Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9072 total)
71 online now:
kjsimons, Tanypteryx, vimesey (3 members, 68 visitors)
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Happy Birthday: Percy
Post Volume: Total: 893,122 Year: 4,234/6,534 Month: 448/900 Week: 154/150 Day: 8/16 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is body hair a functionless vestige?
Robert Byers
Member (Idle past 3600 days)
Posts: 640
From: Toronto,canada
Joined: 02-06-2004


Message 134 of 143 (613740)
04-27-2011 12:22 AM
Reply to: Message 132 by Ken Fabos
04-24-2011 7:58 PM


Ken Fabos writes:

This hypothetical ability to quickly adapt to wetness - very quickly if the entire history of homo sapiens is a few thousand years - would cause strong and clear variations according to geography and climate within human sub populations. We don't see that. Such an 'oversensitive' adaptive ability that simply stops or gets 'stuck in the gear' isn't a real explanation for why we don't.

Sorry but this transient adaptive ability of hair to respond (before getting stuck in gear) to wetness is pure conjecture without basis in evidence.

Women more hairy than men? I think that perception is more about modern social rituals involving scissors and razors than innate physiological differences between men and women; take away those rituals and men are more hairy than women, if not in all the same places - similar density of head hair plus extra on face and rest of body.

As for insulation being the primary function of hair I'd have to disagree; the sensory function is a more fundamental function of hair and (as I pointed out before) looks to predate hair/fur as insulation - right back to the precursors of mammals. Colour, thickness, distribution and growth patterns are all highly variable but the ability to pass tactile sensory signals to receptors in the follicles and surrounding skin looks to be a universal characteristic of hairs that has never been lost.

I think YEC's should stick with 'because God made it that way' and not bother with attempts to sound sciency.

The evidence is the evidence. its the same for everyone. tHen its who does a better job at interpretating the evidence.

I say the simple answer is the first and most likely answer.

Hair is for protecting against the threat of coldness.

We have unneeded hair because a false conclusion was drawn by the body that episodic sweating would chill the area and make it cold. so a trigger was hit but it didn't go far. Then it stayed in its original gear as I said.

I'm aware of the hairyness of the sexes. Yes men have more hair because they were originally more in the fields. yet women have more on the head relative to their smaller heads and bodies because of a greater need to keep the head dry. The rest of the body was fine.

This would of happened soon after the flood.

yes there is great variation in people.

for example Africans have less hair because of a need to sweat away the heat and humidity. Serious need. on the head also the hair tightly curly is a result of the problem.

Northern Europeans have more hair as they lived in a wetter world.

Yet red headed people have less hair then this because of a need to have little covering in the way of the sunlight. The origin for the extreme lack of pigmentation and remnant concentration in the hair and red spots.

Asians have little body hair because of not living in a wet climate.

Hair growth is very relevant to area and is clearly triggered by needs. It being sensitive may go to far but the clear evidence leads to a clear conclusion, or first, that hair is for keeping areas dry on humans.

This is the trigger.

I don't see it being related to sensory function in any important way.

in fact you seem to base it on presumptions of evolutionary ideas in a furry heritage rather then close observational evidence.

Points for trying but more points for accuracy.

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Blank lines.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by Ken Fabos, posted 04-24-2011 7:58 PM Ken Fabos has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by Coyote, posted 04-27-2011 12:27 AM Robert Byers has taken no action

  
Robert Byers
Member (Idle past 3600 days)
Posts: 640
From: Toronto,canada
Joined: 02-06-2004


Message 136 of 143 (613744)
04-27-2011 12:31 AM
Reply to: Message 133 by Jon
04-24-2011 10:33 PM


Re: Like a Rock - 2
i don't link. Just wiki.

You concentrate on the triggers and genetics.

Well again I say the facts are apparent and so the first interpretation should be the most simple.
Hair is a covering against coldness.

In our case its against wetness which in nature leads to coldness.

Yet its so patchy it follows it couldn't actually be doing much of a job or ever did.

so the conclusion must be that the body reacts to triggers that say this or that area is enduring important episodic or continious wetness.

Upon puberty this is areas of episodic sweating.

It makes sense. Its a simple concept.

I include its a over sensitivity long ago because its worthless. Then it stayed in gear .

its reasonable to conclude its from triggers within the body without knowing these atomic mechanisms. We don't know much about bodies as shown by the inability to heat a great deal.

Observation plus analysis equals likely conclusion.

Not unlikely conclusions based on evolutionary ideas.

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Blank lines.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by Jon, posted 04-24-2011 10:33 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by Jon, posted 04-27-2011 12:34 AM Robert Byers has taken no action

  
Robert Byers
Member (Idle past 3600 days)
Posts: 640
From: Toronto,canada
Joined: 02-06-2004


Message 141 of 143 (645787)
12-30-2011 1:19 AM
Reply to: Message 140 by Ken Fabos
12-17-2011 1:59 PM


Re: Does this vindicate my arguments?
There is no reason to see sensory abilities in hair as the reason for hair.
The first answer should be the simple one.
hair is a result of the body trying to keep warm/
by warming or drying.
In our case after the fall or the flood our bodies reacted , or over reacted,
to the areas of our bodies that had special episodic sweating and so grew hair to dry the areas up.
It doesn't work and is today a memory of a original trigger and over sensitivity.
Not remnants of a hairy ape origin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by Ken Fabos, posted 12-17-2011 1:59 PM Ken Fabos has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 142 by Ken Fabos, posted 01-03-2012 4:00 PM Robert Byers has replied

  
Robert Byers
Member (Idle past 3600 days)
Posts: 640
From: Toronto,canada
Joined: 02-06-2004


Message 143 of 143 (646272)
01-03-2012 9:25 PM
Reply to: Message 142 by Ken Fabos
01-03-2012 4:00 PM


Re: Does this vindicate my arguments?
Its fine to have eye lashes helping the eyes or other agendas of hair helping the body to be sensitive to touch/feel.
Yet hair on the bodies for all creatures is clearly from a need to keep warm/dry.
One could in factr say first hair was for the great agenda of warmth and then evolved these other uses.
No reason to see the sensitivity issue as first and foremost.

In any case its about presumptions and investigation.
The bible starts with boundaries that one can presume for ones hypothesis(s).

We started without hair in eden and then still didn't need hair until the flood.
Our bodies had the ability and did react to grow hair for a wetter world we found.
I say these triggers are shown by the areas on our bodies that have unneeded hair.
Our under arms hair unneeded hair because the body back in the day was over sensitive and interpretated episodic sweating as a threat and so grew hair to dry the area up.
Yet it was not needed and fails to do the trick.
However its a great clue as to the whole need and reply of our bodies regarding hair.
its simply a attempt to dry/warm creatures up.
No need for way out evolutionary ideas that can't be proved one way or another.
our own remnants of unneeded are the best clue and fit biblical boundaries.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 142 by Ken Fabos, posted 01-03-2012 4:00 PM Ken Fabos has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022