Did we evolve to eat meat?

[Seamus]

Food tastes are more psychological than based on any sort of evolutionary instinct, I think

And I think that is the bottom line. Trying to compare humans to monkeys or our monkey ancestors is pointless. We are not monkeys (most of us anyway) and our evolution did not follow a "linear" path. There is no point therefore (are you listening Dirk?) in trying to come to a definitive conclusion about whether or not we "evolved" to eat meat. We probably began to eat meat and fat for any number of different reasons. The fact is, we eat it now and it is good for us.

Some of my cousins ARE pretty hairy come to think of it..... :)

I could be misunderstanding you, and I'm not trying to be argumentative here, but why do you say it is it pointless to compare humans to monkeys or apes or our ancestors? Apes aren't monkeys either and people lump them together and mix them up all the time. I agree with you, we eat meat now and it is good for us. Isn't it worthwhile to ask why?

The United States is looking more and more like a fascist state, and one could say that is a bad thing for the rest of the world. The United States is not Germany, but I doubt you would argue that it is pointless to compare the current situation in the United States to what happened in Nazi Germany. We can look at similarities and differences in the economic conditions and political conditions of the two countries, even though they are separated by time and language. By comparing the two we can deepen our understanding of them.

Similarly, humans are not monkeys (except for possibly some of our hairier relatives), but I don't think its pointless to look at our similarities and differences and use them as a basis to draw conclusions about why humans behave the way they do. Clearly human behavior is heavily influenced by the more "primitive" parts of our brains:

The Amygdala Hijack and more
The hidden factor in relationship disharmony

Isn't it worthwhile to look at our primate ancestry (diet, anatomy, social behavior, etc.) for clues as to why we behave the way we do? Since we don't have direct access to our primate ancestors, it makes sense to examine our closest relatives. Comparing human behavior to primate behavior might give us a better understanding of human behavior.

FWIW, thats why I'm interested in this conversation.

 

[Cosmos]

Do you have a source of that statement?

Would it matter at this point if we did? Either what you've been pointed to is proof enough or it isn't. It just doesn't seem as if there will ever be enough proof for you because you've already decided that you're not interested. If you were, you'd try it yourself.

However, if I eat no overt fats at all (as in the 80/10/10 diet) I can eat all the sugar I want, without the spacy feeling. Is there something to the combination of fats and fruits that is the culprit instead of fruit being solely the culprit?

I have to ask, other than being on that diet, are you connected in any way to that organization?

I'd also like to say that you seem to have a strong be right program - meaning that you feel the need to be right to the point that you'll go round and round with someone in the hopes that you'll drain them enough so that they concede. Aside from the energy to be gotten from feeding on others, what is it you're really hoping to gain?

Dirk,
did you read this post from truth seeker ?
want to answer the questions ?

 

[Dirk]

I have to ask, other than being on that diet, are you connected in any way to that organization?

I am neither on the diet, nor connected to that ´organization´.

I'd also like to say that you seem to have a strong be right program - meaning that you feel the need to be right to the point that you'll go round and round with someone in the hopes that you'll drain them enough so that they concede. Aside from the energy to be gotten from feeding on others, what is it you're really hoping to gain?

I do have a strong ´be right´ program and I am aware of that, though not all the time. I love to be right, but seeing the truth I like even more. When someone proves me otherwise, I am willing to admit. I just have not seen utterly convincing evidence that eating meat is optimal and I would like to see it. But at this point, I don´t think there is, otherwise you would have come up with it by now. The best evidence eventually comes from personal experience.

What I am trying to gain? Though I still see a low fat raw vegan diet as an optimal diet, at least in an optimal and peaceful world, I am trying to find a diet that works in practise, in a world influenced by climate changes and psychopathic influences.

Though you may not be aware of it, I am more and more seeing and even being converted to your point of view, despite there not being 100% convincing evidence for it.

Thanks for pointing out that I might be feeding on others with some of my comments. I will think about it.

 

[Laura]

Okay, time to call "time" here. I think that enough time has been taken away from serious researchers on this forum dealing with someone who has not done the research and has very little factual data to hand and is running mainly on some sort of "true believer" in the claims of a guru promoting a rather bizarre diet and lifestyle.

Dirk, you first need to study evolution as a science from both sides of the question: pro and con; and then paleontology, biology, and many other things just to be able to make it worth our while to talk to you. It's one thing to discuss with a professional who may hold a different view but at least has the background to discuss it in a serious way, and quite another for professionals to try to discuss with a true believer/follower of some idea or other. I'm sorry, but we don't have the time - and the planet doesn't have the time either.

If you think we are wrong, fine, you are entitled to think that. There are other forums where you will find people who agree with you enthusiastically and where you can be a star.

If you came here to learn, then you aren't going about it in a very efficient way.

What I notice most particularly about your argumentation is a repeated tendency to subconscious selection and substitution of data which again and again leads to chronic avoidance of the crux of the mater. This is generally due to an individual having been subjected to conversive thinking. If you are not sure what I mean by this, let me direct you to an example that is horrifying, but real. Get a copy of Evidence of Revision and watch it all the way through. Toward the end, where they are covering the assassination of Bobby Kennedy, you will hear an interrogation. The subject is an ordinary California woman named Sandy Serrano and the interrogator is Detective Hank Hernandez. While this is an extreme example, this is what happens to people in our society on many levels and in many ways throughout their lives. It seems to me that it has been done to you and your brain is literally in knots - congested areas that prevent you from going where you need to go for a breakthrough.

Another way you might explore this would be to read about Transmarginal Inhibition. I've written an article on it here:

http://66.90.73.49/articles/show/136090-Transmarginal-Inhibition

Understand that I am not diagnosing here, I'm just pointing out that we've seen this drama so many times, and it plays out the same way over and over again. We have a closed moderator's forum where a number of licensed professionals in various fields including medical and psychological are onboard. The way we deal with forum issues is determined there based on comparing observations, analysis, and long experience. While I offer input myself, I'm usually not the one who makes the decision. I just implement it. The forum members themselves are getting more and more competent at this process themselves; the ultimate goal is to keep the noise down and exclude individuals who are clearly pathological because we simply are not set up or equipped to deal with them nor do we wish to.

I'm not saying that you are pathological, but your writing style, your argumentation, even your beliefs, are clearly moving rather close to what we, here, consider pathology. Whether that is natural to you or is simply habits you have adopted, or is a result of poor diet and brain chemistry imbalance, we can't know.

So, the bottom line is this, I'm closing this thread and you are being put on no-post status until you have had some time to do some reading. If you want to, that is. You can go away mad, or you can take this as an invitation to learn, it's up to you. When you think you have settled down, when you think you can interact as a mature adult instead of coming across as someone with ADHD (which is, quite frankly, how you come across!), you can contact a moderator and try again.

 

[Joe]

I could be misunderstanding you, and I'm not trying to be argumentative here, but why do you say it is it pointless to compare humans to monkeys or apes or our ancestors? Apes aren't monkeys either and people lump them together and mix them up all the time. I agree with you, we eat meat now and it is good for us. Isn't it worthwhile to ask why?

Not in the context of Dirk's line of thinking, which was rather discombobulated. Primates eat mainly fruits and vegetation. We are descended from primates. Why don't we today eat just fruits and vegetation since that is our ancestry. That was Dirk's reasoning and to my mind it was a pointless exercise in trying to compare two radically different species, not because we are genetically so different, but because our lifestyles are so radically different, not to mention the whole area of "spiritual" or "consciousness" difference between humans and primates, which darwinism (and modern science) basically ignore. They want to convince the world that humans are just "big brained monkeys" because that way you don't have to deal with the annoying problem of consciousness.