With all due respect, what is your source for this "how did food evolve?" line. Years ago I saw another, local (ie, nowhere near OK), creationist use it in his newsletter -- duly unimpressed, I could only shake my head over how turned around the reasoning was. For a while, a lot of creationists "independently" tried to pull a Pascal's Wager couched as an auto insurance analogy (see my description of this experience at
No webpage found at provided URL: http://members.aol.com/dwise1/cre_ev/wager.html, which indicated to me that some preacher or televangelist had used it in a sermon. Similarly, this food-evolution cropping up again tells me that it must be in some creationist's writings somewhere.
OK, I would say that the reasoning is turned around, because whether or nor some food tastes good depends on the one doing the tasting. So it's more a question of why certain foods taste good to us. And that depends on what kinds of foods we're suited to eating, what foods contain the nutrients that we need.
At the same time, plants could exploit (not consciously, of course) the eating habits of native animals by providing those nutrients around their seeds so that those animals would partake and then spread those seeds. Or offer nectar to attract insects that will then help transport pollen to other flowers -- the high death rate we're currently experiencing among bees is a threat to our agriculture for this reason.
And, of course, once we domesticate a plant then we control its breeding in order to enhance those traits that we want.
PS
I just caught this. "pickles". Pickles? OK, show me a "pickle plant". Have you ever seen one? I doubt that very much, since it doesn't exist. A pickle is a cucumber that has undergone a human-performed process. Pickles never evolved; they are made. It would be like asking why an apple pie would have evolved to taste good.
Edited by dwise1, : postscript and wager link
Edited by dwise1, : Oops. Just moved the postscript down to where it belongs.
™ Version 4.2
