Hambo Rejects the ‘Fat Eating’ Theory

Two weeks ago, PhysOrg ran this story: A taste for fat may have made us human, says study. It begins like this, with bold font added by us for emphasis:

Long before human ancestors began hunting large mammals for meat, a fatty diet provided them with the nutrition to develop bigger brains, posits a new paper in Current Anthropology. The paper argues that our early ancestors acquired a taste for fat by eating marrow scavenged from the skeletal remains of large animals that had been killed and eaten by other predators. The argument challenges the widely held view among anthropologists that eating meat was the critical factor in setting the stage for the evolution of humans.

“Our ancestors likely began acquiring a taste for fat 4 million years ago, which explains why we crave it today,” says Jessica Thompson, the paper’s lead author and an anthropologist at Yale University. “The reservoirs of fat in the long bones of carcasses were a huge calorie package on a calorie-poor landscape. That could have been what gave an ancestral population the advantage it needed to set off the chain of human evolution.” Thompson, who recently joined Yale’s faculty, completed the paper while on the faculty at Emory University.

Here’s a link to Thompson’s paper, but without a subscription, all you can see is the abstract: Origins of the Human Predatory Pattern: The Transition to Large-Animal Exploitation by Early Hominins.

As you might imagine, all this talk of human evolution has infuriated Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo) — the ayatollah of Appalachia, the world’s holiest man who knows more about religion and science than everyone else. He just posted this at the website of Answers in Genesis (AIG), his creationist ministry: Did a “Taste for Fat” Make Us Human? Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

It’s long been an evolutionary puzzle as to how early humans got the bigger brains they needed to evolve into modern humans. Well, a new study proposes maybe it was a taste for fat that did it — and that’s why we still crave fat today. Evolutionists currently believe supposed primitive humans began eating meat as they evolved. Now it’s proposed it was fat that enabled them to grow bigger brains!

That’s blasphemy! Hambo says:

I have one word to describe this research: fairytale. [Hooray for Hambo!] This is nothing more than a story concocted to try and explain the supposed evolution of humans from non-humans.

After that righteous outburst, he tells us:

No observational evidence backs up any such idea (although they say they are going to start “looking for evidence of bone-smashing behavior in early human ancestors”). The suggestion now is instead of looking for intact bones in the fossil record, we should look at all the broken ones as we’ll supposedly find the ones our ape-like “ancestors” smashed to get the fat to evolve the bigger brains. Wow!

“Wow” indeed. Hambo’s rant continues:

This incredible “scientific” research will no doubt be taught in the public-school classroom — but don’t mention God created human beings as that’s such a way-out idea!

Yeah — each of those ideas is just as scientific as the other. Let’s read on:

A taste for fat didn’t make us human. No amount of nutrition is going to add the necessary information to form the amazingly complex human brain — not to mention all the other anatomical distinctives that make us human. … We’re human because God created us male and female in his image (Genesis 1:27). We didn’t evolve from some ape-like ancestor. We were created by God, fully formed and functioning, from the very beginning.

Okay, that’s pretty much all Hambo has to say on this topic. Now it’s up to you, dear reader. Did we evolve from a bunch of fat-sucking apes? That’s the Darwinists’ theory. If you like it, go for it. But you’ll pay the price for eternity.

Copyright © 2019. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

17 responses to “Hambo Rejects the ‘Fat Eating’ Theory

  1. I remember reading YEARS ago that they had in fact discovered a cave with bones that had been smashed open for their marrow. Don’t remember anymore about it.

  2. anatomical distinctives that make us human.

    I am shocked that a Christian should say such a thing!

    To think that what make us human are mrely anatomical distinctives. That we are valued, not by our individuality, the special relatonship each of us has to one’s Creator, Sustainer, and Redeemer – no, so we are being told, we are valued for being human because of being fully formed and functioning.

    As if being disabled, or not yet fully formed, makes one less than human.

    I need not point out the consequences of such a doctrine!

  3. Sorry, once again, I am forgetting that my signature is not automatically added.

  4. Michael Fugate

    Yes TomS, creationists keep backing themselves into corners from which they cannot escape – they just hope those donating money aren’t paying attention.

  5. I find it interesting that we humans do indeed crave fat, but marrow not so much. I guess by time we got our biggah brains (Hambo impression theah) we were grossed out by it.

  6. “No observational evidence backs up any such idea”
    and if it’s found Ol’Hambo is going to reject it anyway – like radiometry.

  7. Ofc, “X made us human” is clickbait, and all these things may have played a part at some time in some populations.
    @Kosh, interesting link, but I don’t think anything a mere 14,700 years old can have much relevance to the development of fully modern humans,a full 100,000 years earlier

  8. Hammy. Very righteous post. Of the “self” variety. You don’t know that the paper’s hypothesis is wrong because you refuse to engage in and observe the modern scientific method. But as hate and deceptiveness goes, it ranks up there pretty well..A brilliant paper.

  9. By the way Ham Man. Does this mean I have to stop liking fried chicken and
    Ruffles in order to avoid the Lake of Fire?The Lutheran pastors of my childhood would be upset to hear you call me an atheist. Just sayin.

  10. If the HAMster is made in his gawd’s image, then his gawd must have a brain composed nearly entirely of fat with few functioning neurons.

  11. TODAY, the Kentucky state legislature adopted a law which allows concealed carry of a firearm in the state without a permit or any training of any kind. It seems gun violence deniers in the state have the same conspiracy theory malady that afflicts the states creationist, science deniers, climate science deniers and probable birthers and benghazi conspiracy believers.

  12. “No such observational evidence backs up any such idea…”

    Poppycock. We already have the crude Oldowan tools — and animal bones with scrapemarks — as evidence for scavenging on the Pleistocene landscapes. The tools are not sophisticated enough to indicate these ancestral humans — such as H. habilis — hunted prey animals themselves.

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA! The “fairytale” has become a nightmare for Ham and his carnival of clowns.

  13. @ChrisS
    observational evidence
    I am guessing that what this is meant to be is something like “what we see happening right now”. You weren’t there to see the Oldowan tools being made and used, and to know the calendar date, so you don’;t know. (And don’t ask me how I know that you weren’t there. Or how I know that being there is a necessity for knowledge.)

  14. Michael Fugate

    “A taste for fat didn’t make us human. No amount of nutrition is going to add the necessary information to form the amazingly complex human brain — not to mention all the other anatomical distinctives that make us human”

    He’s right they were already there.
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/feb/14/chimpanzees-talk-humans-gestures-language

  15. It’s long been an evolutionary puzzle as to how early humans got the bigger brains they needed to evolve into modern humans. Well, a new study proposes maybe it was a taste for fat that did it — and that’s why we still crave fat today. Evolutionists currently believe supposed primitive humans began eating meat as they evolved. Now it’s proposed it was fat that enabled them to grow bigger brains!

    Of course it couldn’t be that meat has fat on it and that while meat supplies protein, its fat content also supplies extra energy (as well as chemical building-blocks the body can use for other purposes).

    No observational evidence backs up any such idea (although they say they are going to start “looking for evidence of bone-smashing behavior in early human ancestors”). The suggestion now is instead of looking for intact bones in the fossil record, we should look at all the broken ones as we’ll supposedly find the ones our ape-like “ancestors” smashed to get the fat to evolve the bigger brains. Wow!

    ‘No observational evidence.” We’re right back to “Were you there?” There’s no observational evidence that Jesus lived, either–and precious little documentary evidence outside the Bible.

  16. @TomS
    Good catch. The Oldowan tools would merely fall under the term “historical” science, and since they’re not mentioned in the Bible, either, they may as well not exist.

    All together now: “You can’t beat creacrap!”