Anyone got any evolutionary theories for hairloss?

[The Gardener]

Jacob, do you believe that the Earth is the center of the universe? Do you believe that woman was made from Adam's rib?

 

[abcdefg]

balding apparently evolved independently in a few different primate lines.

How do we know this? Science can prove relatively little about these type of things. Its mostly conjecture and theory. At this point in our knowledge you could throw out any balding theory and no one can say your wrong.

 

[bubka]

Jacob, do you really think the word is 6K years old? that dinosaurs were all really vegetarian, and Noah put them in the ark? because thats what your wacko website says, i love it when you come across a fundi like yourself, just blows my mind, seriously, what religion are you that make you believe that bible is word for word fact?

no fossil record my ***

The Gardener: and Adam was made from dirt, and was white, like jesus, with blue eyes and blonde hair, no balding either :roll:

Yes it is a theory.

I used to "debate" in creation/evolution forums. The one thing I used to ask that nobody could back up..was..show me the transitional fossil record on anything. Not pictures or drawings..which is what they would start posting. The actual fossil record- photographs.

theories are either good or bad, evolutions is a very good theory, creation is not even a bad one, it does not even qualify because it requires supernatural forces or "magic" as some people say

 

[docj077]

Yes it is.

Modern science and sequencing technology thinks that you're a liar. Everything in this wheel is proven through modern technology.

You can find homo sapiens on there if you know where to look.

The argument for transitional fossils is pointless. You can see macroevolution taking place even today in the form of Darwin's Finches. There is no transition there.

Not only that, but if you're so unwilling to accept evolution, then perhaps you'd be willing to dig up the trillions of tons and greater of earth that makes up the Earth's crust to prove your point. Either you'll find nothing or you'll find something that ends that argument. It's sort of hard to find transitional fossils when humanity has maybe looked at less than 1% of the Earth's total surface for the answer to that question in terms of archaeological digs.

 

[wookster]

http://www.prometheussociety.org/articles/DaCapo.html

I have reproduced a small part of the diagram given in the article [The editor has redrawn this with limitations in part attributable to the low quality of his copy of Gift of Fire.], showing the human second chromosome on the top, and two chimpanzee chromosomes on the bottom. It is patently obvious that the human second chromosome was created by translocation, or a fusion if you prefer, of two chimpanzee chromosomes. Or to be more precise, that the human second chromosome was created by a translocation of two chromosomes in an animal that was ancestor to both man and chimpanzee.

The sequence of events probably took place something like this. About five million years ago a translocation like that described above occurred in a pithecine male who was the controller of a harem of females. Rather than having 48 chromosomes, which was normal for his species, he had 47. When he mated with members of his harem, who possessed the usual number of chromosomes, half of his offspring would have had 48 chromosomes and half would have had 47. If some of those with 47 chromosomes mated among themselves, or were back-bred to their father, one quarter of their offspring would have had 48 chromosomes, one half would have had 47, and one quarter would have had 46. Those with 46 were the prototype of the new genus Homo. But at this stage they were not yet a new species. At most they can be thought of as a new chromosomal race., probably with great phenotypic difference from their fellows, but still not yet a new species. That had to wait for the appearance of one of the chromosome inversions discussed above. This inversion also probably occurred in a male with a harem and was transmitted in much the same way as the translocation. In this case, however, crosses between individuals with the inversion and those without produced only a few offspring, while matings between inverted chromosomes continued to be fertile, as did those without the inversion. This was the first step in breeding isolation. Suddenly, almost overnight, a new species came into existence.

 

[Jacob]

Oh that's a brilliant point. The mass of the earth..that just happened to form the way it did(from what again?)...just happens to be the correct distance from the sun...just happens to have everything necessary to sustain life.

Again..the transitional fossil record is only pointless because you cannot provide one for anything.

bubka...perhaps you'd like to show us the transitional fossil record? Just call it a wacko website..but don't refute anything. "Fundi"..let the name calling begin.

How is it again that those pine trees were found recently....when they were supposed to be extinct for millions of years? Looking just like the fossils?

wookster: http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v17/i1/DNA.asp

 

[powersam]

Of course it's not needed when it can't be shown. :roll: The fact is..there are no such fossil records on ANYTHING.

There are some misconceptions about what those of us believe when it comes to things like you suggest- lions and tigers. Here are a couple of links: http://www.answersingenesis.org/creatio ... lphins.asp

This is from another page there but summarizes it pretty good:

The pictures [available only in Creation magazine] show dad lion, mum tigress and ‘liger’ cubs. Since the pair came together in 1997 in the Samsung Everland safari park in South Korea, they have produced 17 cubs.1 Such hybrids probably do not occur in the wild, largely because lions and tigers do not live in the same areas. Ligers grow to become the largest cats in the world—up to half a tonne in weight—bigger than either parent. Did God create lions and tigers separately on Day 6 of Creation Week? That they readily hybridize suggests that lions and tigers may have descended from the same original created kind—just as chihuahuas and great danes have both been bred from an original wolf kind. Female ligers can often mate successfully with a lion or a tiger, but male ligers are apparently infertile.2

I'm glad you called it a theory though.

BTW..here's an interesting article I read recently: http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs200 ... tissue.asp

It reminds me of a certain pine tree thought extinct for "millions of years". It was recently found again...looks the same as the fossils of them. That particular one just happened to not "evolve" all these millions of years 8)

sorry dude think you misunderstood me, or i didnt make my point clear. i was not trying to prove that evolution was the source and sole function of life on this earth, simply showing that evolution as a mechanism is a proven theory.

i also included a definition of theory there because you seem to be a little confused as to the various uses of that word. so my calling it the theory of evolution does not mean that it is unproven at all. i thought i was clear on that point at least.

the paragraph you posted is in fact a good example of evolution in action. a single species, living in two different areas, over time will evolve differently in order to be more suited to their different environments.

what i'd like to know is when the big bang happened, where did the chunk of stuff to blow up come from?

 

[docj077]

Oh that's a brilliant point. The mass of the earth..that just happened to form the way it did(from what again?)...just happens to be the correct distance from the sun...just happens to have everything necessary to sustain life.

Again..the transitional fossil record is only pointless because you cannot provide one for anything.

bubka...perhaps you'd like to show us the transitional fossil record? Just call it a wacko website..but don't refute anything. "Fundi"..let the name calling begin.

How is it again that those pine trees were found recently....when they were supposed to be extinct for millions of years? Looking just like the fossils?

wookster: http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v17/i1/DNA.asp

It's a common misconception by people of faith that the Earth is somehow here just for them and created for them to be a potential utopia. Life survives on this planet in temperatures ranging from below freezing to boiling hot. The Earth can move a whole lot closer and whole lot farther from the sun and still maintain organic life. It's just that humans can't survive at those temps. for long periods of time. The Earth is in a perfect position for humans, because humans have evolved to live in such conditions in a comfortable manner.

 

[wookster]

:shock: :shock: :shock:

http://www.science-spirit.org/new_detai ... ews_id=599

In May, scientists at the Broad Institute in Cambridge, Massachusetts, released a study comparing human and other primate genomes with more intense scrutiny than ever before, down to the letters of each base pair. The striking similarities between humans and chimpanzees, especially on the sex-determining X chromosome, led the scientists to a pair of astounding conclusions. First of all, chimps and humans likely diverged from the same evolutionary tree less than 6.3 million years ago, more recently than previously thought. Secondly, the break might not have been a clean one: Early humans and chimps quite possibly interbred for a period of about 4 million years before they split for good. This type of on-again, off-again speciation had formerly been documented in plants and other animals, but never in humans.

The implications sent shock waves through our anthropocentric culture, cuing mental footage of the interspecies monstrosities in The Island of Dr. Moreau. The fear and revulsion some feel at the thought of interbreeding with our simian ancestors is echoed in the expressed objections to modern biotechnologies that blend human and animal parts. President George W. Bush, for one, called for a ban on human-animal hybrids in his 2006 State of the Union address. Yet scientists have already infused mice, sheep, pigs, and other animals with human cells, and a closer look at the boundaries between species reveals the lines to be much more fluid and amorphous than commonly thought, even between humans and nonhumans. If what the Broad Institute scientists suggest is true, we likely descended from humanzees, and if the pace of progress continues, humanzees may be what we once again become.

 

[Bryan]

Oh that's a brilliant point. The mass of the earth..that just happened to form the way it did(from what again?)...just happens to be the correct distance from the sun...just happens to have everything necessary to sustain life.

I think Doctor very nicely answered that objection, but allow me to add one extra little item to what he said: think of all the barren, lifeless rocks out there in the universe which do NOT have life, and aren't capable of sustaining it (Millions? Billions? Trillions?). Therefore: we, the ones who are sitting here thinking about these issues, not surprisingly at all just happen to be on that rare exception: a planet which _DOES_ support life.

Again..the transitional fossil record is only pointless because you cannot provide one for anything.

Sure you can do that. Do a Google search on "transitional fossils". You'll find lots of good info on that, and several examples of them.

How is it again that those pine trees were found recently....when they were supposed to be extinct for millions of years? Looking just like the fossils?

There's never any guarantee that a given organism will ALWAYS evolve. Haven't we all heard that cockroaches existed during the time of the dinosaurs? If that's really true, does that mean that cockroaches disprove the "theory" of evolution??

Jacob, you've accomplished in this thread what I seriously thought could never happen: you've actually made me feel sorry for you, seeing the way you've been kicked around! But that's always a risk when you try to embrace pseudoscience on a technically-oriented site like this one. You better be prepared to have a thick skin, if you're going to talk about Creationism here! :wink:

Bryan

 

[The Gardener]

Millions? Billions? Trillions?

Carl Sagan?

Well, I must join Jacob in a belief in Creation... but I believe it happened on more of a macro level. Our individual biology as humans is a product of evolution, but biology on the whole, that is the stuff that things are made of, was created.

 

[bubka]

your posts speak for your ignorance... and i will call names, when the naming is accurate, which it is, and your posts are prime examples

no, the earths is not likely the only place for life, there are likely countless other places of life...

no, the earths central point is not to grow humans, and the majority, is not ideal for humans, at least until literally hundreds of years ago..

and evolution does not have to happen, it happens when conditions require it, thus life itself

created by who, the Miller / Urey experiments prove that atoms naturally form organic compounds

 

[Bryan]

Millions? Billions? Trillions?

Carl Sagan?

b-b-b-b-b-b-Billions.....

Well, I must join Jacob in a belief in Creation... but I believe it happened on more of a macro level. Our individual biology as humans is a product of evolution, but biology on the whole, that is the stuff that things are made of, was created.

By a "God"?

 

[The Gardener]

Bryan, that depends on what one thinks "God" is.

I think as humans we have a common spiritual core. A core that cares for each other, looks out for the preservation of our species, etc. The Biblical lessons of God were advice as to extending our longetivity and promulgating on Earth as a species.

Some of his older tips, not eating pork for instance, were given to prevent trichnosis... others such as circumsizion had practical considerations at the time as well. Frankly, I think the point of the Bible is to suggest some methods as to how humanity might be able to live with itself over the long run. I think other Abrahimic religions probably feel the same. But I think the human tribal instinct got in the way of people realizing that their religions basically all have the same purpose... and as a result religion has lost its vitality and importance.

 

[WorldofWarcraft]

Of course it's not needed when it can't be shown. :roll: The fact is..there are no such fossil records on ANYTHING.

There are some misconceptions about what those of us believe when it comes to things like you suggest- lions and tigers. Here are a couple of links: http://www.answersingenesis.org/creatio ... lphins.asp

This is from another page there but summarizes it pretty good:

The pictures [available only in Creation magazine] show dad lion, mum tigress and ‘liger’ cubs. Since the pair came together in 1997 in the Samsung Everland safari park in South Korea, they have produced 17 cubs.1 Such hybrids probably do not occur in the wild, largely because lions and tigers do not live in the same areas. Ligers grow to become the largest cats in the world—up to half a tonne in weight—bigger than either parent. Did God create lions and tigers separately on Day 6 of Creation Week? That they readily hybridize suggests that lions and tigers may have descended from the same original created kind—just as chihuahuas and great danes have both been bred from an original wolf kind. Female ligers can often mate successfully with a lion or a tiger, but male ligers are apparently infertile.2

I'm glad you called it a theory though.

BTW..here's an interesting article I read recently: http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs200 ... tissue.asp

It reminds me of a certain pine tree thought extinct for "millions of years". It was recently found again...looks the same as the fossils of them. That particular one just happened to not "evolve" all these millions of years 8)

Quit posting evidence from a biased christian-oriented website. Before you post any more biased christian-based links to "prove us wrong," go look up the word bias in the dictionary. Idiot..... :roll:

Think before you post

p.s. One pine tree doesn't prove the theory wrong. Your evidence sucks.

 

[Bryan]

Bryan, that depends on what one thinks "God" is.

I sense that I'm not going to get a straight answer from you!

 

[powersam]

Millions? Billions? Trillions?

Carl Sagan?

Well, I must join Jacob in a belief in Creation... but I believe it happened on more of a macro level. Our individual biology as humans is a product of evolution, but biology on the whole, that is the stuff that things are made of, was created.

there is actually a whole field of extremely interesting literature out there about how faith and science can work together, especially on the topic of our and this universes origins. cant remember any titles off the top of my head but i'll check it.

 

[Bryan]

Our individual biology as humans is a product of evolution, but biology on the whole, that is the stuff that things are made of, was created.

BTW, that reminds me of a WONDERFUL quote from someone, I have no idea who first said it (in reference to quantum phenomena): "The dreams that stuff is made of..."

 

[Strange Days]

I think Mr(s) Garrison of South Park explains evolution best in the following video: :lol:

One day a retard baby fish crawled out of the ocean with its.....mutant fish hands and it had butt-sex with a squirrel or something...

 

[Armando Jose]

There is a genetic problem with hair growth in this study, possibly the unique with persons that showed no other pathologies, instead pseudohemaprodites persons or others.

Human hair growth deficiency is linked to a genetic defect in the phospholipase gene LIPH.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/quer ... med_docsum


Interesting there is a relation between metabolism of fatty acids (sebum) and hair growth.

Armando