On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 7:10 PM, hillrunner_tx <preedntx@aol.com> wrote:
But, I'm not referring to peoples after 10,000BC. eg Nets, villages, etc.
Paleo hunter-gather groups wouldn't live on the water, near the water. Instinct...survival. They would have found protective retreats where they could eat, sleep, etc., safely and the waterside is certainly not it. You can't sleep in the water and while the big cats don't enter the water, sleeping by the waterside in the open provides an easy target.
Except that the fossil evidence just doesn't point to that. Maybe people didn't sleep on the beach ... in the trees is more likely, before huts ... but what does it matter? If you had to walk a few hundred yards to get breakfast and a drink of water, that wasn't so bad.
If you lived *further* than a few hundred yards from water ... how did you drink? Did you have skins, pots? Haul water to the campsite? Goats and camels can get all the water they need from their food, but humans can't. So who hauls the water?
If you live closer than a few hundred yards ... then you have a treasure trove of nutrients, just sitting there. No game warden. And mussels, eels, and crabs don't fight back much. Seaweed fights back even less. So sure, you go and chase after an antelope, because, well, it's more of a challenge.
I'm not a Paleo hunter, but, I certainly wouldn't pitch camp directly on the water in Alaska near bear drinking or feeding sites...I'd find a spot with access to the water but in a safe, protected area that could be defended not only from bear but wolves and other animals interested in protecting their territory or eating my foodstuffs. And I would apply the same rule in Africa...South America.
It's a theory. But yeah, they did. Bear and wolves were nice trophies anyway.
And we're a nomadic people...how else were bones from the hunter-gatherer era found in the mountains of central Asia? So bugs, rodents were just as important in our evolution as fish, etc.
I agree they were very much used. Way more than than the big animals. BUT ... our brains don't *require* rodent protein. They *do* seem to be geared for fish protein and fats. Goiter used to be highly prevalent in inland communities, until the iodization of salt. If your mother is low in iodine, you will be born with a low IQ. Ditto if she lacks Omega 3 fatty acids. Both are seashore nutrients. So why do we have a brain that requires seashore foods?
And if we DO require seashore foods for our brains, what else are they needed for?
__._,_.___
MARKETPLACE
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment