On Wed, 23 Sep 1998 12:11:28 -0400, Jun Verzola <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Amadeus says:
>
>> Example:
>> A pig (recommended in Neanderthin) is a heavily degenerated animal that
>> looks and tastes totally different from a wild boar.
>> And its meat has a completely different composition in many aspects.
>
>Maybe you're merely looking at the relatively recent and
>commercially-driven pig breeds when you say that a pig is "totally
>different" from a wild boar. Here in the Cordillera region of Northern
>Philippines, as well as among other pig-loving forest peoples of
>Southeast Asia, domesticated pigs look and taste very much like wild
>boars. In many communities,
 they are allowed to range and root around
>for food anywhere but within the cultivated fields and garden patches.
>Maybe that accounts for their semi-wild traits.

I know and have seen domesticated pigs that look rather wild and nice
in vacancies (at Fuerteventua i did).
Jun, I'd count that kind of pigs as very close to a wild boar
And acceptable to who may like pigs (I didn't like pigs taste anyway).

Unfortunately is the average meat that can be bought in a supermarket
in western countries *totally* different.
I guess that 98 percent of all pigs
in america and europe (acceptable?).
The animals are given food totally different from the insects herbs and roots
they eat normally.
This shows up in many health relevant parameters like
especially the composition of the fats.
And I think that has to be considered in an attempt to
describe an anchesters' resembling diet.


I think it 7s not possible to "produce" the quantity
of meat for big populations in wild-like quality *if* they eat much of it.
Even in relatively sparse populated areas like the USA.

>> Try to meet a wild boar in the woods "naked with a sharp stick".
>> It could possibly convince you to better collect some hazels.
>
>You're obviously no member of a hunting-gathering community.
Well I'm better in gathering a little.
My feelings prevent me from killing nice big animals, so
hunting is not the right thing for me.

> Here in
>the Cordillera, you don't "try to meet a wild boar in the woods" in
>order to hunt it -- naked or not. Instead, you set up a trap (a simple
>"sharp-stick" affair should do nicely), attract your prey with wild
>yams smeared with blood or rotting flesh, and wait in a high safe
>place overnight for your meal to arrive and kill itself.

Ah building t
raps.
I guess I'd really be a bad hunter not to think of it.
Killing machines were one thing that made Romans so successful
in their anti-celtic and other wars. One way to kill without risking something.

Ok, when building traps, I'd have to reject my argument, that many wild
animals are rather well protected by their strength.
Does anyone know about fossil traps (holes...) that were found?
Any records if early hominids (habilis, erectus) did build them?
I know of big neolithic trap buildings for mass-killing of antelopes
in the near east.

>
>> I can't understand why I'm attacked in myself not eating meats.
>
>I don't know about the others, but I respect your position. It's just
>that when you use wrong arguments (such as those above), you weaken
>your own case.
I'm able to learn.
I'll be happy to learn about new facts that I didn't realize before
an
d will therefore enhance my understanding as a whole.
I think that's what a diskussion is for.

>Jun V.

cheers

Amadeus