What about snakes? They do have fangs, but no claws (hell, no feet!). They eat meat. (Rats, birds, frogs)

Koalas have claws, but they don't eat meat...

I's confused......
http://www.giftlog.com/pictures/koala_fact.htm
Doesn't sound like something I need!

Horses have wolf teeth (fangs). They need to be filed down or pulled since it hurts for the bit to hit them. They are vegetarian.
http://images.google.com/imgres?img..._US235%26sa%3DN
http://tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn...m.com/teeth.jpg

Chimpanzees have fangs. Yeah, I know the site says they're not "true" canines. Well, of course not. They're in a primate mouth. There was a big stink a while back about a chimp who attacked a man. (I'll search for that) They aren't vegan/vegetarian either.


A video of chimpanzees hunting and killing a monkey.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTPkmH4hWCs
Wow, watching this, they may eat more meat than is recorded...

Chimp attack
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7087194/

Maybe we're like a platypus.
They have no claws or fangs and are carnivorous. So, I don't think fangs/claws define carnivorous. I think it's what you eat...(nods sagely)
http://animals.nationalgeographic.c...s/platypus.html

I was also thinking, it's funny. Humans have no claws or fangs, yet we are the most dangerous animal on the planet.

Humans have claws, they are called nails.

Hey! Who's side are you on?!! Not in the manner I am certain BoBoGuy means....

Edited: Actually, mine could be. Mine are very humped over and very hard. All I need to do is file points...

cows, I'm sure you'll agree are herbivores, sweat through the nose, NOT the skin.
dogs, ominivores, sweat through the tongue

Haven't had the time or the interest to research other animals. I'm having a hard time believing I've wasted this much time on this post!

If we want to get into tables, here's a nice one comparing the digestive tract of a carnivore, herbivore, and human:
http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/ca...omparison4.html

I'd reproduce it here but I don't think the html would work.

Anyone who thinks humans don't have claws and fangs hasn't run into me on a bad day.

I can not name one hunter/gatherer society that doesn't eat animal protein.

However, I do believe that primitive humans taught themselved to consume red meat only in order to survive when plant foods were in short supply. We became omnivores out of pure necessity.

Due to a gene mutation found only in humans and not in our evolutionary cousins the apes, we now know that eating red meat can trigger inflammation and, over the long term, heart disease, certain cancers and auto-immune illnesses.

The problem is that a molecule found in red meat is now recognized as an "alien" and is automatically attacked by the human body simply because it’s not biologically adapted to consume it.

I’m not suggesting that anyone should become a vegan. Heck, I’m a low carbing Cronie and consume my fair share of animal proteins. I do however limit my red meat to small amounts on rare occasions and consume primarily fish and poultry due to the gene mutation mentioned above.

It’s simply sad that a mutated gene so long ago may be causing modern humans problems today. And there’s nothing we can do about it with the exception of avoiding red meat!

It’s very difficult to accept the possibility that humans may indeed be biologically vegan.

Martin: I feel honored to be peer reviewed by you and others with differing viewpoints. We’re in total agreement that I probably would make a bad scientist.

Nancy: I do read all of the posts and wish I were able to reply more. Will try to do better in the future. Your opinions have been appreciated for a very long time. Thank you!

Bo

Hee hee hee. Same here sister!


And dolphins, who evolved from a type of wolf went in to the water to either avoid predation OR because the food source in the water was better.

See any try to go back to the past lately?

Because whales still have those little back feet and leg bones, should we start pulling them out of the water for their own good?

What is simply sad is that a single researcher is getting money to chase after this non-problem. I wonder how many of his colleagues privately refer to him as Chicken Little.

I believe there's an invisible pink elephant terrorizing my neighborhood at midnight because sometimes my trash can is turned over.

When you don't connect your beliefs with good solid evidence then you might as well believe in my elephant.

What utter nonsense, BoBoGuy! Seriously, if you don't back up your ridiculous claims with solid research references, this thread only serves to make you look uneducated.

I agree with Nancy's elephant story...

I don't try to argue with people who are magical thinkers because it is pretty useless. Like my invisible elephant, here's how the argument would go:

Rational me: "It isn't an elephant. There isn't any proof that it is an elephant. It could be a strong wind or the neighbors dog."

Believer me: "Of course it is an elephant! I threw peanut shells out in the trash. Elephants love peanuts."

Rational me: "There are muddy dog paw prints all around the trash can, the dog did it."

Believer me: "No, the dog came after wards to investigate. He know the elephant is there too! Animals sense these things we can't detect."

Rational me (sarcastically): "If it was a elephant, it likes chicken bones. Look, the "elephant" dragged all the chicken bones out of your trash and ate most of them".

Believer me: "Son of a gun! I saw a cow that ate a chicken once, I guess that elephant needs a little extra calcium and protein, eh? Poor thing, it is probably not getting a proper diet living off of people's trash. Maybe I'll put out some hay and carrots for it tonight."

There's just no winning this debate. Belief will always win out over rational thought, unless someone is really ready to consider the evidence that their belief is wrong. It doesn't matter how much evidence you present to support your side, they'll ignore it and skip along to some other "proof".

Evolutionary theory says otherwise. Species, over the long term, do not do something out of necessity. Species, over the long term, adapt to environments (or become extinct). Human ancestors adapted to acquire energy of a novel and more plentiful source.



Ya know, there are a lot of theories posed as explanations of what "may be causing modern human [health] problems today", and some of them make a lot of sense, and have a lot of evidence in support, and don't turn evolutionary theory on its head. We'd like to see why you think so much of this tiny theory. We've seen the various blurbs posted on these boards. Is there anything else you can offer to persuade those of us with strong opinions?

Lets say that you're right, Boboguy. If we "became omnivores out of necessity" then doesn't that pretty much mean we evolved to eat meat out of necessity? Whether that necessity was to support the energy requirements of our large brains, or because the bamboo we used to eat froze in an ice age, it doesn't really matter. We stopped being herbivores (if we ever were, and archeology says otherwise). For instance, maybe Koala bears once ate Cilantro in addition to the the Eucalyptus leaves they currently eat. But the 150,000 years ago cilantro went extinct in their environment. So now they only eat Eucalyptus. Does that mean that Koala bears should still continue to eat cilantro? No, of course not. They moved on evolutionary-wise from that.

You also haven't answered the biological evidence that we require animal products in that we can't get B12 without eating animal proteins, or K2, and we can't get adequate Omega-3's without eating animals.

We also couldn't get enough protein from just gathering plants. You need to have agriculture to do that in order to grow grains and legumes. They're not available much in the wild. So unless the human race sprung into existence at the same time as agriculture, that would be an impossibility.