Re: Humans as scavengers


Lee Olsen wrote:
Paul Crowley wrote:
"Lee Olsen" <paleocity@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1168660843.942999.270180@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

. . and he provided a good example of modern
PA 'thinking'.

snikers...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
I was wondering if you could resolve an argument for me. I was talking
to a friend about the natural diet of humans. It was my stance that
humans have a rather robust digestive system as compared to most
animals, and are capable of eating food that's considerably ripened
beyond that which most animals can eat. I went on to say that we were
gatherers much more than we were hunters, and that we were scavengers
beyond anything else.

You are quite correct. I don't have anything peer reviewed,


What a surprise!

No Crowley, the final site report has not yet been completed that could
very well be an example of what snikers was looking for, see last
paragraph below.

It is no surprise that he is correct, neither hunting OR scavenging has
been refuted for early Homo and plenty of examples of late Homo
scavenging can be given. Most believe some combination of BOTH were
employed, at least of those not hanging out at the pub for their
information.

I don't have anything (at hand) peer reviewed that the earth is round
either, it does not mean peer reviewed work is not available at the
library or is in process.


<snip>

We also adjust fine to an almost total meat diet, showing we would have
no trouble as scavengers.

Err . . . how come you cannot provide ONE
single example of human (or hominid) population
that lives (or lived) BY SCAVENGING ?

Reading comp problems again? Go back and read DeVoto's Lewis and Clark
example. They scavenged that whale, end of story. Where did you ever
get the stupid idea that it has been claimed that populations of humans
or lived "BY SCAVENGING"??? Your attempts at wooden man tactics are
pathetic and childish. Cite you source...put up or shut up.

The question that you so ignorantly ignored was about our tolerance
for somewhat-rancid meat. The issue about scavenging has not been
completely resolved in the literature, and is a totally different
issue. A group could, for instance, kill an animal by hunting and feed
on it until it did turn rancid. A group could kill an animal one week
and scavenge an animal the next, thus mixing hunting with scavenging,
just EXACTLY as other predators do. There is nothing unusual about this
scenario at all, it is the norm, not the exception.

I notice you did not provide one solitary example, peer reviewed or
otherwise, to refute the examples given. What's the matter, the lads
down at the pub stop feeding you information?


How come you cannot provide ONE single
example of human population that DOES ANY
scavenging of rotten meat ?

Snikers said; "beyond anything else". He didn't say ONLY. Your
inability to read demonstrates how you continually come up with
hysterically funny ideas like "chimps can't dig". And what difference
would it make, rotten is rotten, scavenged or not. Where did you get
this wooden-population idea that man is/was some sort of scavenger
ONLY (do you believe everything you hear down at the pub?)?


Meat turns rancid whether it is killed by hunting or scavenging. The
question was, again, about eating something rancid, how it was obtained
has not been fully resolved or REFUTED.

It's the classic case of PA "thinking":
"We know what we want to believe -- so

You are delusional, hard evidence was given, and no evidence has been
given by you or anyone else to refute the examples.


that's what we are going to believe -- and to
hell all the evidence staring us in the face."

So, the fact that Eskimos/Inuit (and probably most Neandertals)
can/could function just fine on a nearly total meat diet and anyone who
was brought up on eating rancid items (and some who weren't) can do
just fine and this can't be refuted. The only thing there is to
believe is the cold hard facts.

If the Inuit ate only meat they would die. It's the blubber, skin and
offal that gives them the critical nutrients to survive, the meat is
just protein. Same for arctic wolves and polar bears.




To review. The largest animals with stone tool-cut marks are hippos
and elephants. It is hardly likely these were killed by early Homo,
therefore, as snikers suggested, scavenged. Only much later is there
evidence for the killing of large animals. The smaller animals were
probably hunted. There is nothing inconsistent with what snikers
claimed. Many ethnographic accounts prove we can and do eat rancid
food.

Marc cited an example of tools and a whale being found together on an
African beach. No one is suggesting early Homo (of over 1 million years
ago) had the technology to hunt whales in open water. If it turns out,
when the final site report is released, the whale bones have stone tool
cut marks on them, this will be a peer-reviewed example (scavenging)
that snikers is looking for.




Paul.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Move over Piltdown, here comes AAH
    ... Pauline M Ross wrote: ... >>If you can get a hold of Ancestors: In Search of Human Origins, Random, ... there's an entire chapter on scavenging and possible ... Hunting and Scavenging by Early Humans: ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Humans as scavengers
    ... to a friend about the natural diet of humans. ... beyond that which most animals can eat. ... It is no surprise that he is correct, neither hunting OR scavenging has ... Meat turns rancid whether it is killed by hunting or scavenging. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Humans as scavengers
    ... to a friend about the natural diet of humans. ... that we shouldn't eat meat. ... thinks human are in any way consistent with scavenging is a dimwit. ... 'Gathering' is of plants, and items like seeds, ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Vegan M.D. vs The Atkins Corporation
    ... with meat flavor and nutrients such as taurine added. ... > to digest cellulose, which means that we cannot digest most common ... They didn't exist when humans first evolved. ... The inherent inefficiency of feeding edible plants to animals, ...
    (sci.med.nutrition)
  • Re: Neutering -- Negative Health effects
    ... Humans are not unique in being the ... Dogs cannot express ... assume they are meat robots. ... decisions for other animals. ...
    (rec.pets.dogs.health)