30 Bananas a Day!

How to argue that we are biologically designed as Frugivores to "Creationism" believers?

Hey guys!

About an hour ago, I had a very friendly debate with one of my co-workers about humans being frugivores. As we got deeper and deeper into the discussion, he stated that since he believes in creationism and therefore does not think comparing ourselves to animals containing similar DNA/digestive systems as us is a valid argument to prove our genetic make-up is designed to eat a diet void of animal products. 

I have never debated with anyone who does not believe in evolution, so I was at a loss for words, as most of my arguments are comparing our biological makeup to primates.

Rather than dismiss his opinion entirely, I want to have some "valid" arguments to present him with. He said that if I can find articles/studies about a human consuming an omnivorous diet in comparison to a human eating a frugivorous diet (something based in the past, to therefore exclude the recent changes/additions to the meat and dairy humans consume for example antibiotics, hormones etc) and which human is the healthiest, in terms of longevity, nutritional needs, functionality, physical/mental performance etc., then he will take a more serious look. 

Its extremely hard arguing with someone who doesn't believe in the scientific FACT of evolution, but I am very determined to show him this is the right way for humans to eat. If any of you have any information/links that contain any information like this, I would greatly appreciate it! 

Views: 7080

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I already replied in response to the actual poster, but now I am responding to the people saying Creationists can't be scientific and specifically to say good point to Craig in pointing out that not all creationists believe the Earth was made in 6000 years. 

 Just because a person is a creationist doesn't make them an idiot.  I'm a creationist and I believe in the theory of evolution as well.  Its very clear to me that both of them are just different ways to look at it.  Only closed-minded people think it has to be one or other other.  Science is a way of looking at things, as is religion.  You're looking at two completely different sides of the story.  All creationism is, is the belief that the universe is the creation of supernatural being.  That's it.  Its not random and its not an accident.  This belief does not contradict the theory of evolution.  *Some* fundamentalist Christian creationist have an ignorant view of science, but a smart and objective person wouldn't apply their belief to all creationists, just as we don't listen to how the media portrays any group of people.

Evolution doesn't disprove God and if you think so your mind has been manipulated by powers that be, regardless of which side you're on.  There are a lot of different ways to look at it, and IMO its very ignorant to think that all Christians or creationist think alike.  Evolution can be God's tool.   Darwin never said anything about God. Many scientists—and theologians—agree with this way of thinking.  I am in the camp that thinks a day for God isn't the same as a day for us.  We have to know that the words they used have been not only translated, but how do you explain mystic concepts.  Metaphors.  You use what you can to paint a picture.  When you're talking about spiritual concepts you are very limited by language and not only that but how can we even begin to pretend to understand God and his/her/its ways.  We can't.  We use what we can.  And we all need to understand that and stop trying to pretend we have all the answers.  The Bible is flawed, it says so in Revelation at the very end.  It doesn't say IF this book gets changed and tempered with, it basically says Those WHO tamper with this... meaning its a fact that it happens.  We have to take this into consideration and when looking at it need to be in a spiritual mindset rather than critiquing and scientific.  Most people just aren't capable of that because they have attached themselves to an atheistic mindset because of our culture or self- doubts or whatever. 

The thing is, when you don't take it so literally and you look at the MESSAGE you can see that the order is exactly the same!  First came light out of the void, right?  Then came the stars and day and night, which I think is interesting when you look at science you may think the stars were there always but http://background.uchicago.edu/~whu/SciAm/timeline_small.jpg

here you can see how stars and day and night came later.  Creation says Earth was covered in water.  I'm not exactly sure if the scientific theories are well agreed upon regarding actual water, but if you consider the limited language/scientific knowledge of the people first writing the Bible, you can see that yes, the earth had to cool down and form land, it was first a hot liquidy ball after the explosion.  From what I can tell, science says the particles were H20, CO2, CO and N2, but regardless of they were, they looked liquidy at first.  It also coincides with the fact our earth is mostly covered in water and the first life/animals came out of the sea.  Seeds were made first, though, same order as science.  Creationist don't say anything contradictory when you look at it this way.  If they had said humans were here first and then came animals then yeah, you'd have a problem.  But the fish then birds then land animals then people.  It all adds up.  

So before you are so quick to lump all creationists together and assume none of them believe in evolution, you might want to consider your own close-mindedness and not assume others are closing their minds to science.  Perhaps you are closing your mind to possibilities, not us.  

Being a christian, I know christian's can be stubborn. There are plenty of medicines he uses that are tested on animals to make sure they are safe. similarDNA? He likes his meat. Logic is no way to convince someone. Consistency and transparency is how you hook someone. Let him see that you have something he does not. Your happier, healthier, whatever it may be. When people recognize a difference they will become interested. Everybody wants to better themselves wether you believe in evolution or creation. Lastly, people like to be treated like a human.

Thanks for sharing :)


greetings jessieh! and welcome to 30bad!

members of your species really aren't "designed" to be frugivores. nor is it sensible to argue that early humans were behaviorally exclusively frugivorous since they weren't. in any case, the former is an appeal to nature fallacy, while the latter is a genetic fallacy. furthermore, neither the wild nor the past are good grounds upon which to base an argument (in fact, doing so isn't too much different from what fact-ignoring religious 'zealots' tend to do).

however, there is overwhelming evidence that eliminating all corpse products and eating whole veg foods is good for health:


if you want specific scientific studies from there, i may have some of them.

these are not silly over the weekend productions financed by the corpse industries, but are long-term, large sample sized serious stuff, peer reviewed and published in reputable medical journals. you'll find some of them highlighted in this science category on 30bad.

for instance, here a socially significant one:

body odor study

humans do tend to have a very strong taxonomic inclination to herbivores though. the comparisons are well laid out in this article:

The Comparative Anatomy of Eating

you write:

Its extremely hard arguing with someone who doesn't believe in the scientific FACT of evolution, but I am very determined to show him this is the right way for humans to eat.

as the saying goes, "it's impossible to win an argument with an ignorant person".

however, you can still have a lot of fun. :D

in friendship,


great points!

Well, there is a path that acknowledges both evolutionary and creation aspects to the development of humanity. But it is not an easy path, as one must develop new ways of thinking to understand what it is to be human. The Bible is a sacred text that can only be understood rightly through spiritual perception, not materialistic cause and effect thinking. Both creationists and evolutionist can err on the materialistic thinking of out time. To understand the spirit we must develop organs of the spirit inherent in every human being. Until this is done, objectivity is not possible. Have a look at Spiritual Science as initiated by Rudolf Steiner. He gives a picture of how to unfold spiritual organs in his book Knowledge of Higher Worlds. Whatever our belief picture is we are all human beings on earth trying to cope with the world we live in. Becoming a vegan is possible for most of us, as for being tolerant for the different ways of seeing life, well that seems much more difficult.

jesus' own words from the Gospel of peace unpervereted by the romans

The China Study is as close to the evolution argument that I ever really need to get. 

Eat animals human get sick,  no eat animals human get well. 

I don't need to prove some super long past evolution and I don't need to investigate the lineage of Abraham!!!!!!!!!!!!  I just need to eat bananas and see how great I feel!  It's so simple.  When faced with stupid arguments,  simplify.   You just want to invite your friend to a better feeling place, not club him over the head with the 'I'm right' stick!

Just remind yourself that you're lucky enough to have found what works for you and are no longer in the torturous paradigm of the SAD.


I agree with you. 

  Hey I am a creationist Bible believing Jesus Freak, who believes that our bodies were biologically made to Eat as much fruit as we can stand. As a scientific evolutionist...You can point out to your christian friend that Genesis Chapter 2-3 shows God telling the first people to enjoy all seed bearing plants and eat all the fruit you can stand accept for one fruit.  God never said anything about munching animals till after the fall of man..as true or allegorical as both sides may consider the Bible to be(if you would be so inclined to check)..your biggest proof text for a Christian is to send them straight to the Bible...there I'm helping the so called other team and I feel great about it.:)


                    Your heading does state that you feel we were designed to eat fruit...I'm sure you meant we evolved to eat fruit right.....because most designs require a designer.........just saying..

                                                                                                           One Love


Thank you for your post and I wanted to add: humans didn't eat meat until after the flood. The meat was a last minute resort. People lived for hundreds of years until after the flood. And it slowly declined after that. There is even a Christian group(s) who still believe that God only allowed meat for survival after the flood. Seventh Day Adventists (predominantly vegetarian) did a large study showing that they lived much longer than the USA life expectancy. (However one of the founders actually spoke out against dairy and meat with passion and wrote "Counsels on diet and health" back in the 1800's. Completely ahead of her time. Her name is Ellen G. White. 

Here's a good article about it. http://www.naturalnews.com/022599.html

Humans (homo sapiens) belong under the Order Primata. Which branches out to either Prosimii or Simii (Anthropoidea). Homo sapiens are in the Suborder Anthropoidea, which branches to the super families of Hominoidae, Pongidae, and Hylobotidae. Homo Sapiens are in the Hominoidae super family. Every species under Primata is a primate due to the nomenclature method. We are under the classification of Primata which encompasses all primate species. Genetically, we do not relate closer to any other species on the planet.
ALL primates are frugivorous accordingly to body surface to weight ratio. Larger surface area = more fruit/foliage, less surface area = more fruit/accidental insects.

   Thats a mouth full



TheBananaGirl created this Ning Network.

30BaD Search

Latest Activity

© 2019   Created by TheBananaGirl.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service