For some, yes. Others you had to hunt or catch.
> Food didn't change. We did.
If you mean the human population grew to a point where simple hunting and gathering could not support it, and then food changed after that, that's getting things backwards. Our ancestors invented farming, i.e., a new way of producing food, and then the population grew larger than hunting and gathering could support. So food changed first. Then we changed.
> You must always ask:
Progress towards what?
Yes, agreed. Not everyone would consider our ancestors' invention of farming to be progress, for example.
The best interpretation of your comment is that of course I support progress away from blatant human rights violations and genocide.
Though I do suggest you take extra care with grammatical use of the comma (,). :)
It was. There was a time you could just walk out and pick it off trees.
Food didn't change. We did.
Progress is not a scalar. It's a vector. You must always ask:
Progress towards what?