'Man the Hunter' theory is debunked in new book

Washington University in St. Louis ^ | February 2, 2005 | By Neil Schoenherr

[Modernman]

Our ancestors got eaten, but they also ate other animals.

We weren't apex predators at first. That had to wait until we evolved smarter and figured out things like spears and axes.

[Spok]

"So man was originally a sociable, peace-loving victim and prey to larger, stronger beasts. He was also in harmony with nature and lived off the land, mainly gathering fruits and nuts."

Then he got a brain.
You realize, of course, that this makes liberals evolutionary retards.

[LaBradford22]

Bollocks. Since when did hunting and being hunted become mutually exclusive?

Exactly.

[Plutarch]

Mere decorations:

[Plutarch]

Approximately 6 percent to 10 percent of early humans were preyed upon according to evidence that includes teeth marks on bones...

You see, there were no scavengers back then.

[PatrickHenry]

Thanks for the ping, but this seems more like political correctness than science.

[Rockingham]

It is said that different nationalities, eras, and researchers project their own characteristics onto prehumans and primates. Thus we now have prehumans as weak prey creatures huddled together for survival -- just like the modern European Union!

[randog]

"It developed from a basic Judeo-Christian ideology of man being inherently evil, aggressive and a natural killer...."

OK, this is as far as I got.

[SilentServiceCPOWife]

If we aren't supposed to be predators, then why do we have eyes on the front of our heads rather than the sides?

[Vigilanteman]

Of course. If you look at the ranks of liberal voters, they consist mainly of two categories:

1. The weak-brained who feel they need big gubmint to manage their lives.

2. The power hungry, who feel they are qualified to do said managing.

[Verginius Rufus]

Perhaps the reason human societies have been prone to warfare is that early man was a hunter and similar skills are involved in both activities--and both require the willingness to kill. Of course if you want to believe that man is naturally peaceful, then it helps if he was not originally a hunter.

The original PETA: People Eating Tasty Animals.

[Spok]

"eyes on the front of our heads rather than the sides?"

So...would Helen Thomas be the exception that proves the rule? Just curious.

[Conspiracy Guy]

More evolution poop.

[MeanWestTexan]

Ah, I see the revisionists are emphasizing the "homo" in "homo sapien sapiens" again.

Those tools were for cutting flowers to decorate garmets made of hemp.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

You nailed it.

[Grut]

By the way, I wonder how the professor thinks they could eat nuts if they couldn't eat meat.

Nuts are crushed while meat has to be sheared, f'rinstance with a blade if you don't have the natural dentition.

Granting everything the professor says is true, it doesn't mean man didn't evolve as a hunter, it just changes the timing a little.

[kas2591]

Then the beer ran out.

[Slainte]

If we aren't supposed to be predators, then why do we have eyes on the front of our heads rather than the sides?

Oh please. Every serious, anthropologist knows that our eye placement is an evolutionary feature that allows the sort of depth perception required by early man to pluck berries from deep within the branches without damaging the bush that was recognized by our more eco-friendly ancestors as a vital resource and irreplaceable component in the ecosystem.

Or maybe it was to be able to better judge how far away those eagles were...