While I agree that William's expression of his perspective is problematic,
he isn't that far off the mark. Ruminants are suited to eating types of food
in which grazing, cud chewing, and fermentation combine to extract nutrients
from these foods. From mouth to anus, we are better equipped for eating
meats. Once digested, they provide a range of amino acids in proportions
that are best suited for meeting our needs, lots of fats to meet our energy
requirements, and even a little sugar to meet our minimal needs for
glucose/glycogen. Clearly there is some variation from one individual to the
next, but the central thesis that we are best suited to eat a diet dominated
by meats is, I think, fairly defensible irrespective of the theory of
evolution. 

Personally, I believe that our current theory of evolution is probably
pretty accurate. Although it has changed significantly over the years, the
central tenet is that we change in response to various environmental factors
that favor survival and reproduction of those best suited to that
environment. Meanwhile, scholars continue to debate many nuances of this
theory.  However, I think that when we lose sight of the fact that it is a
theory, we risk promulgating dogma at the altar of conventional wisdom.


Perhaps William could express his creationist perspective a little more
carefully so Wally isn't incited to pull his hair out in frustration, thus
avoiding experimental hair consumption. :-)
 
Best Wishes, 
Ron