Since the Animal Rights guys wanted to discuss this over at the Environmental Board, which I objected, I decided I'd let you have your shot at me over here were it is proper!
1) We know that the earliest upright-walking (bipedal) hominids, the australopithecines, evolved in Africa about 5 million years ago, and that they shared a common ancestor with modern chimpanzees shortly before that time. Modern people and chimpanzees share an estimated 98.5% of our DNA sequence, making us more closely related to each other than either is to any other animal species.
2) Today, hunting by chimpanzees at Gombe has been well documented (Teleki 1973; Goodall 1986), and hunting has also been observed at most other sites in Africa where chimpanzees have been studied, including Mahale Mountains National Park (Uehara et al. 1992) (also in Tanzania) and Tai National Park in Ivory Coast in West Africa (Boesch and Boesch 1989). At Gombe, we now know that chimpanzees may kill and eat more than 150 small and medium sized animals such as monkeys, wild pigs and small antelopes each year.
3) When Jane Goodall first observed wild chimpanzees hunting and eating meat nearly 40 years ago, skeptics suggested that their behavior was aberrant and that the amount of meat eaten was trivial. Today, we know that chimpanzees everywhere eat mainly fruit, but are also predators in their forest ecosystems. In some sites the quantity of meat eaten by a chimpanzee community may approach one ton annually.
4) The presence of primitive stone tools in the fossil record tells us that 2.5 million years ago early hominids were using stone implements to cut the flesh off the bones of large animals that they had either hunted or whose carcasses they had scavenged.
Now .. few common objections I've run into.
1) We don't have carnivor teeth! Well .. no .. today, we do not, but our ancestors K-9 teeth were much more developed than that of modern humans. It was our tool use that suplanted our need to "rip" flesh with our teeth, and as such, we evolved accordingly.
2) It's culture, not nature. Well .. this is partially true. We humans are capable of surviving on either meat or plant material, with the exception of pure cellulose material, as we lack the enzyme to break the cellulose bond. Biochemically, there is no discrimination between plant protein vs animal protein .. it is all just amino acids to the body.
3) Read one gal who said we can't kill and consume our own meat with our bare hands. This is just reaching for straws. Insects are animals ... and we can eat the crap out of insects all day long. Small rodents could easily be over come as well. But more likely is the explanation in the article. Fist of all, we barely resemble our early ancestors, who were likely much stronger and adapted for the task. Then ... Early hominids were likely scavengers. That left over Zebra Leg was a meal ... we didn't have to kill it, nor did we have to breech the skin .. it was torn apart and ready to consume.
That said .. I don't object to anyone being a vegetarian. I say it's your choice. But the argument put forth on the Environmental Board that humans were never intended to eat meat and that we evolved from pure frutavores is not founded in science.
Well, we're probably not fruitavores, even if we evolved from them (and even that is a subject for debate!). The fact is, we're capable of eating lots of things. One could argue that we're natural omnivores, meant to eat some meat--or that we're herbivores who are capable of eating meat. Really, the difference is one of semantics. The fact remains that people can live very well without eating meat, but not without ever eating plants.
[QUOTE=ManzanitaBear;641545]Well, we're probably not fruitavores, even if we evolved from them (and even that is a subject for debate!). The fact is, we're capable of eating lots of things. One could argue that we're natural omnivores, meant to eat some meat--or that we're herbivores who are capable of eating meat. Really, the difference is one of semantics. The fact remains that people can live very well without eating meat, but not without ever eating plants.[/QUOTE]
I don't dispute your position at all! We definitely need fruit and to a lesser extent vegetable material. I wouldn't even dispute that vegetarianism is a very healthy life style. You seem to be a sane individual, who believes in making choices for yourself, but you don't seem the type who is going to come up to me and make a statement like one fella did on the Environmental board, and claim I'm an immoral person, and that people who eat meat can't be an environmentalist, and for that matter, people aren't designed to eat meat.
Sorry that guy confronted you and resorted to name-calling and such. I'm vegetarian (actually ovo-lacto-pesci-vegetarian to be exact) because I believe it's the best path FOR ME. I'd never presume to know the best path for someone else.
I spent 3 months working on oil rigs in NM and TX and got no end of crap for being vegetarian out there, but once the guys realized I'm not the sort that was going to berate them for their meal choices they calmed down and left me be.
Whether humans evolved as strict vegetarians or vegans or frugivores or whatever is not the point. The point these days is that people can live long, happy, healthy lives without eating meat. And this is important because of the fact that the animal agriculture industry - in other words, the slaughterhouses and factory hen farms, etc. - are such CRUEL industries that cause animals so much suffering.
People should not be supporting these industries. That's the bottom line. And that is what the people in the AR/AW forum are always trying to put across.
Nobody gives a sh*t what Neanderthals ate, or whether or not humans discovered fire in order to roast their cave bear steaks. What matters today is that animals suffer so that people can stuff their faces with burgers and pork chops that they not only don't need but that aren't even good for them.
I agree that our ancient history is not overly relevant to what we chose do eat today. I believe the argument exists in order to justify certain type of eating choices.
My rational for not eating any kind of flesh goes back to the ancient Chinese and Indian medical systems which say that what we eat influences not just our physical body; but, also our Internal Energy, our Spirit and our Heart. An interesting often overlooked fact is that even though the Brahmins were strict lacto-vegetarians, ancient Hindu Warriors were allowed and even suppose to eat meat. A vegetarian diet would not give them the necessary body, mind and heart to be as good a warrior as they good be.
Therefore, I do not eat the flesh of animals because it is more closely tied to the Earth, the grosser emotions and desires and a less calm and peaceful mental state. If you notice most religions which speak of it,do not have their God (gods) eating anything grown on this plane of existence. They "eat" special foods and some traditions even say that eating these special foods make a human more than human. On the other hand, demons always craved food from this plane, especially human flesh. It is one of the things that separated them from the higher planes of existence.
i believe that if a person wishes to break his/her bonds to this plane of existence, he/she must not eat foods (flesh) which will strengthen their ties to the Earth. Animals are more closely tied to this earth and their lives by virtue of their minds and desires. While I am not saying that plants have no desire to live, IMHO, it is less strong than that of animals. Therefore, eating plants will bind you to the Earth less strongly than animal flesh.
It is not even a matter of right or wrong for me. If you want stronger Earthly desires, eat flesh. If you want to brake free of these kinds of desires, do eat not flesh.
Each person needs to make that choice for him/herself.
I also eat fish, dairy products, and occasionally eggs. I followed this diet after talking to a colleague, and wondered how I would manage keeping to this diet (since I travel a great deal for work). After a month, I lost my desire to eat meat.
I guess this shows that we are an adaptive species, when it come to food.
I now frequently encounter people (like the person who opened this dialogue) who seem irritated by my food choices. I don't discuss my choice, and never recommend it when people hear about my diet.
Why are people so "taken back" by our choice not to eat meat?
I think that is more interesting than our decision not to eat meat!
hey guys, i gave up meat (mainly fish and chicken) almost 11 years ago while in college. I never used to eat red meat. It was a snap decision after watching a video of slaughter and the conditions animals are kept in. I suddenly realised I cannot encourage such violence.
It been relatively easy, and there are lots of yummy veggie options available. I encourage people to try it if they have been thinking about it, you will find yourself feel lighter, savouring the taste and variety of vegetables much more!
