At 12:21 1997-12-30 -0500, John C. Pavao wrote:
>Are we saying that our ancestors ate mostly bone marrow and left the rest
>of the animal?  Again, I'm not a scientist, but it seems like that would be
>the most difficult part of the animal to eat.  I should think they would
>eat that last, or if they caught an animal that wasn't enough to be
>filling.  Am I wrong?

If we accept the theory of a (partly) scavenging past, then I think
if you come to a carcass after the lions but before the hyenas (who
might crack the bones) with the help of a stone or two the marrow
could be one of the easiest parts to eat, and probably with less
risc for infections, as it is hidden inside the bones.

- Hans