Why Humans and Their Fur Parted Ways

The New York Times (Science Times) ^ | August 19, 2003 | NICHOLAS WADE

[Pharmboy]

Many shaky suppositions; but the Times never questions them as long as they are PC or compatible with PC-ness.

However, some of the discussion I thought would be of interest to interested Freepers.

[Blood of Tyrants]

What are they talking about? I know several men with more fur than a bear.

[Pharmboy]

*Ping*

[Pharmboy]

Throwbacks.

[Seeking the truth]

It's great to start with one false premise, buttress that with another and then support that one with yet another and it all adds up to a good laugh! (as I am looking at the webs of my fingers & toes!)

[Seeking the truth]

BTW, I know of what I speak.

Every two weeks, I have to shave my chest as the hair starts to pop out of the neck area of my shirts.

My back, forgettaboutit!

[wbill]

"Pardon me, I'll be in the shower shaving my back."

:-)

[ClearCase_guy]

An archaic human walked fur-free about 1.2 million years ago, carrying fire on the savanna

Can someone help me here? Do we have some sort of fossil evidence that hominids were fur-free 1.2M years ago? Or is that just baseless supposition? And use of fire at that time -- do we know that?

[SLB]

I guess it never dawned on these folks that God created us? Some people will never get a clue. I don't think I have webs on my fingers because I evolved from a frog. We are each unique and have different genetic makeup. I started to grow body hair in my late teens, and now am covered with it, but still have a very light beard. On the other hand, I have seen many with heavy beards and hardly a hair below the neck. Isn't He marvelous the way each of us is made the same, but yet unique?

[Agnes Heep]

My thought is that once human intelligence evolved to the point where hunting techniques were perfected and a steady supply of high-caloric food became available, the early hominids didn't need fur to maintain body temperature.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Does the 'w' in 'wbill' stand for "wooly"?

[mewzilla]

Like that fat, t-shirt clad terrorist What's-his-name. You know, the one with more hair than Bigfoot.

[Pharmboy]

The hairlessness is a guess; fire use, however, is supported by hearth evidence. AFAIK, to at least 600,000 years ago.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Mohammed something. That are all named Mohammed.

[hopespringseternal]

It's great to start with one false premise, buttress that with another and then support that one with yet another and it all adds up to a good laugh.

Listening to this line of reasoning it sounds exactly the rantings of conspiracy theorists.

[mewzilla]

LOL. Guess he must be a throw back. Australopithecus terroristus or something.

[Maria S]

I have never understood the evolution thing. If we "evolved" from apes, why are there still apes? Why aren't there only the result of the so-called evolution. Why are some of our so-called ape cousins still swinging from tree branches? Naaaah, I'm sticking with the Biblical version. Makes more sense.

[mewzilla]

We didn't evolve from apes. Humans and apes evolved from the same common ancestor.

[ClearCase_guy]

Thnaks for the reply. As others have mentioned, there is a tremendous amount of guesswork in this so-called "science" article. The hairlessness is (as you say) a guess. And if fire has been dated to 600,000 years ago, isn't it crazy for the article to double that to 1.2M years?

Theories are okay. Filling in gaps by creating hypotheses is the nature of science. But I'd say this article is about 95% guesswork, with the gaps in guesses being filled in by a few facts.

[Little Ray]

We didn't evolve "from" apes. According to evolution theory, we share common ancestors with apes. Apes are as highly evolved for their environments as we are.