Evidence for God from Science

gone

1) carnivores and herbivores - what about omnivores ?
2) grizzly bears - ferocious predators, big teeth and claws -
http://www.cmiae.org/grizzlyinfo.htm
Bears are the largest land based carnivores on the planet. However, due to their varied diet they are better characterized as omnivores. Typically, a grizzly bear's diet in the Columbia Mountains consists of less than 15% meat. The remainder is roots, herbs, berries, and insects.
3) birds - chickens for example are quite happy to eat meat
http://www.lionsgrip.com/chickens.html
Chickens are omnivores, just like the humans they've kept company with for all these millennia.
http://www.bookrags.com/other/health/uric-acid-wap.html
In birds uric acid is discharged as guano and in fish uric acid is converted into urea and then expelled in urine.

So we see that chickens and fish eat meat and do not convert uric acid into allantonin and that grizzlies apparently do yet eat primarily vegetation.

gone

Jbuza wrote:Interesting. Omnivore, yes pretty much every animal is an omnivore to an extent I guess. So would it be safe to say that nearly every animal has the ability to digest greens, grains, and meat? ACross the board?

What I was trying to say is that while humans are more similar to herbivores than carnivores, we are in fact omnivores and not herbivores as the reference was arguing.

gone

our ancestors were herbivores. hominids (man in particular) only started eating meat relatively recently, but we evolved eating plants. some studies have shown evidence that eating meat, and eating more variety of foods caused humans to become more intelligent in the long run.

Jbuza wrote: Interesting. Omnivore, yes pretty much every animal is an omnivore to an extent I guess. So would it be safe to say that nearly every animal has the ability to digest greens, grains, and meat? ACross the board?

To varying degrees.

Why do you generalize?
You're more interested in how facts fit into your worldview than the facts themselves.

Don't you find it interesting at all that bears which seem to be built as carnivores are actually omniverous?

gone

Jbuza wrote:

BGoodForGoodSake wrote:

Jbuza wrote: Interesting. Omnivore, yes pretty much every animal is an omnivore to an extent I guess. So would it be safe to say that nearly every animal has the ability to digest greens, grains, and meat? ACross the board?

To varying degrees.

Why do you generalize?
You're more interested in how facts fit into your worldview than the facts themselves.

Don't you find it interesting at all that bears which seem to be built as carnivores are actually omniverous?

Yes I do find it interesting. I am not generalizing I made no decree that all creatures are omnivores. I do wonder if that is the case, and my world view will have very little impact on wether all animals are omnivores or not, or to what extent.

But I don't think I would be any different than anyone else if I interpret the observations based upon my worldview.

Anyway I was just find the article curious, and that was all.

Why then would a bear who by "design" functions as a carnivore resort to eating fruits and other vegetation?

Would it have anything to do with available niche?

gone

Jbuza wrote:Not to sure, it seems pretty clear that if they were unable to metabolize fruit and vegetation that they would be trying to eat much more meat. Bears are often the most dangerous in the spring before the poplar bud out. They are dangerous because meat is their only available energy source first thing in the spring.

So are you saying that behaviour is tied to anatomy?

gone

gone

Jbuza wrote:

BGoodForGoodSake wrote:

Jbuza wrote:Not to sure, it seems pretty clear that if they were unable to metabolize fruit and vegetation that they would be trying to eat much more meat. Bears are often the most dangerous in the spring before the poplar bud out. They are dangerous because meat is their only available energy source first thing in the spring.

So are you saying that behaviour is tied to anatomy?

No I am not, in fact it seems that the bear demonstrates that behavior is not tied to anatomy.

So if they could not digest fruit or vegetables they still would?

They seem to be built from a carniverous framework yet they are able to digest fruits and other vegetation.
Why?

gone