The main reason I declined to participate -

When I checked the site it appeared to be the home turf
of vegans and vegitarians.  I am offended when they come
here with political nonsense as pressure to try to convert
us so I have no interest in going there to return the fire.
If I concluded incorrectly sorry about that.  You did fine.

The secondary reason -

The first posting used the words carnivore (cats, weasels
and so on), omnivores (pigs, humans and so on) and
herbivores (cows, deer and so on).  Then the discussion
was not about observing an evolutionary biological fact
but about choices.  Starting from that level of either
ignorance or dishonesty there wasn't much ground for
beneficial discussion.  If it's about choices then start out
that way.

Humans are omnivores.  We are evolved to eat almost
anything but to do best on a diet of mixed animal and
vegitable food sources.  It should come as no surprise
that most humans societies eat foods that reflect that
fact.  It is interesting when any one specific society eats
otherwise and it's interesting when any one human makes
a personal choice to eat otherwise.

Human herbivores?  Folks, go ahead and do the genetic
engineering to have your childrens' digestion change so
they are herbivores and it will get interesting.  Until then
if you want to influence human evolution make your own
personal choice and get out there having babies for the
choice to be carried on.  ;^)

The topic of deliberately chosing a diet other than the one
humans are evolved for can be interesting, but when is a
discussion with vegans anything like that rational?

The topic of exactly where in the omnivore range is
optimal for humans can also be interesting, but who ever
offers longevity demographic data to be able to support
their stances?