[R]esistant starch becomes fat (short-chain fatty acids), not glucose.
Resistant starch was likely also consumed by Paleolithic peoples via raw, and after the advent of cooking, briefly-cooked, tubers and legumes, such as the wild African tubers, legume tubers and groundnuts that some African semi-tribal peoples continue to eat to this day. RS is more Paleo than the allegedly “Paleo” demonizers of all starch. If they bothered to read the research, they would know this (see Sex Differences in Food Preferences of Hadza Hunter-Gatherers, link to epjournal.net and “Early Humans Skipped Fruit, Went For Nuts [and legumes, roots, insects and meat],” link to news.discovery.com).
As Paul Jaminet said, his Perfect Health Diet that includes certain starchy foods is more Paleo than “Paleo” (at least the most common conception of it). Heck, even the Inuit traditionally ate wild “Eskimo potatoes” (often raw) and even Loren Cordain allows people following his approach to eat tubers who are active and not trying to lose weight, and Boyd Eaton allows both tubers and legumes. Stefan Lindeberg has studied people who thrive on a tuber-rich diet (The Kitava Study, link to staffanlindeberg.com). Unfortunately, since the days when these early pioneers were most influential, an extreme anti-starch and often anti-carb fringe has formed. In contrast, even Jimmy Moore at times acknowledges that some people thrive on Kitavan-type diets rich in starchy foods.
I’m LC myself, yet resistant starch so far appears to have lowered my fasting, random and postprandial blood glucoses and I appear to handle it better than fruits (though I do eat some fruits too). Haven’t noticed any GI benefits yet, though.