Sounds in line with the WAPF accounts of history.
This article says archeologists have found ancient stores of cultivated grains in Israel which indicate man has been farming for at least 23,000 years:
Clarity Magazine » Blog Archive The Myth of the Caveman » Clarity Magazine
This looks interesting:
Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings: Evidence of Advanced Civilization in the Ice Age: Charles H. Hapgood: 9780932813428: Amazon.com: Books
100,000 years not 10,000. Grains= civilization
Last edited by fiercehunter; 04-18-2013 at 09:06 PM.
The problem is, OF COURSE most of what they'll find is grains and stuff with any large groups of people. Large groups of people can not be nomadic, which meat eating requires as most prey is migratory. Get beyond a couple hundred people in one camp, especially back then, and you couldn't move easily to follow the herd.
Also, camps for nomadic meat eating societies wouldn't leave much of anything behind. It's the people that stayed in one place for long periods of time that would leave stuff for future generations to find. Grains allow for staying in one place. Grains allow for civilization to grow beyond what would be the norm. However, if we're to think in terms of evolution (which I thought was the point of primal), humans are still adapting to grains in terms of function. Because it is the more readily available source of food, it could be that humans are slowly evolving into grain eaters, but we're not there yet. For the most part, as a species, due to tools and adaptation and long life spans, we evolve very slowly compared to other creatures that we can see evolving...the ones that have hundreds of generations for every generation of ours.
200 years ago - Animal skin clothes, barefoot, spears, stone/wood tools, no clay pots, fire made by stick friction, nomadic life, temporary tree/bark/branch shelters, no farming/gardening, hunting wild animals, spear-fishing, gathering wild fruits/veg, constant slow moving- no grains except maybe occasional gathering a handful of wild stuff.
Teeth and physical/mental health/strength good.
Fast forward 200 years - Aboriginal man wears modern cloth clothes, wear's shoes, eats grains and other processed foods including fast food, drinks sodas and alcohols, doesn't move much, modern housing provided, modern medicine/dentistry provided, modern education provided.
Teeth and physical/mental health/strength very poor.
Regardless of the health implications since : It seems we have solid evidence that caveman exited as recently as 200 years ago in Australia - Or is this a myth?
Holy crap, that article was full of New Age pseudoreligious bullsh*t.
Evidence of grain eating isn't surprising. Humans are opportunistic omnivores, and will eat what they can. 23,000 years ago, some people looked at some ancient wild wheat-type grass and thought "Hmmm, maybe we can eat that." Maybe they didn't have much success with hunting in their area or something. They tried it, and it didn't kill them, so they continued eating it. It certainly wasn't widespread until the beginning of the Neolithic.
Just because one group seems to have ate some grains a little earlier than previously thought, doesn't mean it's good or healthy.
SW (1/4/12): 326 lbs. (48% BF)
Steak and Eggs SW (5/11/13): 198 lbs.
CW (6/2/13): 185.4 lbs. (??% BF)
GW: 185 lbs. (~15% BF)
0.4 lbs. to go, ??% BF to go
Then why was it killing me?
Knifegill is christened to be high carb now!Tremendous worms of a swarthy nature pursue me across the sandy blank sky. I stop to think. What the devil AM I up to?!notontherug:
the buttstuff...never interested.
My pony picture thread http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread82786.html
And there were pockets of people eating them, in places where wild grass seed was plentiful.
Not all places have wild grasses with easily harvestable seed, this was not a global phenomenon. People in other areas would not have been consuming wild grass seed at all, but other starch sources along with animals/insects. Roots, tubers, fruits, whatever was available whenever it was available... Omnivores are like that.
The idea that we have had 100,000 years to "adapt" does not account for the way that adaptation(evolution) actually works.
If it doesn't kill you before offspring is produced... then it's not a problem where evolution is concerned. No adaptation is necessary.
Science. It's pretty cool.
“You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.”
And that's why I'm here eating HFLC Primal/Paleo.
I'm interested to follow this and see where the debate leads. For me, modern white flour processed foods are still out but I sometimes eat rice and that's a grain. The ancestral diet principles have done me so much good that I listen to all of the criticism on grains and generally avoid them, with extremely good results. Could it be that even if humans have always eaten them, they are still not optimum food and in a time when we don't need to eat them, why should we?
I sense we are at the beginning of a long scientific inquiry into grains which may lead to the conclusion that they are acceptable in some forms, but what that will be we don't know. Certainly the inflammatory properties of wheat seem to be a pretty much proven, but maybe only some wheats? Maybe GM wheat is worse?
But lets not think that just because grains are still in debate, that the general principles of primal eating are unsound, because from my experience they are completely correct as a way of attaining optimal health. I'll be avoiding grains and legumes until further notice!
Last edited by Owen; 04-24-2013 at 02:26 PM.