I don't get it. Sure, we can eat a lot of different stuff. But carnivores should have much easier time digesting meat, which can be raw or even rotten. That's an important source of protein we couldn't fully utilize before the invention of fire. And herbivores should be getting much more out of plant and grain.
Another thing. I guess it's not far enough in the future that just anybody can go in space(but far enough that they let people just fly wherever and alone), and he supposed to have outstanding health and atleticism, but I don't buy that he's stronger than a bear, for example.
The chimp scientist stated that, although the astronaut did not excel in any particular category when compared to athletes who do, it’s the fact that the astronaut does well in ALL categories that is exceptional.
For example, although the bear might win in strength, the astronaut likely outpaces the bear in swimming. And although the astronaut is likely weaker than a kangaroo at jumping and the cheetah at sprinting, the astronaut is more competent in those categories than many animals, and consistently stays good in all categories, whereas all other animals have a definitive, physiological weakness in an area, like a bear at vertical jumping, a kangaroo at climbing, or a cheetah at endurance sports.
To the point of the food thing, I think it’s just the range that baffles the animals. Yeah carnivores can eat rotten meat and the astronaut can’t, but the astronaut can eat most other things that carnivores can’t. Vice versa for herbivores. And omnivore typically still need a specialized diet. For example, although some dogs can eat carrion, it’s not good for a dog to eat onion, chocolate, garlic, etc. Even rats, which can eat seeds, grains, meat, insects, and fungi cannot digest large amounts of cellulose, and rats are arguably one of the most versatile omnivores.
