Evolution...?

[SlayerN]

unless we as a race selectively breed ourselves, we can wave goodbye to further evolution. A longer lifespan does not count as evolution but that will continue to rise.

 

[Bernzz]

People with unfavourable traits (appendicitis, etc.) aren't dying now, because of the miracle of modern medicine. Therefore, I really don't think we'll evolve more, if at all, after this. We're no longer adapting to the world around us. It's adapting to us.

*sigh* Wings would be nice, though...

Again because idiots like you still don't get it, evolution isn't some magic force that breeds super species, it's simply the result of adapting to survive in a specific environment through the preservation of the genes that are best for reproducing in that environment.

And as for all that "desirable" & "undesirable" crap, Darwin's theories have demonstrated that diversity is what enables a population to resist change, disease, and competition.

I fail to see why you're calling me an idiot. I said we won't evolve anymore because our unfavourable traits aren't dying out anymore. The wings part was a joke.

 

[Nimcha]

People with unfavourable traits (appendicitis, etc.) aren't dying now, because of the miracle of modern medicine. Therefore, I really don't think we'll evolve more, if at all, after this. We're no longer adapting to the world around us. It's adapting to us.

*sigh* Wings would be nice, though...

Again because idiots like you still don't get it, evolution isn't some magic force that breeds super species, it's simply the result of adapting to survive in a specific environment through the preservation of the genes that are best for reproducing in that environment.

And as for all that "desirable" & "undesirable" crap, Darwin's theories have demonstrated that diversity is what enables a population to resist change, disease, and competition.

I fail to see why you're calling me an idiot. I said we won't evolve anymore because our unfavourable traits aren't dying out anymore. The wings part was a joke.

His point is that 'survival of the fittest' isn't the only way for a species to evolve.

 

[Bernzz]

People with unfavourable traits (appendicitis, etc.) aren't dying now, because of the miracle of modern medicine. Therefore, I really don't think we'll evolve more, if at all, after this. We're no longer adapting to the world around us. It's adapting to us.

*sigh* Wings would be nice, though...

Again because idiots like you still don't get it, evolution isn't some magic force that breeds super species, it's simply the result of adapting to survive in a specific environment through the preservation of the genes that are best for reproducing in that environment.

And as for all that "desirable" & "undesirable" crap, Darwin's theories have demonstrated that diversity is what enables a population to resist change, disease, and competition.

I fail to see why you're calling me an idiot. I said we won't evolve anymore because our unfavourable traits aren't dying out anymore. The wings part was a joke.

His point is that 'survival of the fittest' isn't the only way for a species to evolve.

I didn't specify that it was the only way for a species to evolve. I used it as my thinking as to why we won't evolve anymore.

I also think the insult was uncalled for, to be honest. I couldn't have been corrected in a nicer manner? I think I probably could have.

 

[Nimcha]

People with unfavourable traits (appendicitis, etc.) aren't dying now, because of the miracle of modern medicine. Therefore, I really don't think we'll evolve more, if at all, after this. We're no longer adapting to the world around us. It's adapting to us.

*sigh* Wings would be nice, though...

Again because idiots like you still don't get it, evolution isn't some magic force that breeds super species, it's simply the result of adapting to survive in a specific environment through the preservation of the genes that are best for reproducing in that environment.

And as for all that "desirable" & "undesirable" crap, Darwin's theories have demonstrated that diversity is what enables a population to resist change, disease, and competition.

I fail to see why you're calling me an idiot. I said we won't evolve anymore because our unfavourable traits aren't dying out anymore. The wings part was a joke.

His point is that 'survival of the fittest' isn't the only way for a species to evolve.

I didn't specify that it was the only way for a species to evolve. I used it as my thinking as to why we won't evolve anymore.

I also think the insult was uncalled for, to be honest. I couldn't have been corrected in a nicer manner? I think I probably could have.

Yes, and unfortunately you're wrong about it. Like the other poster pointed out, genetic diversity is also important for the continued survival of a species.

Anyway, yes, he should have been nicer. But then again, so many people completely misunderstanding evolution gets on my nerves too. It's the sort of thing that breeds stupid things like ID.

 

[NoCakeFourU]

I believe that humans have almost completely stopped evolving to be honest. The principle of evolution was the survival of the fittest - aka those species best suited or able to adapt to the conditions they lived in would prosper. However we no longer have to do this because instead of changing to suit the environment we now adapt the environment to us (eg. temperature control, medicine).

This. It's all about who reproduces more/survives longer (so they can reproduce more). In our society almost everyone is on the same level - no more separate societies or apartheid, so in a nutshell we're all on the same roughly equal playing field in terms of chances of reproduction and furthering our genes.

And also, less people are marrying/reproducing for physical qualities, and more so for things such as IQ/EQ.

Proof of this lack of evolution is in defects and conditions from birth. A child born blind/mute/or disabled in any regard would not have survived in previous times - resulting in that 'bad' gene never being passed on. But in today's society we allow these people to survive (which I think is good and humane ) meaning that their genes can be passed on.

Although, just because we're not evolving doesn't mean individuals amongst us are changing. In the future we are more likely to see a wider range of people in the world, with a wider range of skills and attributes than before, but the human race is 'extremely unlikely' to move in one particular direction (in terms of genes).

 

[Continuity]

For humanity evolution has stepped beyond the biological, our society and technology have been evolving at a phenomenal rate however, an accelerating rate, who knows where that will take us. Personally I have my fingers crossed for cybernetic intellectual enhancements and thought interfacing with computers (though that has disturbing consequences).

Edit: From 3:00 to 6:15

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dtnyZg8H2A

 

[royohz]

Spoiler: -snip-

1. We are all under constant evolution, we have evolved a lot since the human fossils, but it took a very, very long time. So the next step in human evolution is every single generation.

When a species evolves it becomes a new species, unable to breed with the one that came beofre us, unless I'm misunderstanding you you claim that every new generation is a form of evolution? Which is wrong because an older creepy gentleman can have kids with gold digging young sluts.

No, because makro- and micro-evolution has been observed. A slightly mutated lizard is still a lizard. Small mutations that happen between every generation does not define a new species.

 

[Maze1125]

since the theory suggests it can happen, but not the path it could take.

And this is precisely where the problem is, because the Theory of Evolution never does that.

For Evolution to predict something like that it has to know how and why. As I've said at least twice in this thread, evolution is not a set of rules, it is a physical process that follows the physical and mathematical laws of our universe.

If there is no reason for something to happen then it won't happen.

We have no use for our appendix and yet it still exists in our bodies after millions of years simply because, even though it actively kills a small proportion of us, the selective pressure to get rid of it is simply not strong enough.
So why on Earth do you think that there would be enough selective pressure to get rid of our muscles?

For Evolution to predict something it has to know what the selective pressure would be, and selective pressure for intelligence is not selective pressure against muscle mass.

And yes, we are getting more and more fatties around, but that has nothing to do with evolution. They all still have the genetics for being muscular, they simply choose not to use them.

 

[Apocalyptic-Bob]

We are going to evolve

Honestly, I think it would be almost all aesthetics, like less ability to develop/hold onto fat cells, nicer faces, and less body hair. Basically, the things that get you laid in modern society. It will still take thousands of years, and is completely dependent on the ugly people not spawning, AND the standard of beauty not changing.

step one- push all ugly, fat, and hairy people onto an island
step two-nuke island
step 3- EVOLUTION

Step 4 - ?
Step 5 - PROFIT!

 

[chaos order]

We won't evolve anymore. We've reached a point were instead of adapting to our surroundings, our surroundings adapt to us.

in soviet russia

no but i agree with u

 

[chaos order]

We won't evolve anymore. We've reached a point were instead of adapting to our surroundings, our surroundings adapt to us.

This 1+. Unless our bodies require a need to change then no evolution will take place. I could claim we are evolving ever so slowly right now in our fight against all the new diseases that we've discovered and / or created.

If anything we will devolve into a far more obese creature such as the ones seen in Wall-E simply because the technology we create is making us take more and more things for granted.

As I?ve already said evolutionary stasis is imposable because even if natural selection has ceased to be a factor because of a static environment, mutation and genetic drift would still occur.

that would occur yes but not enough to cause speciation essentially we'd still be "human"

 

[Tireseas_v1legacy]

Nano-machine-based cybernetics which modify humans on a cellular level.

 

[ThrobbingEgo]

We will realize that no matter what the colour a person has value for specific jobs.

What? Please tell me you meant to say something else.

lol. Yeah when you take that one point and notice i forgot punctuation it is kinda bad lol. I meant no matter who they are or their colour they still have a use. If someone was of lower intelligence they would be used for labour in moving specific heavier objects around.

What if someone isn't either very smart or strong? It's not like we are, to borrow from gaming terms, competitively balanced. There are people who are fit, charming, and highly intelligent. There are others who are boorish, bloated, and dim. As someone who's not particularly strong or good with people, it's tempting to think that I will always be smarter than those who are very fit and personable, but that's not always the case.

What do you do with people who aren't suited to any job in particular? Should "worth" be determined by how people can be used?

 

[coolicus]

Whether primates were our ancestors or not, or we came from the sea originally, humankind has evolved through the times and will (if we don't destroy our planet) continue to do so. But we're not perfect, and it has been a while since we last evolved.

The thing is evolution isn't a ladder with things getting progressively better necessarily. Natural selection only filters against harmful things that inhibit reproduction. And we are evolving all the time its not like one thing spawns another . Although today were are somewhat altering our evolution because for a large part natural selection isn't as effective in modern society due to our technology.

 

[UltraDeth]

I hope to develope telekinesis in my next evolutionary step

 

[LieutenantShwa]

I think that people a going to evolve so that we grow faster and have faster metabolisms, because, in modern culture, skinny people are seen as more attractive, and since people eat a lot nowadays, the guy who eats a lot and is still skinny is going probually have a lot of children

 

[TheAceTheOne]

I think we'll figure out some way to unlock the part of our mental capacity we don't use (We only use, what, 10% of our brains, I believe). After that, the sky's the limit.

 

[Nimcha]

We won't evolve anymore. We've reached a point were instead of adapting to our surroundings, our surroundings adapt to us.

This 1+. Unless our bodies require a need to change then no evolution will take place. I could claim we are evolving ever so slowly right now in our fight against all the new diseases that we've discovered and / or created.

If anything we will devolve into a far more obese creature such as the ones seen in Wall-E simply because the technology we create is making us take more and more things for granted.

As I?ve already said evolutionary stasis is imposable because even if natural selection has ceased to be a factor because of a static environment, mutation and genetic drift would still occur.

that would occur yes but not enough to cause speciation essentially we'd still be "human"

Or not. Besides, evolution isn't just the creation of new species. Besides that, nature doesn't care about human inventions such as species.

 

[Caspertjuhh]

next step would be a reproduction gene. we rarely die before 50 anyways, so maybe twins will become more and more common.