How much further can humans evolve?

[AndyFromMonday]

I don't know what path evolution is going to take humanity but one thing's for sure, we will never stop adapting. I'm hoping gills...

 

[Rex Fallout]

Humans have.....evolved? Not from what I've just seen in the crowd lurking outside of McDonalds.

Exactly what I was thinking. I think Society will be the one to evolve. Not us. Not genetically anyways.

 

[Rex Fallout]

I know that some things can be carried in our genes without being passed on, (recessive alleles), but I don't think that's the way it works with hair colour, rather that say a man with black hair has a child with a blonde woman, and the child has brown hair, (though his hair could be almost entirely blonde, or more likely, almost entirely black). It's like height or skin colour, it's not one or the other, but a random compromise between the two, though the hair colour or skin colour genes favour darkness. I'm not saying that blondes exist eventually, just that one day, those who are will be at a result of genetic mutation rather than the appearing of a recessive allele that has been dormant for multiple generations.

Err that isn't how it works. The child has dark hair because dark hair is the dominant gene. And unless the man has a recessive dark haired gene it will not be passed down. However, if that child were to grow up, lets say its a girl, and have a child with a blonde haired man/dark haired man with the recessive blonde hair gene, then they could have a child with blonde hair.

Personally I don't think any hair color will, 'die out'.

 

[OmegaWarmech]

There's no end to evolution.

 

[xXAsherahXx]

Red heads are a dying breed. I assume our pinky toe and pinky finger will vanish since the same happened to horses all those millions of years ago.

shift keys on keyboards and dozens of other devices suggest otherwise.

The rule with evolution is: "Use it, or lose it"

We lost our keen animalistic sense of smell when millions of years ago our ancestors began walking on two legs, so several feet off the ground is no position to be following the scent trail of things left on the ground. Our sense of smell for telling if food is rotten (as we bring it to our mouths to eat) is actually very good because we keep using that.

You can tell by sniffing when milk has gone off far sooner than all but the most expensive scientific equipment. Yet we can't follow the trail of animal musk on the ground like a dog can.

A function we are not using much right now is callous formation. We wear very comfortable shoes outside almost universally, and gloves for any abrasive work, we don't really need to form callouses on our skin where it is worn the most. The presence of man-made physical pollutants (broken glass, nails, etc) pretty much mandate shoes to protect from cuts that callouses never could. So this is likely to be a long term trend in humanity.

You aren't going to lose something that could cost your chances of making a family.

Being "deformed" and missing digits does reduce your chances of finding a partner and passing on your genes. It's not like it takes a huge amount of energy to have pinkie fingers.

Our ape ancestors for millions of years lived on a high fruit diet which gave them plenty of vitamin C, so much so the process in their liver of synthesising vitamin C became redundant and there was no pressure to retain it. Now all the great apes - including humans - are quite unique among mammals in absolutely NEEDING vitamin C in our diet, if we don't get it from an outside source then we get scurvy as out blood vessels disintegrate and eventually we die from massive haemoraging and infection.

You could have shortened that whole passage to the paragraph where you actually stated how you think I'm wrong. The rest was a bit fluffy.

I honestly do not think that losing a pinky will effect mating rituals. "Oh my God, no pinky, now I can't sleep with you!" ...sorta retarded in today's society. ALso, if everyone didn't have a pinky, there would be no problem since it would be considered the norm (for argument's sake).

I appreciate your knowledge in human and ape evolution though.

 

[roostuf]

We are always evolving, plain and simple.

OP: I wish i had a tail, like a fluffy long cat tail. Who knows maybe i might get one in the future.

 

[Twilight_guy]

Anyone who thinks humans can't or aren't evolving doesn't understand evolution. Evolution is not a process with a goal or something that can be staved off, its a naturally occurring process that is a consequence of biology. SO long as a species is alive it evolves over time.

 

[Randomosity]

We can always continue with Micro-evolution but as for Macro-evolution (such as us coming from apes) that is scientifically impossible, Macro-Evolution is pure sci-fi seeing as both the Law of Biogenesis and the second law of thermodynamics both go against Macro-evolution. Though Micro-evolution is a very well proven thing and is constantly happening.

With all due respect, but you, sir, would not be able to recognise the Second Law of Thermodynamics if Rudolf Clausius himself showed up at your doorstep and smacked you over the head with a copy of 'On the mechanical theory of heat'.

Not to mention that Biogenesis is not even relevant to the entire theory of evolution.

Thermodynamics clearly states "All things go from order to disorder" while evolution is very clearly stating the reverse. As for Biogenesis that i do not wish to get into.

 

[Saulkar]

No species ever stops evolving and it is not always for the better. Additionally there is no such thing as devolution, anything that would be considered a step backward in evolution is just another step forward.

EDIT: Lastly there is no conclusion or final destination in evolution. Psychics spawning because they are the final conclusion in our evolution? Never going to happen unless a change in our environment lasting thousands of years required such a drastic alteration of our psysiology. There is no conclusion to evolution with a master race spawning out of it.

 

[Nazz3]

I don't think those are evolutionary pressures.

And it seems that the majority didn't even read the OP.

 

[daydreamerdeluxe]

Genetic evolution is no longer a driving force in humanity, memetic evolution took over from that as we built better and better tools. However, we're still evolving, just with no driving force, like a car rolling down a slight slope that gets steeper and steeper as the gene pool widens. And that's without mentioning the possibilities of bio-engineering in the near future

Thermodynamics clearly states "All things go from order to disorder" while evolution is very clearly stating the reverse. As for Biogenesis that i do not wish to get into.

If you're basing the non-existence of macro-evolution on entropy, how can you acknowledge that life itself exists? One of the predominate traits of all living beings is taking chaotic mixes of chemicals, and organising them into their bodies, based on their genome. It can't do it forever, but, in the short time, life spits in the face of entropy. Also, why bring up biogenesis if you don't wish to talk about it?

 

[Fbuh]

There is a theory that as a species, we are ratehr social. You could argue that things such as psychic abilities develop and become mainstream, humans will eventually see the collapse of teh individual. Just look at how social we are now. In theory, we could eventually see the degradation of things like the ego, super ego, and the id; all of which are processes set in place to protect the individual. To keep the species alive, the individuals must survive, correct? However, if we are at a state in which we are exisiting socially and relying on groups, then we will no longer need to protect ourselves individually. Eventually, we will lose sense of individuality, and our conscious selves will begin to merge and blend into a single stream of being, sort of like a hive. Simultaneously, our genetic mingling are going to mix more and more into a uniform species, sort of liek how a soup cooks down the longer you let it simmer. At some point, we will be a single minded entity, named Human. It is then that we will begin to see our race's true potential, as nothing will be able to stop us.

People ahve called me crazy because of this theory, but it makes sense to me. People are jus afraid of losing their sense of self. Don't think of it like that. RAther, think of it as gaining billions of more selves, and no longer having to worry about pleasing or impressing anybody, because we will all be one.

 

[Flac00]

Of coarse we will evolve. Evolution occurs even if there is no disease or death. It is just the increase of certain traits based upon reproduction rates. So we may evolve to have larger genitalia or to have less freckles. Evolution is very hard to predict so we'll never know.

 

[Mathak]

We can always continue with Micro-evolution but as for Macro-evolution (such as us coming from apes) that is scientifically impossible, Macro-Evolution is pure sci-fi seeing as both the Law of Biogenesis and the second law of thermodynamics both go against Macro-evolution. Though Micro-evolution is a very well proven thing and is constantly happening.

With all due respect, but you, sir, would not be able to recognise the Second Law of Thermodynamics if Rudolf Clausius himself showed up at your doorstep and smacked you over the head with a copy of 'On the mechanical theory of heat'.

Not to mention that Biogenesis is not even relevant to the entire theory of evolution.

Thermodynamics clearly states "All things go from order to disorder" while evolution is very clearly stating the reverse. As for Biogenesis that i do not wish to get into.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics does indeed clearly state that 'all things go from order to disorder in a closed system'. 'In a closed system' being the operative words here. The earth is not a closed system, since we have this massive source of constant energy that experts refer to as 'the sun'. Ergo, the Second Law does not apply to evolution.

 

[Randomosity]

Genetic evolution is no longer a driving force in humanity, memetic evolution took over from that as we built better and better tools. However, we're still evolving, just with no driving force, like a car rolling down a slight slope that gets steeper and steeper as the gene pool widens. And that's without mentioning the possibilities of bio-engineering in the near future

Thermodynamics clearly states "All things go from order to disorder" while evolution is very clearly stating the reverse. As for Biogenesis that i do not wish to get into.

If you're basing the non-existence of macro-evolution on entropy, how can you acknowledge that life itself exists? One of the predominate traits of all living beings is taking chaotic mixes of chemicals, and organising them into their bodies, based on their genome. It can't do it forever, but, in the short time, life spits in the face of entropy. Also, why bring up biogenesis if you don't wish to talk about it?

Fine i will give biogenesis in short. Its the law that only life can create life. but at the very base of macro evolution it states we all began with nonliving matter. Biogenesis also states that living things only produce more living things like them, which is why dogs only make more dogs, cows only make more cows and it continues as such. which further explains why we have never observed macro evolution on any level.

 

[Snoozer]

No one of us will live to see any possible changes due to evolution. Since there are no natural evolutionary pressures for humans anymore the process slows down even more or comes to a compleate stop.
I think it's important to keep that in mind, when thinking about all the horror scenarios that could possibly happen in the future.

And before there can ever be a significant evolutionarry development, we are either able to manipulate our genes anyways or have us all wiped out for whatever reason.

 

[Flac00]

None, because macroevolution is false.

Really? How is macroevolution false?

 

[Smurf McSmurfington]

Thing is evolution is slow. Really slow. We already have conditions that would make us evolve(for instance the absolute ridiculous amount of information we're constantly bombarded by), but since evolution is so damn slow, I doubt we'll actually evolve to cope with the information overflow fast enough, and it's more likely our current technologically somewhat advanced civilisation will just collaspe and we'll be stuck in another dark age, so to speak.

I'm looking forward to genetic engineering becoming prevalent and more complex, so we could basically modify ourselves to be better... though that'd cause a whole host of problems due to human nature being what it is, sadly. Still, one can dream of an utopia.

 

[The_Blue_Rider]

Why does everyone think that Evolution is constant improvement? (e.g getting wings). Evolution is how organisms survive in the environment they inhabit, Humans are still evolving, look at areas in the world affected by Malaria, and then see how many people are carriers of Sickle cell anemia. Its rather high because people with Sickle Celled Anemia have a much larger chance of living because Malaria wont affect them badly, due to the Malaria parasite dying from lack of Oxygen in the sickle shaped red blood cells.

 

[Mathak]

Genetic evolution is no longer a driving force in humanity, memetic evolution took over from that as we built better and better tools. However, we're still evolving, just with no driving force, like a car rolling down a slight slope that gets steeper and steeper as the gene pool widens. And that's without mentioning the possibilities of bio-engineering in the near future

Thermodynamics clearly states "All things go from order to disorder" while evolution is very clearly stating the reverse. As for Biogenesis that i do not wish to get into.

If you're basing the non-existence of macro-evolution on entropy, how can you acknowledge that life itself exists? One of the predominate traits of all living beings is taking chaotic mixes of chemicals, and organising them into their bodies, based on their genome. It can't do it forever, but, in the short time, life spits in the face of entropy. Also, why bring up biogenesis if you don't wish to talk about it?

Fine i will give biogenesis in short. Its the law that only life can create life. but at the very base of macro evolution it states we all began with nonliving matter. Biogenesis also states that living things only produce more living things like them, which is why dogs only make more dogs, cows only make more cows and it continues as such. which further explains why we have never observed macro evolution on any level.

No. Sorry, just...no. The theory that life came from non-living matter is Abiogenesis. Evolution merely states that species change over time. It has nothing to do with how life started (nor with how the universe came into being, for that matter).

By the way, can you source that second statement? Because I am unable to find any reference to Biogenesis beyond Pasteur's 'life can only come from life', no mention of species anywhere.