InfiniteNow Posted March 15, 2006 Report Posted March 15, 2006 Good. But i would subtract the word "wannabe" : S - X(w) = cool again? AI can stand for lots of things...including Artificial Insemination as perhaps in your case good guess... seriously. this used to bother me, but meh...just trips me out.Does anyone else remember, for me it was back in middle school, when one of the meanest things you could call someone was a "test tube baby?" Quote
Queso Posted March 15, 2006 Report Posted March 15, 2006 Yeah I'm pretty sure I got that one a lot,to go along with my st-st-st-st-s-t-ststudder. :eek2: it sucked back then,doodling, Quote
HydrogenBond Posted March 16, 2006 Report Posted March 16, 2006 I think it had to do with wearing clothes. Body hair become less essential for protection against the elements if artificial hair (clothes) is used. From many years of running and wearing socks the hair beneath the socks is thinner than above. Hats are less commonly used than body clothing allowing head hair to remain. The pits and pubes pose a problem with the theory. Unless these areas are retained to collect scent for breeding lure. The naked ape suggests that bald is more evolved. Lets here it for the chrome dome. Quote
ughaibu Posted March 16, 2006 Report Posted March 16, 2006 But why would a hairy ape be wearing clothes? Quote
HydrogenBond Posted March 18, 2006 Report Posted March 18, 2006 The human animal is different in that it likes to ornament itself with objects of social prestige to give it subjective enhancement. Once the hairy prehumans found animal skin "bling", they lost their real fur. It could also have been a function of the last ice age. Their fur may have been more for insulation from African heat than for protection against Norwegian cold. They learned to put on a winter coat for cold weather protection. The bling appeal made bear more stylish than yak. Quote
ughaibu Posted March 19, 2006 Report Posted March 19, 2006 HydrogenBond: Eskimos are as hairless as central Africans but their clothing is quite different. Consider the styles in which meagrely clad peoples ornament themselves, I dont think ornamentation was an early function of clothing. Quote
MagnetMan Posted March 19, 2006 Report Posted March 19, 2006 Mankind have shed its hair because of our unspecialized design. This means that we can work hard in the sun, where most other animals will go and lie in the shade and wait for it to get cooler, by radiating heat from our muscles effectively through our naked skins. And conversely, we can colonize the frozen wastes of the far north by killing other animals and assuming their pelts. So we can basically control both extreme heat and cold through the combination of a hairless skin and a brain to invent clothes. Where we did not lose hair is where we don't have muscles that heat up. Our heads being a case in point, where the hair is beneficial both in heat and cold. Crotches and armpits also don't have muscles that warm up (let's count the number of witty comebacks to that last line...) Best theory I have heard yet!Sounds like good old Afrikaaner reasoning to me Quote
HydrogenBond Posted March 19, 2006 Report Posted March 19, 2006 Dressing for success may have not been a top priority for cavemen. Although a bear skin made one look tougher than sheep skin. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.