Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We wear clothes because a talking snake convinced some folks to eat a magic apple, and that made people suddenly notice that they were nude, which caused them great shame. To avoid the sky Gods wrath, they quickly stitched together fig leaves to hide their exposed genitals.
OR:
Many tribes that live in the cradle of civilization either still don't wear clothes today or they have only began to wear clothes recently for cultural reasons. However, mankind originally improvised clothing to help us adapt to colder climates as we left the warm climate Africa.
The second explaination seems more reasonable to me, but opinions vary.
At least you're on the right track. Now, why would hair continue to exist if it finds no use? Bald people, and those with Brazilian wax job, excluded.
Let's see.....
Hair on the head still provides heating and cooling regardless of the clime.
Under the arms, hair wicks persperation away from the body.
Genital hair....uh...hummm....keeps lice confined to one spot for easier picking???
Beards?To catch dropped food so as to keep your shirt cleaner?
The rest is just vestigal.
(You can tell I googled the question so as to get accurate answers,can't you?)
Let's see.....
Hair on the head still provides heating and cooling regardless of the clime.
Under the arms, hair wicks persperation away from the body.
Genital hair....uh...hummm....keeps lice confined to one spot for easier picking???
Beards?To catch dropped food so as to keep your shirt cleaner?
The rest is just vestigal.
(You can tell I googled the question so as to get accurate answers,can't you?)
I thought beard was for bird nest, but in any case, you're (again) on the right track. We still have them where they are needed. And don't anymore, where we don't (at least to that extent)!
It doesn't -- if "monkey" has no biological meaning. But if "monkeys" represents a monophyletic clade (ie, the infraorder Simiiformes) then every member of that infraorder, extant and extinct, including the founding species, is a "monkey".
This holds true for all clades -- small (apes, superfamily Hominoidea), medium (bird, class Aves) and large (animals, kingdom Animalia).
The problem, as can be visualized on the chart in your post, is that the New World Monkeys branched off from our lineage before Old World Monkeys. If either of these groups -- one, but not both -- were called "monkeys" then that name would be biologically meaningful. Alternately, if the apes branched off first, then there would simply be one large group of monkeys, subdivided but not excluding any subsequent species (as opposed to the way apes are now excluded from "monkeys" despite clearly being in the clade Simiiformes). This group would then not be in our ancestral lineage, but a successor to one of our ancestors.
So "monkeys" is a paraphyletic grouping. These are not unknown -- excluding birds from "reptiles" is one example, and excluding mammals (among other clades) from "fish" (and "reptiles", too) is another. But such groupings are constructs usually meant to underscore some profound difference (such as warm-bloodedness, in the case of mammals from fish and birds from reptiles, or breathing air in the case of mammals from fish). It's hard to see any profound biological difference between what is commonly called a monkey and, for example, a gibbon (an ape), that necessitates such a paraphyletic grouping.
It's an interesting digression -- but my ultimate problem lies not with honest disagreements in biological terminology but those who insist on things like "we just can't be descended from monkeys, I won't believe that!", "I'm not an ape!" and "humans are most certainly not mere animals!". Such people aren't interested in science but rather are interested in manipulating it to fit their weird agendas based on ancient writings that have nothing to do with modern scientific knowledge.
Primates are the order. Within the order primates, there are two suborders, the Haplorrhini and the Strepsirrhini. These two suborders branched very early on, the latter forming most of the families that we that call prosimians. Within the Haplorrhini, there are two infraorders, the Tarsiiformes, and the anthropoidea. Obviously New world monkeys, old world monkeys, and the apes are in the infraorder anthropoidea. Within the infraorder Anthropodiea, there are tweo parvorders, the Platyrrhini (New world Monkeys) and the Catarrhini, which includes old world monkeys and the apes (Including humans). These parvorders also branched early, as evidenced by the fact that New world monkeys are only found in the western hemisphere (having evolved after the Atlantic Ocean opened up), and so evolved in isolation from its ancestral cousins, and so are remotely related.
The point being that the ancestors of monkeys were not, strictly speaking, monkeys, but something else, since they would have shared characterisitics with all other Haplorrhini primates, being ancestral to them all. Ultimately, we are all rodents.
We wear clothes because a talking snake convinced some folks to eat a magic apple, and that made people suddenly notice that they were nude, which caused them great shame. To avoid the sky Gods wrath, they quickly stitched together fig leaves to hide their exposed genitals.
OR:
Many tribes that live in the cradle of civilization either still don't wear clothes today or they have only began to wear clothes recently for cultural reasons. However, mankind originally improvised clothing to help us adapt to colder climates as we left the warm climate Africa.
The second explaination seems more reasonable to me, but opinions vary.
I'd say humans still have just as much hair as a lot of other primates, but most of ours is much shorter and more like "peach fuzz". If you look closely, almost every inch of your body is covered with some hair. So why did our hair become so short in most areas, but not in others? Beats me. I think there are some reasonable explanations in this thread, though. And while most people will focus on natural selection, lets not forget about sexual selection. At some point in our history, maybe we simply started preferring less hairy partners for whatever reason. Maybe there was some sort of parasite or disease that more greatly affected hairier humans, and eventually they were less likely to survive than their smooth counterparts. Who knows? But my money is on sexual selection. How many of us men naturally find ourselves more attracted to hairy women? And I know some women prefer a somewhat hairy man, citing the manliness factor, but how many women prefer a REALLY hairy man? I once knew a man who was so hairy it would look like he was wearing a hair undershirt underneath his dress shirts. The back of his neck was, honestly, only a wee bit less hairy than the top of his head. And most women I knew at the time found it disgusting (poor guy). So this preferred trait could easily still be at work in our brains today. Or it could be a societal issue, I don't know.
I swear I spotted a gorilla at the mall the other day and I asked where he got the Boston sweat shirt and are you wearing a gorilla outfit ? shouldn't you be a homosapien by now? He said go to hell you creationist pig! Which I replied why are you wearing cloths at all???.... you "defaulted evolutionist" .......gorilla...........still........animal for ever.
[*]Family Hominidae: great apes and humans[/list][/list]Primates are the order. ...
The point being that the ancestors of monkeys were not, strictly speaking, monkeys, but something else, since they would have shared characterisitics with all other Haplorrhini primates, being ancestral to them all. Ultimately, we are all rodents.
(The resemblance is in the eyes! Oh, and that clear look of consciousness & inner intelligence!)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just ask my good friend Damon about driving around Hawaii in a convertible all day!
Here! Have a root stem for dinner!
