On Thu, 29 Mar 2001, Phosphor wrote:

> Amadeus said animal carcass was a poor source of fat.  This is indeed a
> foolish, dim-witted comment, although i consider cretinous to be most
> appropriate.

Actually, Amadeus did not make a general claim about animal
carcasses being a poor source of fat.  What he has claimed is
that the carcasses of the typical animals that live in arid
savannah environments are a poor source of fat, and he has
provided documentation for that claim from a source that is
generally respected around here: Loren Cordain.  And he has
argued that people living in such environments have to make
fairly extensive use of plant foods.

I share the skepticism of many here regarding Amadeus's theory
that tubers were a mainstay of the savannah diet.  At least, I'd
need to have some more information about the types and quantities
of tubers available in that environment before I would be
persuaded.  But if that information is forthcoming, I'm prepared
to change my mind.  And please note that Amadeus did provide
documentation for his theory, in the research of Wrangham, et al.
Yes, that research is disputed in the paleoanthropological
community, but so is virtually every theory.

You may not like it, but he's not just making this stuff up.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]