Phil - Either, but I was initially shooting for an examination of the basic assumptions of modern western society. Perhaps that first, then your personal assumptions.

If further replies are on their beliefs / theories / hypothesis about human origins, I suggest they be taken to http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/hot-topics/human-creation-evolution-quantavolution-alien-origins-etc/

Goodsamaritan,

Evolution and human origins are not the same topic. Little green men tossing people on this planet only says how we originally got here, not about our development since that time.

There is no proof that man evolved

...and...

The fact that we bother to discuss this off-topic irrelevancy is proof that we, neolithic man, have devolved.
Shrunken in body and mind indeed.

This is a joke - right?

Modern man is not "neolithic" man. The neolithic period was the last part of the stone age. It ushered in the first agricultural age - this was the so-called Neolithic Revolution - that saw the end of the paleolithic period.

The neolithic period was roughly (very roughly, since it depends upon region) 12000 BC to 1000 BC.

Evolution is not a "theory" in the layman's sense of the word. "Theory", as used by science, is not "theory" as used by everyone else. The misunderstanding is a linguistic one.

Evolution is a scientific model (let's say "Theory" with a capital T), not a small t "theory" like someone's opinion. As a model (formal structure designed based on severe rules of logic to explain empirical data/observations) it is EXTREMELY successful. More so than most...even those that give rise to things like, say, watching TV live via satellite or landing a ship on the moon or building a nuclear bomb. Science uses models (rather than stating "facts") because scientific proof is not concrete, but provisional (Newtonian mechanics works damn well, but Relativistic mechanics works in areas where the Newtonian model breaks down).

It is as close to "fact" as science gets, and science works.

In short, you can take it to the bank...right along with the "theory" that you need to breath air to live.

Played tennis yesterday for the first time in years.

Great workout!

At the moment, I do exclusively body-weight exercises (sit-ups, push-ups, pull-ups, chin-ups, squats, calf raises, etc) and cardio (rope or similar).

I like riding my bike, but haven't at all this year. I used to swim almost every day when we lived by a lake, but now I don't do much swimming, either. Gotta rectify those situations soon.

Interesting piece - thanx for posting!

FYI: I hope my frustration didn't seem pointed at you--it was aimed at Sussman and his ilk, who seem to adopt a political agenda and then seek out information to confirm it.

I should point out that Sussman is not practicing science if he is guilty of seeking info only to confirm what he wants to believe.

Science proper is exactly what humans (and chimps) were doing when we first started making tools.

Cholesterol is the question people keep asking me when I splurge on meats.

I have no ready answer for them because I eat mostly by instinct (except when I'm intentionally experimenting).

How come you folks who eat far more meat than I (not to mention dairy and such, which I don't consume at all) don't have rocks for arteries? Is it due to the fact that what you eat is RAW?

Do non-raw paleo eaters have issues with high cholesterol?

Oh...they also ask about kidneys. too. I suspect because of the Atkins issues.

The notion that humans are either exclusively prey or predator makes no sense and never has. Humans, which popped on the scene about a 1/4 million years ago, may be at the top of the food chain, but they've always been a tasty treat for bears, lions, and gators.

Humans are an opportunistic species. Humans, and earlier primates, may well have been avoiding large critters, but clearly at some point we began chasing their asses down, too. And eating them.

The were studying endurance, but the author keeps saying "fit" as if the terms were synonymous.

The answer to the question, I suspect, is "no". You can increase your endurance, it seems, but I would guess that if one is looking to be "fit", one has to work out a bit more than that.

I'm gonna have to find a shorter article - no time to read all that at the moment!

Ooops - I forgot to answer the other questions.

It's hard to say how long I've followed this sort of dietary thing. I consciously increased my raw intake way back in 1991 or so. I've always eaten raw & extremely rare meats (even before the 90s and before I heard a fancy name for it). I probably wasn't what would be considered "high raw" (80%+ raw by calorie) until 2003 or so, though.

Most of what I eat now is raw, but I am paleo in the sense that I eat no traditional grains like wheat (no breads at all, though once in a blue moon I'll eat rice or raw corn), and no dairy or any kind. I eat fruits, veggies, & meats - the vast majority of it raw.

Lifestryle? No, I don't drink soda or coffee or use most traditional soaps or household cleaners.

I work out several times a week (mostly body weight exercises & cardio) and am self-employed (musician).

I grow my own veggies in my backyard organic garden. I drink on occasion (wine or hard liquors, not beers).

I embrace technology completely.

What are you trying to define? Paleo?

Interesting perspective on technology and control. I'll have to ponder that.