i believe we are constantly evolving, but then why are we still so hairy? how many generations would evolution take to produce less hairy humans? (as in arms, legs, underarms, and such)
if there were a whole cluster of people who were taken to live in the elements and would need their body hair to protect them, in a few generations would they still be as hairy as us, or would they be more hairy to compensate?
if the changes started to become more noticeable, would we also lose the hair on our scalps along with the body hair?
2007-12-07 07:59:00 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Biology
I think evolutions is much less of a factor now than it was 10,000 5,000 or even 1,000 years ago. As a general rule, evolution / natural selection weeds out the weak and causes the strong to reproduce.
With modern medicine, and social standards, those with genetic and physical weakness are no longer removed from the gene pool. 1000 years ago, someone with a genetic physical condition would probably not live long enough to reproduce.
Now, these people are able to live and have families but any genetic conditions will be passed on.
Couple this with the sheer number of people currently living on the planet (~6.5 billion) and the whole natural selection apparatus is slowed down if not completely halted.
So for your example of hair, you may have select groups of people that have a predisposition to less hair but the chances of it becoming widespread are pretty slim.
2007-12-07 08:10:01 · answer #1 · answered by Mark B 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
> why are we still so hairy?
Because there's no great disadvantage to being hairy, and women are still okay with marrying hairy guys.
> how many generations would evolution take to produce less hairy humans?
It'll never happen unless people refuse to have children with hairy people.
> in a few generations would they still be as hairy as us, or would they be more hairy to compensate?
Again, that depends on how well the hairy or hairless were able to have children. We're people. We wear sweaters.
> would we also lose the hair on our scalps along with the body hair?
That hasn't generally happened yet. You'll notice that "male pattern baldness" happens only to men.
2007-12-07 17:38:48 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
a noticible evolution does not happen with in the life span of one person, for any noticible difference you might have to wait a million years, and it chances are it wouldn't be hair, it could even be a gain of hair. Another way changes may be seen is through natural selection, so lets say we go into an ice age, the people who have more hair will be warmer and we will develop into a more hairy species and visa versa
2007-12-07 16:05:03 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
As the theory would go...
Evolution also involves natural selection. I for one don't think I'll ever be "selecting" a hairless female to breed with and don't think I'm alone on that one.
Example: 2 cycle cell anemia genes result in the disease, but one creates a resistance to malaria. Natural selection continues to favor the propogation of the genetic trait!
2007-12-07 16:12:58 · answer #4 · answered by tshnobodysfool 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think with the advancement of modern technologies and the population of humans spanning the globe, our ideals of beauty and attractiveness will have a lot to do with whether we have more or less hair in about a few thousand years.
2007-12-07 16:54:51 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Definately.
2007-12-07 16:08:21 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋