pearl wrote:
> "Rudy Canoza" > wrote in message ...
>> pearl wrote:
>>> > wrote in message ...
>>>
>>>> In normal science there is discussion of specific details which over
>>>> time result in a concensus which is liable to modification with new
>>>> information.
>>>>
>>>> Whatever the current discussion of the details no scholor of not is
>>>> saying humans added meat in increasing amounts to their diet and
>>>> developed the tools to do so.
>>>>
>>>> In historical examples there are human groups which use meat almost
>>>> completely as a function of environmental factors.
>>>>
>>>> Whatever the specific details of human evolution the human diet in all
>>>> parts of the globeflect use of all resources as food as the standard
>>>> condition of human dietary habits and the human digestive system is
>>>> adapted to make this so.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> During a discussion in science the range of views can be broad or
>>>> narrow. Picking thos views alone from one extreme edge of that range is
>>>> misleading, deceptive as to the normal science of the situation, and
>>>> sloppy scholarship.
>>>>
>>>> A proper discussion considers the entire range and presents the strength
>>>> of evidence and flaws with each view. This includes the specific view
>>>> one has. Any thesis is incomplete without a survey of one's weak areas.
>>>>
>>>> Short version, to cherry pick information is a lie and not science.
>>> So go in peace..
>> So stop lying. Stop pretending to have knowledge you
>> don't have.
>
> Stop pretending YOU have credibility and knowledge,

I have lots of those, coupled with immense ability with
logic. You have none. You are a foot-rubbing *FRAUD*
and liar.