The pseudoscience frauds make the science fiction claim that humans are
"obligate frugivores" with a natural diet that is a very high percentage of
fruit, and vegetarian too. However, those of us (like me) who have extensive
experience in climbing trees (to pick fruit) know that humans are not adapted
to tree-climbing. Even using tools, we tend to fall out of trees (I was lucky
and survived 3 bad falls).

We (humans) lack the quadrupedal posture, the specialized muscles and curved
hand bones of the frugivore primates (chimps, orangs, who are non-vegetarian by
the way). So the psedudoscience types claim that we are adapated to eating
fruit, while at the same time we lack the capacity to collect it from the trees
where it is most abundant!

Of course the fakes have excuses, but simple logic defeats their excuses. One
excuse is to claim that humans subsisted by collecting fruit from the ground.
That means humans are the last fruit predator in line, and will be eating
spoiled, insect-infested fruit. It also means the food/fruit supply is much
smaller - a negative survival pressure. The "obligate frugivore" claim fails to
meet the requirement of internal logical consistency.

The article below is interesting because primatologists in the field have
occasion to need to climb trees to evaluate the canopy. The article discusses
how one needs to use modern equipment and techniques (adapted from
rock-climbing) in order to safely climb trees. Indirectly, the article
emphasizes that humans are not adapted to tree-climbing - a point the "obligate
frugivore" frauds have yet to provide a consistent, logical explanation for.


Tree Climbing Strategies for Primate Ecological Studies
pp. 237-260     Alain Houle, Colin A. Chapman, William L. Vickery

International Journal of Primatology
February 2004, Volume 25, Issue 1

http://www.kluweronline.com/issn/0164-0291/contents

Primate ecological studies can benefit from accessing the canopy to estimate
intra-tree and inter-tree variation in food availability and nutrient value,
patch and subpatch depletion, foraging efficiency, as well as nest structure
and nesting behaviors, parasitic transmission and predator detectability. We
compare several ways to access the canopy and examine their suitability for
studies of primates. Two of them—the Single Rope Technique and the Climbing
Spur Method—allow people to safely access almost all kinds of trees, regardless
of their size, height or shape. Modern climbing gear and contemporaneous safety
protocols, derived from rock climbers, speleologists, and industrial arborists,
are reliable and appropriate for primate ecological studies. Climbing gear is
specialized and still expensive for students, but tree climbing can be
dangerous during specific maneuvres. Consequently, formal training and
preliminary experience are essential before attempting to collect data. We
discuss the physics of falling, risk assessment associated with a fall, knots,
gear and safety precautions. Finally, we propose a Tree Climbing Safety
Protocol adapted for 2 climbing methods and primate field ecology. Researchers
should be aware that climbing safety depends on their own judgment, which must
be based on competent instruction, experience, and a realistic assessment of
climbing ability. Therefore, the information we provide should be used only to
supplement competent personal instruction and training in situ. Although most
primate observations have been and will mostly be done from the ground in the
future, canopy information complements the observations. Canopy data will add a
significant new dimension to our knowledge of primates by providing strategic
information otherwise unavailable.

Tom Billings