It is NOT that simple.

Excellent...you ate more, and were able to lose the weight.

Where those calories came from is irrelevant, however.
You would have lost either way.

That is where your terribly wrong.

If I ate 1500 calories of processed foods, I will gain and gain and gain and be starving hungry. I can eat 1500 calories of fresh meats, vegetables, fats and fruits and lose weight.

It's BOTH.
When you eat healthy, and clean, and don't eat processed foods, and make sure the bulk of your nutrition comes from vegetables, good fats, lean protein and minimal grains, it's actually quite HARD to eat excess calories! You get up to about 1600 a day and you feel full all the time (or at least I do).

I am angry because there is an awful lot of shaming and pretentiousness coming from the cals-in/cals-out crowd who look down their noses at anyone who doesn't agree with their oversimplification of how weight loss works. Well, it doesn't work that way for everyone, and overall health is found in eating healthfully, which means a lot more than simply eating less. Otherwise anorexic people would be the epitome of health, no? It does make me angry that when someone posts something that might be useful to someone pursuing health, and when they post something that is different from the mainstream view of health/weight loss, then they get jumped on and called idiots because of course the answer is fewer cals... And that's not the whole picture. That's one tiny piece of the puzzle.

No, Taubes only asked the question differently. Of course low carbers took that as proof that thermodynamics isn't valid. Go reread what he said.

Agreed. Ultimately its about some people not wanting to use portion control (whatever the unit of measurement may be) and blame everything else except their own choices in that regard. Some choices are not ours to make, true. But many are.

It's hard to face reality. I know, I've been there. It's not really about thermodynamics at all, I really doubt if Paleo4lyfe even understands it at all. Living systems are simply thermodynamic systems far from equilibrium (folks keep forgetting about that large nearby yellow star in the sky), but entropy still wins in the end... shrug.

Oh, I wholly understand what MY OWN doctor has been telling me for the past 3 years.

The human body is NOT like a freaking car engine or a computer that is very simplistic.

If the proper balance of hormones, sleep, stress and proper nutrition is not maintained, a person will gain weight on very few calories.

The human body is very complex, we can not compare ourselves to the simplistic car engine or computer. My Doctor has told the residents while examining that thermodynamics has no place in being used with Calories In / Calories out because it makes it seem to easy and simplistic and that is just not the way it works.

I trust my Metabolic Endocrinologist who is a research Dr and has 30 + years in Practice at one of the best medical schools in this country. And, I am not one who trusts Doctors of any kind, but my Naturopathic M.D. referred me over after she was unable to help me.

The jist of everything my Dr has told me is that Calories In / Calories Out is the biggest myth perpetuated. He said it is false because of the simplistic view and wishes that people would wake up. The CI/CO dogma was created for the low fat regimen of the 70's and 80's.

It doesn't mean that the situation cannot be addressed (and I was formerly morbidly obese before I figured some things out) but seriously folks, do you really think the sneering attitude is helping any obese person?

Look, for most healthy people it's basically calories in vs calories out. Things get more complicated with people who are overweight because they often have lower sensitivity to insulin. Weight gain and lower insulin sensitivity are a viscous cycle that lead to a situation where calories in vs calories out begins to fall apart. The first thing you should do is read up on insulin sensitivity and how fix it if yours if its too low, (hint: low carb).