By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
scrapking said:
Stefan.De.Machtige said:

Not only did they eat much meat. Those guys ate perhaps 5 to 10 times more meat.

Brave lads, we can't measure up to those guys .

Ummmm....   got a link for that?  Because I can cite a tonne of sources that say otherwise, including analysis of mummified human hair and rehydration of fossilized human stool that doesn't leave much to the imagination about what people ate in times gone by.  All the evidence I've seen suggests your statement is categorically false.  It is true that meat consumption has dropped in a few countries over the last generation or so, which is positive, but it's nowhere near the 80-90% drop you suggest.  I can't see any way in which your statement could be correct, unless you're talking an incredibly short span of time, and an incredibly tiny geographic area that bucked the global trend.

EDIT:  I see in a follow-up post you said prehistory.  Now we know you're incorrect.  It's a myth that hunter-gatherers mostly hunted.  Most hunter-gatherer populations mostly gathered and had diets rich in plant foods.  This isn't a matter of debate, you can look at mummified hair and analyze it to get a sense of their diet.  Ditto when you find fossilized human stool.  A whole food vegan diet is more paleo than the so-called "paleo diet".

Prehistorical also had a very long aged live.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."