Baldness

[someone]

Going bald. So cheer me up, and tell me the advantage....

[broger...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, September 16, 2021 at 5:20:09 PM UTC-4, someone wrote:
> Going bald. So cheer me up, and tell me the advantage....

1. You can shave your own head, so no money wasted on barbers
2. You'll probably look younger bald than with grey hair
3. No need for shampoo
4. No hot, sticky feeling on your head in the summer
5. When your brain is working overtime to find new ways to hide dualist assumptions in yes or no questions, the excess heat dissipates more easily

[someone]

On Thursday, 16 September 2021 at 22:20:09 UTC+1, someone wrote:
> Going bald. So cheer me up, and tell me the advantage....

Why would we resemble a lion, hair wise if we didn't get a hair cut? (Hair noticeably on head and pubic regnions)

[Glenn]

On Thursday, September 16, 2021 at 2:20:09 PM UTC-7, someone wrote:
> Going bald. So cheer me up, and tell me the advantage....

Funny evolutionists:

https://www.theguardian.com/notesandqueries/query/0,,-192228,00.html

[someone]

:) I'm not a dualist.

But I was expecting more of an evolutionary reproductive advantage given the channel.

But funnyish nevertheless :)

[broger...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, September 16, 2021 at 5:50:09 PM UTC-4, someone wrote:
> On Thursday, 16 September 2021 at 22:35:10 UTC+1, broger...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 16, 2021 at 5:20:09 PM UTC-4, someone wrote:
> > > Going bald. So cheer me up, and tell me the advantage....
> > 1. You can shave your own head, so no money wasted on barbers
> > 2. You'll probably look younger bald than with grey hair
> > 3. No need for shampoo
> > 4. No hot, sticky feeling on your head in the summer
> > 5. When your brain is working overtime to find new ways to hide dualist assumptions in yes or no questions, the excess heat dissipates more easily
> :) I'm not a dualist.

I know; you're a monist, spiritualist. No problem there. The problem is that whenever you try to show internal contradictions in materialism in an elaborate sequence of yes-no questions, you always load the questions with dualist assumptions. As a result, you are very good at showing that a materialist who accepts dualist assumptions will contradict himself, but not good at all at showing internal contradictions in materialism.

>
> But I was expecting more of an evolutionary reproductive advantage given the channel.

In addition to trying to force dualist assumptions on materialists, here, in this question, you seem to want to force extreme adaptionist assumptions on evolutionists.
>
> But funnyish nevertheless :)

[André G. Isaak]

Is there some reason why you assume there should be an evolutionary
advantage?

André


--
To email remove 'invalid' & replace 'gm' with well known Google mail
service.

[Bob Casanova]

On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 16:45:31 -0600, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by André G. Isaak
<agi...@gm.invalid>:

>On 2021-09-16 15:45, someone wrote:
>> On Thursday, 16 September 2021 at 22:35:10 UTC+1, broger...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Thursday, September 16, 2021 at 5:20:09 PM UTC-4, someone wrote:
>>>> Going bald. So cheer me up, and tell me the advantage....
>>> 1. You can shave your own head, so no money wasted on barbers
>>> 2. You'll probably look younger bald than with grey hair
>>> 3. No need for shampoo
>>> 4. No hot, sticky feeling on your head in the summer
>>> 5. When your brain is working overtime to find new ways to hide dualist assumptions in yes or no questions, the excess heat dissipates more easily
>>
>> :) I'm not a dualist.
>>
>> But I was expecting more of an evolutionary reproductive advantage given the channel.
>
>Is there some reason why you assume there should be an evolutionary
>advantage?
>

Like many, he probably thinks that nothing can exist which
confers no advantage; lack of disadvantage is apparently
beyond him/them.
>
--

Bob C.

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

- Isaac Asimov

[Glenn]

On Thursday, September 16, 2021 at 3:55:09 PM UTC-7, Bob Casanova wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 16:45:31 -0600, the following appeared
> in talk.origins, posted by André G. Isaak
> <agi...@gm.invalid>:
> >On 2021-09-16 15:45, someone wrote:
> >> On Thursday, 16 September 2021 at 22:35:10 UTC+1, broger...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Thursday, September 16, 2021 at 5:20:09 PM UTC-4, someone wrote:
> >>>> Going bald. So cheer me up, and tell me the advantage....
> >>> 1. You can shave your own head, so no money wasted on barbers
> >>> 2. You'll probably look younger bald than with grey hair
> >>> 3. No need for shampoo
> >>> 4. No hot, sticky feeling on your head in the summer
> >>> 5. When your brain is working overtime to find new ways to hide dualist assumptions in yes or no questions, the excess heat dissipates more easily
> >>
> >> :) I'm not a dualist.
> >>
> >> But I was expecting more of an evolutionary reproductive advantage given the channel.
> >
> >Is there some reason why you assume there should be an evolutionary
> >advantage?
> >
> Like many, he probably thinks that nothing can exist which
> confers no advantage; lack of disadvantage is apparently
> beyond him/them.
> >

Scifi much?

[RonO]

On 9/16/2021 4:16 PM, someone wrote:
> Going bald. So cheer me up, and tell me the advantage....
>

There is none. You are a more efficient swimmer if you shave your head.
Most of your heat loss during cold weather is through your head by
surface area, and hair is insulation that bald people have less of.
Hair protects the skin at the top of your head from exposure to direct
sunlight.

Some speculate that this increased exposure would increase vitamin D levels.

It seems that there may be no evolutionary advantage.

There was speculation that there was sexual selection involved where men
that made it to the age where their hair fell out might be more
desirable mates than the younger males that hadn't proven themselves. I
recall something about sperm count, but that seems to have died. There
may be a testosterone level difference and that might be associated with
more masculine traits, but the current claims are that this is not true.

My guess is that sexual selection wins, and that at one time in the past
going bald meant that you had passed some milestone that made females
believe that your genes might be better than the guys that hadn't gone
bald, yet. You'd think that going gray would be enough, but a lot of
men start going bald before they go gray, and my guess is that more
survived to go bald than gray. Currently, there doesn't seem to be any
such selection.

Ron Okimoto

[someone]

You think females evolved to fancy bald guys? That it was just a race to baldness?

[RonO]

The thing about such selection is that it can be cultural and have no
genetic basis among the females that participated. All they needed was
advice from their mothers on who to pick that would be most likely to be
around to help raise the kids. It just had to be a fad long enough to
increase the frequency enough so that it wasn't lost to drift, but had
to go on long enough to select for all the modifiers that increase the
hair loss.

Ron Okimoto

[*Hemidactylus*]

André G. Isaak <agi...@gm.invalid> wrote:
> On 2021-09-16 15:45, someone wrote:
>> On Thursday, 16 September 2021 at 22:35:10 UTC+1, broger...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Thursday, September 16, 2021 at 5:20:09 PM UTC-4, someone wrote:
>>>> Going bald. So cheer me up, and tell me the advantage....
>>> 1. You can shave your own head, so no money wasted on barbers
>>> 2. You'll probably look younger bald than with grey hair
>>> 3. No need for shampoo
>>> 4. No hot, sticky feeling on your head in the summer
>>> 5. When your brain is working overtime to find new ways to hide dualist
>>> assumptions in yes or no questions, the excess heat dissipates more easily
>>
>> :) I'm not a dualist.
>>
>> But I was expecting more of an evolutionary reproductive advantage given the channel.
>
> Is there some reason why you assume there should be an evolutionary
> advantage?
>

Most men would have reproduced before it became very apparent to potential
mates. Maybe some benign byproduct?

[*Hemidactylus*]

Kinda technical but maybe some connection to earlier puberty onset and bone
density:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-07862-y

If so a nonaptive byproduct in itself?

And: “In males, we took the number of children fathered as a male fertility
trait, finding negative phenotypic correlation with the number of children
fathered (Pearson’s r = −0.026, 95%CI: −0.030 to −0.021). More concretely,
men with MPB score of 4 on average had 0.09 fewer children than those with
MPB score of 1, after adjusting for age.”…”Among female-specific fertility
traits, LDSC identified nominally significant (P < 0.05) rg between
increased MPB severity and fewer number of live births (rg = −0.06,
SE = 0.02) and increased age of first birth (rg = 0.04, SE = 0.02) (Table
1), suggesting shared genetic risk. These directions of effect point
towards lower female fertility, and negative selection. There is also
S-parameter evidence for negative selection on age of menarche (which is
permissive for reproduction), and on age at first live birth41. These two
traits show opposing directions of effect between (a) lifetime reproductive
success (LRS) (age of menarche: positive; age at first live birth:
negative36) and (b) rg with MPB (age of menarche: negative; age at first
live birth: positive), which is consistent with MPB being negatively
correlated with LRS and fertility”

[Oxyaena]

On 9/16/2021 5:16 PM, someone wrote:
> Going bald. So cheer me up, and tell me the advantage....
>

Thank fuck I'm only 20 and am on hormones.

[jillery]

Correct. Baldness is as adaptive as losing teeth.

>And: “In males, we took the number of children fathered as a male fertility
>trait, finding negative phenotypic correlation with the number of children

>fathered (Pearson’s r?=??0.026, 95%CI: ?0.030 to ?0.021). More concretely,

>men with MPB score of 4 on average had 0.09 fewer children than those with
>MPB score of 1, after adjusting for age.”…”Among female-specific fertility

>traits, LDSC identified nominally significant (P?<?0.05) rg between
>increased MPB severity and fewer number of live births (rg?=??0.06,
>SE?=?0.02) and increased age of first birth (rg?=?0.04, SE?=?0.02) (Table

>1), suggesting shared genetic risk. These directions of effect point
>towards lower female fertility, and negative selection. There is also
>S-parameter evidence for negative selection on age of menarche (which is
>permissive for reproduction), and on age at first live birth41. These two
>traits show opposing directions of effect between (a) lifetime reproductive
>success (LRS) (age of menarche: positive; age at first live birth:
>negative36) and (b) rg with MPB (age of menarche: negative; age at first
>live birth: positive), which is consistent with MPB being negatively
>correlated with LRS and fertility”

--
You're entitled to your own opinions.
You're not entitled to your own facts.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2021-09-16 23:27:31 +0000, RonO said:

> On 9/16/2021 4:16 PM, someone wrote:
>> Going bald. So cheer me up, and tell me the advantage....
>>
>
> There is none. You are a more efficient swimmer if you shave your head.

When I swam competitively the more serious competitors wore swimming
caps and shaved their legs and bodies. I wasn't a good enough swimmer
to worry about such matters.

> Most of your heat loss during cold weather is through your head by
> surface area, and hair is insulation that bald people have less of.
> Hair protects the skin at the top of your head from exposure to direct
> sunlight.
>
> Some speculate that this increased exposure would increase vitamin D levels.
>
> It seems that there may be no evolutionary advantage.
>
> There was speculation that there was sexual selection involved where
> men that made it to the age where their hair fell out might be more
> desirable mates than the younger males that hadn't proven themselves. I
> recall something about sperm count, but that seems to have died. There
> may be a testosterone level difference and that might be associated
> with more masculine traits, but the current claims are that this is not
> true.
>
> My guess is that sexual selection wins, and that at one time in the
> past going bald meant that you had passed some milestone that made
> females believe that your genes might be better than the guys that
> hadn't gone bald, yet. You'd think that going gray would be enough,
> but a lot of men start going bald before they go gray, and my guess is
> that more survived to go bald than gray. Currently, there doesn't seem
> to be any such selection.
>
> Ron Okimoto

--
Athel -- French and British, living mainly in England until 1987.

[Mark Isaak]

6. You leave less trace evidence at crime scenes.

--
Mark Isaak eciton (at) curioustaxonomy (dot) net
"The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred
to the presence of those who think they've found it." - Terry Pratchett

[John Wilkins]

Evolution has decreed that the average male will have a limited amount of testosterone. If you choose to use yours growing hair, that is none of my business.

[*Hemidactylus*]

I tried in my 20s to bodybuild. That didn’t get me fame and glory. Good to
see you slumming again.

[John Wilkins]

I'm avoiding work. That was always my motivation for being at t.o.

[jillery]

What an odd way to break your T.O. fast. I hope it's the first of
many more.

[Bob Casanova]

On Fri, 17 Sep 2021 19:53:12 -0700 (PDT), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by John Wilkins
<john.s....@gmail.com>:

I can't think of a better one...

[*Hemidactylus*]

I had seen a few blog posts ago you had gotten a new teaching gig. Belated
congrats on that!

[Dexter]

RonO wrote:

> On 9/16/2021 4:16 PM, someone wrote:
> > Going bald. So cheer me up, and tell me the advantage....
> >
>
> There is none. You are a more efficient swimmer if you shave
> your head. Most of your heat loss during cold weather is
> through your head by surface area, and hair is insulation that
> bald people have less of. Hair protects the skin at the top of
> your head from exposure to direct sunlight.
>
> Some speculate that this increased exposure would increase
> vitamin D levels.
>

Would that that were true. I'm here to tell you it certainly
didn't work for me.

[Bob Casanova]

On Sat, 18 Sep 2021 21:55:02 -0500, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by "Dexter" <N...@home.com>:

Ummm...*What* didn't work for you? Faster swimming, skin
protection by hair, or increased vitamin D production by UV?

[Dexter]

Bob Casanova wrote:

> On Sat, 18 Sep 2021 21:55:02 -0500, the following appeared
> in talk.origins, posted by "Dexter" <N...@home.com>:
>
> > RonO wrote:
> >
> >> On 9/16/2021 4:16 PM, someone wrote:
> >> > Going bald. So cheer me up, and tell me the advantage....
> >> >
> >>
> >> There is none. You are a more efficient swimmer if you
> shave >> your head. Most of your heat loss during cold
> weather is >> through your head by surface area, and hair is
> insulation that >> bald people have less of. Hair protects the
> skin at the top of >> your head from exposure to direct
> sunlight. >>
> >> Some speculate that this increased exposure would increase
> >> vitamin D levels.
> >>
> > Would that that were true. I'm here to tell you it certainly
> > didn't work for me.
> >
> Ummm...*What* didn't work for you? Faster swimming, skin
> protection by hair, or increased vitamin D production by UV?
> >

Elevated vitamin D levels in conjunction with hair loss.

I have typical male pattern baldness that began when I was 19
(back in 19 mumble mumble). A couple of years ago my doc
started me on a vamin D supplement as my level was too low.

[Bob Casanova]

On Sun, 19 Sep 2021 22:08:53 -0500, the following appeared

OK; thanks. Sorry to hear of the problem, especially since
I've read that the best source of D is production in the
body rather than ingestion. I've never heard of it being an
issue, at least among those with lighter skins, but I guess
anything can happen.

[Dexter]

Not at all a problem. As I've aged I've become much less the
out doors type, especially in the hot southeast summers. That
might be contributing.

[Glenn]

"Although the series is set in Miami, Florida, many of the exterior scenes are filmed in Los Angeles and Long Beach, California."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dexter_(TV_series)