Amadeus:
>However, the acoustic Beatles slogan is from a opponing article, to the
>early tubers theory, from the site i've quoted.

Talk about cherry-picking. The article is generally weak; the conclusions
far-fetched; and as I understand it, doesn't deal with EFA's or brain
growth in a realistic way. Basing such a hypothesis on _calories_ isn't
exactly cutting edge. I am glad you can find a neat looking article to
support your way of eating, but you can hardly take one article in
isolation and then defraud the whole paleo/meat concept. Well, you can, but
who will take you seriously?

>Hm Hm, can you provide and references, where you derive this claim from?
>Or tell, which implication this has for your nutrition and the paleo-aspect?
>Just statements are lame for me.

Like your statement that any more than 10% animal foods is a waste, eh? ;)

BTW, I have been meaning to ask you:

Does it bother you that most all of the plants you are eating are very very
domesticated, often having little resemblense to wild plant foods? Almonds,
for example, were reportedly quite inedible before domestication. All the
veggies are a very far cry from wild plants. Fruit even more so.

So wouldn't your arguments against modern meat apply just as appropriately
to plants?

And do you plant, tend, and "slaughter" your own plant foods? If you don't,
aren't you being a tad hypocritical?


Cheers,
Kirt

Secola  /\  Nieft
[log in to unmask]