Human Evolution

[MadamePapillon]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,316375,00.html

I've been hearing a lot on the topic of human evolution lately and many very differing and interesting theories on the subject.

For many years it seemed to be an accepted theory that we were all eventually going to merge into one big super race with light brown skin and very little differences between us. A 'master race' so to speak.

Another theory was that humans were going to split off into two seperate races and one would begin devolving into a more primitive form while the other kept moving forward to higher intellegence ect ect.

Still, more recently, it appears that rather than merging and becoming more alike evolution seems to be speeding up and we are experiencing a sudden burst of change, resulting in us becoming, not the same, but even more different, especially in certain parts of the world.

This isn't exactly new, though. All you have to go is go to a civil war museum and check out the uniforms the soldiers used to wear to realize how much we have changed since then, especially in the height area. Some put it down to better nutrition, still others blame chemicals and the growth hormones put in many of our modern foods.

So what do you all think is the future for human evolution?
Are these simply natural changes or have we become chemically and genetically altered due to the sudden use of chemicals all around us and the genetic/hormonal manipulation of our foods?
Or could it be a little bit of both and we are simply speeding up the natural process?
What do you think? Just how far have we come and where do you think we are we heading?

[kireikoori]

For many years it seemed to be an accepted theory that we were all eventually going to merge into one big super race with light brown skin and very little differences between us. A 'master race' so to speak.
Why, so people think were all gonna be the same race some day? No more Whites and Asians and Blacks?

That's gonna suck if that happens. Variety is the spice of life. I'm totally ok with race mixing but I don't want it to get to that point.

I dunno what's gonna happen but I hope it's not that!

I think that the human race will be more or less split off into the haves and have nots as it always has. The first world smarties will continue to evolve higher and higher and the third world people will not be so fortunate and be exploited because they are weaker. And will probably eventually die off before a subrace split can happen. The highest of the human race will continue to peak until people are only left with the best.

With the rate the poor are dying of disease like aids and starvation, I don't think they'll split into another weaker subspecies or whatever, but will mostly just die off. The few who get lucky and ascend into the better living conditions, education ect just pool back into the better and escape the fate of others.

That's how I see humanity, as one big Darwinistic struggle to ascend to the top of the pyramid and the fate of those who can't escape the bottom is suffering and death. The pyramid will get even more grand, the people at the top will just get even more grand. But the peak won't be a new subspecies, just the peak of human development.

But then again I've very little knowledge of genetics and that was probably just incoherent, meaningless babbling.

[Kinsao]

Chemicals, genes and hormones are all 'natural' things in themselves - I don't believe us humans are doing 'unnatural' things because we ourselves are 'natural' too and simply using the resources that are available to us - raw materials and our human brains. :) I think science is a part of evolution, although we can move in positive or negative directions depending on choices.

Personally, I think there will become a division between people who are more 'enhanced' (genetically modified, etc.) and those who are not. Some people will be able to afford screening, health benefits and enhancement procedures for their offspring and others will not - effectively creating a new kind of 'haves' and 'have nots' division based as much on physical/biological 'status' as on wealth. Science may be able to enhance humans' natural intelligence, but not everyone will be able to benefit from this, so I can envisage a kind of two-tier class system evolving among humans.

[Goldiegirl]

I read somewhere that wealthy people overall were taller (at least in the USA) because usually the man marries a super tall, super beautiful woman. Also, it has been shown that attractive people make more money and move up faster in the ranks of their job. Money will divide people. I think Kinsao made a good point. Some people will have more opportunities available to them in the areas of health care, and perhaps they will be able to have their DNA enhanced or modified so they don't get diseases or age as fast. That might make them more attractive to employers as they wouldn't have high health care costs and absences from work due to illness. This reminds me of Deep Space Nine (Star Trek) where the crew finds out that the doctor, Julian Breshear (spelling) had his intelligence enhanced when he was a child, and therefore was smarter and perhaps didn't deserve his lot in life. I can't remember the whole episode, sorry to ramble on here! :)

[MadamePapillon]

Wow, everyone seems to be on the same page with this.

I do agree that there is a definite gap between the haves and have nots. Better nutrition, better access to medical attention and possibly in the future, access to genetic enhancements.

But I don't think the have nots are simply going to die out. Look at Africa, they are about as 'have not' as you can get and yet they continue to survive through diseases, malnutrition, lack of water ect and they are still considered the strongest race when by all reasoning they should have died out long ago.
And lately there have been discoveries that some Africans are evolving genes which make them immune to certian diseases like Malaria.

It's hard to guess about this because while people in first world countries have access to better medicines and life saving technology they aren't building up any natural immunities and there is no proccess of natural selection. So in effect I think that people in first world countries are weakening themselves in the long run.
Meanwhile, in third world countries only the strong survive. They build up immunities and the weak and sickly often don't survive to pass on any genetic weakness.

So lets just say all modern technology fails one day (which is predicted to happen, who knows when) I think the 'have nots' would be in a far better possition to survive than us.

[scorpion da black]

sorry , dont believe in it.
i am a creationist type of guy...
i think this way of thinking that some race will be ahead of the other in evolution and one will be left premitive is a racist way of thinking, totally negative.

[Derfel]

Enhanced DNA? Better genes? Thats more like it!
Its all cruel, it really is, but honestly, its time for us to move from our instinctive level, its time for the generation of "Poeta Doctus's" to be born, superhumans, humans who will make a step towards revealing the mysteries of life, of the cosmos of everything. We probably won't make it, and the next and damn lucky generations won't even shed tears for us penguins of humanity, but hey, at least, humanity as a whole will be a step ahead. When I think about this I just feel so sh1t, it pains me that we were kicked away from the fire so cruelly by fate.
But I believe that we will see the beginning of great discoveries and great things in general. May we live long enough to discuss this once again in 60-90 years, I pray for it...

[pugtm]

never mind super humans, just clearing out cancer from our dna will be huge leap forward. no birth defects, no retardation. a huge help for humanity. Super humans will be later and god knows what'll happen by then.

[Sarapva]

I believe that it will depend on how humans develop morally and spiritually more than physically on whether they become "great" or not.

[scorpion da black]

very well said sarapva sama
humans show great advances in their way of thinking which made way for their fast technological progress....
if there would be a human evolution it would be a robotic kind...artificial parts replacing wasted living original tisue parts..
or synthatic living tisue replacing wasted parts.

i imagine people with missing limbs to have robotic parts in place that gives the same function.
people with missing eyes, ears...etc....it would all be replaced with artificial parts.

and that is not very far in future, more like 10 years from now i presume.
the work is already in progress, a women i heard of had succesfully planted a hand that respondes to brain signals and does some 90 major moves of human hand

[Derfel]

Humans will never become great because the title "great" is given by humans. You look up to someone who's superior to you, but he can be superior to everything else including animals, aliens whatever, you will not label him and his kin, great, because you find it ordinary.

[Mycernius]

sorry , dont believe in it.
i am a creationist type of guy...

Dispite the massive amounts evidence against it? I hope your are not a Young Earth believer as well.
Another theory was that humans were going to split off into two seperate races and one would begin devolving into a more primitive form while the other kept moving forward to higher intellegence ect ect.
Morlocks and Eloi:D

Human evolution is driven by the world around us. At them moment we try and control the world, but even so our bodies are slowly changing to adapt to a modern world. Even something as simple as texting is effecting children. Theor thumbs are getting longer and more dextrous than previous generations. Our mouth are getting smaller, especially in the west, as we tend to eat processed food so less chewing involved. That is why people now have a tendency to suffer with their wisdom teeth. There even people who do not grow them (I used to work with a guy like that).

[Kinsao]

Wow, that's interesting! I never knew about the thumbs. Although... isn't that more a question of how their physical activity affects their growth, since presumably they aren't actually being born with longer thumbs, but they become that way as their life goes on and they spend a long time texting from an early age. :?

Didn't know about the mouth thing either... my jaw is really narrow and I had to have braces to widen it in order to fit all my teeth in... although it is still too narrow and my wisdom teeth have no space to come through. :( Doesn't sound exactly right though as I do a lot of eating! :D

[karlyboo]

Hm, the article doesn't seem to be bringing anything new to the table. The theory that evolution doesn't move at a steady rate and goes in fits and starts has been around for some while to explain the extended periods where a species' development just plateaux. It makes sense TBH when one considers that evolution is based on the environment changing and certain natural mutations slowly becoming the norm due to becoming an advantage (and vice versa for mutations which are not so advantageous). Since the environment may stay stable for some while one would expect the rate of evolution to decrease.

What the future holds in store for humans regarding a two-speed evolution I think is largely what we want to make it. I'd say it's more than anything going to be a case of have and have-nots, which is arguably how the world has been divided already for some time.

Personally I'd be more worried about (in increasing order of likelihood) being hit by a very big, intergalactic rock, some ridiculously large war or being hit by a truck on my way to work.

Evolution is a system pretty much around the premise that the best will win, in the grand scheme of things I have no problem with that. If it means I'm left by the genetic wayside, it is the way of things. I can't change the foundation upon which all life on this planet is built.

Unless one is of the opinion that this entire world was made just for one's self. Which apart from being more than a little bit self-centred is quite dangerous, as summed up nicely by the late Douglas Adams:

"...imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in, an interesting hole I find myself in, fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!' This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, it's still frantically hanging on to the notion that everything's going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for."

[Derfel]

True, but convincing yourself that your life has a purpose makes you feel safer, many people need this belief, the rest of the people on earth want a bit more adrenaline and film scripts hehe :D Bring on Apocalypse I say!

[karlyboo]

True, but convincing yourself that your life has a purpose makes you feel safer, many people need this belief, the rest of the people on earth want a bit more adrenaline and film scripts hehe :D Bring on Apocalypse I say!

Your purpose is what you make it, I say. People can define that how they like, the only issue I have is when people start thinking they were 'meant' to do something, for example people (examples of whom I've met) who firmly believe God will save humanity from climate change because we're his children. We were *meant* to live on the earth and nothing will stop that. I think if we trust to that we may be in for a slight disappointment and a shortage of high-factor sunscreen.

I suppose it's about the use of a purpose to abdicate responsibility for things we should really be dealing with more than anything.

[Dimitree]

I just cant help but feel pitty for anyone who thinks he "evolved" from apes or anything like that :)
For me "evolution" exists only in peoples minds.
For example if we take the principle of evolution and make into a simple logical form it will look something like this :

We have some cubes - green cubes and red cubes.
Red is the bad genes and green is the good genes.
When we apply evolution theory to these cubes sooner or later we will have only green cubes and 0 red cubes.
Now open your window and face the truth and facts :) Look around, see people, see nature.
It simply doesn't work, never worked, will not work ... ever... :wave:

[karlyboo]

I just cant help but feel pitty for anyone who thinks he "evolved" from apes or anything like that :)
For me "evolution" exists only in peoples minds.
For example if we take the principle of evolution and make into a simple logical form it will look something like this :
We have some cubes - green cubes and red cubes.
Red is the bad genes and green is the good genes.
When we apply evolution theory to these cubes sooner or later we will have only green cubes and 0 red cubes.
Now open your window and face the truth and facts :) Look around, see people, see nature.
It simply doesn't work, never worked, will not work ... ever... :wave:

Hurray for massive oversimplification, then?

[Dimitree]

You can un simplify it as much as you like :)
As long as you have the "The best gene survives" thingy, you have an algorithm that excludes and includes stuff.
As long as you have that you ultimatly come to the end result as having only good genes or very very very very small number of bad ones.
Evolution didn't work for millions of years ?
Why do people still try to make it work :bluush:

[Derfel]

The best gene has the highest chance to survive, but as things are at the moment Lady Fortuna has the best genes, and she kills all she doesn't like, to put it simple there's a great amount of luck involved, so you can do whatever you wish, those superior genes you're talking about might rot and decompose just like anyone's if their bearer doesn't get lucky.
Genes sure decide much, but don't forget about the personality, while our genes are rather similar, our personalities can differ so so much. Take yours for example, and the homeless' genes who's out there freezing in the winter. You've got a nice warm house, and he's got nothing but a cruel destiny ahead, even though your genes are similar. That is the power of personality.

[Dimitree]

Luck has nothing to do with the fact that strong handsom intelligent men have children and on the other end week not attractive and not that intelligent people have children too.
And they have had them for millions of years :)
This has nothing to do with luck.
Evolution simply doesn't work.
Maby you should stop being lazy and find out what stands behind the "Luck" thing you mentioned. :wave:

[Derfel]

How is dying in a plane crash related to genes? Would one with better genes jump out right in time and run on the surface of water like superman until he reaches the shore? If you can find a contact you sure smoke something rough.

[Dimitree]

How is dying in a plane crash related to genes? Would one with better genes jump out right in time and run on the surface of water like superman until it reaches the shore? If you can find a contact you sure smoke something rough.
I don't think you make much sens, at least to me.
the "Evolution" theory is "happening" in another place not in ariplanes which were recently invented btw ...

Anyway :) i don't want to argue :) i just wanted to state what i think :wave:
And i'm realy tired of disproving Pop culture statments ;) it gets boring after the 5000000000 time...
I'm talking about the main core principle of evolution theory which doesn't work and you are giving something hardly related to it.

[Derfel]

We're living in a world governed by occurence's, mostly by random ones. Good gene theories are cool, but they stumble outside their labs to be honest.

[Dimitree]

pop culture for the win ....
You realy think that Random exists ?

Sciance " yes we can make random things from number 3 to number 5 ! our program is random !" lol ... how about if the true solution will come from numbers betwean -eternaty to + eternaty ....

Lack of knowledge is not an excuse to say that things are random, "lucky" and so on.
If random ever existed we would see elephants transforming into galaxys and back to potatoes and even that example is not true random.

But maby i should shut up because i feel like i'm flooding the forum now :D

[Derfel]

That last statement is a decent one, the first decent one made by the poster.

[karlyboo]

Evolution 101:

Evolution is not 'the best gene wins'. Hence why the analogy of red cubes and green cubes is erroneous. The central mechanism to evolution is mutation. Mutations occur periodically in DNA sequences- we've studied this, we know it occurs.

It is the same mechanism by which a pair of genetically healthy parents can have a genetically unhealthy child.

So you could in fact start with a scenario of purely 'good' genes (again, an oversimplification but one which is redundant to the point) and by the next generation have 'bad' genes introduced.

Mutations may be beneficial or not, depending on the nature of the genetic mutation, it's extent and the environmental factors involved- e.g. a genetic mutation which gives a creature slightly denser fur when that creature lives in a very cold environment will make that creature slightly more likely to survive and potentially pass this dense-fur gene on to the next generation; whereby over time there is the potential for this gene to propagate across the gene pool.

Similarly a 'bad' gene may still be passed on from one generation to the next if it does not prevent the organism which possesses the gene from procreating.

The key theme here is mutation, which can be positive or negative. Mutations happen, therefore there will always be a mixture of genes within an individual organism. The beauty of that being that if the environment suddenly changes, these so-called 'bad' genes may start proving useful and allow that organism a better chance at survival.

More information is available at your local library, Wikipedia, New Scientist, Google Reference Search and much more.

Dimitree did you honestly think you'd found the disproof to evolution which as escaped some of the brightest minds of the last 100 years?

[Tsuyoiko]

Similarly a 'bad' gene may still be passed on from one generation to the next if it does not prevent the organism which possesses the gene from procreating.@ Dimitree: If you only take away one idea from this whole discussion, this has to be it.

[Mars Man]

More information is available at your local library, Wikipedia, New Scientist, Google Reference Search and much more.

and please do not forget to highlight Nature, Science, and Scientific American....

[karlyboo]

and please do not forget to highlight Nature, Science, and Scientific American....

My apologies, I'll add them in to the list :)

[yumeitsumo]

I don't think we came from Monkys. Case closed.

I don't think we came from Monkys. Case closed.:wave:
bai bai
Stay kirei!
banana ga hoshii!
tamago ga hoshii!
baka janai no?
IIE!
JKJKJK. Bai again.

[Mycernius]

I don't think we came from Monkys. Case closed.

I don't think we came from Monkys. Case closed.:wave:
bai bai
Stay kirei!
banana ga hoshii!
tamago ga hoshii!
baka janai no?
IIE!
JKJKJK. Bai again.
We didn't come from monkeys. Why is it every person who doesn't accept evolution (see theists) always say we came from monkeys? A myth that is constantly used by theists who don't have a clue what they are on about, and it bugs the hell out of me. :okashii:
Monkeys, humans and apes all share a common ancestor. As evolution played out on this creature it slowly split into groups. From one of them came the Apes and humans, and from another came monkeys.
I have yet to see a theist come up with a decent argument against evolution.

[Derfel]

I have yet to see a theist come up with a decent argument against evolution.

Whoa, thats a load of gloves you threw everywhere :D

[Mycernius]

I am also a menber on AN forum (Atheist Network). We get a few theists every now and then posting all sorts of rubbish. As I have said I have yet to see a decent argument present itself.
Evolution doesn't currently hold all the answers to life on Earth, but our knowledge is increasing. All creationists can come up with is ID (intelligent design) a very weak counter argument to evoution. It spends most of its time trying to disprove evolution and yet has very weak evidence to back up its dubious claims. I'd rather stick to scientific progression rather than the ramblings of bronze age zealots and shamans.

[Derfel]

While I see atheism obviously has a point, and I don't wish to argue anymore about whether God exists or not, simply because over the past few days my views have changed quite a bit, now im completely clueless about the whole question now... whatever, Im not going to flood the forums with my rubbish. But now im neither an atheist nor a theist, simply i've no clue.
Now let me return to what I was saying. I have nothing against atheism or atheists, but I say, that even though those old chaps might have been wrong, heck knows, they deserve some praise for being ignorant in our place.

[Mycernius]

While I have no problem with a bronze age man trying to make sense of the world, I do object that, despite all evidence for evolution and our advancments, that people in the world would still take the word of a dead shamans view of the world over modern science and knowledge, and then condemn anyone who dares insult their beliefs as intolerant hedonists. Pot, kettle and black come to mind.