![]() |
Are we still evolving ?
.....as in Darwins theory of natural selection, or are we now in total control of our own evolution for the first time ever ?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12535647 Just going back to Shakespeares time only a third of babies born survived to the age of 21, now the figure is 99%. There also appear to be signs that instead of increasing in height with each generation as has always been the case, the human race has now begun to get shorter. I have previously posted my own pet theory that this would happen for quite a while now, partly because of a large percentage of the population spending most of the leisure as well as working time sitting down, especially since the coming of computers etc. Do modern medicines,living arrangements and numerous forms of protection from various hazards mean that we now, for the first time ever, control our own evolution ? |
Re: Are we still evolving ?
Originally Posted by Dick Dasterdly
(Post 9213583)
.....as in Darwins theory of natural selection, or are we now in total control of our own evolution for the first time ever ?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12535647 Just going back to Shakespeares time only a third of babies born survived to the age of 21, now the figure is 99%. There also appear to be signs that instead of increasing in height with each generation as has always been the case, the human race has now begun to get shorter. I have previously posted my own pet theory that this would happen for quite a while now, partly because of a large percentage of the population spending most of the leisure as well as working time sitting down, especially since the coming of computers etc. Do modern medicines,living arrangements and numerous forms of protection from various hazards mean that we now, for the first time ever, control our own evolution ? Micro evolutionary changes, like a small, not visible change, is that evolution? I don't think so unless it triggers something new. I'd say that only things that produce an irreversible change can be classed as evolution, but that's only my opinion. I'd be interested to hear other opinions... |
Re: Are we still evolving ?
Evolution happens in peaks and troughs i.e. species may do lots of evolving over a few hundred years during particular turbulent times - or do no evolving at all for millions of years if they have found a nice friendly niche for themselves in their habit.
Are we currently evolving, yes we are, kind of. Although height for example isnt an evolutionary trait unless all the short people died off. It is more a case of better diet in the past hundred years leading to more tall adults, this isnt evolution as there are still short adults who carry on reproducing :) When thinking about what may be the next evolutionary step for humans we have to think of environmental pressures that will stop a part of the human race from reproducing. That is the only way evolution happens. This could be diet, the climate, energy dependency, lifestyle factors e.g. we know that poorer people have more children, so these genes are becoming more spread among the human race. However, rich/intellegent people tend to procreate together. So I quite like the idea of there becoming two sub-species of humans within the next 10,000 years. Tall, lean clever humans and short and fat numbskulls :rofl: However, my gut feeling is that we will change our environment so much within the next 10,000 years that the human race will probably die out from mass extinction along with most other land mammals. :thumbdown: |
Re: Are we still evolving ?
Originally Posted by bil
(Post 9213640)
I really don't think so. Evolving isn't something that you do, it just happens to you. Plus, evolution, that is macro evolution which produces a visible and obvious difference in a species is an interrupted process, whereby things don't, can't evolve because there are no empty niches available. So the system is in stasis untill a 'catastrophic' event empties niches/creates new ones, whereupon the lifeforms capable of moving into those niches undergo immense evolutionary pressure. Once the niches are filled, the system goes back to stasis.
Micro evolutionary changes, like a small, not visible change, is that evolution? I don't think so unless it triggers something new. I'd say that only things that produce an irreversible change can be classed as evolution, but that's only my opinion. I'd be interested to hear other opinions... |
Re: Are we still evolving ?
Originally Posted by cricketman
(Post 9213665)
Evolution happens in peaks and troughs i.e. species may do lots of evolving over a few hundred years during particular turbulent times - or do no evolving at all for millions of years if they have found a nice friendly niche for themselves in their habit.
Are we currently evolving, yes we are, kind of. Although height for example isnt an evolutionary trait unless all the short people died off. It is more a case of better diet in the past hundred years leading to more tall adults, this isnt evolution as there are still short adults who carry on reproducing :) When thinking about what may be the next evolutionary step for humans we have to think of environmental pressures that will stop a part of the human race from reproducing. That is the only way evolution happens. This could be diet, the climate, energy dependency, lifestyle factors e.g. we know that poorer people have more children, so these genes are becoming more spread among the human race. However, rich/intellegent people tend to procreate together. So I quite like the idea of there becoming two sub-species of humans within the next 10,000 years. Tall, lean clever humans and short and fat numbskulls :rofl: However, my gut feeling is that we will change our environment so much within the next 10,000 years that the human race will probably die out from mass extinction along with most other land mammals. :thumbdown: |
Re: Are we still evolving ?
Originally Posted by jimenato
(Post 9213782)
As I understand it, macro evolution produces a new species - rather than 'produces a visible and obvious difference in a species'. I wish I knew more about this...
Any group of animals usually has within it separate groups of that animal that are slightly different. If environmental pressures act so as to drive those groups further apart, that's when the foundations of a new species are laid. |
Re: Are we still evolving ?
Surely the slow,steady progression of man to his present form from his early homosapien days is evolution as referred to in the article.
The point being that until now it has occurred naturally as in many other species, as a result of adapting to changing environments and circumstances throughout time. However what the article seems to suggest is that with present day knowledge, further development/evolution of the human species is now in mans own hands for the forseeable future at least,, barring of course a major catastrophe or unbelievable stupidity, (maybe not so unbelievable looking at recent events). I would tend to agree with the article as far as mans physical form is concerned. However future mental/brain evolution/development,use and ability is another question entirely,as the time may be close when we will rely on computers not only to do almost all our thinking,sort all our problems, but also to organise and perform almost every minor aspect of our lives. The much underused human brain no doubt could in future develop and perform way beyond it's present levels, on the other hand the human race could just sit back and end up like vegetables. The mind boggles. |
Re: Are we still evolving ?
Evolution, biology, culture – such a discussion can get dangerous very quickly - so I would start off by saying that I believe we are all equal.
The biggest, easiest and latest example of recent evolution is the US, America, a true melting pot of race, colour, culture, religion, tradition – humanity evolving. It hasn’t taken very long from lynching the last black man in Georgia in 1956, to electing a black president in 2009. The UK still has a monarchy, but we have also evolved to send our children into further education, even though the current mob in power now want the students to pay for it. (How the hell did that happen?) After the bloodiest wars of the last century, Europe is now united in peace, sort of. Ireland has evolved to quieten the bigots and may even return to being one nation. The English have stopped the Highland clearances and Scottish people want shot of them altogether, an inevitable result of evolution. We’ve come a long way since the early humans walked out of the caves and managed to stand upright. As soon as they could, they looked around for clubs and beat the **** out of each other. It’s not clubs now, it’s rockets, but the principle is the same. |
Re: Are we still evolving ?
Originally Posted by HBG
(Post 9214891)
Evolution, biology, culture – such a discussion can get dangerous very quickly - so I would start off by saying that I believe we are all equal.
The biggest, easiest and latest example of recent evolution is the US, America, a true melting pot of race, colour, culture, religion, tradition – humanity evolving. It hasn’t taken very long from lynching the last black man in Georgia in 1956, to electing a black president in 2009. The UK still has a monarchy, but we have also evolved to send our children into further education, even though the current mob in power now want the students to pay for it. (How the hell did that happen?) After the bloodiest wars of the last century, Europe is now united in peace, sort of. Ireland has evolved to quieten the bigots and may even return to being one nation. The English have stopped the Highland clearances and Scottish people want shot of them altogether, an inevitable result of evolution. We’ve come a long way since the early humans walked out of the caves and managed to stand upright. As soon as they could, they looked around for clubs and beat the **** out of each other. It’s not clubs now, it’s rockets, but the principle is the same. Human advancement over the past 10,000 years has come from improved usage of tools and social interaction. This isnt evolution. If you took a homo sapians baby from 50,000 years ago and brought it up in a modern environment then it would turn out like any other human. Modern humans just have more tools nowadays thanks to the "advancement" of society. In order to evolve something has to select out or in a particular characteristic from the population e.g. grow an extra arm or something (crude example I know). It will take a near chatastrophy to do this - or a human social construct where (for example) humans decide that a certain group of humans are not allowed to procreate, and so the characteristics of this group will die out. |
Re: Are we still evolving ?
Originally Posted by HBG
(Post 9214891)
Evolution, biology, culture – such a discussion can get dangerous very quickly - so I would start off by saying that I believe we are all equal.
The biggest, easiest and latest example of recent evolution is the US, America, a true melting pot of race, colour, culture, religion, tradition – humanity evolving. It hasn’t taken very long from lynching the last black man in Georgia in 1956, to electing a black president in 2009. The UK still has a monarchy, but we have also evolved to send our children into further education, even though the current mob in power now want the students to pay for it. (How the hell did that happen?) After the bloodiest wars of the last century, Europe is now united in peace, sort of. Ireland has evolved to quieten the bigots and may even return to being one nation. The English have stopped the Highland clearances and Scottish people want shot of them altogether, an inevitable result of evolution. We’ve come a long way since the early humans walked out of the caves and managed to stand upright. As soon as they could, they looked around for clubs and beat the **** out of each other. It’s not clubs now, it’s rockets, but the principle is the same. |
Re: Are we still evolving ?
OK, one thing we need to do first is to actually define what we mean by evolution.
For me evolution is the creation of a new species. ie an alteration of one group within a species so radical that the new group can no longer breed successfully with the parent group. Cricketman makes the point. We are not distinct from our distant ancestors. Were we not separated by time, we could breed with them, so we have not evolved with respect to them. I'm willing to bet that we could do this with our ancestors from 10, maybe 50 thousand years ago. Everything since way back when, is just evolutionary background noise and not evolution per se. |
Re: Are we still evolving ?
Originally Posted by jimenato
(Post 9215018)
Completely off topic but student fees were brought in by the mob in power in 1998.
|
Re: Are we still evolving ?
Oh and no... we are not still evolving.
|
Re: Are we still evolving ?
Originally Posted by rugbymatt
(Post 9215027)
Oh and no... we are not still evolving.
|
Re: Are we still evolving ?
Originally Posted by bil
(Post 9215035)
I think the question would be better expressed thus, 'Are we still subject to evolutionary pressure?'
|
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 3:37 am. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.