> wrote in message u...

> > >> "scavenging, *not* hunting. Our review of the archaeology yields
> > >> results"
> > >>
> > >> In the question of when and why pre-humans added meat as part of
> their
> >he above is a difference without a distinction. Meat
> > >> was part of the diet and has continued to be so eversince.
> > >
> > > Some humans...
> >
> > Meat has been an essential part of the diet of all
> > human societies, and of the vast, overwhelming majority
> > of individual human beings.
> >
> > Humans eat meat: at all times and places.
>
> "'Gut Morphology and the Avoidance of Carrion among Chimpanzees,
> Baboons, and Early Hominids"
>
> So which is it, you were the source of the first above concerning
> "scavenging,

In the context of competitive male displays, remember.

> is it "scavenging or hunting?

Low-yield scavenging.

> Or was it both according to
> size of animal and ease of trapping etc. such as the small animals the
> chimps and hunter gatherers of historical humans used in many places?

Is there any evidence for that in the fossil record, namely,
aggregation of processed bones at hominid home bases?

> Why should humans hesitate to use meat freshly killed by other animals?

'Carrion is very quickly contaminated with a high bacterial
load because the process of dismemberment of a carcass
exposes the meat to the bacteria from the saliva of the
predator, from the digestive tracts of insects, and from
the carcasses' own gut. "

> It makes no difference, there is evidence of different kinds that the
> pre-human line of hominids was using meat regardless of speculation of
> method of aacquisition at least 2million years ago. There is a
> continuing line of evidence that that has never stopped. As the
> technology for hunting appeared "scavenging need not have been a large
> source if at all.

<restore>

'Brown says that pushing the emergence of Homo sapiens from
about 160,000 years ago back to about 195,000 years ago "is
significant because the cultural aspects of humanity in most cases
appear much later in the record - only 50,000 years ago - which
would mean 150,000 years of Homo sapiens without cultural stuff,
such as evidence of eating fish, of harpoons, anything to do with
music (flutes and that sort of thing), needles, even tools. This
stuff all comes in very late, except for stone knife blades, which
appeared between 50,000 and 200,000 years ago, depending on
whom you believe."

Fleagle adds: "There is a huge debate in the archeological literature
regarding the first appearance of modern aspects of behavior such
as bone carving for religious reasons, or tools (harpoons and things),
ornamentation (bead jewelry and such), drawn images, arrowheads.
They only appear as a coherent package about 50,000 years ago,
and the first modern humans that left Africa between 50,000 and
40,000 years ago seem to have had the full set. As modern human
anatomy is documented at earlier and earlier sites, it becomes
evident that there was a great time gap between the appearance of
the modern skeleton and 'modern behavior.'"
...
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0223122209.htm