It's not belief in marketing, it's zealot like belief in the advancement of science. People are dissatisfied with what they imagine to be their fate, they believe science can achieve anything and are basically waiting for science to produce a silver bullet to morally absolve man of his sins, they fail to see the technology and knowledge already exists. They fail to see their society is corrupted by corporate influence. It's similar in my experience to Alex Jone's "Goblin People". They are not interested in actually holding a real conversation, they believe themselves to be preaching the gospel on high, they shut down any descent to their assumptions with ridicule and insult, they obscure the truth to foster their own enterprise. They are intellectual elitists who worship a game that was created to trick them into subservience.

http://www.13.waisays.com/plants.htm

The above is 1  possible viewpoint among many. I personally only eat a few vegetables such as radishes and carrots. I will also eat   raw salad leaves even though I don`t like the taste of them, as a raw salad is easier for the mundanes(I mean, "cooked-foodists"       )to accept on a social level. My rule/guess is that the higher the levels of antinutrients in the raw vegetable, the less it tastes good, so raw broccoli/raw kale are out.

I agree, and believe though hunger may have driven people to eat grains in times of want, it wasn't the primary factor in the development of the widespread grain addiction that spawned the agricultural revolution. From my point of view there isnt a linear progression of cause and effect that easily explains the rise of the grain headed hominids. There is an element of quantum co-arising, that poses a "chicken or the egg" dichotomy which cannot be addressed with "either or"linear thinking. 

As Gabor Mates work has shown, addiction is a holistic phenomenon, and the presence of addictive substance in the environment are often not nearly important as the patterns of behavior established by the society at large. Sociological factors must of played a huge role, at the time of the divergence between "hunter gatherer' and agrarian. The fact is that though in some areas humans had diminished the big game staples of hunting cultures, there continued to be nomadic people who continued to follow the herds to new frontiers...and in many cases succeeded in becoming herders of large open range livestock, which provided them everything they needed....... while in other cases the early agrarians began to set up long term structures and institutional establishments. Even in time of famine and want the agrarians stayed put and would no longer venture out in search of food, and when the locust and pest ate up their grain crops many starved, rather than resort to gathering the insects, and digging for grubs. The same spirit which made them raise the temples to the gods, and become attached to a central location, is the same spirit of addiction which lent itself to the rise of a grain brain culture.

This did not happen overnight....the  establishment of religious temples, and stone permanent structures of early civilization occurred during transitional phases, usually near water ways where even when there was no hunting, fish was plentiful as primary staple, and enabled many early agricultural communities to prosper and populations to explode. Over the course of generations deeply ingrained behavior pasterns developed, the people became totally domesticated and acculturated, indoctrinated with ideology, they forgot entirely the ways of their nomadic ancestors. Divisions of labor and hierarchy emerged and created an underclass who no longer had the freedom, time, or know how to forage and fish for supplemental food. This underclass became entirely addicted to the daily bread rations, and became reliant on the nectar of the tards( known as wine and beer) for their diversions....without even realizing it humanity became simultaneously addicted to Grain, as well as to civilization itself.

These are general observations which span the gamut of the many conflicting sides humanity and not a moral judgment...... perhaps Aldous Huxley was right in, how prescribing an opiate to the masses is in some way necessary in order to make people of civilization enjoy a life of servitude. Growing and using various forms of dope has brought more humans together than was possible in hunter gatherer groups, where without narcotics there seems to be a natural limit to the number of people the tribal alpha hierarchy can tolerate.

I was at a job sight once and there as a black man, a bi racial, a Cuban, a Guatemalan, a Mexican, and myself smoking a joint, and the black man says with a huge smile as he takes a hit "this is the one thing that can bring everyone together" and everybody there laughs . Be it sharing tea, smoking tobacco, coffee, or even "Breaking bread" there seems to be something about these euphoric substances which can break down primal barriers and unite large numbers of people...and even if nations of people are only united out of some hopeless codependency, which is overall detrimental to the health of the individual, perhaps some how by creating unity and cooperation, the communal living dope growing agrarian humanity isnt without some merit??

Chickens don't eat grass.

I saw a few chickens eat individual blades of grass, but mostly they just picked at it and kicked it around. Not very impressive, in my view. I'm sure if you starved them you could get them to eat most anything.

My guess is that if she had put down a pile of bugs and a pile of grass next to each other, the bugs would be gone before the chickens even touched the grass.