> How much is considerable for you?
> As much as chimps eat? 1.5% insects and 2% meat?
> I called early hominids
> (exactely : our anchestors' line before they learnt to use stone
> tools) "almost fruitarian" because every fruitarian p robably has a
> small insect portion in the food.

But there is no concensus on exactly what species of primates (that
may or may not exist today) our ancestors actually *are*.  I don't see
any way around an "I believe..." type of debate on the subject because
there is too much contradictory evidence.  I don't have specific
references at hand.  One study that indicated a higher (20%-40%, if I
remember correctly) level of insects in a primate diet was based on
tooth structure and wear.  (I do my e-mail from work, and all that
info is in one *huge* stack of papers at home to organize *someday*!!)

> So before we end up in a term definition what to call a "fruitarian"
> - we can use something else maybe "fruit and vegetable eaters with
> 3.5% animal parts".

Like I said, I disagree that the 3.5% is accurate.  Can we agree to
disagree on what might have actually happened two to four million
years ago?  I realize I won't change your mind, and I assure you that
my own beliefs are also firm.

> What speaks against it is, that the smaller primates are, the more
> insects the include in their diet. We are among the bigger primates,
> aren't we?.

A friend of mine is a PhD in anthropology, and spent time in Africa
studying the gorillas as well as other primates.  I don't believe he
published anything in a peer-reviewed journal about it, but I do have
a photograph of him with the gorillas.  :-)  He also told me that
insects make up a majority of the caloric intake of many of the
so-called vegetarian primate species.  He was amazed that folks think
that gorillas eat mainly vegetation, when in the wild he did not find
that to be the case.  He indicated that the primates he was with were
so adept at catching and eating the bugs that you had to be with them
for quite a while to even figure out that's what was going on.

> You tell me to be tired repeating something, what did you repeat?

I disagreed with your first post on this thread, as did a couple
others, but my words did not make enough impression to be answered, I
guess.  The next thing I knew, you were saying that we all agree on
the fact that the early hominids were frutarians.  I just felt that
there is room for an opposing viewpoint in the discussion, so I said
so again.  I don't find your arguments to be convincing to me, but
that doesn't make either of us right or wrong.  Just not of the same
viewpoint.

Lisa Sporleder
Ester, Alaska