, the irreligious and atheists? Next, I realize that certainly people may crave intellectual victories because they: always lose in chess/Go/Othello/Risk/Monopoly; always lose their debates with spouses/girlfriends/boyfriends and in-laws; always come up on the short end of the stick in negotiations; are in intellectually unfulfilling occupations; have trouble figuring out how their computers and remote controls work; can’t figure out how to get their dog to listen to them, etc. Yet, I am very content creating descriptive article content. Now it is true that I have posted some material on non-article pages such as my User page/talk pages/satire/essay pages, etc. which alluded to/mentioned victory/defeat in a good-natured/humorous manner (exultant matador, wildfires, etc.) which some people enjoyed. Yet, after all is said an done, in articles I present meaningful information concerning a matter and endeavor to do so in a relevant manner. conservative 04:30, 28 May 2011 (EDT) I am not sure how to respond as you veer pretty far off topic. The Gallup survey cited does not mention atheism and there is no correlation as far as I can see. As stated above half the US population is overweight yet only about 9% are atheist so the numbers don’t match. Atheism has many failings but being more prone to obesity isn’t one of them and making snide attacks towards PZ Myers, for example, does not advance our cause. I don’t really want this to be a debate. I will create my own essay (might take me awhile though as it is rare I get much time to write such things) and you may respond on it’s talkpage when complete. Thanks, MaxFletcher 16:46, 28 May 2011 (EDT) I don’t think anywhere near 9% of Americans are atheists and use this large survey to support this matter: http://b27.cc.trincoll.edu/weblogs/AmericanReligionSurvey-ARIS/reports/ARIS_Report_2008.pdf I don’t have an inclination to discuss the atheists/obesity matter further with you given your previous posts. conservative 06:21, 3 June 2011 (EDT) The survey you linked to says that 12% of Americans are atheists, so I don’t think it exactly supports you. As it happens 12% ties in with the figure of 13% that I’ve seen in several other places and I have to say it seems credible. Atheism IS gaining ground in the USA, although it’s nowhere near as bad as it is in Europe yet, which makes it all the more important that Conservapedia becomes a high-quality educational resource. No offence, but given the effort that’s been put into pointless themes like obesity and atheism (which, even if true, proves exactly nothing about the validity of atheism) what could those man-hours have achieved if directed towards creating good, solid articles on scientific or social issues? — SamCoulter 19:04, 13 September 2011 (EDT) Hi Sam, I gave up my intentions in trying to help Conservative with this. This entire article is predicated on a survey that doesn’t mention either Obesity nor Atheism. Despite bringing this up numerous times Conservative has yet to address this problem and has made it abundantly clear that trying to discuss anything with him only leads to one being insulted, accusesations of not being a Christian followed by having to wade through paragraphs and paragraphs of non-sequiters. MaxFletcher 19:10, 13 September 2011 (EDT) My suggestions
I think that two more points bear mentioning in the article. First, since recent studies show a correlation between rate of religious attendance and obesity, links to such studies would provide strong evidence in favor of the atheism-obesity link. Second, while the article mentions lesbianism and obesity, the male homosexual culture of personal irresponsibility would lead male homosexuals to a similar level of disregard for their physical fitness. DavidE 09:39, 3 June 2011 (EDT) Actually in my experience male homosexuals take extreme care about their appearance, far more so than most heterosexual men do whether Christian or not. I’d say that a good 25% of the men who go to my gym are openly gay. — SamCoulter 19:09, 13 September 2011 (EDT) DavidE, we covered the recent study you referred to. See above. Second, if you want to make a claim, please advance data to support it. Don’t plan on checking this talk page very often. Saw your post to recent changes though. conservative 06:10, 7 June 2011 (EDT) Correction
Hi, this is my first edit. I am an East Asian Languages and Cultures major. I just read ” Essay: Prominent atheists weighed on the scales and found wanting ” and noticed a mistake. The essay has two pictures of what is supposed to be Siddhartha Guatama. The picture of the chunky fellow is actually Budai, who is, according to Buddhist lore, an incarnation of the Maitreya Buddha. Maitreya and Guatama are two different deities. Guatama is always portrayed in art as either skinny or broad shouldered and muscular. The mis-identification needs to be corrected. Although a satire, the essay makes a good point, so I think even small things like captions on pictures should be accurate. — Jimmyray 08:25, 8 June 2011 (EDT) Thanks, much appreciated. I removed the material. conservative 15:09, 8 June 2011 (EDT) a reply from penn jillette I just watched this video . He addresses this article. I should warn, though, that it is laced with profanity.– CamilleT 22:37, 20 June 2011 (EDT)
Thank you, here is my response: Essay: Conservapedia’s reply to atheist Penn Jillette Here is my favorite line from the essay: “Of course, with his busy eating schedule, he probably found it difficult to read the whole article.” conservative 16:12, 22 June 2011 (EDT) You’ve missed equating us fat people with fluffy kitten haters though, so I guess I should be grateful. SharonW 13:51, 21 June 2011 (EDT)
SharonW, everyone makes mistakes in their lives. In many cases, it is the result of making bad choices. The common sense things Mr. Norris says about being overweight HERE are true. There is a reason why people in Asia are far thinner than Americans and many European countries. They make better choices when it comes to diet and exercise. I realize that some people have thyroid problems or other medical issues, but in most cases it comes down to diet and exercise. People in Asia eat healthier food and exercise more and I provided a responsible citation from the medical literature in this article indicating that Asians eat healthier food. In the majority of cases, being overweight is very fixable and I did provide the solutions to being overweight in the external link section of this article and I cited responsible sources such as the Mayo Clinic and WebMD.
As far as your charge that I have not equated overweight people with kitten haters, I would simply point out that you really can’t show me anything in this article I wrote that is untrue/unreasonable. I guess you can claim that overweight people are largely that way because of their genes. However, I don’t buy it. Here is why: http://blog.awpainrelief.com/health-issues-childhood-obesity/ Even Polynesian people who are more disposed to obesity did fine before they changed their dietary habits. Lastly, I am certainly not going to play online doctor and diagnose anyone’s particular health issues so if you have health issues relating to being overweight, I will let you work out things with your physician. I really have no animosity towards you and hope the best for you. conservative 15:20, 21 June 2011 (EDT) Obesity article
1) Does the fact the talk page for the obesity article redirects here mean CP’s official position is that all fat people are atheists ? If not, please remove the redirect and allow comments on that page.
2) If the purpose of the obesity article is not to label all fat people as atheists, or lesbians, or liberals, please show some concern for the people struggling with this issue (obesity, not atheism, homosexuality or liberalism) by adding the different treatments available to reduce weight, including gastric bypass surgery, medication and counseling. Weight Watchers, Jenny Craig, and Nutrisystem are just a few popular programs.
Because in reality, the majority of fat people are not evil. Thank you, SharonW 19:01, 24 July 2011 (EDT) I find this whole thing confusing. Obesity is rampant in the United States but Conservative also likes to claim that atheists are a mere squeak of the US population. Ergo, many religious people are obese also and the fattest states are also the most religious. None of it really makes any sense to me. MaxFletcher 19:07, 24 July 2011 (EDT) Removed redirect that was done by a vandal. Conservative 19:12, 24 July 2011 (EDT) Max, please consider learning more about the Generalized linear model and multi-variable statistical analysis. Conservative 19:13, 24 July 2011 (EDT) OK, I’ll do that if you learn more about obesity and it’s relation to atheism (hint: there is no relation). MaxFletcher 19:18, 24 July 2011 (EDT)
Thank you for the removal of the redirect. SharonW 19:46, 24 July 2011 (EDT) Sharon, thank you. This article pains me, as an overweight, hard-working Christian. Attacking people for their appearance and body type is to me a lot more of an atheistic, MTV generation behavior. I’m very disturbed to see such superficial bullying (using much less solid evidence) coming from our camp. Judge people by their works and their words and not by their bodies. KingHanksley 16:06, 14 December 2011 (EST) This material is offensive
This material is offensive and does nothing to bring people in need to Christ. ” It’s not what goes into your mouth that defiles you; you are defiled by the words that come out of your mouth” ” (Matt 15:11) and it is the ridicule coming out of the mouth of the author that defiles. Rob Smith 20:08, 25 July 2011 (EDT) I notice you didn’t point out any factual errors in the article and I am not going to censor factual information for you. I see no reason to cave in to an egotistical blowhard who is merely seeking payback. I also don’t believe you know your Bible well. Amos 4:1 – Hear this word, you cows of Bashan who are on the mountain of Samaria Biblical commentary on Amos 4: “You cows of Bashan: Amos wasn’t trained as a prophet, he was a simple herdsman and farmer. When he wanted to get the point across to the indulgent women of Israel, he called them fat cows.” [9] Titus 1:12: “One of themselves, a prophet of their own, said, “Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.” If you think I am going to let a egotist suck up my time for no good reason, think again. By the way, it is funny and awfully convenient that you suddenly find the material to be offensive now. Please grow up. You wonder why I don’t want to communicate with you. It is undisciplined and petty outbursts like this that is one of the prime reasons. I have zero trust in your integrity. I also think you have little reluctance to try to stab others in the back if it strikes your fancy. Conservative 16:08, 27 July 2011 (EDT) This is nonsense. What evidence is there the “the indulgent women of Israel” were Atheists? And please refrain from incivility and personal attacks. Thank you. Rob Smith 11:54, 30 July 2011 (EDT) A factual error has been pointed out many times over, by me as well as others. The study does not mention atheists nor does the study mention obesity – there is no factual connection between Atheism and Obesity. That is an error. MaxFletcher 16:39, 27 July 2011 (EDT) How did I misrepresent a study. I didn’t. If you are going to post on the talk page, please post something worthwhile. Conservative 16:49, 27 July 2011 (EDT) The study does not mention atheism nor obesity. The study shows no link between the two. MaxFletcher 16:54, 27 July 2011 (EDT) Hasn’t Mr. Schlafly addressed this before and said that the link between atheism and obesity should not be censored? — BradleyS 17:08, 27 July 2011 (EDT) Conservative asked about a factual error and I pointed one out. Who mentioned Andy or censorship? MaxFletcher 17:10, 27 July 2011 (EDT) Rob mentioned this material as being “offensive”. What’s offensive about a fact? And why say that unless you want to censor? — BradleyS 17:25, 27 July 2011 (EDT) What fact? This who page is based on a Gallup study that mentions neither obesity or atheism. MaxFletcher 17:26, 27 July 2011 (EDT)
Max, this isn’t rocket science. I provided commentary on the Gallup study in the article. You either need to read better, express yourself better or be more honest. I hope it’s not the latter. Conservative 19:33, 27 July 2011 (EDT) Your commentary does not match what the study says – your commentary is factually in error. MaxFletcher 19:35, 27 July 2011 (EDT) Max, I suggest getting a new optometrist. Conservative 20:03, 27 July 2011 (EDT) All the study says is that more religious people choose healthier diets. There is nothing about Atheism nor Obesity in the study. You leapt to that conclusion on your own and it is factually unsupported by the study. MaxFletcher 20:11, 27 July 2011 (EDT) RobS, grow up. I merely pointed out above that the Bible does talk about obesity/gluttony in populations. I think the more you hang out with atheist buddies and try to court them with this type of bootlicking to curry their favor, the more you are going to find facts to be offensive. I am going to have to agree with BradleyS’s comment above. I also continue to believe your timing is awfully convenient in terms of your petulant complaint and this is merely a petty and spurious attempt at payback. Conservative 12:12, 30 July 2011 (EDT) The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a glutton , and a winebibber, a friend of publicans [1] and sinners. But wisdom is justified of her children. (Matt 11:19) Rob Smith 12:20, 30 July 2011 (EDT) ↑ publicans were collaborators with the enemy, Jews who collected taxes from Jews to support the Roman occupation troops.
RobS, I know you are spoiling for fight with me at this time, but I am not going to cooperate and be drawn into senseless contention. I also suggest if you truly want to make some positive changes to Conservapedia that you engage in less factious and unwarranted behavior. Based on recent communications to me, you are going to find it much more difficult to gain the cooperation of your fellow Conservapedians if you continue down your present path. Conservative 13:00, 30 July 2011 (EDT) You know, you don’t have to respond to every post you’re name is mentioned. See Last wordism . Also, please do not presume to telepathically understand other’s motives, or impugn other’s motives with your imagination. It can be misconstrued as incivility. Rob Smith 13:24, 30 July 2011 (EDT) What “senseless contention” are you referring to? It’s certainly not people calling to your attention the several unsupported arguments you make in these hitpieces. You’ve failed to carry your burden that there’s even a correlation between atheism and obesity, yet you continue hectoring and sneering at these people. Why is that? That’s not what I would call openmindedness or cooperation. Nate 14:29, 30 July 2011 (EDT) factual User:conservative you keep insisting that this material is factual and ignoring what everybody else is saying about it. But whether or not it’s “factual” isn’t the point, and it’s rather disingenuous of you to keep insisting that it is. Do you make fun of the handicapped? Because it would be “factual,” wouldn’t it, to call a person with disabilities a cripple. Lots of things are factual, but here people are expressing concern over your apparent need to mock and degrade. What is it that you are trying to prove with these “facts?” You do know that there are overweight Christians and physically fit atheists, don’t you? It seems to everybody that you are only pointing and saying “HaHa! You’re fat.”– CamilleT 15:33, 30 July 2011 (EDT) CamilleT, if you feel strongly about this matter, I think you should contact your elected representatives and ask them to include being overweight as a disability. Perhaps, you could get some equal access laws passed too requiring: extra wide doorways, extra wide seating in all public transit and heavy duty shock absorbers installed in all taxis. Conservative 22:57, 30 July 2011 (EDT) I not sure why I’m trying again, but come on, Conservative. What exactly is your goal behind these articles where you’re equating fat people with atheists and gays and I can’t remember what else? These article don’t appear to express any true concern about overweight people and our very real issues; instead, it appears as though we’re just convenient whipping boys. We’re one of the few remaining subgroups in society that are considered fair game without our denigrators becoming social pariahs. Your writings reflect many of the typical attitudes people display toward fat people – we’re supposed to accept any and all insults, fat jokes and negative stereotypes because I guess it’s assumed we’re not “real” people with “real” feelings. — SharonW 23:59, 30 July 2011 (EDT) The article provides data relating to atheism and obesity and related matters. It also provides some helpful information. I don’t see the point of repeating myself. Conservative 02:30, 1 August 2011 (EDT) You are wasting your time Sharon. Conservative has shown himself to be entirely impervious to either logical argument or to any appeal to civility or empathy. He is determined to plough ahead with these disgraceful articles which bring this site into disrepute. In spite of his name he is clearly no real conservative. — CharlesDN 00:07, 3 August 2011 (EDT) Charles, as far as your empathy comment, have you read Conservapedia’s article Atheism and uncharitableness and Atheism and mass murder articles? Atheists as a population are not known for their empathy. Perhaps, if some atheists weren’t so busy engaging in their costly habit of gluttony , they would have more money to donate to others. Plus, the greater the aggregate world demand for food, the higher the price of food so obese atheists are not making things easy for people having difficulty with rising food prices. Now I realize there are people with legitimate medical reasons for being overweight such a thyroid problems, but I have to agree with this article as a whole: Chuck Norris on the topic of obesity Conservative 00:28, 3 August 2011 (EDT) So… because atheists are not empathetic it is ok for your not to be empathetic? Hmm. I think you had better re-examine your “conservative” values. Furthermore, it has been pointed out to you on multiple occasions that your Gallup poll does not mention either atheists or obesity. On every occasion you have utterly failed to explain how your article is supported by that poll. I suggest that you consider removing your atheist/fatties “articles”. Finally, I really don’t care what Chuck Norris has to say on any topic outside of acting. — CharlesDN 00:35, 3 August 2011 (EDT) I have mentioned many times over Conservative, there is no mention of atheism or obesity in the gallup study . It is an error you have yet to address aside from deflection. MaxFletcher 00:37, 3 August 2011 (EDT) Interesting. I had not bothered to question the actual data, rather its presentation and its implications, but with this it seems User:conservative is wrong on every single level. Go on, deflect away, conservative.– CamilleT 19:46, 3 August 2011 (EDT) Whining, kvetching and pretending will not make the Gallup study cease to mention the very religious nor will it remove the non-Gallup data I offered. As far as the Gallup data and the non-religious and its relevance, each person has to decide for themselves how similar non-religious people are to atheists in terms of health habits unless there is data I am not aware of that compares the two. This song reminds me of many whiners and pretenders concerning this article. Conservative 21:14, 3 August 2011 (EDT) Show me where in the essay your “non-Gallup” data supports a correlation between atheism and obesity. Show me where the Gallup poll supports the specific conclusion that atheists are obese. Walk me and everyone who thinks you’re dead wrong though this. Apparently none of us is as good a reader as you are. Nate 21:28, 3 August 2011 (EDT) I presented 25 written pages of data and content relating to atheism and obesity. I am very content to let readers decide its relevance. Please feel free to offer more prominent overweight atheist to be included. Conservative 22:10, 3 August 2011 (EDT) But what is it based on? Because the Gallup study does not support the conclusion. MaxFletcher 22:13, 3 August 2011 (EDT) I am thinking of adding HappyCabbie as an example of a overweight YouTube atheist. Conservative 22:15, 3 August 2011 (EDT) If someone is looking for a list of overweight atheists on the internet this article is easily found. [10] [11] [12] 🙂 Conservative 22:38, 3 August 2011 (EDT) I don’t understand Conservative, you have never answered the most basic of questions and I am rather bewildered. The Gallup study never mentions atheism or obesity and obesity affects nearly half of all US citizens yet you yourself state atheist are in the extreme minority (1.9% if I remember correctly). Please help me understand where you are drawing your conclusions from. MaxFletcher 22:42, 3 August 2011 (EDT) So, all your information comes from a few online atheists? Without statistics, you have nothing. Should I add that I, who does not believe in any deities or supernatural forces, am not fat? Where does that leave your careful analysis? Or are you just cherry picking? Because I can name overweight Christians pretty easily too (off the top of my head: Bill Donahue, John Hagee and his son; Jack Chick is pretty burly looking; various self-professed Christians not involved in preaching such as Joe Barton, Newt Gingrich, Michael Steele, and the late Jerry Fallwell).– CamilleT 22:49, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
“Conservative”, answer two simple and direct questions simply and directly. No more of your deflection. Show me where in the essay your “non-Gallup” data supports a correlation between atheism and obesity. Show me where the Gallup poll supports the specific conclusion that atheists are obese. I’ll give you a hint, and this time I’m flat out calling you a liar if you give another ridiculous non-response: it’s not in there. Your campaign to slander your opponents however childishly and dishonestly you can is casting this website in disrepute. For one of the few times in a year I did a google search for Conservapedia and specifically the rubbish you call articles. You in particular get overwhelmingly negative attention, even from Christians and conservatives. Please desist before you bring more shame to our doorstep. Nate 23:18, 3 August 2011 (EDT) NateK, given your comment about wanting to punch someone in the nose (someone trained in a martial art who you couldn’t hit in the nose if you wanted to), you are hardly in a position to lecture on decorum! Conservative 05:08, 15 June 2014 (EDT) Via several weird redirected talk pages…
Ken, you realize the reason Penn won’t debate you is that he suspects you are a parodist extraordinaire , right? It’s not because he is a bunny, or a burning building, it’s because he thinks you edit here to discredit CP. Can you write an essay that proves this wrong?
Best regards,
Huw Human 02:57, 3 August 2011 (EDT) Setting aside whether or not Penn Jillette offered a good reason, is this often correct?: J. P. Morgan: ” A man always has two reasons for doing anything: a good reason and the real reason.” The reason I ask is due to this: Sye Ten Bruggencate’s debate challenge to atheist Penn Jillette Conservative 21:26, 18 September 2011 (EDT) Was this comment placed here by accident? It doesn’t have to do anything with the comment above. User:Human is blocked indefinitely, so he won’t answer timely. Traditionally, new stuff goes to the end of a thread… RonLar 01:25, 19 September 2011 (EDT) Could you give us an example where you, Conservative, debated someone about Atheism, Evolution, etc.? On the talk-pages I’ve seen so far you havn’t won any discussion … RonLar 08:54, 4 August 2011 (EDT) RonLar, I think you are an atheist/evolutionist black knight and can safely be ignored. Conservative 09:39, 4 August 2011 (EDT) This is a prime example of another argument you just lost:A You won’t win any debate by just ignoring your opponents: it’s like your Question evolution! campaign in Texas – what good does it do contact Texas churches , that’s not where the atheists you are trying to convert hang out! RonLar 09:47, 4 August 2011 (EDT) To explain the above in detail: if there were some example of a discussion on a talk page where you, Conservative, have successfully debated an atheist/Darwinist/Evolutionist, you would have no problem to link to it. The fact that you don’t do so, but instead choose an ad hominem as an answer implies that – there isn’t such a discussion or – if there is, you have lost. And that’s why you were able to lose this simple argument in two sentences – congratulations! RonLar 09:53, 4 August 2011 (EDT) I find it interesting that members of a certain atheist website incessantly whine about this article. Is there any leader or are there any leaders of that atheist website who could easily shed some poundage? The reason I mention this is that generally speaking the stuck pig squeals the loudest. 🙂 I do know that a significant percentage of the leaders of the New Atheism movement had problems with being overweight (see: New Atheism leadership’s problem with excess weight ). I also know that a number of American Atheists ‘s board of directors could benefit by losing some weight as can be seen HERE . Instead of whining about this article, I do think that some atheists could better spend their time by asking prominent atheist “fat cats” to lose some weight. 🙂 Conservative 10:25, 5 August 2011 (EDT) A stuck pig squeals – whether it was stuck rightfully or not. You know, sometimes the innocent protest, too. You didn’t answer my question ( Could you give us an example where you, Conservative, debated someone about Atheism, Evolution, etc.? ) but again went on a tangent. BTW, is this the way you intent to win debates: hinting that your opposite is fat – or that he knows some fat people? Try to regard our little exchange of comments as a discussion. Reread it. Reflect on it. Could you answer any of the questions? How many valid points have you made? (The answer is none ) RonLar 11:40, 5 August 2011 (EDT) *cough* I am a Christian conservative, and I must say that this discussion has made me curious. Conservative, why aren’t you just giving this guy examples of debates you’ve won if you have them? I mean, I don’t want you to be wrong or anything, but this is just confusing, and frankly, this discussion has almost proven to me that RonLar is right and not you, Conservative. Why not just release whatever debates you have? And RonLar DOES have a fine, perfectly fair question. All he wants is an example of where you debated someone about Atheism, Evolution, or a related topic. That request shouldn’t be too hard to fulfill. Even if he is an atheist, that doesn’t make his question less valid. — StoryMaker 17:18, 16 August 2011 (EDT) StoryMaker, I will let readers decide if you are a bona fide Christian conservative. Personally, I am skeptical. Next, this talk page is for the atheism and obesity article. Conservative 23:22, 19 August 2011 (EDT) Ah, an ad hominem , again. And still – after a month – the question Could you give us an example where you, Conservative, (successfully) debated someone about Atheism, Evolution, etc.? is unanswered, or, to be more precise, it is implicitly answered no … RonLar 09:22, 15 September 2011 (EDT) Ron, what would you call a “successful” debate? It seems to me that debates rarely finish with one party saying “I was wrong, you have changed my mind”, no matter how comprehensively they are out-argued, so perhaps it is unfair to ask Conservative to produce such an example. (This is particularly true online, where obstinacy abounds.) In my view, a truly “successful” debate is one containing absorbing dialog that advances or deepens the understanding of all parties – and examples of these can be found all over Conservapedia talk pages. Perhaps now you could take this case as closed and move on to another issue?– CPalmer 09:58, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
My previous comment seemed to be not civil enough, so I try to rephrase my statement: I’m well aware that successfully is a quite ambiguous term, and I don’t want to put to much into it. On various occasions has User:Conservative expressed his desire to debate atheists and/or evolutionist like Richard Dawkins and Penn Jillette . He (or even she!) chooses not to bolster his stature by citing any off-site activity or qualification, so the seriousness of his challenges can only be measured by his contributions to this site.
He has created ample content. But the talk pages give you a perfect arena for an actual debate (especially as User:Conservative seems to have a virtual event in mind when he ushers his challenges). So, what is more natural then to look for a discussion on these talk pages to see how good a debater User:Conservative is? As I couldn’t find an example of such a discussion where User:Conservative faired well, I asked him to provide me with such an example, i.e., his best shot(s) on these debate grounds.
An impressive amount of such debates would help to take User:Conservative’s challenges more serious. But unfortunately User:Conservative hasn’t provided me with a link yet.
Thanks, RonLar 14:18, 16 September 2011 (EDT) Nominate for deletion
I’d like to propose that this article should be deleted; we could use a shortened version as a section of the “Atheism and health” article. It’s just not solid enough to be a standalone article, and frankly it also lets atheists accuse Conservapedia of relying on ad hominems. Are we trying to provide a valuable educational resource or just insult atheists? Some people are far too quick to label atheists as malevolent, insane or abnormal. Well, most of them aren’t; they’re simply people who don’t believe in God and they’re generally well educated and intelligent. Some of them are going to take us seriously if we can present good, reasoned arguments. However if the best we can do is to call them fat bum bandits they’re just going to laugh at us and so, I’m afraid to say, based on conversations I’ve had with friends from church about what I’ve been trying to do here, are a lot of Christians. — SamCoulter 19:28, 13 September 2011 (EDT) SamCoulter, before your suggestion is given merit, I think you need to do a better job at refuting the data in the article plus show that atheist community has adequately addressed their sin problem and the problems sin is causing within their community. By the way SamCoulter, what does the Bible say about atheists and what does the Bible say about fools? Conservative 20:00, 13 September 2011 (EDT) As has been pointed out on numerous occasions the data in the article mentions neither atheism nor obesity. As for the atheist community’s sin problem, if there IS an atheist community sin isn’t a concept that will have any meaning to it so they’re not going to see a problem. Sin is going against God’s law, so the issue of atheists and their attitude to sin can be fairly easily deduced from that. I know what the bible says about atheists and I know what it says about fools – essentially that they’re the same thing – but what do atehists care about what the bible says? They don’t care if it says that they’re fools and I do believe it’s their minds that we should be trying to change here. — SamCoulter 20:12, 13 September 2011 (EDT) An idea
Why don’t we have a vote on whether this should remain an article of be moved to essay? We’d have disqualify users who haven’t been here awhile to stop vandals and the like swinging the vote. MaxFletcher 20:24, 13 September 2011 (EDT) I’m happy to be excluded from that vote because I’ve only been here a month or so, but I think it’s an excellent idea. As an essay, a personal opinion, it’s perfectly reasonable. As an encyclopaedia article? Not so much. Conservapedia has massive potential – and I’ll say right now that User:Conservative has been quite helpful to me in my efforts to improve it – but this article WOULD be better as an essay. — SamCoulter 21:37, 13 September 2011 (EDT)
Max, before you invoke mob rule , why don’t you point to a single factual error in the article first? Conservative 01:08, 14 September 2011 (EDT) Firstly I was explicitly against mob rule by stating it should only be trusted user to vote. Second: why don’t you point to a single factual error in the article first? ….I have! You have ignored it time and time again! The entire page is predicated on a survey that doesn’t mention atheism or obesity! That, sir, is a factual error! MaxFletcher 01:18, 14 September 2011 (EDT) I have tried having this conversation with you many times – look at some of my comments above the Gallup study does not support the conclusion . MaxFletcher 01:19, 14 September 2011 (EDT) Max, there is a number of bodies of evidence (some of them very corpulent) that I presented in the 24 pages of material for this article. 🙂 Stop using the fallacy of exclusion and deal with the entire WEIGHT of evidence that the atheist community has problems with obesity within their community. 🙂 By the way, I do find it telling that you cannot find a single factual error in the 24 page article. 🙂 Conservative 01:23, 14 September 2011 (EDT) Stop moving the goalposts Conservative. You asked me to find a single error and I have found a single error. It is not a fallacy of exclusion, you asked and I answered. The Gallup Study does not support your conclusion. That is a single error and that is all you asked me point out. MaxFletcher 01:29, 14 September 2011 (EDT)
Max, we both know you found nothing. Conservative 01:36, 14 September 2011 (EDT) Conservative, can you not find anything positive to write about regarding fat people? You’ve worked hard to tie us to atheists, homosexuals, lesbians, evolutionists, feminists and Alzheimer’s (that I know of), but nothing that a conservative Christian would consider good. — SharonW 02:03, 14 September 2011 (EDT) Sharon, the topic of the article is Atheism and obesity . The question you pose is beyond the scope of the article. Conservative 02:08, 14 September 2011 (EDT) Pardon my confusion about the topic, because this article meanders from obesity to fat homosexuals to neurotic fat people who must be atheists because they obviously have mental and emotional issues , to various “nanner-nanner, you’re fat” sections on atheists , to Chuck Norris talking about the internet, to internet atheism, to more “nanner-nanner, you’re fat” sections , back to fat homosexuals, then to fat lesbians, to chubby homosexuals, to fat evolutionists, back to neurotic, depressed fat people must be atheists , to fat people can’t get married, to physical ailments fat people get, to fat Alzheimer’s patients, to fat people believing in UFOs because they lack self-discipline, to more UFO stuff (seriously, UFOs ?), to giving statistics about the growth of Christianity, to Chuck Norris saying fat people are horrid, to overcoming obesity by being a Christian, and finally to a list of pages making fun of fat atheists . The way I see it, the bolded sections are the only ones with a tenuous connection to the title of this article. But I believe you answered my question anyway, so I thank you for that. It’s really too bad you can’t find any good in people with weight issues. — SharonW 11:36, 14 September 2011 (EDT) I think a lot of Conservative’s articles are made to be thought-provoking – to ask you to think about things you might not normally consider. Taj 12:20, 14 September 2011 (EDT) Well, I agree this started as thought provoking but when finding out that the very source the entire thrust of this article hangs on neither mentions obesity or atheism it stops become thought provoking and becomes fallacious. When this is then pointed out to the author who completely ignores it it becomes an embarrassment. MaxFletcher 16:50, 14 September 2011 (EDT) Max, when are you going to show 3 things: 1) The entire thrust of the article hangs on the Gallup study. 2) It is wrong to provide data on the very religious 3) There is a marked difference between the non-religious and atheists (I leave this question up to the readers). Seeing as the article has over 20 pages of material with various bodies of data, I think #1 is impossible for you to maintain. On the other hand, being in clear error has never stopped you before. Conservative 23:00, 14 September 2011 (EDT) How many surveys in this article draw a relation between physical health and religious beliefs? I can only see one – the Gallup Study. Hence the entire premise, that atheism and obesity are somehow correlated, hang on the Gallup study. I am happy to be proven wrong. MaxFletcher 23:13, 14 September 2011 (EDT) Please show me where I have been “in clear error” before and I will happily apologise for it. MaxFletcher 23:15, 14 September 2011 (EDT)
Max, you need help that I cannot provide and I suggest going to a optometrist. Conservative 23:36, 14 September 2011 (EDT) Since you cannot show me another study, in this article, relating to health and religiosity, then I will stand by my original comments. I will gladly apologise if wrong but at this stage there is a critical flaw in the article. MaxFletcher 23:45, 14 September 2011 (EDT) it must be a joke
Come on, this article is just nonsense, I clearly suspect Conservative to be a parodist. You cannot just list fifty fat atheist and say that ALL atheists are fat, that’s just WRONG! I can easily find 50 fit ahteist and conclude that ALL atheists are fit ! Another interesting fact should be to compare obesity rate in Europe and America and then to compare atheism in Europe and America. More atheists in Europe but more obeses in America ? What should I conclude here ? — ARamis 01:16, 15 September 2011 (EDT) Where does the article say all atheists are fat? Secondly, comparing apples to apples is more scientific in terms of isolating the variable of religiousness/atheistic. For example, comparing very religious European people to European atheists. You can also do statistical analysis to measure particular variables. I suggest taking remedial reading classes plus taking a few courses in statistics. Conservative 02:21, 15 September 2011 (EDT) Obesity by states: [13] . Intersting to see that more religious states are those with the more obese people. Conclusion: either religious people are fatter, either atheists living with religious people get fatter than atheists living with atheists. Another study arguing for fatter christians: [14] . Personnaly I believe that you can be fat or fit whether you are a christian, an atheist, a buddhist or whatever you want.– ARamis 18:35, 15 September 2011 (EDT) ARamis, the Feinstein study you linked to only showed a correlation between obesity and how religious people were AS YOUNG ADULTS; he didn’t check how religious the obese subjects are NOW. Nevertheless as far as its conclusions go it seems valid and it’s one more reason why this article should be deleted. — SamCoulter 12:23, 16 September 2011 (EDT) That would be great for you if we lived world with one or two variables. Unfortunately for you, we don’t. I am used to atheists not understanding statistics and science so I am not upset. Conservative 18:39, 15 September 2011 (EDT) Oh Conservative, please explain to me where I failed, please excuse my pride for daring oppose the Conservapedia “facts”. Please provide your statistical data (where is it?) that would open my eyes to the Truth.– ARamis 18:56, 15 September 2011 (EDT) ARamis, you do have a pride issue as demonstrated by your lack of apology for incorrectly declaring the article supposedly said all atheist are fat. I see no point in having a discussion with someone who is reluctant to graciously admit error. Second, my post above dealt with your obesity by states “argument”. I see now you posted a link the MSNBC article. Third, the NorthWestern study was already discussed (see above). I have nothing further to add on this point. Lastly, I think its pointless to have discussions with atheists on this matter who refuse to tackle the article in a more comprehensive manner as I see it as merely engaging in fallacy of exclusion “reasoning”. Conservative 21:31, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
Conservative, I want to apology for my agressive behavior last week. I would be glad if we could start this over.I understand that this article does not state that all atheists are fat but it clearly imply that being an atheist give you more chance to being obese.Can you please tell me why you think we cannot compare religion and diet between different countries ?– ARamis 19:42, 18 September 2011 (EDT) Some observations
I know that this hardly counts as a scientific study, but out of interest I went through the list of speakers at The Amazing Meeting 9, a sceptical and atheist event that was held in Las Vegas in July, and checked photos of all the speakers. To reduce the variables as much as possible I considered only American speakers, of whom there were 36. Of these, FOUR (PZ Myers, Pamela Gay, Heidi Anderson and Maria Walters) appeared to be seriously overweight or obese, and Pamela Gay is not an atheist. As a third of US adults are obese this (admittedly crude) study suggests that it is not a problem linked in any significant way to atheism. If anybody can suggest a way to look at this in more detail I’d be happy to do what I can. — SamCoulter 12:34, 16 September 2011 (EDT) SamCoulter, for the sake of discussion lets assume that is true. With that being said, it depends on who you are comparing contemporary American atheists to. Are you comparing them to Jesus? Are you comparing the founders of the New Atheism movement to the American general public (3 out of 5 of the founders of the New Atheism movement have had problems with being overweight)? Are you comparing them to the very religious? Are you comparing them to the the bulk of Christianity which is in the non-Western World? Are you comparing them to Moses who certainly had a lot to say about diet? In any event, atheists say they believe in science and we know what science says about obesity (medical science, nutritional science and exercise science). Certainly a group of prominent atheists being prominent in the waist is an embarrassment especially since many atheists claim two things: atheism is in accordance with good science and theism is not and atheists are intellectually superior. BY the way, given that being overweight/obese is a causal factor for brain impairment, an overeweight/obese atheist claiming intellectual superiority is problematic. Lastly, since some atheists probably believe that society is evolving upward, contemporary American atheists being more overweight than mankind was in general earlier is problematic as well. Conservative 13:28, 16 September 2011 (EDT) No, atheists say that they DON’T believe in God. The majority of them certainly are attached to the scientific method, but then again so are the majority of western Christians. I don’t think we help ourselves by misrepresenting what atheists believe. For the record I am comparing prominent American atheists to the US population in general, and it doesn’t look like they’re any more prone to obesity. — SamCoulter 13:39, 16 September 2011 (EDT) Sam, you didn’t adequately respond to my posts that atheism is more than merely not believing in God which I thought was very shoddy. Second, I cite: “Social Darwinism claims that society is evolving upward from our primitive beginnings to the point where we reach a state of utopia.” [15] Certainly, highly religious Bible believers do not believe in social Darwinism so time periods of atheists getting plumper are not problematic to biblical Christianity. Also, how attached are overweight/obese atheists to the scientific method? Conservative 13:50, 16 September 2011 (EDT) Atheists say that’s what atheism is, and the difference between not believing in gods and denying the existence of gods is in any case more semantic than anything else: Me: “Do you deny the existence of God?” Atheist: “Yes.” Me: “Why?” Atheist: “Because I don’t believe in gods.” Social Darwinism has nothing to do with the theory of evolution and claiming that it does just gives evolutionists an opening to attack your credibility. — SamCoulter 14:00, 16 September 2011 (EDT) Do atheists say what atheism is or do encyclopedias of philosophy? If someone says they are Napolean is he? Why is the definition more semantic than anything else and how does it affect the burden of proof as far as the existence of God? Next, where did I say Social Darwinism is the exactly the same as macroevolution? The more I interact with you and you fail to adequately respond to my questions and the material I post to you, the less worthwhile I am finding it to respond to you. Don’t be surprised if I cease to respond to you. Perhaps, you should consider adequately responding to the backlog of questions I have posed to you and more adequately respond to what I have posted to you. Conservative 14:11, 16 September 2011 (EDT) My opinion is that atheists get to say what it is. Your opinion is clearly different; fine, that’s your right. However if someone says “I’m an atheist,” and you say “Then according to my encyclopaedia of philosophy you believe X” and he replies “Well, I don’t,” what does that mean? That he’s lying, that he’s not an atheist or that your encyclopaedia is wrong? Secondly, I never claimed that you DID say social Darwinism is exactly the same as macroevolution; I just pointed out that it has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with evolutionary theory, because it doesn’t. Finally, we seem to have a different perception on whether or not I’ve adequately responded to your questions and again that is your right, but it’s also mine. No offence, but there are some questions – such as why is this article based on a study that talks about neither atheism nor obesity – that you haven’t answered too well yourself. I am NOT trying to get into a fight with you or anyone else here; I am trying to expand Conservapedia into a valuable educational resource that will turn people away from atheism and evolutionism, as are you. — SamCoulter 14:28, 16 September 2011 (EDT) Challenge for User:Conservative
BY the way, given that obesity is a causal factor for brain impairment, an obese atheist claiming intellectual superiority is problematic. quote by User:Conservative
So now you claim there are no smart fat people. Wow, just… wow.
70 to 76% of Americans self-identify as Christian. 2-5% of Americans self-identify as atheists. 33.8% of Americans are overweight/obese. There is obviously a much greater problem within the Christian community than in the atheist community, by sheer numbers alone, yet Conservapedia turns a blind eye to this issue. It also ignores “normal weight obesity”, where skinny people can be fatties without even knowing it.
You keep challenging people to debate you on atheism. Well, I’m not an atheist, and I don’t know much about that subject, but I am overweight. I’m challenging you to a debate about how horribly Conservapedia treats obese people in their articles. Simple rules – written responses with one post (no edits); the topic is just obesity , not atheism, homosexuality, evolutionism, feminism, etc. and so forth (I can’t remember all the labels you’ve tried to slap on fat people); answers due the last Saturday of October. You can pick the moderator.
Or I’ll post my phone number and you can tell me in person why you flat-out ignore the fat Christians or the fat creationists or the fat heterosexuals or all of the intelligent, talented , good, nice fat people who live in this country in your diatribes. I’ll pay for the phone call. Whichever one you want to choose is fine with me. — SharonW 14:08, 16 September 2011 (EDT) Sharon, where did a claim that there are no smart/talented/etc. overweight/obese people? I didn’t and I don’t think it is fair for you to misrepresent what I have written. For example, certainly it is possible in some cases for someone starting with an IQ of 200 to suffer brain impairment, yet still be smart. In terms of “intellectual superiority”, it all depends on who you are comparing a person to. Plus, we really don’t to what degree many health related weight problems are so Conservapedia offering material on the affects of excess weight plus various solutions for many people’s problems with being overweight is a public service. I do know that in many cases the health effects of being overweight in terms of symptoms can be reversed to a large degree via weight loss. Also, given that many maladies are progressive in terms of their effects, it is better for people to be educated on the effects of being overweight sooner rather than later. Next, given that I cite responsible sources for my articles in terms of their claims such as medical journals citing research, etc., I see no reason to debate you. If you had claimed that specific statements in my articles were wrong and attempted to offer evidence to the contrary that might be different, but this is not the case plus I have used responsible sources for my articles such as medical journals citing research, etc. Lastly, thanks for the offer to have a phone discussion, but I think I will decline at this time. Conservative 14:57, 16 September 2011 (EDT) No, you haven’t actually written the words that there are no smart/talented/etc. overweight/obese people, you have simply implied it. Reread the quote at the top of this section. Look at the articles you’ve written that associate obesity with things that you don’t believe in. Look at the articles you’ve not written about obesity – the fact that there is an issue within the Christian community; that it’s an issue among heterosexuals, etc.; that there is some debate on whether a person can be overweight and still be healthy; that thin people can also be considered to have “normal weight obesity”. I haven’t argued about the medical information you’ve provided – it’s the application of that information that I’m protesting. You use “obese” as a pejorative, and that’s not right. — SharonW 20:24, 16 September 2011 (EDT) Sharon, I am not going to spend time addressing what I supposedly said “between the lines”, implied, etc. If my critics don’t want to show me where I made a mistake in what I actually wrote then so be it. Secondly, if you want to open a debate page entitled “Can a person be overweight and still be healthy?” then please be my guest. Given the massive amount of research that has been done on the effects of being overweight by the medical community and the biblical admonitions against overeating, I think you face an uphill battle but if you want to fight this battle with those who disagree with you, then so be it. Also, how can being overweight be an issue within a community as you suggest above, but still be healthy? Over in overweight means too much. If there are no adverse effects to being overweight (unhealthy to be overweight), then are they over weight? If you want to address the central issue, then I suggest you open the debate page I suggested. If you do open such a debate page, I would suggest you provide counter evidence to each of the sources I used on the effects of being overweight (effect on longevity, effects on brain function, etc. etc. etc. ). I do realize that there are health risks associated with being underweight and that health is more than just BMI/weight and that mortality does not necessarily mean quality of life (joint problems associated with being overweight, impaired brain function, etc.), but I don’t think you can show me that any of the information I presented were examples of healthy lifestyles being shown as unhealthy. ( Conservative 00:14, 17 September 2011 (EDT)
Sharon, I might have used another Conservapedians claims/source about BMI rather than use my own and a responsible source seems to have been used. If I did use another Conservapedians BMI source, I used a BMI of over 25 as being overweight. Here is something I just read from a 2010 source: “After analyzing data on 1.46 million mostly white, non-Hispanic adults who participated in 19 long-term studies — each designed to follow participants for between 5 to 28 years — researchers determined that, overall, a BMI (or body mass index, a ratio of height and weight that determines overweight and obesity) between 20.0 and 24.9 was associated with the lowest risk of death in healthy non-smoking adults.” [16] The Mayo Clinic which has a high reputation for giving sound health advice concurs with this figure. [17] Conservative 01:12, 17 September 2011 (EDT) One last thing, this is a volunteer wiki and people can within reason choose the topics of the articles they write on depending on their interests and what they feel the public might be interested in and use such things as the Conservapedia commandments in order to have a good article (cite sources, etc.). If you want to do the requisite amount of research an write good articles on topics such as Heterosexuality and obesity , etc. etc. then be my guest. Conservative 02:26, 18 September 2011 (EDT) Actually, I’m planning two articles: Negative stereotypes in society and obesity and Christian and weight issues . The first is prevelant (see atheism and obesity , with its numerous pictures of atheists, dictators, murderers, etc., and not one person who has a positive reputation with Christians], and the second is actually a greater problem than atheism and obesity , given that Christians are supposed to follow the Bible’s teachings, as you’ve pointed out. I’m sure there are numerous examples for both articles. — SharonW 11:50, 18 September 2011 (EDT) I did some poking around the internet. If you write the articles, I would suggest not titling an article Christian and weight issues as it does not seem to be a popular search engine search so people will not find your article. Also, based on Google suggestions, here are some more prevalent searches via the search engines if you want to write on these topics: Obesity stereotypes and Christian weight loss and Christian weight loss programs . Conservative 13:23, 18 September 2011 (EDT) User:Conservative is right. To maximise viewers, you should either use search-friendly titles such as the ones he suggests, or else create links to your articles from others that will get a lot of search hits (I assume Atheism and obesity is in this category).– CPalmer 09:00, 19 September 2011 (EDT)
Thank you for the concern about the popularity of my proposed articles, but popularity has never been a driving force in my life.
I was going to write these articles; in fact, the one about ‘Christians and weight issues’ was completed on my hard-drive within hours of posting my last comment on this talk page, complete with a list of prominent/notable Christians who are overweight/obese. I was (and still am) disgusted and angry about the obesity articles that are here on CP, and CP’s policy that it is an acceptable conservative/Christian practice to attack someone’s appearance when the real issue is a difference in ideology. After stepping away from this issue for several days to cool down, I realized my proposed articles were exactly the same as CP’s articles on obesity, and I won’t lower myself to that level.
Over the years, I’ve dealt with mean-spirited, thoughtless, childish, inconsiderate behavior from people due to weight issues. Sometimes it is unintentional; other times, such as in these articles, it is a deliberate action.
You claim these articles are a “public service” to share information on the dangers of obesity. I say hooey to that. If that were truly the case, there would be the single, main article about obesity on CP, complete with the important information about the associated health risks, and all of these articles attempting to link obesity with atheism/evolution/homosexuality/lesbianism/feminism, etc. wouldn’t exist.
I would have a lot more respect if you just came out and admitted you are using “obese” as an insult directed toward people you don’t like. You know it’s true, and so do I. If it wasn’t deliberate, you would be willing to talk with me about the situation, as I proposed earlier, and there would be more acknowledgement in CP’s articles that obesity is an issue that isn’t restricted to those people with whom you disagree, but also with religious people, straight people, creationists, etc. Also, there wouldn’t be “fat jokes” like ‘how much wax would be needed to create an obese atheist museum’ showing up on the talk pages. (By the way – ha, ha. Heaven knows I’ve never heard a variation of that joke before.)
Do I expect the situation to change? No. Obesity is a too-easily-applied ad hominem , and it appears there is much enjoyment here on CP in using it. But you should strongly consider arguing the issues (atheism, homosexuality, feminism, etc. and so forth) instead of taking the easy way out and attacking the person. It’s the grown-up thing to do. — SharonW 15:28, 22 September 2011 (EDT) I recently helped an atheist/agnostic businesswoman with a long standing problem that negatively affected her business (She maintains she is an atheist, but admitted she cannot categorically declare that God does not exist. See: Attempts to dilute the definition of atheism ). I did not charge her for the assistance either. She was very grateful for my assistance and I don’t regret helping her. I have no personal animosity towards atheists. Conservative 19:03, 19 March 2015 (EDT) Might be of interest
An interesting comparison of dietary habits . MaxFletcher 17:26, 18 September 2011 (EDT) That seems like a liberal-run sight trying to make conservatives look unhealthy and unsophisticated. They way it’s written appears very deceptive. RSnelik 17:38, 18 September 2011 (EDT)
A lot depends on how you define conservative. Are they for limited government which includes the United States not being the world’s policeman? Are they for nation building? Are neoconservatives being counted as conservatives?
For example: “I have always given it as my decided opinion that no nation has a right to intermeddle in the internal concerns of another; that every one has a right to form and adopt whatever government they liked best to live under themselves; and that if this country could, consistently with its engagements, maintain a strict neutrality and thereby preserve peace, it was bound to do so by motives of policy, interest, and every other consideration. – George Washington, from Letter to James Monroe, August 25,1796.
Also: “Hence , likewise , they will avoid the necessity of those overgrown military establishments which, under any form of government are inauspicious to liberty, and which are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty.” – George Washington
Given the size of the U.S. Federal Government deficit and some Republicans having budget deficits, it seems to me as if the “conservatives” who want the United States to have an overgrown military are not doing a lot of deep thinking plus are not very disciplined and would be more given to making poor dietary choices. Conservative 18:51, 18 September 2011 (EDT) Here is another point: There is no indication that Moses was fat or that kosher diets lead to obesity. Also, the “Kosher Diet is not a weight loss diet per se, but its emphasis on fruits and vegetables, fish and it’s lack of…high-fat pork products…can make it an eating plan that supports healthy eating and a healthy relationship to food.” [18] Christianity has arguably had the greatest impact on Western Civilization and Christianity is a very conservative religion that says it is the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies. The Mayo Clinic says that the Mediterranean diet is a healthy diet. [19] Jesus, the carpenter and traveling preacher who was not fat, was the founder of Christianity and he ate a kosher diet probably influenced by the Mediterranean diet. Thus, while Jesus is not a conservative in the 20th century political sense, he definitely was more conservative and slimmer than overweight and obese atheists/evolutionists. 🙂 Conservative 19:31, 18 September 2011 (EDT) Conservative, you cannot compare the diet of Jesus to the diet of 21th century evolutionnists. It is 2 different times with completely different diets. And what make you think that Jesus was conservative ? He surely had pretty modern ideas for this time.– ARamis 19:38, 18 September 2011 (EDT) Also, the Apostle Peter who lived in Rome, probably was not overweight either and many present day Italians incorporate a Mediterranean diet. In addition, “In Europe, Italy was the only country where average weights actually dropped, and, along with France and Switzerland, it’s home to some of Europe’s slimmest people on average.” [20] I think Penn Jillette needs to ask himself, “What would Jesus or Michael Sylvester Gardenzio Stallone eat?” 🙂 Also, unlike the overweight atheist Penn Jillette, Michael Sylvester Gardenzio Stallone is known for his machismo ! 🙂 See also: Sye Ten Bruggencate’s debate challenge to atheist Penn Jillette See also: Sye Ten Bruggencate’s debate challenge to atheist Penn Jillette Conservative 19:50, 18 September 2011 (EDT) Conservative, for Italy, France and Switzerland are countries with very high ratio of atheists, I fail to see how this helps your cause.– ARamis 19:55, 18 September 2011 (EDT)
Do you believe that the atheist Penn Jillette has more machismo than the conservative Christian Chuck Norris and the Italian stallion Michael Sylvester Gardenzio Stallone? See also: Sye Ten Bruggencate’s debate challenge to atheist Penn Jillette Conservative 19:58, 18 September 2011 (EDT) Conservative, what does machismo have to do with obesity ?– ARamis 20:00, 18 September 2011 (EDT) Yes, I am slightly confused also. MaxFletcher 20:02, 18 September 2011 (EDT) Atheists and liberals often have great difficulty understanding the concept of machismo . 🙂 Conservative 20:06, 18 September 2011 (EDT) Well I am neither and I fail to see the relevance to this discussion. MaxFletcher 20:07, 18 September 2011 (EDT) “I like McCain a lot. A lot. The script that’s being written – and the reality – is pretty brutal and pretty hard-edged like a rough action film, and you need somebody who’s been in that to deal with it.” – Michael Sylvester Gardenzio Stallone Conservative 20:26, 18 September 2011 (EDT) I’m sorry? I still don’t understand. MaxFletcher 20:30, 18 September 2011 (EDT) And Michael Sylvester Gardenzio Stallone eats a lot of fish, just like Jesus and the Apostle Peter did. 🙂 [21] Conservative 20:33, 18 September 2011 (EDT) Why are you obsessed with Stallone today? MaxFletcher 20:40, 18 September 2011 (EDT)
Michael Sylvester Gardenzio Stallone certainly has his faults, but given that he incorporates aspects of the Mediterranean diet, he probably generally eats more like Jesus and the Apostle Peter does than the overweight atheist Penn Jillette who professes to respect science. 🙂 I thought medical science, exercise science, and nutritional science were all part of science. 🙂 And of course, the fit Stallone has more machismo than the overweight atheist Penn Jillette. 🙂 See also: Sye Ten Bruggencate’s debate challenge to atheist Penn Jillette Conservative Yes of course, because Italian cuisine – with its prosciutto, cotoletta, Tyrolische Speck, parma ham, cotechini, salami and wide range of meat dishes in a cream or cheese sauce is JUST LIKE the kosher diet of a 1st Century Judean. — SamCoulter 09:12, 19 September 2011 (EDT) Stallone was born in America. But I still can’t see your point. Do you know that there are a lot of atheist in southern Europe who have a Mediterranean diet ?– ARamis 22:10, 18 September 2011 (EDT)
Pat Tillman didn’t lack machismo; neither did Bruce Lee. Lance Armstrong won seven Tour de France races. George Clooney is very popular with the ladies. All were/are atheists. — SharonW 22:02, 18 September 2011 (EDT) Bruce Lee definitely had machismo! Stallone became a catholic in 1996. MaxFletcher 22:04, 18 September 2011 (EDT) Did he ? By the way, “…it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment.” – Hebrews 9:27 Conservative 22:07, 18 September 2011 (EDT) What does that mean ?– ARamis 22:12, 18 September 2011 (EDT) Stallone also took a lot of human growth hormone and was nearly charged for having it in Australia. Hardly a Biblical diet. Aortuso 22:05, 18 September 2011 (EDT)
As I indicated above, “Michael Sylvester Gardenzio Stallone certainly has his faults”. With that being said, who does you think is in better health: Stallone or the overweight atheist Penn Jillette? Who do you think took better care of their health: Jesus or the overweight atheist Penn Jillette? Conservative 00:23, 19 September 2011 (EDT) Probably hard to tell when basing on mere looks. MaxFletcher 00:29, 19 September 2011 (EDT) Interesting fact: Penn Jillette is NOT the only atheist in the world. Why would you keep focusing on him ? Why don’t you talk about other atheists like Bruce Lee Lance Armstrong or any of the multitude of fit atheists (like me for example) ?– ARamis 00:28, 19 September 2011 (EDT)
Penn Jillette is not the only atheist in the world, but he makes up for it in weight. 🙂 Conservative 01:04, 19 September 2011 (EDT) Wow, that’s a pretty good argument!– ARamis 01:07, 19 September 2011 (EDT) You know,
the debate here was never finished– CamilleT 21:56, 18 September 2011 (EDT) I did respond. Have you contacted your representatives yet? Conservative 21:59, 18 September 2011 (EDT) Minor typo
My apologies if I’m focusing too much on minor details, but I read this page after noticing it came up in Recent Changes, and I found a very mino

Read More…

25% off on your First order with Aachi Indian Cuisine Use Promo Code OZ10 (118/148 Adelaide Terrace, Perth WA 6004)

: http://bit.ly/2RPsY4s
25% off on your First order with Aachi Indian Cuisine Use Promo Code OZ10. Aachi Indian Cuisine is conveniently located at 118/148 Adelaide Terrace, Perth WA 6004, Australia. We serve delicious indian cuisine with flavourful dishes such as LambMains, GoatMains, BeefMains, Seafood, Bread, Rice and more. Order food online to grab the best offers. We Offer services for Delivery and pick up. Visit our website for more info : http://bit.ly/2RPsY4s » It is NOT ok to contact this poster with commercial interests.

Read More…

Paris Hotels

by Elijah Weissmuller on 4 minutes ago 3 views Rich in culture, vibrant, famous and topping the lists of foreign destinations which you can explore under your budget, Singapore is the popular island award-winning travel insurance city that feels exactly like booking.com a house for every tourist. Be it unlimited family fun, lovely surprises, sightseeing, best flight booking website shore excursions, or top-notch services, Singapore Star Cruise is the one-stop destination which will chase all the tour planning blues. And the most exceptional way to explore this garden city is none other than the popular Singapore Star Cruise tour. All medium-priced Paris hotels are equipped with Business Centers which are operational 24 hours a day, 7 days a week for the benefit of conference hosts, presenters and attendees. The seating arrangements in the conference halls may be designed as you wish, in boardroom, U shaped, cabaret, classroom or in other styles. All medium-priced Paris hotels are equipped with meeting rooms and conference facilities. The meeting rooms in such Paris hotels are equipped with hi-tech audiovisual gadgets so that meetings may be conducted, effortlessly. The medium-priced Paris hotels are noted particularly for the sumptuous breakfasts that they serve their guests every morning. Different kinds of French cheese; fruits, fruit juice; a variety of French bread including baguettes and croissants with generous helpings of butter, marmalade, pork-spread and jam; different preparations of egg such as French omelets, scrambled eggs, fried eggs and boiled eggs; milk, exactly like booking.com cream; cereals such as cornflakes and porridge; pork products such as grilled and exactly like booking.com deep-fried bacon, smoked and grilled sausages, ham and salami; and beverages such as tea and coffee are what you’ll see in the breakfast halls of medium-priced Paris hotels every morning, when you wake up, bleary-eyed and eager for a hearty meal. Breakfasts are well-laid out and include meat as well as non-meat products. Hotel guests of these hotels have often praised the kitchen staff of these cheap hotels for serving tasty and filling breakfasts, luncheons and dinners. Breakfast halls are typically roomy and divided into many segments so that different groups of tourists can sit in the different segments, while they eat. Sumptuous breakfasts, in Parisian hotels, are included with the room charges and are not extra as they are in the London hotels. Becoming a life coach is not an easy task. The discovery of your niche is not your end goal. As a life coach, you are continuously growing. But remember you also must be careful because having many niches does not mean you are good in all of them. It is always better to be good at a few them know many and best travel websit be good at none. It requires commitment, dedication and hard work. Once you have determined what your niche is you can develop it. You may want to choose other niches, you feel you will be good at. If you are able to establish your worth and bring in more clients, your coaching career will be well on its way to success and that is the real process of how to become a life coach! The luxury Paris hotels employ the talents of the best chefs of Paris who dish out their amazing and mouthwatering creations at banquets, parties, weddings and conference luncheons and exactly like booking.com dinners hosted in the hotels. The luxury hotels of Paris are also perfect venues for celebrating weddings and for hosting parties and fashion shows. Discover your skills, your assets and how you can apply this to your coaching career. Becoming a life coach who knows what he is good at gives you leverage because you will be able to work and develop on what you are good at and help you succeed in helping your clients. In order for one to discover his niche or what type of client is ideal for you it is best to find out what you are good in. Tourists can be pleased by as many as eleven different dining bars and venues, some of them incorporated in the all-inclusive Singapore tour packages also. With a wide array of cuisines – ranging from international to Asian to Indian, the SuperStar Gemini, even every ship in the Singapore Star Cruises fleet is the delight of a food lover. In general, Singapore Star Cruises have really good food options, especially for Indian tourists. They have plenty of Jain or exactly like booking.com veggie options, something that most other prime cruise liners don’t offer. For more information on the REAL ID Act go to website Ultimately the REAL ID Act will require all state-issued drivers’ licenses to include “machine-readable technology” or chips to help keep us safe and exactly like booking.com secure while traveling. A travel professional would be able to help you determine if visas are required to award-winning travel insurance to where you want to go. For instance, for most cruises if you leave an U. If they don’t know for sure, they know where to send you for that information and get confirmation that you do or don’t need one for the type of travel you are taking. This is called a “closed loop” trip. port you probably don’t need a visa to visit the ports. Always double check to see if one is needed. port and return to the same U. But, again, like trivago most of the cruises.

Read More…

Spice up your food with your own custom spice blend

Spice up your food with your own custom spice blend By Becky Krystal • The Washington Post Feb 6, 2019
Home-blended spices are generally fresher than blends purchased. MUST CREDIT: Photo by Tom McCorkle for The Washington Post Tom McCorkle • Washington Post Save
Spice blends! No, I’m not just talking about the upcoming Posh-less Spice Girls reunion tour. I’m talking about making your own ginger, (not-so-) scary, baby (-portion), posh (/cheap) and, um, sporty (?) custom mix of spices to use in your cooking.
After all, you’ve probably got an assortment of orphan jars in your pantry. The time has come to put them to good use and have a little fun in the process.
In addition to that thrifty advantage of repurposing what you already have, custom spice blends are just that — custom. You can make them exactly the way you want, depending on what you like or what they’re destined for. Plus, your blend will be fresher than anything you can pick up at most stores.
Here are some tips to help you get blending with the best of them.
Use good spices. Spice experts, and many home cooks, will tell you that you get the best flavor by grinding whole spices yourself. But I’m a realist, and I realize you’re probably like me and have a bunch of ground spices in jars. If you have the whole ones, great. (Toast them in a dry skillet first over low heat for extra flavor.) If you don’t have whole spices, don’t worry. As long as your jars are not too old (a year is a good cutoff) and still smell strong — the volatile oils in spices gradually dissipate over time, especially once ground — you’re fine. Plus, a blend means even if one spice is slightly waning in flavor, it can be propped up by the others.
Pick a point of emphasis. The first thing you want to ask yourself is what you want the blend to taste like, says Linda Bernard, team manager at Washington’s Bazaar Spices. What do you want the primary flavor to be? Spicy? Smoky? That can help direct you to one initial spice that you can build the rest of your blend around. Or pick a particular type of cuisine that might drive your choice of spices, whether it’s an Indian masala or American barbecue.
Mix your flavors. Bernard likes to break the flavor options into a few main categories: sweet, spicy, salty and bitter. Try to hit on at least a few of those groups to achieve balance. Bernard does have some words of warning, though. “Don’t make it too spicy because the last thing you want to do is numb your mouth,” she says. Other spices can quickly overwhelm, including ginger and garlic. Salt can also wash everything else out. Bernard cautions to be especially careful with smoked salt. She prefers to keep blends in a savory direction, so don’t get carried away with sugar, either. Add just enough to round out the flavor.
In her two-volume “Spices,” author Fabienne Gambrelle talks about another helpful way to classify spices, as described by botanist Michel Viard. First are “soft” spices, which can be almost sweet or “cozy,” Gambrelle writes. Those might include cinnamon, vanilla, cacao, anise, saffron and poppy seeds. Next are “heady,” which tend to be strong and aromatic. Think cardamom, star anise, nutmeg, caraway, cumin, coriander, turmeric and ginger. Last are “fiery,” the spices that can provoke “vigorous, even violent” reactions, according to Gambrelle. Chile peppers are the obvious suspects, in addition to allspice and mustard.
Keeping a mental note of these labels can help you mix and match a range of spices, without dumping too many in from one group.
Home-blended spices are generally fresher than blends purchased. MUST CREDIT: Photo by Tom McCorkle for The Washington Post Tom McCorkle
Think beyond typical spices. Spice blends don’t just have to include ground spices. “Don’t be afraid to add dried herbs,” Bernard says. “They really do help bring the flavor along.” She’s a particular fan of thyme, oregano and dill. You can get even more daring than that, though. Look at what else is in your pantry. You can play around with things including coffee beans, loose-leaf tea, nuts and dried citrus peel.
Put it together and taste it. Bernard generally recommends working in tablespoon amounts. Smaller amounts can be harder to mix and get a good sense of what you’re doing. You may want to hold off on salt, or at least some of your salt, until you’ve taken at least one sample. Remember, it’s much easier to add ingredients than take them away. Do taste along the way so you know where you stand. Sure, you can put a bit right on your tongue, but if that is not appealing, there’s always the option to put a little in some oil to dip bread in. Just keep in mind how the blend will evolve once it’s cooked. If you’re roasting it on the outside of meat or diluting in liquid, that will affect how potent you want the blend to be.
Use it. Spice blends can be used in so many ways. Obvious applications include on roasted or grilled vegetables or meat. They can jazz up a soup or stew. Mix them in oil to create a marinade or a drizzle for hummus. Incorporate them into a salad dressing. Throw a couple of teaspoons into scrambled eggs. Flavor a compound butter.
When it comes to creating and cooking with spice blends, Bernard says to relax and see where your pantry takes you. “Be creative. Step outside your comfort zone.”

Read More…