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