It IS relevant. It is Scientific Fact that evolution is real. From there,
diet, climate, environment, etc dictated our evolution to who we are today
as a species. That is the basis for this whole diet.



On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 3:28 PM, william <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> On 02/24/2012 12:59 PM, Kenneth Anderson wrote:
>
>> The moderator might ban religion (and politics and sex) from the list
>> and keep only the diet as a subject.
>>
>
> I did not realize that the mention of the Hebrew name of the ship builder
> would set off a religious squabble. Thought it was history.
> Should have used the earlier Sumerian name, Ziu-Sudra, or, better, no name
> at all.
>
>  The problem is that evolution
>
>> figures strongly in the paleo diet and every time evolution is
>> brought up, the nonevolution religionists bring up religion and
>> dominate the time, even though they appear to be a minority. It might
>> be a bit more dull that way, but less emotional and more
>> diet-oriented---although I don't really like the idea of banning.
>>
>>
> I would vote for the banning of evolution, unless someone can show that it
> is relevant.
>
> William
>