Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: CottShop; count-your-change; Coyoteman
If evolution supposedly casts off what isn’t ‘useful’, then what possible purpose could htere have been for the male nipples IF coyoteman is suggesting they are useless?

Which raises a couple interesting questions.

If they're useless, how and why did they evolve in the first place?

If evolution supposedly casts off what isn’t ‘useful’, then it can be presumed that body hair or fur wasn't useful, as man has relatively little of it.

If man and the other apes all descended from a common ancestor, and lived in essentially the same environment, did man lost the hair or did the other apes gain it? Why one and not the other? How is being hairless and needing to clothe oneself an evolutionary advantage? Right about now, some of that fur would be a huge advantage in this stinkin' cold.

750 posted on 01/15/2009 6:04:31 AM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 743 | View Replies ]


To: metmom
How is being hairless and needing to clothe oneself an evolutionary advantage?

One suggestion is better cooling for activities such as persistence hunting.

752 posted on 01/15/2009 9:18:03 AM PST by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 750 | View Replies ]

To: metmom; CottShop
did man lost the hair or did the other apes gain it? Why one and not the other? How is being hairless and needing to clothe oneself an evolutionary advantage?

Here's a column outlining three theories. Basically, they boil down to a semi-aquatic period in human evolution; heat regulation when humans moved out of the forest and onto the open savannah; or reduced habitat for parasites.

So a question in return: if man and the other apes didn't descend from a common ancestor, why is there a human birth defect that causes hair to grow all over the body, including the face? I understand the idea of the Fall and devolution. But if the original perfect man was hairless and unrelated to other apes, why should devolution take humans in the direction of other apes?

And what's your explanation for why men have nipples? Do you subscribe to CottShop's charming theory that God installed them just so we'd have another erogenous zone in case we needed it?

753 posted on 01/15/2009 9:36:19 AM PST by Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 750 | View Replies ]

To: metmom

[[If evolution supposedly casts off what isn’t ‘useful’, then it can be presumed that body hair or fur wasn’t useful, as man has relatively little of it.]]

I’ll tell ya what- on days liek today- -12 degrees, I’d surel iek a nice thick matt of fur- brrrr lol

[[If they’re useless, how and why did they evolve in the first place?]]

National geographic apparently thinks man evolved from woman- they have been desperately tryign to show all human life starts off as a woman i nthe womb, and they’ve been relentlessly showing a show called ‘The Pregnant MAN’- you know, that WOMAN who got a sex change, but kept her womanly innards, and got pregnant? Talk abotu desperate to kick God out of life- NG apparently doesn’t care abotu hteir reputation as honest and trustworthy by showing crap liek that.


755 posted on 01/15/2009 9:47:55 AM PST by CottShop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 750 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson