Well, I have to say that there were too many leaps of faith in the piece. As I listened, it became clear to me that the fellow was just plain leaving out a vast portion of the process of cooking that needs major attention. First, it is that when anything is cooked, especially veggies, they loose a great deal of their nutrients and vitamins. I don't care how much more easily these are absorbed, the net result of cooking is not going to be MORE nutrient value. Ease of digestion, yes. Riddance of bacteria, yes. Clearly, the loss of a great deal of nutrients in the cooking process is going to more than erase the gain in absorption rates. This is not to say that I disagree with everything he was speaking to. He just missed the point a tad. I think it much more likely that the balance of types of foods, and the introduction of food storage or preservation was much more likely the root cause. For instance, creatures that planned ahead, or perhaps ?just accidentally? laid up food stores for the dry months or the cold months would have a considerable advantage over ones who merely gathered and ate at any given time.
Next, there is a disconnect in the technology arena. Lets assume that he is right that this happened some 1 to 2 million years ago. Where did these folks do their cooking, and with what kind of cookware? I haven't heard of any pots that could take cooking in the modern sense from that time period. Best case was an animal skin with water in it heated by tossing in rocks from the fire. This kind of cooking is WAY difficult, try it. Mostly only effective for things like herbal remedies or tea. Perhaps some sort of crude baking in rock enclosures within a fire? Very dirty! I know its a long time ago and all, but then again, these sorts of inventions are attributed to somewhere around 10-15k years ago. Clay pots were not able to be used for cooking until the modern era, and even then are very fragile.
Things like breads or tortilla type of foods? Those took industry, like grains gathered, ground, and from the meal some sort of patty made. Cooking these on a hot rock, sure I can believe it. Also, grain seems to store fairly well. This seems to have merit! Most people can't digest raw grain, but how about those guys 1 m. years ago? Go figure. I understand that the way that termites digest wood is through a symbiotic relationship with microbial colonies in their guts. Could we have had different microbes back then that allowed us to digest raw grains or even other plant matter that we can't even imagine eating now?
I don't know of any possible evidence that could support grain processing in that time frame, although I have held some stone tools that are dated to more than 1 m. years ago, but these were blade tools, I haven't seen any grain grinding tools. I would put this in the frame of almost possible, with a few leaps of faith such as massively abundant wild grain plants. Could they have been farmers? It would take a lot of convincing to the contrary modern ideas of archaeology! Don't get me wrong here, I think most archaeologists base their ideas on whim, fancy, or other archaeologists' mistaken ideas.
I'd be willing to believe that meat on a spit was about as far as cooking went 1-2 m. years ago. Now, is it really possible that the cooking and preservation of meats alone could bring about this change? I don't know, but I do find cooking meat over a fire to have primordial significance in my life.
Slashdot Mirror
Hi,
Well, I have to say that there were too many leaps of faith in the piece. As I listened, it became clear to me that the fellow was just plain leaving out a vast portion of the process of cooking that needs major attention. First, it is that when anything is cooked, especially veggies, they loose a great deal of their nutrients and vitamins. I don't care how much more easily these are absorbed, the net result of cooking is not going to be MORE nutrient value. Ease of digestion, yes. Riddance of bacteria, yes. Clearly, the loss of a great deal of nutrients in the cooking process is going to more than erase the gain in absorption rates. This is not to say that I disagree with everything he was speaking to. He just missed the point a tad. I think it much more likely that the balance of types of foods, and the introduction of food storage or preservation was much more likely the root cause. For instance, creatures that planned ahead, or perhaps ?just accidentally? laid up food stores for the dry months or the cold months would have a considerable advantage over ones who merely gathered and ate at any given time.
Next, there is a disconnect in the technology arena. Lets assume that he is right that this happened some 1 to 2 million years ago. Where did these folks do their cooking, and with what kind of cookware? I haven't heard of any pots that could take cooking in the modern sense from that time period. Best case was an animal skin with water in it heated by tossing in rocks from the fire. This kind of cooking is WAY difficult, try it. Mostly only effective for things like herbal remedies or tea. Perhaps some sort of crude baking in rock enclosures within a fire? Very dirty! I know its a long time ago and all, but then again, these sorts of inventions are attributed to somewhere around 10-15k years ago. Clay pots were not able to be used for cooking until the modern era, and even then are very fragile.
Things like breads or tortilla type of foods? Those took industry, like grains gathered, ground, and from the meal some sort of patty made. Cooking these on a hot rock, sure I can believe it. Also, grain seems to store fairly well. This seems to have merit! Most people can't digest raw grain, but how about those guys 1 m. years ago? Go figure. I understand that the way that termites digest wood is through a symbiotic relationship with microbial colonies in their guts. Could we have had different microbes back then that allowed us to digest raw grains or even other plant matter that we can't even imagine eating now?
I don't know of any possible evidence that could support grain processing in that time frame, although I have held some stone tools that are dated to more than 1 m. years ago, but these were blade tools, I haven't seen any grain grinding tools. I would put this in the frame of almost possible, with a few leaps of faith such as massively abundant wild grain plants. Could they have been farmers? It would take a lot of convincing to the contrary modern ideas of archaeology! Don't get me wrong here, I think most archaeologists base their ideas on whim, fancy, or other archaeologists' mistaken ideas.
I'd be willing to believe that meat on a spit was about as far as cooking went 1-2 m. years ago. Now, is it really possible that the cooking and preservation of meats alone could bring about this change? I don't know, but I do find cooking meat over a fire to have primordial significance in my life.