Answer this & u can have 10% of my nobel prize, if I win

[bobmer]

This is the puzzle:

It's not edible.

It is a thing that Caucasians exported to other cultures when they colonized them.

It did not exist in non-caucasian cultures before they were colonized.

It can be seen the Eqyptian museums which means that it existed more than 5,000 years ago.

A few thousand years ago, it was a symbol of honor only for kings and queens.

It became widely used and became a symbol of commercial and industrial development. To have one, indicated stature.

Today we can find it in almost every home and all offices.
But in some developed countries like South Korea, it is still customary NOT to have this thing in some homes.

Hair loss in non-caucasian cultures increased along with industrial development. Because they depend on this thing in their commercial and industrial activities, an independent researcher theorizes it may have something to do with hair loss.

This researcher calls it 'man's worst invention' He went ahead to study its effect on the cardiovascular system. His suspicions seem to be supported by his and other studies.

 

[michael barry]

bobmer,

please tell me that you dont think shampoo causes hairloss...........

I really hope thats not what youre getting at. Women would all be bald and all men would be bald if it were so. My uncle, who is overweight and covered in body hair, has a full head of hair in his fifties with his teenage hairline. He eats tons of fats, processed foods, drinks colas, has a lousy diet, and gets only a moderate amount of excercise.


I hope youre not another one of those Lawrence Custinger acolytes....

 

[Strange Days]

Yeah, my guess is soap or some other cleaning agent. :roll:

 

[bobmer]

It's not shampoo or soap.

And I think I owe StrangeDays for trying, it's not any cleaning agent.

Allow me to narrow the field. It's not a chemical.

does soap affect the cardiovascular system? I guess not.

Anyone else care to try? I'm increasing the prize to 20% of my nobel prize, if I win. :hairy:

 

[Sean68]

is it ink/pens?

 

[bobmer]

Nope. I don't think the Egyptians used pens 5,000 years ago.

Read the tips so you can narrow the field. I might add some more tips later.

 

[Sean68]

true. hence the hieroglyphics i suppose.

 

[Hans Gruber]

''man's worst invention''


religion obviously ! :hairy:

 

[Berserk]

Who is this "independent researcher" that you speak of?

 

[DammitLetMeIn]

is the answer male pattern baldness?

 

[newguy2006]

rugs and/or carpet?

 

[Stu85]

Can i just ask how it existed in ancient Egypt yet apparently was only exported by caucasians? Despite Hollywood's portrayal of egyptians, they're not actual caucasians are they?

 

[beaner]

Indoor plumbing/running water/toilets

 

[Jm0311]

answer is butt sex

 

[Johnny24601]

re:

Egyptians are not caucasian.
Is it a refrigerator?

 

[DammitLetMeIn]

is it a chair?

 

[bobmer]

Is it male pattern baldness? DamnItLetMeIn, I've read your arguments. YOu're a lot smarter and brighter than your answer or question.

This independent researcher is the author of my book.

Nope, its not religion. Every culture have their own religion if i'm not mistaken.

Nope not rugs or carpets. We had them even before caucasians colonized us.

Yes it was exported by caucasian even if it predates caucasians. They are the colonizers of the world. Apparently, since many races came from the middle east from north africa, it was only the caucasians who brought it with them to europe. The other races that emmigrated from the middle east did not take it with them.

It not indoor plumbing nor toilets. It;s neither buttsex. that's not unique to caucasians.

Yes eqyptians are not whites but different races emerged from north african, then to the middle east and spread from there granting that the gene trace that was conducted was accurate. And you could be right if refrigerators existed during Julius Caesars's time.


DAMNITLETMEIN. I AM AMAZED. YOUR ARE GOOD!!!
It's the CHAIR guys.

Great, now U can win part of my nobel prize money but not you. I said u.

Anybody wants to argue that this chair is not bad for your health?

Should I add that the Caucasian population decreasing? And already, the population of other industrialized countries are beginning to? Is it possible that pattern hair loss is an indication that the natural selection process is taking its toll?

 

[michael barry]

bobmer wrote:

"Anybody wants to argue that this chair is not bad for your health?

Should I add that the Caucasian population decreasing? And already, the population of other industrialized countries are beginning to? Is it possible that pattern hair loss is an indication that the natural selection process is taking its toll?"



Gee, I guess all those balding orangutans and bonoboos and chimps and stumptailed macaques in Africa just need to stop sitting on those tree branches and lay down on them instead..........................

All joking aside, the one statistically signifigant change in populations after the chair is introduced is varicose veins in legs. Perhpas the legs get too little or too much blood and this happens or circulation is constricted in the area somewhat when people have to do sedentary work for hours on end (secretaries, etc.). People in Japan who didn't bald much before WW2 had chairs though, so your theory is shot to hell right there.

Dietary changes like less green tea catechins, rice sterols, plant sterols, soy isoflavones, fish oils from fish, and less oxidative protection from inflammatory citokines and superoxides by not eating as many fruits and nuts and increasing insulin resistance (thus more adrenal testosterone) is why industrialized nations see MODERATE increases in baldness. Increased stress (cortisol ain't good for hair either) might exacerbate this some.



Bobmer, as far as your "Caucasions are dying out" comment.....Yes, the birthrates are below replacement now in much of Europe and blue-state America, Canada, Australia, New Zeland, China, Japan (very low----there), Russia, Brazil, Argentina, Iran (yes, Iran's birthrate is quite low), and a few other places.
Bobmer, this is because of feminism, loss of tradtional families, birth control and two-parent income families and due to the fact people are willingly putting off famiies until financial maturity is achieved.

ALSO its happening becuase the WEST is MATURE enough to see that we cant go on increasing population forever in a world of limited resources. THe highest birthrates are in third-world shitholees in Africa, with a couple of nations having 7 children per female. You dont really think they are more EVOLVED than the cultured, educated Japanese do you? Me either. The Japanese have some of the highest cumultative IQ scores on earth, and I hope their birthrates rebound some, but it is a small Island with 100+million people on it, so maybe the optimal population there might be around 80 million. Perhaps they are doing it somewhat instinctively because its a tad crowded. China, with its one child per couple family planning policy, is obvisoulsy attempting to achieve much the same thing. Perhaps a China with 600 million will be alot more pleasant for the Chinese 100 years from now than the China with 1.25 billion now, and all will live better and it will be more agriculturially sustainable and lead to a higher quality of life. Women are as fertile as they ever were, and as human beings we can control reproduction ourselves. We are not animals.

 

[Guest]

and as human beings we can control reproduction ourselves. We are not animals.

michael,

i guess you have never watched Maury or Jerry Springer.

Regards,
JayMan

 

[bobmer]

one statistically signifigant change in populations after the chair is introduced is varicose veins in legs.

ratio is 1 man in every 4 women if i'm not mistaken. Constriction - you could be right because on a chair you have a tendency to sit on the upper legs instead of your butt. And surprise surprise. Guess who's saying that estrogen has something to do with varicose veins.

People in Japan who didn't bald much before WW2 had chairs though, so your theory is shot to hell right there.

Yes that is true but we're talking statistical numbers. Not whether they have it or not. They had it before wwII but how widespread is the real question. We had it in my country as far back as 1540 in very limited numbers. But this took off to become widespread only after wwII when industrialization took off as well.

Dietary....

Yes. Less and less of veggies and fruits. Real food has been replaced largely by processed foods - the art of making trash taste delicious - is one of the 'hallmarks' of development.

as far as your "Caucasions are dying out" comment.....Yes, the birthrates are below replacement now in much of Europe and blue-state America, Canada, Australia, New Zeland, China, Japan (very low----there), Russia, Brazil, Argentina, Iran

China yes and no. depending on the timeline. There is or was a state policy before that bannedcouple from having a second child. Today and for the past decade china has been the fastest developing country. The birth rate of any country can be affected by the activities, their priorities.

Our idea of 'development' is a change equal to the blink of an eye in evolutionary terms. Too abrupt for adaption which could be the reason why the natural selection process is taking over.

this is because of feminism, loss of tradtional families, birth control and two-parent income families and due to the fact people are willingly putting off famiies until financial maturity is achieved.

Yes, i agree on all counts.

its happening becuase the WEST is MATURE enough to see that we cant go on increasing population forever in a world of limited resources.

I don't think so because governments are actively doing something to prevent the downward trend. They can cite this or that but it's really a phenomena.

THe highest birthrates are in third-world shitholees in Africa, with a couple of nations having 7 children per female.

It could be a natural response to the poor state that they are in. A sort of natural desire to preserve the species. They bear more to lessen the chances of total annihilation?

The Japanese have some of the highest cumultative IQ scores on earth, and I hope their birthrates rebound some, but it is a small Island with 100+million people on it, so maybe the optimal population there might be around 80 million. Perhaps they are doing it somewhat instinctively because its a tad crowded.

We dont know but the government there considers the drop a problem and is working out a plan.

China, with its one child per couple family planning policy, is obvisoulsy attempting to achieve much the same thing. Perhaps a China with 600 million will be alot more pleasant for the Chinese 100 years from now than the China with 1.25 billion now, and all will live better and it will be more agriculturially sustainable and lead to a higher quality of life.

Second child=infanticde back then

We are not animals.

. Yes, but we are worst than animals.

Let's get back to the chair. Is the chair an adverse environmental condition? Thus far, yes for varicose veins. The next question is: Is it just variconse veins? Estrogen, the potion that keeps women protected from diseases men are more prone to, is being blamed for varicose veins. Guess who. Testosterone is what protects men from varicose veins is being blamed for hair loss. Guess again by who. Answer is by people who are capable of synthesizing these chemicals.

I want to get some inputs on how bad or not bad a chair can be since it was never a part of our immediate environment for millions of years. We used to sit on the ground on our butts. This prevents varicose veins because the legs are raised higher than the butt or hips.

Guess what else is raised?