[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*

[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!)

[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.

[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.

[aomagrat]

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

Global warming started 1.2 million years ago.

[StriperSniper]

Once hairlessness had evolved through natural selection, Dr. Pagel and Dr. Bodmer suggest, it then became subject to sexual selection,

Everything I want to say would get me banned. ;-)

[sticker]

Humans lost their fur when women thought it made them look fat.

[happygrl]

ping for an anthropology discussion.

[biblewonk]

Doesn't the theory suggest that humans were the same a million years ago as they are now?

[LiteKeeper]

Many shaky suppositions

If you look closely at most reporting of "scientific" discoveries, they are made up of "shaky suppositions" unchallenged by the press. Why? Because it furthers their cause of minimizing or eliminating the need for God and the creation model.

[SpinyNorman]

Among the newly furless humans, bare skin would have served, like the peacock's tail, as a signal of fitness. The pains women take to keep their bodies free of hair — joined now by some men — may be no mere fashion statement but the latest echo of an ancient instinct.

Someone wanna tell the butch lesbians populating Northampton, MA that little factoid?

[Frankss]

I was told to eat my spinach because "it'll put hair on your chest" Well, it worked all over. Remember "birds make no nest in bare trees"

[Spok]

...and I thought it was because of PETA.
I don't know if this has any great anthropological significance, but I still teach my boys how to separate animals from THEIR fur...bear hunting this weekend just below B.C.

[martianagent]

Many shaky suppositions...

The whole thing is shaky, and the idea of humans ever living on the African savannahs is idiotic. Humans are too slow and too noisy to live on the savannahs. The young of prey animals know how to keep quiet; the first time some human infant ever started crying on the savannahs, with lions and hyenas walking around anywhere within five miles, it would be all over.

[HitmanLV]

As an intalian american gentleman, I've been accused of having fur on more than one occasion! Maybe I'm just so retro.....

[Gargantua]

" The result, if the dates are accurate, is something of an embarrassment. It implies we were naked for more than a million years before we started wearing clothes."

Of course we were. Now then, there's a good research group... now take your medication and try to relax, N'Kay?

"If" the dates are accurate? Get a grip. Stop wasting taxpayer dollars on this junk science and get a real job. Please.

[pkjeff]

<< The compilers of Genesis write that as soon as Adam and Eve realized they were naked, they sewed themselves aprons made of leaves from the fig tree, and that the Creator himself made them more durable skin coats before evicting them. But if Dr. Rogers and Dr. Stoneking are correct, humans were naked for a million years before they noticed their state of undress and called for the tailor. >>

At least this shows clearly that certain theories are contradictory with Scripture. So is the Bible correct or Drs. Rogers and Stoneking? hmmmmmmm...