On Sun, 11 Jan 2009 19:21:19 -0500, william <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Post-contact Inuit cooked, IIRC according to Stefansson because they
>thought that white men could not live on raw. Some here apparently
>believe the same. Pre-contact, they had neither pots not reason to use them.

According to sources like "Ancient Pottery of the Pacific Rim"
(http://www.workingdogweb.com/Pottery.htm), Canadian Arctic pottery predates
both the whites and the Inuit (and even pre-dates the pre-Inuit Thule
culture). It says that ceramic clay pottery dates back 3,500 years in the
Arctic. Soapstone pottery also predates the later metal pots of the whites.
Inuit culture apparently developed out of the earlier Thule culture around
500 years ago. 

Soapstone was first used for lamps and later for pots: "Soapstone was
utilized in the construction of lamps, which would heat the Dorset dwelling
during the cold and dark months. The fuel for these fires was the fat from
seals." (Wikipedia) However, it was lit with dried moss and heather, so one
wonders how they would get that in the winter. (Soapstone Lamp,
http://www.greenland.com/content/english/tourist/culture/arts_crafts/the_soapstone_lamp).

>The plentiful seal oil burns with a flame so smoky that the walls of
>their snow houses were black inside - probably their lungs were black
>too. This is a low temperature flame. I would really like to have
>someone try cooking on seal oil before making claims that it is possible.

West coast Eskimos apparently didn't have much problem with smoke from
cooking during the winter, and they even had two "cook rooms"!:

<<A winter house in northwest coastal Alaska was called an “inne”. Built
underground during the summer months, the inne was a permanent dwelling. The
inne had one doorway with steps leading down into the shed. The shed led in
two directions, one to a passageway leading towards the main living area,
and another towards a stormy day cook room. Cooking was normally done in the
main living area under an open skylight to let the smoke out. During bad
weather, to avoid the danger of wet bedding from the open skylight, a skin
covering was drawn over the opening and weighted down, and food was prepared
in the stormy day cook room. This room had a small opening in the roof to
let smoke escape. Heavy skins hung in the doorways prevented excess smoke
from entering the main living area. Furs were also hung close to all
doorways to keep out cold.>>
http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1991/2/91.02.07.x.html

As for Eastern Inuit, multiple (though not all) sites claim that they used
the qulliq for heat and cooking as well as light:

"The qulliq, or soapstone lamp, was probably the most important item any
Inuit woman owned. The qulliq was used for heat, light and cooking"
http://www.mccord-museum.qc.ca/en/collection/artifacts/L61.30.1-3&section=196?Lang=1&accessnumber=L61.30.1-3&section=196
(see also Aboriginal Protocols,
http://74.125.45.132/search?q=cache:KR8Tvv_00tEJ:www.cci-icc.gc.ca/symposium/protocols_e.aspx%3Ftemplate%3Dprint%26+qulliq+cooking&hl=en&amp;ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us)
But I wonder how they could have cooked over the equivalent of a candle flame.

"A qulliq is a traditional seal oil lamp that was used for heating the igloo
or qammaq (sod house) and for cooking." (Interviewing Elders Guidelines,
http://www.naho.ca/english/media_Guidelines.php)

But this book gives a different view for the Eastern Inuit, indicating they
used whale oil only for light and heat: 
American Indian Cooking Before 1500, By Mary Gunderson, E. Barrie Kavasch

>I use snow for insulation every winter. So did the Inuit.
>I use wood for heat, they used human body heat, as their dwelling places
>were small enough.

I've slept overnight in an igloo, and the body heat doesn't do much for you
after nightfall when it gets really cold, though maybe it would do more in a
really well constructed igloo. Plus, as I mentioned, multiple sources claim
the Inuit used the qulliq for some heat as well as light, though probably
not a lot of heat.

>Eating cooked food makes man sick. We have spent 12,000 years proving
>this beyond all doubt, so this endless insistance that paleolithic man
>cooked becomes boring.

I agree that eating only cooked food contributes to illness. I'm not arguing
that we should eat only cooked food, just that avoiding all cooked food is
unnecessary, as I believe even you admit that the Inuit and Nenets cooked
some of their food during the summer, and that it's at least theoretically
possible that tubers could have been cooked and eaten for at least the past
250,000 years (though how much was consumed, I don't know).