Evolution is not a scientific theory, page-447

  1. 23,957 Posts.
    lightbulb Created with Sketch. 770
    Leading on from the "naked ape" theory ie: that proteins etc were directed
    to brain development as apes lost hair.

    IMO one could test that theory by an experiment on a mammal species with hair
    that reproduces rapidly (like what the fruit fly does for genetic research)

    Take the hamster for example it reaches reproductive maturity in 6 months?
    If so then its generation cycle is say 1/30th that of humans. We could take breeding couples
    and induce baldness and the same in their offspring and so on.

    We know that apes started to loose hair 2 million years ago and purportedly
    converted the proteins/minerals saved to developing brain and morph into humans .

    We know that a form of human has existed for nearly 300,000years

    So it would take 56,000 years to reach the equivalent in the hamster with induced
    baldness to reach the stage of brain evolution that apes to humans have made.
    Perhaps ongoing checks could be made after say 22 years (40 generations of hamsters?)
    to measure change, if any.

    Or perhaps there is another mammal that has been loosing hair for say a long time
    and that ancient skulls are available to compare scull sizes then to that of now?

    I guess science is not easy but we seem to be getting better at it since
    religion has been sidelined....eh? ( ask Galileo)
 
arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.