I wish people wouldn't make gross generalisations/assumptions about groups based on the comments of just 1 or 2 individuals. I should point out that the vast majority of rawpalaeodieters(those pesky "raw meat and fat folks"(lol!)) haven't the faintest interest or even remote liking for  Creationism/anti-evolution arguments, and, indeed, for obvious reasons if you think about it, have a bigger, more vested interest than cooked-palaeodieters as regards  favouring the issues of evolution and non-adaptation to specific foods. The only people I know of, even vaguely remotely connected to RAF(Raw Animal Food) diets,  who are of a largely Creationist mindset, are the crazy WAPFers(Weston Price Foundation supporters) who believe, more or less, in a cooked-meat/raw-dairy/fermented grains diet(not exactly really raw or even palaeo, in the first place).  

 

Personally, I think religion(and politics) should be avoided completely on this list unless they have a particularly strong  Palaeo slant. So, for example, it might be barely acceptable to discuss how Palaeolithic-era tribal shamans would go in for eating hallucinogenic mushrooms in order to enhance their trances while doing those beautiful Palaeo cave-paintings in western Europe(OK, it's not even a solid theory, as yet, but, it's a hell of a lot more interesting than discussing Creationism, which, quite frankly, is the polar opposite  of the theory behind a Palaeolithic diet. After all, if we are to believe the literal word of the Bible re Bishop Usher's original interpreation, we, supposedly, only started existing c.4,004 BC, some 6,000 to 14,000 years AFTER the Palaeolithic ended(depending on one's definition of the Palaeolithic era). So, it's either one or the other that has to be true. And this list is for those who believe in the Palaeo version of events.

 

As regards Cordain, I've had enough experience of the archives of this group to know that not everyone or even the majority is a stout follower of Cordain, even if they still follow Palaeo ideas, in general terms. Some are rawpalaeodieters, some are Stefanssonite followers(ie just cooked-animal meat and fat), some are  low-carb/high-fat like Ray Audette(last I checked),  some are Cordainites, and still others sometimes even like to  indulge in dodgy, non-Palaeo foods like dairy or grains.   That's the trouble with the "Palaeo" definition, I guess, everyone has their own different POV as to what it "really" means. 

 

Geoff



 
> Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 15:12:23 -0500
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: On the tone of the digest
> To: [log in to unmask]
> 
> I don't know the history of this site, but the name says PALEOFOOD Digest.
> Did you have that name before Cordain began publishing his work? It seems to
> me that this site is dominated by a few individuals who dismiss all the
> scientific evidence regarding the Paleo diet and evolution. What is that all
> about? I suppose censorship should not take place, but somehow closed-minded
> smart-ass remarks designed to provoke should not rule, as they seem to do.
> Maybe the raw meat and fat folks should have their own digest, and the
> Cordain-paleodiet people another one.
> 
> Ken

_________________________________________________________________
View your Twitter and Flickr updates from one place – Learn more!
http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/137984870/direct/01/