the so fallible Bible

[Brakeman]

Atheists don't go with the most probable if it's inconvenient. Consider scurvy. The least probable outcome of a deleterious mutation is that it fixes in the species, yet that's the scenario with vitamin c synthesis in certain primates.

As opposed to theists who just lie about talking to god, lie about their holy adventures every Sunday to each other, then get on this board and lie when they propose debunked ICR claims?

http://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage...c-14167861

Answer by Levi · Oct 28 '10 at 09:09 PM

Good question. I've heard that it was a genetic mutation that we eventually were able to adapt to with diet. The other option is that because of our self-selected diet the ability to synthesize C was not preserved because it wasn't as needed. Gary Taubes illustrates in his book Good Calories, Bad Calories that carbohydrates (sugars) serve to age us and also compete with the same molecular pathways that Vitamin C does with priority given to sugars. Therefore if you eat lots of carbohydrates you will need to consume more vitamin C to compensate for the pathways blocked with sugar and the degradation caused by excess sugar consumption. He concludes with the implication that paleolithic peoples eating their typical diet would not need as much vitamin C if the diet was lower in carbs. Most higher carb fruits and veggie seem to have lots of vitamin C. On a similar note, the Inuit traditionally consumed very little fruits and veggies and ate mostly meat and fat. They needed very little vitamin C which they were able to procure from whale blubber.

I'm grossly oversimplifying but that's the basic idea. Evolution can be a bitch.

For more Paleo Diet hacks: http://paleohacks.com/questions/25450/wh...z2hwXDQUKN