Comments for "Food Science - Why It Works" Video at VideoSift.com

By firefly

firefly (http://firefly.videosift.com) — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 14:22:20 -0800

My four-year-old loves sliced apples. I'm going to try that apple trick next time.

By joedirt

joedirt (http://www.videosift.com/member/joedirt) — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 14:41:18 -0800

Yep, it you have vitamin C tablets, it works. Also, that's why lemon juice stops browning.

By djsunkid

djsunkid (http://djsunkid.videosift.com) — Fri, 23 Feb 2007 04:43:11 -0800

Heh, this only brushes the surface of food science. If you're really interested, check out a book called On Food and Cooking: The Science and Lore of the Kitchen by Harold McGee. I got it for my birthday last year because I was spending hours upon hours at the library reading it. It is in the reference section and not available for borrowing. It really is the bible for food science. The chemestry, the physics- so so so so much information. An absolute MUST for food nerds.

By ant

ant (http://www.videosift.com/member/ant) — Fri, 23 Feb 2007 04:53:35 -0800

Hard to hear though.

By pragmatick

pragmatick (http://www.videosift.com/member/pragmatick) — Fri, 23 Feb 2007 06:11:37 -0800

I think you do not understand the principles of evolution. Nature did not *do* anyting and even if it did so, it would not do something "so that". Evolution is a process of natural selection, you make it sound like some nature-goddess like Gaia thought "Oh, let's make onions in a way that predators have to cry when trying to eat them."

By djsunkid

djsunkid (http://djsunkid.videosift.com) — Fri, 23 Feb 2007 06:39:43 -0800

I think you do not understand the principles of evolution. Nature did not *do* anyting and even if it did so, it would not do something "so that". Evolution is a process of natural selection, you make it sound like some nature-goddess like Gaia thought "Oh, let's make onions in a way that predators have to cry when trying to eat them."

pragmatick, maybe you feel like you know evolution better than this guy, but I expect that you DON'T want to argue against this guy:

Living things are not designed, but Darwinian natural selection licenses a version of the design stance for them. We get a short cut to understanding the heart if we assume that it is 'designed' to pump blood. Karl von Frisch was led to investigate colour vision in bees (in the face of orthodox opinion that they were colour-blind) because he assumed that the bright colours of flowers were 'designed' to attract them. The quotation marks are designed to scare off mendacious creationists who might otherwise claim the great Austrian zoologist as one of their own. Needless to say, he was perfectly capable of translating the design stance into proper Darwinian terms.

-- Richard Dawkins - The God Delusion pg182

So there.

By pragmatick

pragmatick (http://www.videosift.com/member/pragmatick) — Fri, 23 Feb 2007 08:56:40 -0800

I don't, but I was always taught not to use causal clauses when describing natural behaviour or phenomena. I think it's one thing if anyone (clearly) knowing about evolution like Richard Dawkins uses phrases like "designed" and another, if it's used commonly. I am not sure if people who say things like "nature did that so..." actually believe that or if it is just out of the inability to express it the right way. So as long as it is not clear that everybody knows what's what it does not hurt do use proper terms. Biologists say "was designed to" altough they know it's wrong, I think that's the point of your quote, but considering there are a lot of people who might understand it wrong you just should try to be as precise as possible.

I did not want to start a discussion. I am neither an expert in evolution or biology nor a native english speaker, so one way or the other I would lose :-P

By djsunkid

djsunkid (http://djsunkid.videosift.com) — Fri, 23 Feb 2007 09:05:17 -0800

Fair enough. I'm sure that casual use of causal clauses and other language shortcuts used by scientists is probably at least partly responsible for the education crisis in the USA right now. Just look at how many creationists latch on to the word "Theory" in evolutionary theory, and try their damndedst to convince the public that theory means that scientists just GUESSED.

Perhaps it would be better to say that the release of sulphur is adaptive for the onion because...