That idea has a lot of appeal.
Posted on 01/06/2016 12:01:00 AM PST by SunkenCiv
That's the advantage of the scientific method -- instead of relying on fixed ideas, new knowledge becomes available. People who don't like information to change see that as some kind of weakness, and are dead wrong.
That's been one of the hypotheses for a long while now -- the main impediment has been, no type specimen of Bigfoot, and without that, it will *never* be accepted as a real species (or as seems likely, more than one species).
That idea has a lot of appeal.
Raw food diets are fine if you do not need to exert yourself to find food and you do not need to exert a great deal of energy in your work and you take supplements.
People who are on raw food diets lose weight because they are not getting the same calories and nutrients from the food they are consuming.
While this is fine if the three conditions mentioned above are met if they are not you will eventually starve to death.
This is one reason why we must chew raw food very thoroughly. I think 30 chews was recommended by Fletcher. Pottinger did extensive experiments with cats. In one study he feed one group 100% cooked meat and milk, another 75% cooked meat and milk, and the third group 50% raw meat and milk. By the second generation the first cats were almost sterile, the second group had unhealthy kittens and by the third generation was sterile. The 1/2 raw food group was reproducing successfully into the 8th generation when the experiment was ended. They had been kept in raised cages with screening on the bottom so waste fell to the ground. The cages were removed, but a year later the ground under the first group was sterile, the 2nd batch grew a few puny weeds, but the third ground area had a rich growth of greenery.
Consequently, I try to eat about half of my food raw, and chew it thoroughly. Pasturized milk is cooked milk, but yogurt with live cultures is raw. When doing nutrition teaching, I recommend eating about 1/2 raw food. I have recently started drinking Kefir in addition to eating yogurt to improve my gut flora. I also believe we should test GMO foods in a manner similar to the cat study I described. Otherwise we have no valid answer to whether GMO food is or is not safe for large, long term consumption.
You can chew your food all you like you are still not breaking down the cell walls needed to get the nutrition you would if you cooked your food.
Lucky for you the era you live in is able to provide you with copious amounts of calories, nutrients and supplements so you amuse yourself by spending your time moving your jaw around.
I will not convince you otherwise and have no inclination to try.
Sorry, but I think you have a misguided idea about what the scientific method is.
In practice one is supposed to make a theory, test it, and hopefully prove it. Instead we have people making theories and then passing the claim off as true without any proof. A mandible and teeth are not sufficient proof, and yet a few bones make up so many of our claimed species.
They can theorize what the animal may have looked like, how it may have acted, and what it may have been related to - but that is all guessing, no proof, no verifying, no testing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
