Evolution...?

Question

Do you think that body hair is a vestigial feature and why?

Answer 1

We were designed with body hair...it directs the path of your sweat...it affects the way water rolls off of your body...and it does tend to keep the body a little warmer than if you had none....have you ever shaved everything off? Also, if you didn't have some body hair, you wouldn't have so much fun removing the tape the nurse puts on your arm after blood is drawn! People without eyebrows don't even look right, so there must be a reason for it helps offset the glare of the sun in your eyes if you are counting that facial feature for body hair...and when you are lacking body hair in certain parts, you might be mistaken for someone who is physically immature....I know when I worked with people (mostly children) from Southeast Asia who have considerably less body hair than the average Caucasian, they had a ball pulling the hair out of my arms...I never wore shorts around them. I can only take so much pain!

Answer 2

Yes. Here's why:

A vestigial feature is a feature that has little or no function in an organism, but appears to be a throwback to an ancestral organism in which the feature a much more significant function. In other words, it has lost most or all of its original function. (See first source.)

Examples in humans are the appendix, wisdom teeth, tailbone, embryonic gill folds and tail, the muscles that let you wiggle your ears (used for turning ears in other primates), the micro-muscles that give you goosebumps (used for fluffing the fur in other mammals), the plantaris muscle (a useless muscle in the human calf used for grasping with the feet in primates ... see second source), even your big toe (not the toe itself, which is used for balance, but the fact that the shape, bones, muscles, and nerves in your big toe show that it is a vestigial thumb once used for grasping).

One tell-tale sign of whether a feature is vestigial (i.e. whether it serves a function) is whether all members of the species have it. (E.g. 9% of humans are born without a plantaris muscle.) Or if the feature is related to reproduction, then all members of one gender have it. (E.g. the peacock tail is absent in females, but it serves a function related to sexual selection, so it is NOT vestigial.)

The second test of whether something is vestigial is whether it can be removed without loss of some function. E.g. the appendix is present in pretty much all humans, but it can be removed without loss of any known function.

So is body hair vestigial? Well, the fact that it is mostly absent in females, indicates that it doesn't serve a significant function related to warmth, and the fact that body hair is mostly absent in many (if not most) males, indicates that it doesn't serve any significant function related to reproduction. (In fairness, it is harder to apply the second test ... removing body hair obviously doesn't make a significant difference to a human wearing clothes.) And body hair most certainly *does* serve a function in other mammals.

So yes, I would say it is clearly a vestigial feature.

Answer 3

Body hair is there as a form of insulation. It keeps heat in, and cold out. Since man discovered fire, we have evolved so that we need less body hair now than we used to, but the hair on our scalp must retain some function, probably to do with sexual display.

Answer 4

No, body hair helps us in sensing different things and plays a vital role in touch.

Answer 5

Since we evolved from ape-like creatures, it would be. But I don't know why we lost hair when they came down from the trees. I think it was for more efficient cooling in the hot African climate. And the fact that early man used fire for warmth.

Answer 6

I would have to agree with Jalapinomex on his answer. I would also have to vote to give secretsauce the worst answer. Nothing personal, but there ARE no such things as vestigial organs. Some organs and features may have functions that are unknown to science. A perfect example of this is that of the appendix. The appendix is an important part of our immune system. It is a germ free section of the dirtiest part of the body that helps the body produce antibodies and protects the intestinal tract from infection, It also is on the bottom of the only part of the intestinal tract where waste materials must move upward. The appendix performs an important role by creating fluids that force waste matter up this section of the intestines. Without an appendix we become more susceptible to a large number of diseases that are caused by bacteria and viruses, as well as to cancer.

The existence of wisdom teeth may very well take top dishonors as an alleged proof of evolution in the form of a vestigial human body part. It is stated that at one time in our alleged evolution we had more room in our mouths. It also has been suggested that we had to chew more than we do today. Both of these statements may be plausible, however they do not prove or even suggest that we are evolving. These teeth still function for chewing and are by no means useless or vestigial. The lack of space in the mouths of certain people - and by no means all people - is a consequence of the degeneration of the human race in regard to both genetics and lifestyles. This is quite contrary to the concept of evolution, which implies that we are improving and adding features.

The so called “gill-slits in embryos are not slits at all. They are skin folds that develop into the chin, neck, ears etc. In fact, in fish, theses “gill-slits” do not even develop into gills. The whole idea of Embryology and Homology is fraudulent.
See actual photos here:
http://www.bible.ca/tracks/haeckel-truth-lie-embryology-photos.jpg
Ernst Haeckel's drawings were declared fraudulent by Professor His in 1874 at which time Haeckel's confessed. Even Haeckel's confession was fraudulent and misleading.
1.Haeckel fraudulently draw embryos in the "tail bud" stage to be almost identical for different species.
2.Heterochrony is falsified because in some species of direct developing frogs, and in monotreme mammals, limb buds are already present at the tailbud stage, whereas in other species, these are not seen until significantly later. Human embryos have tiny protrusions called limb buds, particularly if they have developed to the point of having as many body segments as Haeckel gives them. But Haeckel did not include limb buds.
3.Birds are characterized by their prominent mesencephalon. Whereas most amniote embryos have a heart by this stage.
4.The chick embryo eye is blackened, like a mammal's, although it wouldn't be pigmented that early.
5.Haeckel gave the bird embryo a curl in the tail that resembles a human's.
6.Haeckel also falsified the size of each embryo to be the same when in fact there is a huge difference in size. The scorpion fish embryo is 700 microns long at the tailbud stage, while the mudpuppy salamander measures some 9 millimeters.
One of the most astounding and preposterous claims made by evolutionists is that the human coccyx is the remains of an ancient tail. This is certainly a very amusing notion on one level, but the humor of the tale of the tail is lost when it is pointed out that it is still being taught to public school children as science. The suggestion is that we lost this tail because we no longer need it. The coccyx is more than the end of the spinal column. The human coccyx is the attachment point of nine muscles that allow for a number of movements, most important of which is for the act of defecation. Evolutionists should ask Ashley Murry of Wilmington, Delaware if she agrees with their conclusion that a coccyx is unnecessary. This young woman will be forced to wear a diaper for her entire life because she was born without a coccyx. It is unlikely that she would be very supportive of their contention. Another important use of the coccyx is that it assists us in the act of sitting. It is not impossible to sit without one, but it is awkward and uncomfortable. Furthermore, the coccyx helps to support certain internal organs.

Subclavius Muscle
"This small muscle stretching under the shoulder from the first rib to the collarbone would be useful if humans still walked on all fours. Some people have one, some have none, and a few have two." -Discover Magazine
A quick breeze through General Practice records would show that the Subclavius Muscle does indeed serve a purpose, and should not be included in a list of “useless body parts”. Notice what the following – found on General Practice Notebook (GPN) – says regarding this muscle,
"Its action is to stabilise the clavicle during movements of the pectoral girdle. It acts to depress the lateral end of the clavicle and pull it slightly anteriorly. Its presence may provide protection to the subclavian vein - which lies deeply - when the clavicle is fractured. Loss of subclavius function rarely produces clinical features." GPN (2004)

Nipples on males were one of Darwin’s evidences for descent with modification, however it wasn’t too commonly spoken of for a while until recently. Now, it seems that everywhere you go, you hear, “Why do males have nipples?” Along with many other “evidences” put forth, this does not affect creation theory, but instead, is actually predicted. Contrary to common belief, a baby growing in its mother’s womb does not start out as a female; however, it does start out very similar to males and females, in that it is sexually dimorphic.
Nipples on males are one example, amongst many, of design economy and efficient embryological development. Another example would be the development of both the müllerian duct system (female) and the wolffian duct system (male). This is due to both sexes having the same genetic information for these structures. The differences are only a product of designed chemical signals later on in development.

In conclusion, Jalapinomex is correct, secretsauce is not.

Answer 7

No. I live in the Midwest and am sure glad that I have long enough hair to keep my ears warm.

Answer 8

no. it keeps us warm in the cold. ask any bald guy, hell tell ya

Answer 9

Never!!!

Answer 10

ok, maybe