1.How is it that guys like Robb Wolf on cooked paleo also have good health results?
Robb wolf is addicted to coffee and seems to always have some sort of "problem"
2.What about calcium since there is no fresh squeezed veggie juices?
Eat small fishes with bones, blood, leafy greens, oranges etc.
3.Sesame seeds/flax seeds ok?
No imo
4.How about homemade mayo for chicken salad?
Eggs+apple cider vinegar+oil(olive/macnut/tallow etc.)
5.Homemade coconut milk/almond milk, what else is recommended as far as liquids?
water, fruit juices if you can tolerate them? Coconut water. 
8.Sweets?
Fruits, honey

Here is a report showing AGE-levels for cooked foods, some of which have been boiled. Note how even the boiled foods, while containing fewer amounts of heat-created toxins than other types of cooked foods, still contain sizeable amounts of such toxins:-


http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=de&rlz=1G1GGLQ_DEAT362&q=cache:UJZQmrLDaPkJ:http://marshfieldceliac.weebly.com/uploads/2/5/5/7/2557865/ada_ages_in_food_reduction1.pdf+advanced+glycation+end+products+levels+in+foods&ct=clnk#7

According to the study cooked plant foods contain negligible amounts of AGEs(potatoes and rice had almost 0, even bread was close to 0), in my first comment I was referencing plant foods for the most part but its good to know that no matter what the cooking methods meats generally contain a lot of AGEs.

Plus, the trollish claim that cooking makes food more nutrient-rich is similiarly ridiculous given plentiful reports re nutrient-loss caused by cooking:-

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O39-cookinglossofnutrients.html

http://nutritiondata.self.com/topics/processing

Only exceptions include things like grains, but grains are a health-problem even when cooked, plus cooking creates additional heat-created toxins in the process.

You misread what I said, I was saying cooked meat is less nutrient dense then raw meat.  Regarding grains if you look at the chart you provided most grains have near 0 AGEs so again I don't think the heat created toxins are the problem. 

  The whole point is that most modern cattle, however grassfed, are severely inbred(and therefore unhealthy) so as to provide far inferior meat to raw wild game. Besides, feeding on grass does NOT mean they are on the same level as raw wild animals as, say, a wild aurochs in palaeo times would have had access to plants(ie herbs) other than just grass/hay. I've been told by 1 grassfed-meat (rawpalaeo)farmer that adding herbs like clover makes a hell of a difference to the nutritional profile of his grassfed meats, for instance.

My mistake when I said nutrient, I meant to refer to macro-nutrient.  The macro-nutrient content of animals never changes(unless fed grains), of course the domestic meat is probably less micronutrient dense but this is an assumption. Hybridized fruits have a different macro-nutrient and micro-nutrient makeup then wild fruit, 75% of the carbohydrates are fiber compared to the 20ish% in cultivated fruits. Wild fruit is nearly inedible to humans, especially without processing.  Can the same be said for wild game?? I don't think you get that we can feed the cultivated cows wild foods and they will end up with similar nutrient content to wild aurochs, this isn't the case for cultivated fruits.

Domesticated animals aren't hybridized for certain macronutrients like fruit, they are hybridized for other reasons.  If they hybridized cows to have more fat or protien that would be similar to hybridized plant foods but they don't afaik.  The composition of domesticated fruits is radically different than wild fruit, the same can't be said for domesticated animals.

Check out how different wild fruits are compared to domesticated
                %water    %lipid %protein %sugar    %fiber
wild fruit           81.0      4.9          9.5       13.9     33.6
domestic fruit   84.8      2.5          5.5        34.0     10.0
domestic
vegetables        90.3      1.9          18.8        24.0    10.0

http://cast.uark.edu/local/icaes/conferences/wburg/posters/nconklin/conklin.html

For the most part though I've had plain lean steaks and vegetables (probably 75%).

Anyone would resort to fast food and think they were addicts if they had to rely on lean steaks and vegetables for there main source of calories.  Your body needs calories and it will get them any way necessary which usually entails cravings for extremely calorie dense foods(i.e. taco bell).

Start drenching your steaks and vegetables in butter/tallow/coconut oil etc. Up your fruit consumption(preferably fresh) and maybe add some cooked starches(drench these in butter/tallow/coconut oil as well).  If you can tolerate nuts/fatty fruits eat a couple ounces of those, preferably macadamia nuts or avocado.  The big key imo is to drench all your food in animal fat, if you do this you will most likley get enough calories.  If you continue to have cravings download cronometer and start entering your daily food intakes, aim for 2500-3000+ depending on lifestyle.

Do you have percentages for other monkeys like chimps?

It should be similar to gorillas as they have very similar gut anatomy.

Are you implying that a measurable amount of energy is gained, if any at all, from the fermentation?

I'm not implying anything, its a fact.  Fermentable fiber produces short chain fatty acids in the colon which are absorbed and used as energy.

Fiber behaves differently depending on whether its fermentable or not.  Your assumption that all fiber irritates the digestive system and causes stress isn't really backed up by anything.  I don't think theirs even evidence that non-fermentable fiber behaves the way you think it does.

No energy is gained from this. Resources are wasted just for the digestive system to handle the plants.

Humans acquire 2-5% of there total dietary energy from the bacterial fermentation of fiber into Short chain fatty acids.  Explain to us what resources are wasted?  The ones doing all the work are your gut bacteria.

Not too sure about the estrogen problem but if your interested in experimenting gelatin could be an option for overcoming the joint pain and loss of collagen.

I dunno but I find water with a tiny dash of salt hydrates me better then pure RO water.

I meant to specify apes. Apes (with an exception of humans) can digest vegetation. Fruit isn't a significant food as it's not common enough to provide calories to a human population.

Great apes are hind gut fermenters, meaning they ferment fiber into short chain fatty acids for the majority energy.  Humans have the same exact capability to ferment fiber except we can only ferment a tiny amount because we do not have the large intestine volume as apes do. 

Humans have a much larger small intestine than apes as we rely on highly digestible foods but we still have the capability to ferment fiber just like our great ape cousins.

Other than apes, most monkeys eat lots of fruit with little animal products. We can eat fruit and not have problems so long as they aren't super high in sugar because of genetic breeding.

Monkeys eat highly fibrous fruits which are fermented to Short chain fatty acids for energy(apes rely on SFA for over 50% of there energy intake).  If you tried to eat there fruits you would probably find them pretty inedible, humans are actually adapted to the "super high in sugar" fruits because of our gut physiology.

Red palm oil has 11mg per tbsp

Its a fruit so it meets your prereq

They have sally fallon as one of the experts but I think it would be a much better debate if they had someone like chris masterjohn who actually knows the science.