How essential is hot food

Well that hardly shows that hot food is essential, in fact it shows that it is not.

quote:

the innate ability to farm

Interesting concept. I wonder how this would reveal itself in the growing infant?

quote:

Originally posted by David Scott?:

quote:

the innate ability to farm

Interesting concept. I wonder how this would reveal itself in the growing infant?

I've perhaps not quite explained it well enough. The "innate ability to farm" is relevant as a characteristic of the parents that confers a survival advantage on their children. This ability is either passed on by genetics, teaching, or a combination of both. In a genetic sense it correlates with intelligence. Farming requires more planning and forethought. Mentally (if not physically) it is harder than hunting or gathering. If farming results in a better outcome nutrition-wise for parents and especially offspring, the characteristic will be persistent and effectively selected for. Children grow up to be farmers like their parents either because they share some of their parents' intelligence (innate ability to farm, as I clumsily stated it), or their parents taught them to farm or both. They also have a higher survival rate than their hunter-gatherer neighbours, and so slowly, farming, rather than hunter-gathering becomes the norm.

quote:

Originally posted by Derry:
Well that hardly shows that hot food is essential, in fact it shows that it is not.

It is not directly related other than the claim that both farming and cooking may have conferred some evolutionary advantage, and therefore, over time become the norm. Not to say their aren't alternatives to cooked food.

It is worth remembering in this discussion that over history most people did not have enough to eat. Any change in behaviour that resulted in better nutrition (and/or lower sickness and poisoning rates) and therefore, longer life, lower infant mortality, and higher reproduction rates would be a key evolutionary advantage.

quote:

t is worth remembering in this discussion that over history most people did not have enough to eat. Any change in behaviour that resulted in better nutrition ................. would be a key evolutionary advantage.

Hmmmmm. I'm now wondering when does "chnage" become "evolution"

I had assumed that the c.6bn people on earth today, were, in evolution terms, the same as those Modern Men who left Africa c.75,000 years ago. We are different from Neanderthals, but Asian, African, European, Abiriginal Austrailians etc are all one species.

The Key events in the development of Moden Man had always struck me as being 1) leaving Africa 2) introducing farming - c.10,000 years ago in the Levent 3) introducing indutrialisation c. 200 years ago. (and possibly introducing metalwork - bronze/iron work sometime between 2 and 3.

But even these key events haven't changed us a a species.

So, is Man today a single species ? Is Man today the same species as Modern Man who evolved in Africa c. 150,000 - 200,000 years ago ?

My view is "yes" to both questions, but this understanding is based on a very limited reading of about half a dozen books, on a subject that I don't think has been well researched at present.

Cheers

Don

Seems to be several ideas here that develop as the timescale progresses.

The evolutionary development of an omnivorous diet and associated food hunter/gathering ecological niche over tens of millions of years.

The social and cultural change brought about by the advent of cooking with division of labour, food storage options, new calorie sources and the opportunity for social interaction with a communal approach to eating. Measured more in hundreds of thousands of years perhaps.

The development of organised agriculture rather than opportiunistic food gathering, measured in tens of thousands of years.

The development of the microwave oven....


Bruce

quote:

Originally posted by Bruce Woodhouse:


The development of the microwave oven....


Bruce

And then the "Pop Tart".