I asked ChatGPT to write an introductory paragraph for this series. This is what he wrote:
This series of posts aims to use the Socratic method and deductive logic to examine the truth and validity of mainstream scientific arguments. ChatGPT is an AI language model with a vast knowledge base and impressive ability to understand complex concepts. However, its learning is limited by its programming and the data it has been trained on. While ChatGPT may initially seem persuadable, this is not an accurate characterization of its capabilities. It can recognize logical fallacies and evaluate arguments based on their merits, but it cannot override its algorithms on its own. When presented with arguments that contradict mainstream positions, it may cite the preponderance of evidence supporting those positions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That was much easier than expected.
Calories out is a little more complicated.
Just gonna throw this in there to illustrate the other point I frequently make on this blog...
*****************************************************************************************
********************************************************************************************
The mental gymnastics here! It's possible his body is burning calories at the same rate as a healthy individual, but the body adapts to conserve energy and burns fewer calories overall?!
He's saying, the human body is complex, it's not the scientists' understanding of a calorie that's incorrect, even though they have no direct means to measure it.
If the calorie thing is legitimate, it would be constant, this is what we find in every science, they make all these assumptions and inferences. How does everyone just accept this?
Now, let's allow GPT to put the nail in the coffin himself:
So there you have it, a calorie is a theoretical construct. It's possible to take in more calories than one expends and still to lose weight.
I don't know that what I am about to say is true, it is only a theory, but it does make more sense to me than this theoretical calorie thing...
Notice how every year there's a new pill for sale on TV claiming it's a magic pill that will induce weight loss. Somehow companies selling these things never go out of business, and always seem to have more funds to advertise their products.
This means that people keep buying them, and it's hard to imagine they keep doing so if they aren't working.
The following attempt to explain what is really happening, while not scientific, and containing anecdotal evidence, is just a theory I've noticed. Though does make some sense.
Everyone knows someone who has terrible dietary habits, yet somehow always seems to remain thin no matter how much junk food they eat.
This could be because our relationship to the food we eat is the more significant determining factor when it comes to whether we are gaining or losing weight.
Does the food make us feel good? Do we believe that eating it will nourish us with all of the nutrients the body needs?
If we're eating junk food, generally, we're going to feel pretty lousy afterwards, in these cases, we're associating feeling bad with the food we're eating.
This could be what causes weight gain.
If it's true, we should be very careful not to beat ourselves up about eating something we think isn't good for us. The worse we feel about ourselves because of the food we're deciding to eat, the greater the negative effects it could have on the body, if this is true.
Something to think about.
Comments