evolution paints human ancestors covered with fur.
fur has several benefits as stated by britannica "the pelts of fur-bearing animals are called true furs when they consist of two elements: a dense undercoat, called ground hair, and longer hairs, extending beyond that layer, called guard hair.
the principal function of ground hair is to maintain the animal’s body temperature; that of guard hair is to protect the underlying fur and skin and to shed rain or snow.".
You didn't read it. The answer is really simple.
You are being obtuse - as usual.
Do lions and apes walk upright across the Savannah during the day? What happens if you do that? Does fur keep you cool in the sun or make you overheat?
It's not a matter of opinion, it's about facts.
Read the link.
evolution paints human ancestors covered with fur.
fur has several benefits as stated by britannica "the pelts of fur-bearing animals are called true furs when they consist of two elements: a dense undercoat, called ground hair, and longer hairs, extending beyond that layer, called guard hair.
the principal function of ground hair is to maintain the animal’s body temperature; that of guard hair is to protect the underlying fur and skin and to shed rain or snow.".
evolution paints human ancestors covered with fur.
fur has several benefits as stated by britannica "the pelts of fur-bearing animals are called true furs when they consist of two elements: a dense undercoat, called ground hair, and longer hairs, extending beyond that layer, called guard hair.
the principal function of ground hair is to maintain the animal’s body temperature; that of guard hair is to protect the underlying fur and skin and to shed rain or snow.".
Read the underlined bit again. Slowly.
evolution paints human ancestors covered with fur.
fur has several benefits as stated by britannica "the pelts of fur-bearing animals are called true furs when they consist of two elements: a dense undercoat, called ground hair, and longer hairs, extending beyond that layer, called guard hair.
the principal function of ground hair is to maintain the animal’s body temperature; that of guard hair is to protect the underlying fur and skin and to shed rain or snow.".
cofty, the wait for 2 is over.
Really? You think this is a hole in evolution? A schoolchild could tell you what selection pressures transformed us into "naked apes".
Try harder.
evolution paints human ancestors covered with fur.
fur has several benefits as stated by britannica "the pelts of fur-bearing animals are called true furs when they consist of two elements: a dense undercoat, called ground hair, and longer hairs, extending beyond that layer, called guard hair.
the principal function of ground hair is to maintain the animal’s body temperature; that of guard hair is to protect the underlying fur and skin and to shed rain or snow.".
cofty, your link does nothing to address the question
Yes it does. It provides proof that Homo sapiens descend from very hairy ancestors who had a arectores pilorum muscle attached to every hair follicle.
evolution paints human ancestors covered with fur.
fur has several benefits as stated by britannica "the pelts of fur-bearing animals are called true furs when they consist of two elements: a dense undercoat, called ground hair, and longer hairs, extending beyond that layer, called guard hair.
the principal function of ground hair is to maintain the animal’s body temperature; that of guard hair is to protect the underlying fur and skin and to shed rain or snow.".
Fur is beneficial for survival. Evolution stripped humans of this advantage?
No it didn't. The advantage of any feature depends on the specific conditions which change over time. Upright walking hominids who left the trees and walked on the African Savanna needed to keep cool.
A more interesting question is why we kept some hair.
evolution paints human ancestors covered with fur.
fur has several benefits as stated by britannica "the pelts of fur-bearing animals are called true furs when they consist of two elements: a dense undercoat, called ground hair, and longer hairs, extending beyond that layer, called guard hair.
the principal function of ground hair is to maintain the animal’s body temperature; that of guard hair is to protect the underlying fur and skin and to shed rain or snow.".
Shadow - 8 months ago you started a thread called Evolution Hole #1 which turned out not to be about evolution at all.
Still waiting on number 2.
evolution paints human ancestors covered with fur.
fur has several benefits as stated by britannica "the pelts of fur-bearing animals are called true furs when they consist of two elements: a dense undercoat, called ground hair, and longer hairs, extending beyond that layer, called guard hair.
the principal function of ground hair is to maintain the animal’s body temperature; that of guard hair is to protect the underlying fur and skin and to shed rain or snow.".
Goosebumps are the evidence of your hairy ancestry...
looking at the board, i see so many long threads on " evoultion vs creation " ect, ect.. therefore if " your" qualifications are only those of " an" uneducated j.w, may i ask one question?.
q) what makes you feel you are now qualified to comment with absolute ,authority on any discussion?.
i ask the above question because for most of us " ex-witnesses " logic is still words written in the pages of an awake" magazine.
both are susceptible to being represented by a Godlike deus de machina - Ruby
Do you mean Deus ex machina?
If so I don't understand what you mean by that in this context.
looking at the board, i see so many long threads on " evoultion vs creation " ect, ect.. therefore if " your" qualifications are only those of " an" uneducated j.w, may i ask one question?.
q) what makes you feel you are now qualified to comment with absolute ,authority on any discussion?.
i ask the above question because for most of us " ex-witnesses " logic is still words written in the pages of an awake" magazine.
It is a feature of our world that people think their opinion is of equal value to other people's facts.
The veracity of a position isn't measured by it's popularity or by how passionately somebody believes it to be true.
As long as somebody is discussing verifiable evidence I don't care about their qualifications. Recent threads have demonstrated a disconnect between qualifications and understanding of science.
