On this list, the topics range from insulting fat people to traveling back a
theoretical million years - something for everyone. It's the variety that
keeps me interested. If it were just about 'carrots: yes or no', most
subscribers would bail on us, dude.

Arthur McConnachie
[log in to unmask]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Raymond, Charles E. x1280" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2000 8:37 AM
Subject: [P-F] Off topic posts?


> Maybe I'm just in ketosis and looking for trouble, I dunno but seeing as
how
> we were all reminded that exercise posts were not related to a support
list
> dedicated to Paleo eating. How is the below considered support or on
topic?
> This is really just mental masturbation and not very helpful to anyone
> interested in eating a Paleo diet. I can't go to the store with this info.
> And benefit from it, I can't tell someone this info. And consider it
advice
> or support. Why is it here? Isn't there a more scientific list for this
type
> of, IMO, useless information?
>
> [SNIP]
>
> Woody plants disappeared (beside lower temperatures) because of extreme
> dryness in winters.
> The bioprodictiviy, estimated to have been similar to today(4-5 big
animals
> per 100 ha) then was reduced to about 10 percent of before.  This
explains,
> why (at least in europe) so few remainders were found from glacials, and
so
> much more artefacts from thermals and onset stages.
> Ice age - last about 2 mio years- is made up for half or a little less
from
> thermals (with climate like today) and the rest from glacials.
>         >
>         >Although homo sapiens being Primates could not eat this grass,
they
> could
>         >exploit the animals wh
> o did.  These animals were known as the Pleistocene
>         >Megafauna and existed in far greater numbers than all of our
> domestic and
>         >wild animals alive today.  Imagine the Buffalo herds of the old
> American
>         >west.  Now multiply their population by four and their individual
> size by
>         >two.
>         >  Then add several other species of much larger size in similar
> numbers.
>         >This was indeed the "happy hunting ground" of the American
> Dreamtime.
>
> Very happy. And what did they drink? If in Ketosis?
>         > <snip> the "less productive tropical regions".
>
>         >In short, during the Pleistocene, the diet of Man would have been
> closer to
>         >the Inuit than the Bushman.
>
> And exactely where and when did this inuit-like pleistocene *climate*
> happen? Whould you mind defining *where* Steppe/thundra (with grass only
and
> so much big animals)
> happened to be? Let say in the year 30000bc
> or65000 bc or from 80000bc to 1
> 30000bc? Or when else.
>
> And when it was in Africa in a glacial, wasn't it so, than less *dry* more
> favourable landscapes with woods and exploitable plants were reachable
> within a few 100 miles?
> I can't see that this megafauna-steppe picture you use to portray lasted
for
> a longer time and at large areas.
> If you have differrent informations, then please offer them here exactely.
> regards
> Amadee S.
> (last inquiry before heading - Coconut tree tropical beach zone)
>