Bravo for using terms from logic. With a degree in Philosophy, I am overjoyed to see the terms used and used properly. I even liked the argument until I realized the tone. A practitioner of logic is bound by its rules. A reductio is a fallacy if it is really an ad hominem and I don’t think there is any question about this argument’s status.

For my own part, I am a "Euro" user and have thought of trying a Greenland paddle. Though, I am too deep into building his and her kayaks and too cheap to buy one. As it stands, however, I have no dog in this fight. But I am interested in this argument.

The idea presented that the body has a "hard lifetime limit" may or may not be accurate. This is far from my field of expertise. However, I have recently read more than one article about running and the knees of runners. These articles are written by folk’s whose expertise is medical science. Forgive the ad verecundiam turn on my own argument, but what the heck…rules be damned.

The writer of one article believes that running, with all its hard pounding, actually lubricates the knees and hips. Cadaver studies have shown that runners who habitually over train or who train while overweight have knee damage. Runners who avoid over training and training while overweight tend to show little sign of damage. Of course, there is mountains of anecdotal evidence that suggests otherwise.

"Greenland paddle is more efficient"
: "Greenland paddle is easier on your body"

: Really, let's take a look: 1 "More efficient" ?
: There is a Latin term used in the field of logical reasoning "reductio
: ad absurdum".
: All English speakers will intuitively understand its meaning.
: "Reduction to absurdity" applied to greenland paddle: since the low
: profile of greenland paddle is what makes it "more efficient" ,
: the ultimate greenland paddle will be a round stick.
: Round stick produces very little resistance hence must be uber-king of
: greenland paddling.
: The fact that round stick will do little to move the boat forward and a lot
: to produce vortex as it moves through the water
: greenland paddle proponents will conveniently skip.

: 2. "Easier on your body" ?
: Yes, since it produces less resistance, our muscles do not work as hard.
: What about the frequency and total stroke count? It takes more 'greenland
: strokes' to move the boat a given distance.
: Our bodies do have a hard lifetime limit how many times we can bend our knees
: or swing our arms. Greenland paddle uses up that limit faster.
: Muscles are very adaptable and resistant to wear and tear. The tendons and
: joins are a different story.
: Greenland paddles go easy on the 'sturdy' subsystem (muscles) and hard on the
: vulnerable ones.
: If large-blade paddle feels too hard to pull through the water, there is
: simple solution: Apply less force.
: You will be easier on your body yet still efficiently move the boat, not stir
: the water.

: So why there are armies of die-hard greenland paddle users and proponents?
: Well, greenland paddle has it's (albeit narrow) niche: when the wind really
: blows hard, or there are no materials to make larger blade,
: greenland paddle will do.

: Still, the large blade "euro" (why it is called this) paddle
: evolved for a good reason - most of the time and for most people it is
: superior to greenland stick.

: Ah, but it's so pleasant to believe in the "wisdom of thousands-year old
: traditions", the undiscovered but charmingly green lands of fuzzy
: logic, the thousands of inhabited planets beyond our solar system, the
: bigfoots roaming mountains on the horizon, large monsters swimming in
: Scottish lakes, Masonic lodges ruling the capital markets,
: Elders of the Zion setting fiscal policy and spooky action at a distance
: entangling elementary particles.

: In fact, to the contrary to what Ray Kurzweil writes in the "Singularity
: is Near", the un-rational and non-logical is what truly
: differentiates humans from, well.. the non-kayaking population.