Frank B. Finite
A "True" Atheist
A hairy situation for some
individuals:
All of us have seen the very
detailed scientific renderings, drawn by scientist artists, of
what the ancestors of man (and early man) actually looked like
a long long time ago. For your viewing pleasure, here are a couple:

Looking for a wife (mate).

Vegetation conspicuously added by the
Editor in Chief
for closed-minded fundamentalist censorship reasons.
The commonality we observe here
in the scientific data is that they all had a thick lavish coat
of hair. And you can notice the earlier (top) specimen had more
than the other.
As all mammals, man needed this
furry protection to survive the elements. But as we evolved (or
rather, our surroundings evolved us), we slowly lost this total
follicle canopy to where today we only have a few patches left
in some key areas.
Scientists can only speculate
as to what may have caused this shedding. Some believe in a global
warming of temperatures.
Others may speculate that before
the wheel was invented, early man would roll down hills to get
to the valley faster. After thousands of years of man (women
and children too) rolling down hills, friction slowly rubbed
their hair off.
I personally subscribe to this
latter hypothesis.
But it doesn't matter how it
happened, but that it DID happen. Modern man does not have this
covering of hair - at least most of us don't.
There are those among us, however,
who do have a great deal of hair on their body. Some have chest
hair that even crawls out of their shirt at the neck hole. Others
have a liberal spreading across their back.
Still others, on very rare occasions,
have this full thick covering across 100%
of their bodies which is absolute
proof that man descended from ape-like creatures.
And of coarse we don't need to
mention today's infamous Big Foot and Sasquatch creatures - but
we are going to anyway.
But for these individuals, this
is not good news. Following the evolutionary time-line as presented
by the visual evidence constructed by our best scientists, they
are not as highly evolved as the rest of us.
For some reason they have the
earlier genetic code for hairy bodies. And this can be a problem
in most of today's societies in the realms of survivability and
mating to pass off genes through offspring, because it's not
viewed as attractive . . . anymore.
Now there are some things that
can be done to help one's hairy self out if needed. For this
information, I suggest reading my earlier article
in issue seven.
It may be brought up that there
are women who like a hairy chest and/or back and/or whatever
else. They find it attractive and usually mate with them. Like
this one:
This, however, is a bad idea.
First of all, if you are a female
human animal that does find hairiness attractive, it is obvious
that you too are less evolved than the rest of society. Apparently
you inherited the lower genes for such attractedness.
(Note: this is not a moral judgement
based on religious reasons, it is an Amoral judgement based on
scientific ones. Morally,
you can do what ever the heck you want.)
Second, if you produce offspring
with a hairy man, the chances are greater that these defective
genes will get passed off to your cub(s). You should find this
naturally repulsive directed by your maternal instinct for high
survivability and reproductivity of your embryos-to-be-birthed.
There is a war waging within
the members of your body. Your "hairy attractive" genes
are dueling with your "maternal instinct" genes over
which type of mate you will choose.
Only time will tell which genes
will be naturally selected, and which ones will not.
Of coarse the "fundy"
position is that there is a loving God who created ALL people
and that he loves them all equally. This would make everyone's
personal worth equal no matter what you look like.
But that's a bunch of malarkey!
Truthfully,
Frank B. Finite's brain
(a chance evolutionary byproduct since the accidental dawning
of time, space and matter)
|