I think it's irresponsible to recommend a diet to people that has little to no scientific support for the kinds of effects that you promise or imply: weight loss, improved physical and mental health, and longevity. In fact, some possible instantiations of the paleo diet are, I believe, currently considered unhealthy by the medical establishment, such as a diet high in saturated fats, cholesterol, and/or red meats.

I notice that none of your references have any serious qualifications to be giving nutritional advice. The most rigorously argued of your sources - "Good Calories, Bad Calories" - is written by a science journalist. The scientific establishment has spend decades and billions of dollars trying to understand nutrition, and these people think they can figure it out by thinking hard and reading some papers?

Morover, you can find equally convincing arguments, anecdotes, and "experts" for any of: vegetarianism, raw foodism, veganism, low-carb, etc. What makes the paleo diet different?

You can experiment with your own body all you want, but giving drastic dietary advice on such flimsy evidence seems pretty reckless.