Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 107 (8805 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 12-12-2017 5:11 AM
353 online now:
PaulK, xongsmith (2 members, 351 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Post Volume:
Total: 824,044 Year: 28,650/21,208 Month: 716/1,847 Week: 91/475 Day: 1/37 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
567
8
910Next
Author Topic:   Is body hair a functionless vestige?
Taq
Member
Posts: 7272
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 106 of 143 (612415)
04-15-2011 11:50 AM
Reply to: Message 102 by Robert Byers
04-15-2011 12:59 AM


I agree our hair gives no warmth. however it does attempt to keep us dry.

No, it doesn't. If anything, it keeps more water on the body than not having hair. For examples of hair that DOES keep water off the body you should check out dog breeds that have a dense undercoat, such as Labradors or Newfies. That hair actually does keep water off the body unlike ours.

I see it as a quick reaction in a post flood world.

You seem to see a lot of things for which there is no evidence.

I don't see hair as doing much unless for women it more keeps them from being too cooled in the climate.

Hair density in women is the same as in men for most cases. Alopecia is more common in human men, but it does occur in women as well. Also, more insulation is actually a hinderance in many climates that humans are otherwise well adapted to, such as the savannas of Africa. Like I said before, sweating is a much more useful thermoregulatory adaptation in humans than hair is, by a long ways.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Robert Byers, posted 04-15-2011 12:59 AM Robert Byers has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by Robert Byers, posted 04-20-2011 2:54 AM Taq has not yet responded

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 5772
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 9.6


Message 107 of 143 (612417)
04-15-2011 12:15 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by Robert Byers
04-15-2011 12:56 AM


I've always understood they have more hair or hair holes relative to the size of their heads compared to men. Then also a stronger quality.

What you understand is meaningless if you have no evidence to back it up. There are a lot of things that a lot of people understand to be correct that are woefully wrong. Instead of just asserting how about trying to present some evidence.

nOt by evolution by mutation/selection but innate triggers to quickly adapt .

Evolution by another name?

ABE
Hair holes? hair holes? Are you freaking serious? You make all these supposed scientific claims and you don't know the name for "hair holes"?

Edited by Theodoric, : No reason given.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Robert Byers, posted 04-15-2011 12:56 AM Robert Byers has not yet responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10115
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 108 of 143 (612429)
04-15-2011 2:43 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by Robert Byers
04-15-2011 12:56 AM


Robert Byers writes:

NoNukes writes:

You have not even established that women have more hair on their heads than men.

I've always understood they have more hair or hair holes relative to the size of their heads compared to men. Then also a stronger quality.

You are just making that stuff up. And your explanation is completely backwards.

A smaller body with a smaller surface area would mean

1) Less energy need be generated internally required to attain a given temperature.
2) Less heat loss due to radiation or convection.

That means that big people, male or female, need greater protection against heat loss in a cold, wet climate than do smaller people.

Yes i insist marine mammals were just post flood creatures that took to the water. nOt by evolution by mutation/selection but innate triggers to quickly adapt .

Apparently those innate triggers produced inheritable changes. Someday it might be worthwhile to discuss the mechanism by that you understand will allow such things to happen.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Robert Byers, posted 04-15-2011 12:56 AM Robert Byers has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by ringo, posted 04-15-2011 3:09 PM NoNukes has responded
 Message 127 by Robert Byers, posted 04-20-2011 2:57 AM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 13965
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 109 of 143 (612434)
04-15-2011 3:09 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by NoNukes
04-15-2011 2:43 PM


NoNukes writes:

That means that big people, male or female, need greater protection against heat loss in a cold, wet climate than do smaller people.


Because of the square-cube law, bigger people have a higher mass-to-surface-area ratio, which should translate to higher heat-producing capacity and lower heat-loss capacity, shouldn't it?

(I don't see it having much to do with hair though.)


If you have nothing to say, you could have done so much more concisely. -- Dr Adequate
This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by NoNukes, posted 04-15-2011 2:43 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by NoNukes, posted 04-15-2011 9:56 PM ringo has acknowledged this reply

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10115
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 110 of 143 (612465)
04-15-2011 9:56 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by ringo
04-15-2011 3:09 PM


ringo writes:

Because of the square-cube law, bigger people have a higher mass-to-surface-area ratio, which should translate to higher heat-producing capacity and lower heat-loss capacity, shouldn't it?

A larger body would definitely lose more BTU/hr than a smaller one, but I hadn't considered an increase in heat generating capacity proportional to the mass. So for big, compact animals, a smaller fraction of the generated heat would be lost. A larger body would be better at maintaining temperature in the cold, but less able to get rid of heat in a too hot environment. I think you and Byers are right about that.

ringo writes:

I don't see it having much to do with hair though.

More hair might help in cold climates, but women don't actually seem to have more hair on their heads. Not sure why Byers is trying to explain something that does not seem to occur.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by ringo, posted 04-15-2011 3:09 PM ringo has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by Jon, posted 04-15-2011 10:52 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

    
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 111 of 143 (612469)
04-15-2011 10:52 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by NoNukes
04-15-2011 9:56 PM


A larger body would be better at maintaining temperature in the cold, but less able to get rid of heat in a too hot environment. I think you and Byers are right about that.

That doesn't seem to fit with the evidence though: human groups from hotter climates tend to be larger and lankier while groups from colder climates tend to be shorter and stockier.

Or is this a false impression I'm getting?

Jon


Love your enemies!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by NoNukes, posted 04-15-2011 9:56 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by ringo, posted 04-15-2011 11:29 PM Jon has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 13965
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 112 of 143 (612471)
04-15-2011 11:29 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by Jon
04-15-2011 10:52 PM


Jon writes:

human groups from hotter climates tend to be larger and lankier while groups from colder climates tend to be shorter and stockier.


A long, thin shape would have proportionately more surface area than a short, thick one of the same mass.

Consider a sheet of plywood 48 by 96 inches and 1/2 inch thick. That's 9360 square inches of surface area, according to my calculations. Now cut it into 12 inch squares - 32 squares to make a stack 16 inches high. That's 1056 square inches surface area. The short fat stack will stay much warmer than the thin sheet.


If you have nothing to say, you could have done so much more concisely. -- Dr Adequate
This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by Jon, posted 04-15-2011 10:52 PM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by Jon, posted 04-16-2011 9:00 PM ringo has responded
 Message 117 by OliverChant, posted 04-17-2011 2:29 PM ringo has responded

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 113 of 143 (612548)
04-16-2011 9:00 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by ringo
04-15-2011 11:29 PM


A long, thin shape would have proportionately more surface area than a short, thick one of the same mass.

Consider a sheet of plywood 48 by 96 inches and 1/2 inch thick. That's 9360 square inches of surface area, according to my calculations. Now cut it into 12 inch squares - 32 squares to make a stack 16 inches high. That's 1056 square inches surface area. The short fat stack will stay much warmer than the thin sheet.

That's kind of the point I was trying to make. Unless females are the exact same proportion as larger males, wouldn't their smaller bodies already keep them warmer?

I can't see why women would need more 'hair holes' than men.

Jon


Love your enemies!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by ringo, posted 04-15-2011 11:29 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by ringo, posted 04-16-2011 11:02 PM Jon has acknowledged this reply

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 13965
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 114 of 143 (612552)
04-16-2011 11:02 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by Jon
04-16-2011 9:00 PM


Jon writes:

I can't see why women would need more 'hair holes' than men.


I agree that the hair-holes argument doesn't make any sense. It's pretty funny though.


If you have nothing to say, you could have done so much more concisely. -- Dr Adequate
This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Jon, posted 04-16-2011 9:00 PM Jon has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by Coyote, posted 04-17-2011 12:09 AM ringo has acknowledged this reply

  
Coyote
Member
Posts: 6037
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 115 of 143 (612554)
04-17-2011 12:09 AM
Reply to: Message 114 by ringo
04-16-2011 11:02 PM


Another fundy boo-boo
ringo writes:

Jon writes:

I can't see why women would need more 'hair holes' than men.


I agree that the hair-holes argument doesn't make any sense. It's pretty funny though.

This is the problem we have.

Fundies are convinced that they have the answers to various questions so they don't need evidence, logical conclusions from that evidence, or the scientific method.

Simple bone-head mistakes are the first clue. Folks who know their subject tend not to make too many of those mistakes. Other folks, who have little to no scientific training, and who may be getting their "science" from fundie websites, do not fare so well.

That brings up the question: Why should scientists pay any attention to folks who know little to nothing about a scientific subject?

Does zeal bring scientific knowledge? Sorry, no.

Does religious apologetics bring scientific knowledge? Sorry, no.

Does religious revelation bring scientific knowledge? Sorry, no.

Does religious belief bring scientific knowledge? Sorry, no.

If you have not studied a particular field of science to at least an advanced level, you have no business opining on that subject. Sad to say, religious apologists are the main offenders in this regard. Perhaps they should just "put a cork in it."

(See also tagline.)


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by ringo, posted 04-16-2011 11:02 PM ringo has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by OliverChant, posted 04-17-2011 2:27 PM Coyote has not yet responded

  
OliverChant
Junior Member (Idle past 2339 days)
Posts: 28
Joined: 04-17-2011


Message 116 of 143 (612602)
04-17-2011 2:27 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by Coyote
04-17-2011 12:09 AM


Sorry but hair has function
First of all if your girlfriend had no hair you wouldnt find her attractive

Secondly your pubic hair regulates temperatures for your genitals.

Thirdly the reason why we as humans find people with hair attractive is because it shows a sign of health so there you go...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Coyote, posted 04-17-2011 12:09 AM Coyote has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by Jon, posted 04-17-2011 2:47 PM OliverChant has responded
 Message 128 by Robert Byers, posted 04-20-2011 3:00 AM OliverChant has not yet responded

    
OliverChant
Junior Member (Idle past 2339 days)
Posts: 28
Joined: 04-17-2011


Message 117 of 143 (612603)
04-17-2011 2:29 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by ringo
04-15-2011 11:29 PM


YOUR WRONG
Haha I'm South African and we "white "people are generally larger than the "bbalck people yet we originate from colder climates????
This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by ringo, posted 04-15-2011 11:29 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by OliverChant, posted 04-17-2011 2:31 PM OliverChant has not yet responded
 Message 123 by ringo, posted 04-17-2011 2:58 PM OliverChant has responded

    
OliverChant
Junior Member (Idle past 2339 days)
Posts: 28
Joined: 04-17-2011


Message 118 of 143 (612604)
04-17-2011 2:31 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by OliverChant
04-17-2011 2:29 PM


Re: YOUR WRONG
"black"sorry
This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by OliverChant, posted 04-17-2011 2:29 PM OliverChant has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by Jon, posted 04-17-2011 2:41 PM OliverChant has responded

    
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 119 of 143 (612607)
04-17-2011 2:41 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by OliverChant
04-17-2011 2:31 PM


Please Use the Edit Button
There is an 'Edit' button at the bottom of every post you make, right next to the 'Reply' button. You can use that button to fix any typos or grammatical mistakes you notice after submitting your post; you do not need to make a new post to indicate a correction.

This is a forum, not an chat room. Let's try to keep it that way for everyone's sake.

Thanks


Love your enemies!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by OliverChant, posted 04-17-2011 2:31 PM OliverChant has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by OliverChant, posted 04-17-2011 2:42 PM Jon has acknowledged this reply

  
OliverChant
Junior Member (Idle past 2339 days)
Posts: 28
Joined: 04-17-2011


Message 120 of 143 (612609)
04-17-2011 2:42 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by Jon
04-17-2011 2:41 PM


Re: Please Use the Edit Button
sorry
This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by Jon, posted 04-17-2011 2:41 PM Jon has acknowledged this reply

    
Prev1
...
567
8
910Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017