Science Seat: You could have been a furry beast
By Kelly Murray, CNN
Editor's note: The Science Seat is a feature in which CNN Light Years sits down with movers and shakers from many areas of scientific exploration. This is the sixth installment.
As primates, humans were once furry, much like the modern chimpanzee. But when, and why, did we lose this fur and become "naked"?
Nina Jablonski, professor of anthropology at Pennsylvania State University, studies primate evolution with an emphasis on human skin. Among numerous academic publications, she also wrote the book, "Skin: A Natural History."
CNN Light Years spoke with Jablonski about the evolution of human skin, from furry to naked. Here is an edited transcript:
CNN’s Kelly Murray: Were humans ever furry like a modern chimpanzee, and how do we know?
Jablonski: Yes. We, as primates, are furry and because we last shared an ancestor with chimpanzees about 6 to 7 million years ago, and that common ancestor was hairy, or furry. All of our living relatives are hairy; we are the only naked ones. It is simply by the principle of parsimony that we can deduce that we were hairy. Also, we know that we did share a common ancestor with hairy chimpanzees about 6 to 7 million years ago. So there is every reason to assume that our ancestors were hairy.
CNN: What did our fur look like?
Jablonski: The most likely appearance of the fur is very much like modern chimpanzee fur: Uniformly dark, or black, over the body surface. There probably wasn’t a sort of contrasting front and back as there are in many animals. And this dark hair would have been covering lightly pigmented skin. If we look at a chimpanzee today, what we see if we look under their hair is actually very light skin. So we have actually reasoned by looking at comparative evidence, that the most likely appearance of the skin in our common ancestor was light skin covered by dark hair, much like chimpanzees have today.
CNN: A lot of your research focuses on human skin pigmentation, but you argue that the study of skin pigmentation cannot be addressed until you understand what happened to our fur. Why is that?
Jablonski: I consider discussion of the loss of fur to be really foundational in any discussion of human skin. Fur serves many, many functions for animals, but one of the important functions is that it protects the skin from the sun. The dark pigmentation in skin, and specifically the most important pigment - melanin - is a good substitute for part of the function of fur. Melanin is such a superb natural sunscreen. So the story of pigmentation is integrally linked to the story of the loss of hair or fur.
CNN: When did we first lose our fur and gain this pigmentation?
Jablonski: The human lineage evolved in Africa. If we start at a starting point of 6 to 7 million years ago, when humans first parted ways from the ancestors of chimpanzees, we have a lot of fossils that indicate that humans were walking on two legs, but they were not modern-looking. They were fairly short, and they still had quite ape-like body proportions: fairly long arms, relatively short legs. These were Australopithecus species of various kinds. They were good bipeds, but they were also capable tree-climbers. But when we look at their skeletons in detail, it’s pretty clear that they were not active runners. They could walk on two legs but they weren’t running or striding purposefully across the savanna most of the time, they were sort of living lives that are much like those of chimpanzees: fairly close to the edge of the forest, sometimes going into trees for protection, and then walking for short distances in the open to forage.
We hypothesize that, at that stage in our lineage's evolution, we still would have had quite a bit of body hair, because the reason we started to lose body hair is related to the need for controlling body heat.
It turns out that primates lose most of their heat through radiation from the surface of the body into the environment, and by evaporation of sweat. The hotter it is outside, the more important sweat becomes, especially if the animal is exercising vigorously and generating a lot of internal body heat. Internal body heat is good to a point, but you have to be able to liberate excess heat, otherwise your brain, organs and muscles get too hot.
Primates as a lineage almost exclusively use sweating for this purpose (versus other mechanisms such as panting). There have been a lot of hypotheses made about why we lost most of our body hair. And I definitely, and many colleagues of mine definitely are of the opinion - based on the environmental, anatomical and genetic evidence at hand - that we lost most of our body hair because of the needs of heat regulation.
CNN: How does sweating cool the body?
Jablonski: When sweat evaporates from the surface of the skin, the blood in the small veins in the skin becomes cooled slightly. This blood then flows back toward the heart, and that seemingly insignificant amount of cooling of the blood is physiologically very significant, because it brings cooler blood back to the heart, which is then oxygenated by the lungs and pumped back into the circulation, including the brain. There are quite a few primates that can sweat well, but we are the premier sweaters of the world.
So, we actually have several different lines of evidence to indicate that humans lost most of their body hair when their patterns of activity changed dramatically. And we see this illustrated beautifully in the fossil record when we look at early members of the genus Homo such as the species Homo ergaster, found in Eastern Africa.
We know from a variety of anatomical studies done by many excellent colleagues that these individuals were long-distance runners and high-speed walkers in open environments. Studies of the fossils and genetic evidence allow us to deduce that these ancestors would have had excellent sweating abilities. So by about 1.2 million years ago in the history of our lineage, in the early days of our genus Homo, we were mostly hairless. And at the same time, we were darkly pigmented.
The transition from hairlessness to naked skin was accompanied by the acquisition of permanent dark pigmentation. ... You can’t have naked skin that is without protection in a really sunny environment, because strong sunshine, including high levels of UV radiation, is so damaging to so many functions of the skin.
CNN: Without UV protection, would those individuals have developed cancer?
Jablonski: Well, I think cancer probably wasn’t the main event, because cancer mostly afflicts people after reproductive age. It takes some time for skin cancer to develop. Our hypothesis has been that the most important effect was actually the harmful effects that UV radiation has on the B vitamin, folate, which is necessary for all cell division and cell repair, and is really important in the formation of the human embryo.
CNN: There are other theories that bare skin is beneficial for us to communicate with each other by decorating ourselves. Does that have anything to do with losing our fur?
Jablonski: Right. We communicate and we decorate ourselves, but those things happen much later in evolution. Especially the deliberate body decoration aspects. That’s certainly an added benefit of having naked skin, is that we lavishly decorate it, and we use it as a medium for communication. But we don’t see that as a causal reason for loss of hair in the first place.
CNN: Why do we get chill bumps when we’re cold or scared, and does that have to do with humans once having fur?
Jablonski: Yes it does. Those little chill bumps, or goose bumps, are caused by tiny little pieces of smooth muscle in the skin that cause the hairs on our body to stand up. When we had fur, this was really helpful because when the hairs stand up, it actually increases the insulating value of the hair. So if a dog is cold, or a squirrel, or a monkey or a chimpanzee is cold, his or her hair will stand on end and that will increase the outer insulation of the body.
Ours is pitiful. I mean we can see our hairs standing on end, but mostly we just see the skin getting sort of crinkled because of the contraction of these muscles. The hairs over most of the human body are so fine that they don’t have any effect on insulation whatsoever. But it turns out that we haven’t gotten rid of all of our hair because those little hair follicles turn out to be absolutely critical for healing of wounds. Every time we get a cut or a burn or anything that causes an abrasion or a change in the surface of the skin - an injury to the skin - the stem cells come from the hair follicles that enter into the repair of the wound. So those hair follicles turn out to be like little banks of future skin cells that are absolutely essential to the wound repair process.
CNN: Why do we still have armpit hair, pubic hair and hair on our heads?
Jablonski: The hair on the top of our heads is still a great protection from direct UV radiation. When you’re standing at the equator, or near the equator, you’re getting the highest levels of sun and UV radiation right on the top of your head. And so hair absorbs a lot of heat from the sun, and protects the scalp. Really curly hair is very good at this; really dark hair is good at this.
If you have dark hair yourself, you can verify this by sticking your fingers under your hair when it’s sunny outside. The surface of your hair gets very hot, but the surface of your scalp is actually quite a bit cooler.
As for armpits and pubic hair, those hairs probably were retained for the propagation of pheromones, the scents that are so important in communication, although we do our best to get rid of these scents by showering every day and using all these products to get rid of smell. But these scents are really important in subconscious communication between humans. So these small areas of hair have been retained, but most of the body is naked so as to facilitate the loss of body heat through very rapid evaporation.
@CNNLightYears on Twitter
People in Orbit
Expedition 36 Commander
Expedition 36 Flight Engineer
Expedition 36 Flight Engineer
Contributors
-
Elizabeth Landau
Writer/Producer -
Sophia Dengo
Senior Designer
I'm now not certain the place you are getting your info, however great topic. I must spend a while studying more or working out more. Thank you for excellent information I was searching for this info for my mission.
I don't even understand how I stopped up here, but I assumed this publish used to be great. I don't recognise who you might be however certainly you are going to a well-known blogger should you are not already. Cheers!
If you believe in God, then you know we didn't evolve. We were made in God's image and I doubt our God is a chimpanze or or an ape. Science is always trying disprove there is a God, but science is just a theory made up by man unlike knowing the real truth which is God and Jesus. I pray for people like you because we know that when the end times do come and the rapture happens, you will be dumbfounded by the power of OUR LORD AND SAVIOR! But if you want to keep on believing that your are an ape then go ahead, here is a banana 🙂
Circular reasoning, and you're so blinded by brainwashing that you can't see it. Religion is evil.
I am not buying it. Because of the lack of proof beyond imaginative theories I am leaning toward we have always looked similar as today. My theory is that we hair to help protect from miquitos. I made up this theory by observing mosquito s on my arms and legs having a hard time getting close enough to drill into my skin. Since mosquito s have been around as long as man I think that sounds more logical
Now that you mention it, I am a furry beast. However, I mind you...a good looking one
upto I saw the paycheck four $8995, I didnt believe ...that...my brothers friend realie bringing in money part time from there new laptop.. there neighbour had bean doing this for less than twenty one months and just now repaid the depts on there condo and bourt a brand new Nissan GT-R:. we looked here,........... BIT40. ℂOℳ
Wow. I don't think I have ever seen so much blatant racism, stupidity, and just plain wrong facts in one post.
closest living animal to a transitional form is the platypus. a mamal with a duck bill and lays eggs and has a pouch like a marsupial. they must have not changed much since mamals evolved from repiles or birds(dinosaurs).
I guess IQ is not a pre-req for scientists. Especially a female with a butch haircut.
Because physical appearance is the best indicator of intelligence.
How is it even possible for you to be that ignorant?
Think of the money we'd save on clothes.
Think of the money we'd spend on perms.
THE THEOLOGY OF BONGWI, THE BABOON
Roy Campbell
This is the wisdom of the Ape
Who yelps beneath the Moon –
'Tis God who made me in His shape
He is a Great Baboon.
'Tis He who tilts the moon askew
And fans the forest trees,
The heavens which are broad and blue
Provide him his trapeze;
He swings with tail divinely bent
Around those azure bars
And munches to his Soul痴 content
The kernels of the stars;
And when I die, His loving care
Will raise me from the sod
To learn the perfect Mischief there,
The nimbleness of God.
I wonder how the creationists reconcile their attacks on evolution – which has no biblical basis whatsoever – with their shunning of the heliocentric theory of the solar system, which places the sun – not the earth – at the center of things. On this point, the Bible is very, very clear – it indisputably puts the earth at the center of the heavens, with the sun explicitly orbiting around it. Yet not a peep from the fundies over this blatant bit of blasphemy, now widespread in the secular world and – gasp! – taught openly in our schools to innocent children.
Not to mention the fact that they're teaching children that the earth is only 6000 years old, and that man lived along side dinosaurs. Or perhaps God just created fossils to confuse us and keep himself amused.
Fossils = Great Flood when the earth was volcanically destroyed. while also be 'washed'. It's a scientific fact that Earth was covered with water, hence the massive amount of dried up sedimentary rocks. Other fossils (e.g. 'dinosaurs') were buried by super-volcanic eruptions which indeed have also peppered the globe.
Genesis is easily defendable with true, observable science.
You blithering idiot. Plate tectonics describes the mechanism by which sedimentary rocks were raised above sea level. Genesis is easily dismissed by "true, observable science". As is the rest of that book of fairy tales.
"Other fossils (e.g. 'dinosaurs') were buried by super-volcanic eruptions which indeed have also peppered the globe. "
How odd, then, that fossils are NEVER found in volcanic deposits.
@ Earthling147,
Plate Techtonics is bunk junk. Where have you been? The idea that these 'plates' are 'bumping' into each other at .5"/per year (comical) does not explain the massive volcanic deposits everywhere (e.g. the city of Quatemala rests on volcanic ash, 1,000 feet thick mind you). Earth has a destructive volcanic past, hands down true observable science, period, paragraph, end of story. Hence fossils strewn everywhere. The Bible says the Earth was completely destroyed – volcanically. And you call the Word of God a fairytale? Evolution is nothing but a fraud as true science will always prevail.
Indeed, the Bible is geocentric, hands down. The correct term modern physicists use is 'geostatic' or 'geostationary'. The Copernican system is bunk right out of the gate due to the required reversal of the moon, and even Copernicus himself admitted his thesis does not explain what is truly observed.
Earth is fixed, the Scriptures are accurate and true.
Yes, indeed there are fossils in volcanic deposits of various types, mainly ash, which by the way will often render itself as 'sedimentary' (which technically it is because of it's vapor content).
So how do you propose the sudden burial of large animals which required heat, pressure and lithification?
god made man
but he used the monkey to do it
apes in the plan
we're all here to prove it
i can walk like an ape
talk like an ape
do what a monkey do
god made man
but a monkey supplied the glue
“Why, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations, (why) do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms?”
Charles Darwin
http://evolutionisntscience.wordpress.com/evolution-frauds/
http://scienceagainstevolution.info/v11i3e.htm
http://www.icr.org/article/evolution-biologically-impossible/
http://www.icr.org/article/biggest-problems-for-evolution/
This is a rhetorical question, posed by Darwin in a closing chapter of the Origin of Species, because – like all scientists, and unlike creationists who are mired in dogma – was aware of questions and objections that might arise concerning his postulate.
He goes on and spends the rest of the chapter answer such criticisms.
It's truly a pity that you resort to chopping quotes into pieces in order to shore up an unsupportable position. Exposing yourself as a liar and a cheat simply detracts from whatever else it is you may be trying to say.
That was not my work. If you check the first link I included, that statement is highlighted at the top of the article!
Also, the people who presented their position in the linked to articles are Scientists and Professionals with High Academic Credentials!!!
"the people who presented their position in the linked to articles are Scientists and Professionals with High Academic Credentials!!!"
No, they aren't. Unless you consider degrees in theology from fundamentalist Baptist colleges to be "high academic credentials" and even slightly pertinent in a discussion concerning science.
They have their degrees from accredited universities by ABET! You are confusing where they work/worked at with their Alma mater! Look them up!
A few minutes spent perusing Youtube is all that it takes to prove that we haven't evolved much from our ape like ancestors, and only marginally more intelligent. Even that's debatable.
we have guy at work that is as hairy as any chimp. i swear it looks like he is smuggling a sheep under his shirt.
They're automatically assuming that everyone believes in evolution and are Athiests as we all believe we came from Aples? How arrogant of CNN as usual.
Saying you don't believe in evolution is like saying you don't believe in gravity.
I agree.
As a registered geneticist I can assure you the colored have no more in common with humans than a toaster to an eagle.
READ VERSE 26 in the following passage:
Acts 17:24-28
"24 The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands; 25 nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things; 26 and He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation, 27 that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; 28 for in Him we live and move and exist, as even some of your own poets have said, ‘For we also are His children.’"
[Scripture is from the New American Standard Bible (NASB)]
http://www.biblegateway.com
This tripe that humans are hairless is just absurd. Sure some genetic groups have little body hair other than head, pits and pubes but other genetic groups are quite hairy. I'm one of them; nearly as furry as the chimp in the pic. I'm not hairless at all and as my mother said one time when I as in m early 20s, I look like a baboon (fur wise- not overall appearance).
I think us white people evolved from bears. We are heroic and brave. Truly wonderful. The coloreds seem to be evolved from skunks. They smell. Smelly smelly animals that are allergic to soap and deodorant. I'm a geneticist so I know this info.
READ VERSE 26 in the following passage:
Acts 17:24-28
"24 The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands; 25 nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things; 26 and He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation, 27 that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; 28 for in Him we live and move and exist, as even some of your own poets have said, ‘For we also are His children.’"
[Scripture is from the New American Standard Bible (NASB)]
http://www.biblegateway.com
What does a book of fiction have to do with a discussion of science?
We aren't supposed to call them that anymore. Now they are called colored or kneeeegrows. They are n@sty creatures that travel in packs. I saw some once while on vacation. It was frightening. I'm sure glad we didn't get off the bus.
I hope you realize people consider you to be a joke, right? Also disgusting and not worthy of contributing to the gene pool. Have a horrible life.
'H u m a n E v o l u t i o n' hypothesis does in fact suggest that 'H o m o Sapiens' emerged as a distinct species of 'Hominids' or 'Great Apes.' That is covered by the 'Evolutionary History' of the genus 'H o m o' of primates!
Also, professor Nina Jablonski's reasoning to why we kept our head hair contradicts 'N a t u r a l S e l e c t i o n' when it comes to dark and light hair! If 'N a t u r a l S e l e c t i o n' were true, the hotter the area (closer to the equator,) the lighter head hair people would have since lighter hair absorbs less sun light than darker hair! In other words, people in Africa would have had the lightest head hair than anybody else according to 'N a t u r a l S e l e c t i o n' since Africa is the hottest place on Earth!
Moreover, the 'F o s s i l R e c o r d' is so fraudulent that it is disputed by E v o l u t i o n i s t s anymore, and not just by C r e a t i o n i s t s, as well as 'E v o l u t i o n' itself!!
God Almighty the Father, Son and Holy Spirit created everything and gave all creatures their basic instincts, intuition and common sense that fit their species!
Acts 17:24-28
"24 The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands; 25 nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things; 26 and He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation, 27 that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; 28 for in Him we live and move and exist, as even some of your own poets have said, ‘For we also are His children.’"
[Scripture is from the New American Standard Bible (NASB)]
http://www.biblegateway.com
Humans have less hair than chimps, but not less hairs. Humans have about the same number of hair follicles as a chimpanzee has. Our hairs are just finer and shorter. Evolution didn't rid us of hair, it just gradually made our hair finer and shorter.
You must feel very safe behind your computer screen, typing out all of this mindless junk that you apparently call "facts," but I'd like to see you actually emerge out into the real world and tell people exactly what you think about African-Americans. I am willing to bet that you would not have one ounce of courage to do that. What you posted here is pure ignorance and stupidity. No matter how much you try to convince people how "intelligent" and "musically talented" you are, you will not succeed because you have already showed all of your stupidity in all of your posts. I highly doubt you were in the military, and I highly doubt you are musically talented. Plus, if you have supposedly traveled all over the world as you claim, you would actually be more accepting towards other races/nationalities, including African-Americans. I suggest you emerge from your mother's basement, go back to school to earn an education, actually learn about different countries and cultures, study anthropology the correct educational way (since your anthropology "facts" were so off-base), and accept people for who they are despite their skin color. As of now, you are one ignorant, racist dummy.
I disagree. The colored are terrible creatures. Always up to some sort of criminal activity.
Sarah Palin shaves with a tea party patriot shaver!
You could have saved yourself a lot of trouble if instead of typing up that great long post, you had just typed, "I am a racist moron with no knowledge of genetics, anthropology, or anythig else related to science."
This article is SUCH BUNK. Are you SERIOUS? We did NOT descend from apes. Think about it. If we EVOLVED from APES, why are there still APES? It is pretty much as simple as that. GOD made apes. And GOD made humans.
If you are descended from humans, then why are there still humans? How is it even possible for you to be that stupid and still be alive?
LOL! Total BS! You couldn't find anything more newsworthy?
Professor Nina Jablonski's reasoning of why we kept our head hair contradicts 'Natural selection' when it comes to dark and light hair! If 'N a t u r a l S e l e c t i o n' were true, the hotter the area (closer to the equator,) the lighter head hair people would have since lighter hair absorbs less sun light than darker hair! In other words, people in Africa would have had the lightest head hair than anybody else according to 'N a t u r a l S e l e c t i o n' since Africa is the hottest place on Earth!
Some of us are still hairy beasts.
You people are simply not decent human beings; considering the sheer volume of demented crap A-Hs like you post all over the web, it's incredible that anyone can believe that we are the worse guys; that's just rich. Besides being simply juvenile, many things like you are also demented.
I'm obamaphone and I'm the biggest moron to ever play with a computer.
I have read this book and found it very productive. Thanks for sharing the extraordinary knowledge.
get your love back
until I saw the draft 4 $8259, I did not believe that my neighbour woz like they say really bringing in money part-time online.. there aunts neighbour has been doing this for only about 14 months and by now paid the debts on their villa and bourt a gorgeous McLaren F1. we looked here........... BIT40. ℂOℳ
39.8 % of those on welfare in the usa are black. Only 28% of all blacks in the usa are on welfare. This isnt the only spot where you fudged your facts somewhere on this thread. The term 'willfully ignorant' comes to mind. By the way, what 5 (lol) instruments do you play? Exaggerate much? I could say I'm the highly successful owner of a corporation that just made its first million, but then I would be exaggerating. Actually, no I wouldnt be. And Im a woman. Luckily your internet will be cut off next week because you probably cant afford it. Troll.
Human did not arinate on planet earth thereby couldn^t have evolve from a primate. By the way theirs people on two other planet s not far from here look same chari .. as we here on earth. Most scientist never seen a UFO yet they know everything except just look up UFO over Jax Fla June 1971 0r 72 and read what it really like what up and beyound our solar.system.
O.K., kids, time to turn off the Sci-Fi channel, read some Bible and get to bed. You can play Planet Of The Apes in the morning. calnewlanministries.com
Hi, search on youtube for 'shut up pesky creationists' and you'll find a great video describing what the scientists found in our DNA 🙂
The more things change the more they stay the same.
Ask many women if they like a hairy man. They will almost all say EWWW. There ya go. WE breed hairyness OUT of ourselves. WE look the way we do because WE SELECT OURSELVES.
Give it a few generations and the selection sticks.
Hah, funiest thing I've read all day! You must lay awake at night dreaming this stuff up.
You are a Moron.
Despite all of these responses, not one of anyone here can show one shred of evidence that would point towards n1ggers being the same species as us.
They are not human beings, not because of the different skin color, but because of their filthy, failed genetics. If I am wrong, then why are 80% of them dependent on welfare/food stamps/section ape just to survive? That's a fact, by the way. 80% of the worthless n1ggers need the White Hand that feeds them to merely survive a low-level existence.
I love that you're demanding evidence to the contrary of your claims, yet you're presenting no evidence of your own claims. Just spouting nonsense.
sHAVE THE MONKEYS TO SEE WHOM THEY LOOK LIKE
Assume everything leave nothing to actual science. That’s what I say
Sharing about 97% of our dna with a chimp in now way proves we are the same ... We have a lot of the same characteristics.. But that doesn't make us the same species .. DNA is the schematic that is used to form our bodies.. And so since a chimp has arms legs fingers toes etc. is it really such a leap to find that schematic/blue print looks a lot the same?
I love how a scientist can say they "hypothesize" something.. And its taken as fact , UNTILL something proves it wrong..
I want Proof first..
How is any of this possible when everyone knows that Santa Claus knocked up the Tooth Fairy 6,000 years ago and gave birth to Adam, who then took a rib out which cloned itself into a female Adam, which then had an incestuous relationship with itself to produce mankind in the image of the Easter Bunny? Surely this completely unverifiable story makes more sense than things that are logical, scientific, and supported by archeological evidence.
what archeological evidence?
Evolution is a total joke. Evolutionists cannot explain when and why animals and humans stopped evolving. They cannot explain it because it simply isnt real. We didnt come from fish, slime or anything of the sort. Seek truth and you will see that we are a creation by the hands of a master Creator.
looking at some of the male specimens that run around in the summer without their shirts on - I would say some did not lose their fur at all ....
Oh look, an article about primates and evolution, so of course all the trolling, low-IQ creationists and racists flock here to proudly display their ignorance and bigotry, hiding behind internet anonymity.
The human hair is meant to help protect us from misqitos
You said: "all living things on this planet are about 99.999% alike as far as DNA, if I'm not mistaken"
You are mistaken. We are only 98% similar to great apes, and far less with other mammals. If you compare across phylum, you find tremendously lower numbers. Further, the number of chromosomes alone can show you the huge difference between species.
Your entire premise is based on flawed presumptions.
Hence the "if I'm not mistaken" part..... Jesus Christ can you even read?
Actually, science has shown it is the feeble minded racist that lacks any true intelligence. Surviving on a primitive type of pseudo intelligence these troglodytic hermaphrodites are excellent mimics and can pass as normal human beings very well, but when compared to an actual human being the racist,most often the white supremacist, is shown to be slow and having a calloused medulla oblongata. This simple creature acts in many ways like a Chihuahua; yippy, suffering from an exaggerated sense of ability, and having various internal weaknesses that often lead to a shortened life span. The chief among these is the severe lack of any real cognitive ability. Mostly inbred, they can appear beautiful like a thoroughbred horse, but as dumb as a box of rocks.
Your comments here provide an excellent example.
College educated, militarily trained and educated, top of my class throughout my entire life, world experienced, traveled to most of the Continents of our world, experienced many cultures, and very knowledgeable about the entire world. Oh, and I play 5 musical instruments quite well.
Nice try, though.
You couldn't get into college. The military kicked you out. And the name of the only world you ever travelled started with "Disney."
Also, one of your great-grandparents was African-American.
As I said, the lowly racist is an excellent mimic 🙂 You'll forgive me if I doubt your honesty and intelligence
but hey,since we're going with pedigree here... Descendant of kings and chieftains alike, I speak over 6 languages, 2 fluently, working on a third, only graduated high school and took 2 semesters of community college courses and I'm still more intelligent than you, I have an IQ of 124, and play piano easily, though I can only do little things like row row row your boat and mary had a little lamb, My entire family is US Military, and the only reason I'm not is because my Asthma didn't get me passed MEPS. I read physics, astronomy and mathematics books for leisure, but I don't pretend to be as intelligent as you pretend to be. In short, I'm not impressed. Your argument still fails and is born of the stupid your family passed down to you and you lapped up.
Chimps, our closest living relative has DNA that is about 2 to 3% different than ours. There is no 99.999% as you pontificate. You don't know what you are talking about. You need to look stuff up before you go on a senseless rant that makes you look like the fool you are. Too bad that we are no longer sterilizing people like you with sub-standard mental acuity, you shouldn't breed.
Well, Jessica, it might trouble you to let you know, that just because you're a woman, I am much more vital and necessary to the world than you'll ever be, not to mention that my IQ is at least 20 points higher than yours just because I'm a White Man. Ha. I'd ask you not to breed, but then you wouldn't be able to sponge off men to gain a survivable life, now would you?
You have a personal problem. Compounded by confirmation bias.
My only problem is how the American public has been brainwashed into believing that n1ggers are actually human beings, capable of living civilly in a modern technological society. Other than that, I'm doing just fine, thanks for the concern.
Obvious troll is obvious.
You are feeding a Troll. Stop feeding him, and he will become extinct. Feed him, and he will reproduce across the Internet. Tchuss!
As a non-American, I'm sorry, but I do not understand some of the postings here. Who is god and what is a bible? I am not clear on what all these references have to do in a scientific inquiry. Is this god or bible some scientific author or peer-reviewed journal that I am missing?
Yes, CanSteve, God is a scientific author, and you're missing a great deal of vital information. Order a book called the Holy Bible (KJV) from Amazon and do some reading. Perhaps you'll learn something. calnewlanministries.com
Uhmm, Mr Cal Newlan, you and i clearly disgaree on "scientific author." I am not aware of any research that this god you speak of is some authority in science. I can order Archie comics on Amazon, that doesn't mean it is peer-reviewed...lke this bible you speak of, which i cannot find in peer reviewed literature. I do not live in the US, so I don't know who this god you speak of is nor this bible. Why are you referencing this text? It is not peer reviewed. This god you speak of, is he someone important in science only you know of but the rest of the scientific community does not?
"...why do we tolerate them in our societies?" The same could be said for bigots like you.
So, when you get robbed, r@ped, carjacked, or killed, will it be by a "bigot" such as myself, or a n1gger? Which one is way more likely? Stop lying to yourselves....
AHAHAHHAAAAHAHAHAHA
we are all descended from telephone sanitizers, consultants, and pr execs.
Don't forget the hairdressers, tired TV producers, insurance salesmen, personnel officers, security guards. it also explains why we like to take long baths.
Douglas! Thank God you're back! There's this fellow named Eoin (or whatever, I'm not convinced Eoin is a real name...) who wrote some horrible and unnecessary follow up to your great literary masterworks because everyone seems to think you went and had a heart attack and died!
Basically it was some alternate universe Hitchhiker fanfiction! Just utter... there are no words... Could you please correct this misconception?!? Also, would you write a few more books? Better still, add a few books to the Dirk Gently series? If ever there was a trilogy that needed a few more books added, it's that one!
And Douglas, merge those novels with the Hitchhikers' Guide trilogy the way Asimov merged his robot novels with the Foundation novels.
What is so cool about this is it proves man never went to the moon and Omer 90 percent of science is fake.
Most non scientist are imbeciles and gay. Just sayin. Us scientist RULE !
After 30+ years of 'awareness', supposedly educated people such as yourself (assuming you really are a scientist) are still using "gay" pejoratively? Shame on you *shakes head*
And like the Fur theory above. the Neanderthal one is the same. No one has every gotten a sample of a Neanderthal's DNA.
No one can even PROVE they existed.
Sorry, Charley, we have lots of Neanderthal DNA.
Neanderthal genome sequence was posted online and freely available as of last year. As are a few other genomes of ancient peoples, but those were less publicized. Surprised you didn't hear of it – it was a Big Deal.
There's no actual evidence that humans ever had fur. The author herself uses words such as "deduce" and "assume" to arrive at her conclusion. "So there is every reason to assume that our ancestors were hairy" is what she said. Then she went on to hypothesize... That's not evidence and it's not factual. It's a belief.
She also has the idea of our sweat cooling the blood wrong. Sweat cools the skin as it evaporates, yes, and to some extent cools the blood, but it's the heat radiating out of the body that is doing the cooling, not cooler blood returning to the heart. A dead person will radiate heat away as the body cools and there's no blood flow to help the process along.
Lastly, there's no evidence that we're descended from chimps. These people like to claim that because we share 98% of our DNA with chimps that we must have descended from them. That claim was made long before they could actually map a chimp's DNA. We share 96% of our DNA with virtually every lifeform on the planet. There are a lot of conclusions that can be drawn...pick one and you'll be as apt to be as right as if you'd picked one of the others. Science like to make broad statements based on little evidence and proclaim it as fact. It's not. It's a fundraising tool and a political one as well.
No one (except for christians that what to distort science) said we camefrom chimps, evolution says humans and chimps evolved from a common species.
EXACTLY JAX! It's called divergent evolution. Evolution is not a c evolved from b evolved from a type deal. It is a c and b diverged from a and evolved in different ways type deal. At least someone got it right *rolls eyes*
Evolution doesn’t say anything. Men and women who have no grasp on logic say these irrational things. Still waiting on that transitional fossil with a note tied to it saying how many children it had and what they looked like and what its parents looked like. naw never mind Lets just assume stuff, makes for better science.
We scientists hide those transitional fossils in places called museums...and they're open every day 🙂
"VBZ: We scientists hide those transitional fossils in places called museums...and they're open every day"
Gould and Eldredge stated, at great length, that those transitional fossils hardly ever exist; that major abrupt transitions without intermediates occur in the fossil record as a rule. I believe them and not you. So what fraudulent pieces of cr*p do you keep in those museums?
To Tim and the other guy...the transitional fossils you're looking for did not have the cellular wear with all to survive in the fossil record. Our skin and bones are not nearly as resilient to environmental factors, as say a triceratops or Tyrannosaurus Rex.
I don't know why species A would leave many fossils, related species B would leave many fossils, but the intermediates between them would be so fragile that they could leave no fossils.
Face it, as a rule, the fossil record does not record evolution. I have read the writings of Gould and Eldredge where they expound this fact at length. They turn around and make the excuse that, evolution happens too fast to be recorded in the fossil record. My conclusion still stands; the fossil record does not record evolution.
Perhaps if you were to examine every cubic inch of a mostly-buried layer of sedimentary rock covering several tens of thousands of square miles and several hundred feet thick you might be able to find every last piece of the puzzle. Unfortunately, geologists only get to see tiny slices of these huge repositories. To blatantly plagiarize another's post, if you are assembling a thousand-piece jigsaw puzzle and you can't find the last three pieces, are you going to deny that it's a picture of a locomotive because you can't fill in the last bit of sky?
Earthling: of course we cannot examine every square inch of the crust of the earth. Hence, you are saying that Gould and Eldredge, being unaware of this basic fact, are imbeciles.
Fossilization is a random event, until proven otherwise. The fossils are a random sample of living creatures that existed at the time of the fossilization event. Hence, you have a problem, all your puzzle and locomotive examples notwithstanding.
If there are many examples of species A in the fossils, and many examples of species B in the fossils, and these two species differ in several morphologic characteristics; and you never find any intermediates between the two in the fossils, then you are pretty much forced to say that if evolution proceeded from A to B, that it did so quickly. That was the conclusion that Gould and Eldredge reached. They stated at length, that this was the rule and not the exception, and that a change in evolutionary theory was necessary. My conclusion is, that if evolution happens too quickly to be recorded in the fossil record, that your camp is a fraud for saying that the fossil "record" is a record of evolution. You can't say that, honestly. There is no answer to my logic, so quit trying.
For adh..., here's where Gould actually stood:
Since we proposed punctuated equilibria to explain trends, it is infuriating to be quoted again and again by creationists - whether through design or stupidity, I do not know - as admitting that the fossil record includes no transitional forms. Transitional forms are generally lacking at the species level, but they are abundant between larger groups.
– Gould, Stephen Jay 1983. "Evolution as Fact and Theory" in Hens Teeth and Horse's Toes: Further Reflections in Natural History. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., p. 258-260.
Sure there is no evidence...until you look at your chest, arms, legs and beard on your face ya freak...
So why is the hair your referring to nothing like fur? Texture, growth, and it's usually non shedding **my beard just fell off?? Isn't something I've ever heard before without cancer treatments** It's so different we don't call it fur we call it hair. Just sayin..
Tom – Did you even read the article?
Secondly, do you even understand the theories put forth here? At no point does any evolutionary theory state that someone woke up one morning and their fur was gone. Evolution is a gradual process that takes place over many generations, not something that occurs overnight in an individual.
I'll just ignore the usual Creationist nonsense in your post and correct one sentence that sticks out like a sore thumb:
"Science like to make broad statements based on little evidence and proclaim it as fact."
Replace "Science" with fundamentalists or Creationists and the sentence is 100% spot on.
Projection much?
We should not be mad with creationists. It is the evolution that made them the way they are. In my opinion, somewhere along our evolution path there was an advantage in having ability to believe/hope even in fantasy. Maybe the groups with that ability were more cooperative with each other, more hopeful in their success or maybe they were more easily controlled by one or few individuals. I think originally this ability was quite different but as the concept of belief evolved so did that ability. Skip few million years and here we are.
I can’t think of any other reason so many people would believe in various religions.
Eric,you speak truth
I would rather live like there was a God and die to find out there was none than to live like there was no God and die to find out there is one.
JZ, whipping out Pascal's wager is not going to convince anyone. Gambling on God just because it's the safest bet is not a good enough reason to believe in something ridiculous. Plus, let's say you're right.... Don't you think God would know that you only invested in believing just to save your own ass?
The reason people believe in some religion is because they had that BS drilled into their heads to the point that they believe a loving god would harden Paroah's heart or that a handful of mortals can make someone a god.
JZ, that's a really stupid reason to be going to church on Sunday morning.
You are just avoiding the question. This is not the reason I accept Jesus as my savior, I actually learned about this after I became a Christian. But really think about this statement.
1) We are not descended from chimps, we share a common ancestor.
2) The genetic material we share is identical. We are not 96% identical with the rest of the world. Your claim shows that you don't understand genetics, and haven't bothered to learn. We have the same chromosomes as the great apes, except two of our chromosomes are fused (in their genome, those two are split). Further, our DNA contains great ape RNA from viruses that can be traced back to apes. In other words, you have ape virus in your DNA.
3) Besides the number of chromosomes, the content is unique for great apes. You don't share such similarity with anything except that common ancestor. If you map the CONTENT of the DNA for each organism, it forms a hierarchy showing the lineage. THAT is how we know for certain our history. That hierarchy matches the fossil record.
If you plan to dispute science, you better use science and not just a few sound bite statistics.
No, those similar parts of DNA are what build our bodily structure and let us live! We also share 92% of DNA with Snails, but all that ways is that 92 % builds our bodily structre.
No, those similar parts of DNA are what build our bodily structure and let us live! We also share 92% of DNA with Snails, but all that ways is that 92 % builds our bodily structure.
Why do you get goose bumps then? It's a left over trait from when we had fur.
You can make up complicated sounding nonsense all you want, but it's still nonsense. Your post clearly demonstrates that you don't know a dang thing about genetics. You are just another faux intellectual regurgitating stupidity that someone fed you.
Definition of religion: regurgitating stupidity that someone fed you.
"Dator Sojak: Definition of religion: regurgitating stupidity that someone fed you."
By your own definition, therefore, you and Jeeebusss are religious, because you regurgitate stupidity incessantly.
EVIDENCE OF COMMON ANCESTRY : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dK3O6KYPmEw
I'm a geneticist who works with genome sequences on a daily basis and you are wrong. Humans absolutely do not share 96% of their DNA with every other animal. Where on Earth did you get that number from? We do share gene function, ordering of genes, and a "genetic code" with every other organism because all life has one common origin, perhaps this is what you are confusing? In terms of sequence, our closest living relatives are chimps. You are free to go to any genome browser and deduce this yourself – the full genome sequences of dozens of animals are freely available online as are tools for statistical comparison.
You're right that this scientist does float a few theories that have less than solid proof, but the fact that we had hair is not one of them. There are several lines of evidence for this that she does not go into – perhaps try google scholar and search for the papers if you are curious. The structure of our skin makes no sense unless we one had a lot more hair. The reasons for hair loss are all hand waving, of course, but they are at least logical possibilities.
As a scientist, shouldn't you make a distinction between hypotheses and theories? Creationist types jump on the word theory and misuse it to peddle their weird view of the universe. Professor Jablonski, as you say, is guilty of blurring the line between the two. Hypotheses have "have less than solid proof." Theories have been tested, duplicated, challenged, defended and confirmed as scientific fact.
humans have the same amount of hair follicles as chimps so humans haven,t lost their fur it is merely reduced in individual thickness on most of the body.
I have fur. You should have seen me when I was 15. Not kidding. I was beyond hairy. I was pretty well covered in hair, including my knees, elbows, back of hands, back, stomach, everywhere.
i don't know, have you watched "Keeping up with the Kardashians"?
Wow professor, and where do you profess your above the experts expertise?
For the love of Darwin, go back to school, open a bio book, and read the chapter. The Bible does not count as a science book, it is an anti-science and equality book. We did not come from chimps for the 10000th time you blasted Christian boneheads, we had a COMMON ANCESTOR. I swear, given the power I will make sure only atheists and scientists inhabit this planet.
Why can't you shallow, religious nutbags stay off the "Lightyears" threads? We don't come to your church and preach the REAL truth, so why can't you just shaddup and keep your fairy tales to YOURSELVES?
I gotta disagree with USAtheist. If creationists want to take their views online where they can be held up to the light and exposed as the imbecilities that they are, I say more power to them. The internet will ultimately destroy religion: Daylight is its worst enemy.
and Tim...evolution has said a hell of a lot more than your imaginary friend ever did 🙂 just sayin
why in the name of good sense did I bother to look at these comments?
You always feel dumber after reading a creationist's attempt to preserve their understanding of the world and the way it works...
It makes absolutely no sense that we would "evolve" from hairy to hailess only to be required to cover up with animal skin I.E. fur or hair, in order to survive. It goes against the very principals of evolution and natural selection.
we arent required to cover with animal skins. Or clothes. It has been proven time and time again that with the development of shelter, a cave, a house, a stick hovel, we can survive fine in the cold and when our hair fell off, we werent in the cold anyway. We were in extreme heat. There are several human cultures still living naked. I assure you, they are doing fine.
I didn't.
These scientists are so dumb, it's funny. Maybe they came from a monkey, not me. They just spout nonsense amounts of time and really think that matters. You can smash a watch with a hammer and shake it around in a box for a billion years and it will never turn into anything, let alone a working watch. And with life being about a billion times more complex than a watch evolution is TOTALLY impossible. And let's not forget that to believe in evolution you would have to beleive that the solar system and entire universe just magically appeared out of no where, magically. lol. It's far more logical to think that creation requires a creator and designer. God created the universe and all life, it's so obvious and answers every single question that science fumbles all over themselves on.
So, you don't believe the universe 'appeared out of nothing', but you think your god did?
There is only one word for you!!! BRAINWASHED!
So which of the millions of gods created the universe and all life? And please provide proof that that god did it.
Quit trotting out the same pathetically weak argument. If God is called Zeus, Allah, Yahweh, or the great spirit, it makes little difference. You betray your poverty of thought.
How did your false god, stochastic thermodynamic randomness, synthesize the first cell from inorganic matter?
Dfgfg, I sure hope you don't expect to get any flu shots.
Why? Because the flu mutates a bit every year and becomes a new strain with new properties. Then the Scientists develop a new vaccine for people to get to protect themselves from the new strain of Flu.
And guess what, that mutation that the Flu goes through every year. ITS CALLED EVOLUTION! You can also see the evolution of other bacteria in a petri dish over the course of a few months. It's been here on Earth for billions of years whether or not you admit it to yourself.
So if the small changes we see in flu viruses and bacteria are evolution, then what do we call the supposed development of life from an original form? That is called evolution also, and the claim is that the occurrence of the former indicates the latter occurred. It does not. It is quite common that effects that produce small changes can not and do not produce large changes. For example, in spring, a difference in cloud cover often produces a difference in temperature from day to day. Yet in three to four months, the temperature may be 50 degrees warmer, a difference not produced by differences in cloud cover. Furthermore, looking at the small difference does not indicate what the cause of the large differences is. Getting back to biology, an issue is complexity. Track the flu virus for as many years as you want, track the bacteria in the Petri dish for as many months as you wand, an at the end the organisms have the same complexity as they did at the start. Yet the development of all life from a common form obviously requires a many-fold increase in complexity - something the processes claimed to be responsible for evolution have not been observed to produce.
LOL!
You calling scientists dumb is like Einstein calling you smart.