How much further can humans evolve?

[Platypus540]

We do have one natural predator: disease. We can still evolve resistance to things like cancer, or even just the common cold.

Also, theoretically there are many more. Less sleep requirements? Armor-plated balls?

 

[Flac00]

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.

Uhhhh......you might need to check your facts again. Just to help. here is a link to the definitions of both Biogenesis and Thermodynamics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biogenesis

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics

So, after rereading your facts, you'll notice that none of what you just said made sense.

Biogenesis is pretty much a "counter" to the idea of spontaneous generation. AKA: organisms can't exist without having been created by another animal (baby being birthed, plants being seeded, ect.) The only way this could make any sense is if you have completely misunderstood the simplistic definition of Macroevolution and assumed that species change instantaneously (a frog species suddenly evolving into a salamander).

The second law of thermodynamics just means that energy is not created and is instead only transferred. (the main "disproof" of perpetual motion machines).

 

[kebab4you]

Well we still got our useless pinky toe ,tail bone and appendicitis. So I would say we still got far to go.

Edit:And less body hair...

 

[ShadowsofHope]

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.

Macro Evolution (or the "end" result of Speciation) has nothing to do with Abiogenesis, sir. Which is the term you should use when stating the theory that we come from primordial matter that existed on Earth long before any actual life existed on it. That primordial matter being the basic building blocks of both animals and human beings, such as carbon, protein, calcium, etc.

Also, there is no difference between Macro and Micro evolution. They are a Creationist strawman when in separate terms. Macro Evolution is simply the "end" result of multiple courses of Micro Evolution in an evolutionary tree of organisms. A dog may always birth a dog in result, but that offspring is not necessarily the same as the parent at the genetic level. Heck, the domesticated dog (result of Macro Evolution in those select species of Wolverine) came about from the common wolf (through multiple stages of Micro Evolution, over generations of time), through generations of conditioning and oversight by human beings (a perfect example being sled dogs, of the Husky - note the similarities between the Husky and a wolf you find in the wild now).

 

[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.

Macro Evolution (or the "end" result of Speciation) has nothing to do with Abiogenesis, sir. Which is the term you should use when stating the theory that we come from primordial matter that existed on Earth long before any actual life existed on it. That primordial matter being the basic building blocks of both animals and human beings, such as carbon, protein, calcium, etc.

Also, there is no difference between Macro and Micro evolution. They are a Creationist strawman when in separate terms. Macro Evolution is simply the "end" result of multiple courses of Micro Evolution in an evolutionary tree of organisms. A dog may always birth a dog in result, but that offspring is not necessarily the same as the parent at the genetic level. Heck, the domesticated dog came about from the common wolverine, through generations of conditioning and oversight by human beings.

That'd be the common wolf. I don't think wolverines have ever been domesticated.

 

[ShadowsofHope]

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.

Macro Evolution (or the "end" result of Speciation) has nothing to do with Abiogenesis, sir. Which is the term you should use when stating the theory that we come from primordial matter that existed on Earth long before any actual life existed on it. That primordial matter being the basic building blocks of both animals and human beings, such as carbon, protein, calcium, etc.

Also, there is no difference between Macro and Micro evolution. They are a Creationist strawman when in separate terms. Macro Evolution is simply the "end" result of multiple courses of Micro Evolution in an evolutionary tree of organisms. A dog may always birth a dog in result, but that offspring is not necessarily the same as the parent at the genetic level. Heck, the domesticated dog came about from the common wolverine, through generations of conditioning and oversight by human beings.

That'd be the common wolf. I don't think wolverines have ever been domesticated.

Eh, I can change it. It was just a general term to give him the point, anyways.

..At least, I hope he gets the point. I really hate having to repeat myself on this topic, how easy it is to eventually understand these basic concepts. -_-

 

[MordinSolus]

We will evolve until we are immune to all diseases, we have more advanced technology than Mass Effect, we find every corner of the universe, and we live in eternal peace with whatever lifeforms exist.

 

[MagnetoHydroDynamics]

At some point in the near future we'll start to mess with our genes ourselves... Then evolution is pretty much null and void.

 

[Hugga_Bear]

This is just a thought which came to me the other day. I was looking out the window of the bus and realised how far humanity has come since the early days. Scientific and technological advancements have compensated for nearly all our shortcomings. Cars, heavy machinery, computers, medical achievements, have allowed us to become lords of the planet.
Then a thought struck me; have we taken ourselves outside of evolution? Wild animals have predation, harsh weather conditions, foraging or hunting for food, sickness, and a myriad other worries, but for humans, dangerous animals can be repelled or destroyed, houses (and in extreme cases, bunkers) protect us from the weather, or food is easier to access than ever, and we have a greater understanding of diseases and inherent frailties and how to compensate for them than ever before. So I wonder, do humans have ANY remaining evolutionary pressures, in the First World climate at least, and if so what traits would they select for?

Yes. We do still evolve and our bodies are in a constant arms race though granted we may soon subvert even that, our medicinal capabilities are set to skyrocket soon (high as they are now).

We do evolve though pressure is down, there will be an increase (has been) in hereditary diseases and disorders such as Cystic Fibrosis and Trisomy 21, where the sufferers would normally die out (late stage developers like Huntingdons will just be around anyway since they hit you after nominal fertility). That's the only real drawback and like I said pushing toward treatability now.

We will probably continue to evolve to have bigger brains and so on but that's conjecture and we'd have to wait millions of years to see, most of our 'evolution' is now rapid progress, technological or otherwise.

 

[Jacco]

apparently we are getting taller. Thats evolution right?

No, that's actually caused by a very complicated myriad of factors, the largest of which has to do with the hormones and drugs we inject into our food.

 

[Rex Fallout]

I respectively disagree. It's not just dark hair and light hair, there's all sorts of the inbetween when it comes to shades of hair colour, it's not one or the other as you claim it to be.

Crap I didn't explain it right, I just said dark. Assuming Dark is, lets say, Brown hair. Brown hair is the dominant Gene as compared to say Blonde Hair. I'm not entirely positive whether or not other hair colors are Recessive or Dominant, but that's pretty much the way it works. Works the same way with eye color I believe. Feel free to try and prove me wrong, Genetics isn't my forte. All I am absolutely positive about when it comes to genetics is that if I see a needle with a glowing liquid inside, I stab that bad boy into my arm! NO QUESTIONS ASKED.

 

[The-Epicly-Named-Man]

Apparently we're getting taller and each generation has less of a need for hats than the last, and it's also probable we're becoming more attractive. However, it's my belief that the only fundamental evolutionary change human beings will go through is a mental one. At least until the world's flooded XP .

 

[RJ Dalton]

The flaw in your thinking is that evolution is an "upward" process. It isn't. Evolution doesn't mean we're better people, it just means that we've adapted to new situations. In that sense, man will never stop evolving as long as there something we need to adapt to. Or else, we go extinct. One or the other.

 

[Rex Fallout]

Yes. We do still evolve and our bodies are in a constant arms race though granted we may soon subvert even that, our medicinal capabilities are set to skyrocket soon (high as they are now).

We do evolve though pressure is down, there will be an increase (has been) in hereditary diseases and disorders such as Cystic Fibrosis and Trisomy 21, where the sufferers would normally die out (late stage developers like Huntingdons will just be around anyway since they hit you after nominal fertility). That's the only real drawback and like I said pushing toward treatability now.

We will probably continue to evolve to have bigger brains and so on but that's conjecture and we'd have to wait millions of years to see, most of our 'evolution' is now rapid progress, technological or otherwise.

I'd argue that with the vast majority of our society our brains, may actually be getting LESS intelligent. Come now, we as a society prefer meat heads over the intellectual geeks. Think about it. Its sad, but true.

 

[Jake Lewis Clayton]

I hate it when scientists and others alike say thing like "humans can't evolve." They don't look at the bigger picture, humans have evolved from neanderthals (is that how you spell it?) over millions of years and the CAN evolve, just not while natural selection has gone out the window with handicapped people and those with less desirable natural traits can roam around breeding. Personally I'd like the old meat and two veg to be refined a bit more, it always looks a bit of an after thought.

Actually neanderthals split from homosapians(humans) a long time ago, there was a bit of interbreeding but realistically we are two seperate species.

 

[Reaper195]

I've always wanted some form of bone weapon, similar to Wolverine, but more like Jensen from Deus Ex.

 

[Gentle Dementia]

I believe that we don't have enough natural selection to make any more drastic changes to the race, however, our technology is evolving. and always will.

 

[CarlMin]

When you look out of that buss, try to remember that you are seeing a very small part of your planet, where a very small percentage of the human population live, during a very short period of time on this planet. And it'll be gone soon enough.

Humans haven't gotten far. There are families of bacteria that are more successful. Just because some of us live in some unnatural level of luxury, with tools that makes our lives more complex but relatively safe, doesn't mean that we have achieved anything notable in my opinion.

This doesn't mean I hate human society, or that I'm some kind of misanthropic anarchist. I'm just sticking around enjoying this while it lasts, but I think that we should see humanity for what it is - some sort of evolutionary mutation. And we aren't lords of the planet simply because we have the power to destroy it.