Mr Anthropologist, I dare you to eat raw chicken, then raw beef meat!!! come on do it if you're a man. -- CHADI'S FORUM

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Sunday 06 [ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4], 5, 6 ]

Subject: Mr Anthropologist, I dare you to eat raw chicken, then raw beef meat!!! come on do it if you're a man.

Author:
chadi
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 19:19:37 12/02/02 Mon
In reply to: Grad Student in Anthropology 's message, "Uh, actually, they do. If you look at the history of human evolution you can map out the change of the teeth through what the genus Homo was eating. Teeth did change shape due to omnivorous diet (including meat)!" on 16:01:56 12/02/02 Mon

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Subject Author Date

Hey, dumbass, I was commenting on your erroneous statement that human teeth are not meant for a carnivorous diet. Grad student in anthropology 19:57:19 12/02/02 Mon

Did I say that cooking meat is something new? Try to understand what you read before making your rantings. (NT) -- chadi, 20:17:45 12/02/02 Mon

You still have not pointed out how eating ANY meat is dangerous to the human digestive system nor have you tried to explain how human teeth are not equipped for a carnivorous diet. -- Grad student in anthropology, 20:22:23 12/02/02 Mon

Go to the third previous message above and read before throwing your curses. -- chadi, 20:33:23 12/02/02 Mon

You will not comment because you do not have the actual scientific facts to back it up. The fact is you don't know. -- Grad student in anthropology, 20:51:42 12/02/02 Mon

Of course i will not comment on what says someone like you who considers archeology a "100% pure objectiveand acurate science". (NT) -- chadi, 21:05:54 12/02/02 Mon

1. I was coming from a physical anthropological point of view, not archaeoligical. Although both are subfields of anthropology, what they deal with may or may not overlap. 2. Cannibalistic tribes are/were only those that ate a PART of the human body from an enemy, their diet did not even consist 1% human. -- Grad student in anthropology, 18:29:57 12/03/02 Tue
Also, post-processualism in archaeology has shown that archaeology is not 100% objective. Read up on history of theory of archaeology before you comment on something else you know nothing about. Might I suggest "History of Archaeological Thought" by Bruce Trigger? -- Grad student in anthropology, 18:38:57 12/03/02 Tue

Of course i have some actual scientific facts: haven't you heard of Cannibals? This is the best scientific fact that proves man is a meat eater. Just like spiders eat each other when kept alone. What a sarcasm! (NT) -- chadi, 21:54:55 12/02/02 Mon

You can't say, "What a sarcasm." You have to say, "What sarcasm!" (NT) -- English Teacher, 22:09:45 12/02/02 Mon

Maybe we would better ask, "What sarcasm?" I can't seem to find which statement you consider to be sarcastic. -- English Teacher, 22:17:03 12/02/02 Mon

I know what sarcasm means (NT) -- chadi, 22:26:00 12/02/02 Mon

Obviously you do not since I was not being sarcastic yesterday. (NT) -- Grad student in anthropology, 18:32:32 12/03/02 Tue