The redneck strike again.

[LastPoet]

Note to self: never open a rico thread when you have a mouthful of drink. I very nearly died just then.

For safety reasons, I stopped drinking/eating while reading this forum.

[Cyberman]

A very true and important safety tip. It ought to be included in the small print. "Atheist Forums accept no liability for injury, damage to equipment and/or loss of life as a result of food and beverage related incidents induced by certain opinions herein contained. Users are advised to observe extreme dietary caution when browsing this forum and ideally ensure that mouths are free of all choking hazards."

[James2014]

The more you look at different sites and the more you find different results.
All the sites that i have looked at say that it is 10 times the body

Enrico, what you are saying does not make sense. The reference you just posted showed that all of the studies after 1900 demonstrate that the intestines are around 5-6 times the length of the body, and that we are therefore omnivores. Did you not read you own reference, or did you just scan for the one line that might back up you argument and post that. If you have any other sources then show them or admit you were wrong.

One thing i would like to ask you.
1) Fruits seem to be the easier digested food for humans.
Does this means that our body is best suited for a frugivore diet or it is just a coincidence?

We digest both meat and fruit perfectly well, and in some cases better as we cannot digest the cellulose in plants. A diet high in meat can cause long term health problems, but it is also a very good source of calories and many important vitamins, such as B12, that pre industrial humans could not synthesise. That is why humans throughout our evolution ate meat, and have adapted to be able to eat meat. Archaeology demonstrates this. Now you may say that early humans only ate meat when they were starving, and that their normal diet was one of plants. Do you have any evidence to support this? No. You argue that B12 can be obtained from soil bacteria. Do you have any evidence to support the idea that this is a reliable source of B12? No

2) I was saying that meat eating animals do not get cardiovascular diseases while humans get it.
Some people here brought the example of a wild dog that get such a disease. This wild dog was kept in captivity.
Do you think it does make sense to take a wild dog kept in captivity to contradict me?

Animals in the wild don't get cardiovascular disease because they die before they are old enough to get this disease. Your argument is just silly but instead of answering the questions others put to you, you divert the argument with nonsense. What does "I rely on your maths to get enlightened" even mean? Are you implying that the simple maths I used to demonstrate you are wrong is in fact incorrect?

[Fidel_Castronaut]

[shep]

wrote something

[Little Rik]

Enrico, what you are saying does not make sense. The reference you just posted showed that all of the studies after 1900 demonstrate that the intestines are around 5-6 times the length of the body, and that we are therefore omnivores. Did you not read you own reference, or did you just scan for the one line that might back up you argument and post that. If you have any other sources then show them or admit you were wrong.

Sorry but you are making a hell of a confusion.
Omnivores are more similar to carnivorous than to humans.
Like carnivorous they never get cardiovascular diseases provide that they live in the wild while humans that eat meat do get them and the evidence it is in our society and hospitals.
I may agree with you about the length of the digestive system of one or the other compared to body length but at the end it is well documented that meat eating creatures have a shorter digestive system than veg.

We digest both meat and fruit perfectly well, and in some cases better as we cannot digest the cellulose in plants. A diet high in meat can cause long term health problems, but it is also a very good source of calories and many important vitamins, such as B12, that pre industrial humans could not synthesise. That is why humans throughout our evolution ate meat, and have adapted to be able to eat meat. Archaeology demonstrates this. Now you may say that early humans only ate meat when they were starving, and that their normal diet was one of plants. Do you have any evidence to support this? No.

The evidence is there for all to see.
To evolve the way we are it takes ages and ages.
If we would have eaten meat for long long time than we would look like omnivore but as you can see we do not have the peculiarities of omnivores.
Do we look like bears or dogs? NOT of course.

You argue that B12 can be obtained from soil bacteria. Do you have any evidence to support the idea that this is a reliable source of B12? No

I think you need to get updated about the b12.
It looks like your information relate to what the rednecks are saying.

http://www.roylretreat.com/articles/b12.html


In fact, contrary to meat and dairy industry propaganda, meat-eaters are known to be more likely to have a vitamin B12 deficiency - this has been known since 1959!!

http://www.living-foods.com/articles/b12issue.html

Animals in the wild don't get cardiovascular disease because they die before they are old enough to get this disease.

This is one more spat up coming from your imagination, right?

Your argument is just silly but instead of answering the questions others put to you, you divert the argument with nonsense. What does "I rely on your maths to get enlightened" even mean? Are you implying that the simple maths I used to demonstrate you are wrong is in fact incorrect?

Not at all.
You may well be correct in regard to length but it is you that avoid to face the real issue about the differences in the digestive systems (meat eater compared to humans).
You come up with the pig first but the pig despite having a similar digestive system length to human can not be compared to human.
Do you eat shit like a pig?
No?
Well if not there has got to be something quite different despite the similar digestive system length, right?

---

A very true and important safety tip. It ought to be included in the small print. "Atheist Forums accept no liability for injury, damage to equipment and/or loss of life as a result of food and beverage related incidents induced by certain opinions herein contained. Users are advised to observe extreme dietary caution when browsing this forum and ideally ensure that mouths are free of all choking hazards."

You never finish to surprise me.
After years of nothingness for the second time in few days you come up with
one more humorous comment.
Well done Stimbo!
I am seriously thinking about popping a kudos in your post.

[shep]

[Tonus]

Well done Stimbo!
I am seriously thinking about popping a kudos in your post.

Sounds like he's ready to take the relationship to the next level, Stimbo!

[Cyberman]

Not while I still have my strength, he won't.

[Cyberman]

Sorry but you are making a hell of a confusion.
Omnivores are more similar to carnivorous than to humans.

What, you mean the species that has evolved to consume meat and plants? Those humans? That's the very definition of omnivore you plank.