How much further can humans evolve?

[xAFROMANx]

if your talking about evolving genetically then yeah we still have plenty to look at, no more sickness, height & strength, and yeah either develop a use for or lose the appendix.
Personally i'd love to see humans become like the creature from Splice, everyone would be much more interesting.

 

[DracoSuave]

In this thread:

A lot of people who mistakenly think evolution is about becoming faster, stronger, smarter, taller, or any number of specific traits that have nothing to do with Darwinism... with zero posts talking about the ONE thing evolution is about:

Adaptation.

Are humans becoming better adapted to their environment? Constantly, though both mate selection, as well as through other factors.

Humans will continue to evolve so long as humans have differences and exist in an environment. To claim otherwise is to fail at knowing what evolution is, and thus, have zero stake in the discussion.

 

[gigastrike]

Humans can't evolve any further. Evolution happens to further the survival of a species by passing down genes that assist in survival. (There are some evolutionary changes that don't matter much like eye color, but most of it is for survival.)

Because of the medical field and the refusal to 'cull' those with mental/physical deficiencies from the gene pool, humans have hit a plateau where ALL genes are getting passed down instead of just the good ones. It's too bad people were so against Eugenics.

That just means that evolution will be less drastic and less focused. Doesn't mean it will stop. You can never stop genetic mutations. There will be mutations, and they will be passed on regardless of whether we need them to survive as a species or not.

 

[flamingjimmy]

Humans are still evolving, right now. It's just slow enough that you won't notice it.

There's still sexual selection if nothing else, people too ugly/stupid/assholish to find a mate will not pass on their genes.

 

[Kopikatsu]

Humans can't evolve any further. Evolution happens to further the survival of a species by passing down genes that assist in survival. (There are some evolutionary changes that don't matter much like eye color, but most of it is for survival.)

Because of the medical field and the refusal to 'cull' those with mental/physical deficiencies from the gene pool, humans have hit a plateau where ALL genes are getting passed down instead of just the good ones. It's too bad people were so against Eugenics.

That just means that evolution will be less drastic and less focused. Doesn't mean it will stop. You can never stop genetic mutations. There will be mutations, and they will be passed on regardless of whether we need them to survive as a species or not.

True, but it also means it will be detrimental to the species, so I can't call it evolution.

As was mentioned above, people with genetic illnesses are living longer to the point where they can have children and pass those defective genes down. In a few hundred years, the global rate for those diseases will most likely increase significantly.

 

[winter2]

How is having blue eyes a genetic defect

Realisticaly it isn't, an argument could be made in terms of sexual selection that it could be an advantage or disadvantage, or a non factor. All on how you wanna define it, that is where the arguments come in evolution, the fact evolution happens isn't, it is all the little why's that are.

As I say, allelic frequency in a population over time.

The thing is the change doesn't need to be an advantage or disadvantage, there are many that do basicaly nothing.

defect is the wrong word really, its a genetic mutation, a accident if you will.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/3323607/Blue-eyes-result-of-ancient-genetic-mutation.html

SWEET! I'm a blue eyed, blonde mutant!! Cue X-Men theme. (Also, I wonder if there is some blonde/blue eye hatred/fear/envy in this thread. )

 

[ZiggyE]

In this thread:

A lot of people who mistakenly think evolution is about becoming faster, stronger, smarter, taller, or any number of specific traits that have nothing to do with Darwinism... with zero posts talking about the ONE thing evolution is about:

Adaptation.

Are humans becoming better adapted to their environment? Constantly, though both mate selection, as well as through other factors.

Humans will continue to evolve so long as humans have differences and exist in an environment. To claim otherwise is to fail at knowing what evolution is, and thus, have zero stake in the discussion.

Except that's where you are wrong. Adaptation isn't the cause of evolution at all. We don't adapt to our surroundings. Our genome changes through mutations and those with the favourable mutations live on in their niche and the others die off. We don't adapt to our niches, instead those who are lucky to get the best genes for survival live while the others die off. That's what natural selection is.

 

[teisjm]

We hardly won't.
Evolution is very simple, those fit to survive end up surviving and pass on their genes, those who don't perish before doing so.
Theres no big guiding hand choosing which genes would be most fit for passing on, and which are not usefull anymore, hence we won't loose our pinky toe, or our appendix, unless having those stops us from pro-creating.
The only thing that we can evolve past, is things stopping us from pro-creating, mainly sterility, and only the kinds of sterility serious enough, that they can't be helped medically.

On the other hand, you could argue that we're actually devolving, since people who would've not survived to pass on their genes years ago, can survive and pass on their genes today, due to science.

If controlled breeding was enforced, we could evolve more, or if science finds some way to controll which genes are beeing passed down to the child of 2 given people.

But yeah, science is taking over for evolution, providing the solutions to our problems, evolution would've otherwise provided in a much crueler way.

 

[kayisking]

and i suppose eventually someone will be born without an appendix.

You do realise that the appendix actually has a function right?

Actually there's no scientific evidence that it does. Everyone's still arguing that.

There are theories that it MIGHT have something to do with the immune system, but a lot of people think it's entirely useless.

OT: Technically there's no extent to how much any race can evolve.

Well, there is one. If a race evolves to a point where it no longer dies, then there would be no natural selection and thus no evolution.

 

[ZiggyE]

Theres no big guiding hand choosing which genes would be most fit for passing on, and which are not usefull anymore, hence we won't loose our pinky toe, or our appendix, unless having those stops us from pro-creating.

This. It's why males have nipples despite them having no function at all.

and i suppose eventually someone will be born without an appendix.

You do realise that the appendix actually has a function right?

Actually there's no scientific evidence that it does. Everyone's still arguing that.

There are theories that it MIGHT have something to do with the immune system, but a lot of people think it's entirely useless.

OT: Technically there's no extent to how much any race can evolve.

Well, there is one. If a race evolves to a point where it no longer dies, then there would be no natural selection and thus no evolution.

But whether that's possible is debatable.

 

[Venats]

Both, human technology and evolution (Ninja'd on both! Aagh!) is skyrocketing in speed. Faster than ever before, and it will continue to go faster and faster.

To be fair, Moore's Law sort of ran out because of physical limitation. So even some aspects of technology have hit a wall (one could argue that pharma tech is on a pendulum trajectory at this point, doing good and bad at the same time) and has been on said wall for the last four or five years. Technology is the quick change in human society, evolution is what keeps us alive on the long run... or kills us. Our own technology has created super viruses, people that cannot live without society, and so on. As the saying goes, mother nature always bats last.

I wouldn't be surprised if some near future event forced evolution's hand on a global scale.

Then there's the whole of space, humans aren't even remotely adequately evolved to survive in it, certainly not in multiple different systems. We have to go through all those steps too... we need to figure out how to survive outside of our planet's/sun's magnetosphere (as both our bodies and any conceivable technology will be under the whims of cosmic radiation, so super robot bodies don't really work). Evolution has a lot of work to do... if it can even overcome said problem at all.

It is true that the tallness evolution could be down to lack of nutrition rather than evolution. The other examples do hold up better though.

There are claims that the Mongols and other such tribes of people were on average 2 meters tall, however the peoples that they tended to conqueror were usually smaller and weaker. So, breed them together and you get people that would be around what is today's average height. Then we have to take into account all the growth hormones in food... Oy.

A thing that needs to be taken into account with height/size is temperature. As the planet heats up overall, people might start getting smaller. From a purely physics point of view (as I am no biologist), the ratio of surface area to volume is an important factor for how your body "keeps it cool". For instance, the stereotypical big Russian was perfectly designed for the stereotypical cold weather in Northern Russia. A larger body has a lower surface area to volume ration, meaning they retain heat better.

 

[Zipa]

How is having blue eyes a genetic defect

Realisticaly it isn't, an argument could be made in terms of sexual selection that it could be an advantage or disadvantage, or a non factor. All on how you wanna define it, that is where the arguments come in evolution, the fact evolution happens isn't, it is all the little why's that are.

As I say, allelic frequency in a population over time.

The thing is the change doesn't need to be an advantage or disadvantage, there are many that do basicaly nothing.

defect is the wrong word really, its a genetic mutation, a accident if you will.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/3323607/Blue-eyes-result-of-ancient-genetic-mutation.html

SWEET! I'm a blue eyed, blonde mutant!! Cue X-Men theme. (Also, I wonder if there is some blonde/blue eye hatred/fear/envy in this thread. )

Heh I'm perfectly happy with my green eyes tbh.

 

[DracoSuave]

Except that's where you are wrong.

So, while saying that I'm wrong about species adaptation, you go on and describe the process of species adaptation.

Just sayin'.

 

[Drops a Sweet Katana]

Apes probably thought that their form was the furthest that they would ever go. Now look at them.

We could evolve to grow wings, have 4 legs, develop psychic powers. We will always keep evolving.

Um, no. That can't happen without some serious (and I mean SERIOUS) genetic tinkering. We would never naturally evolve to grow wings or any additional pair of limbs alongside our existing limbs on account of us being tetrapods (four-limbed vertebrates descended from late Devonian lobe-finned fish such as Eusthenopteron) for a start, not to mention the sheer redundancy of such features. Human, and indeed any tetrapod, would be ill-suited to even be artificially engineered to be a hexapod (six-limbed animals, none of which are vertebrates) as their anatomies are poorly suited to accommodate an extra pair of limbs.

When our descendants become so different to us that they become truly new species, we'll most likely end up with a number of different species diverging from their basal form, modern Homo Sapiens. For example, in more technologically dependent populations, we will see more of a shift towards greater intellectual capacities and with it, the gradual atrophy of our bodies, for example smaller muscles, bones and organs in order to make up for the greater amounts of energy consumed by the increasing brain size.

Evolution is a slow process, so any divergence probably won't be apparent until hundreds of thousands of years down the line. By that time, if our species isn't wiped out before then, our descendants will probably have at least a few other planets to call home, which will cause further divisions as they adapt to their new environments.

 

[winter2]

How is having blue eyes a genetic defect

* SNIPPETY SNIP *

defect is the wrong word really, its a genetic mutation, a accident if you will.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/3323607/Blue-eyes-result-of-ancient-genetic-mutation.html

SWEET! I'm a blue eyed, blonde mutant!! Cue X-Men theme. (Also, I wonder if there is some blonde/blue eye hatred/fear/envy in this thread. )

Heh I'm perfectly happy with my green eyes tbh.

Freak!



(Oh.. and I wasn't thinking about your post when I was half jokingly mentioning the blonde/blue eye thing)

 

[Tinybear]

So, do you think that, from the economic divide between First and Third world areas, two separate sub-species of humanity might evlove? (P.S. I'm studying genetics, so I know that any organism will develop a divide between species if separated by say a geographical event, but could the same thing come about today, in an age of easy long-distance travel, and would it happen before technological advances could be shared that would allow developing countries to catch up to us?)

The third world will never be able to be middle class rich the way the world is developing now. There's simply too many people. India has 1.1 billion people, China has 1.3, and Africa is nearing 1 billion, and they're expected to rise up to 1.5 over the next 100 years, if not less. These numbers means that it is a physical impossibility to develop a middle class simply because it's impossible to supply that many people with a middle class life. That is the harsh fact, poor people will be poor because they birth too many, and they birth many because they're poor. (in third world countries I mean). China is trying to reduce their numbers, and it will be interesting to see how that goes, India is trying, but most people involved have said that it's rather futile to try, and Africa is Africa, they need to sort their shit out.

So, there will be two very separate evolutionary tracks from here on out. One in the west, where you have a physical degradation, and very likely a mental split in the population. The other in Africa and India in particular, where adapting to horrible living conditions has made the human body resilient. Practically every Indian is immune to E-coli.

I think that in the long run, Indians will be the most superior ones genetically. Intellect will usually breed itself because it will show through success, no matter where you are, while resilience needs a challenging environment to grow forth.

 

[Zeema]

I want giant Angelic Wings

i want it

 

[madster11]

Height is the big ones i noticed.

Went to some historical sights from only around 100 years ago, and the doorways and handrails are all tiny, designed for someone around 5 foot tall.

Me, being 6'1, felt like a giant.


Also, glorious blue eyes club here.

 

[Jacob Haggarty]

I dont think those in the western world can do much evolving for the simple fact, we dont need to anymore. In evolution, the environment changes the organism, but in our case, we simply change the environment. Nature is second to US, instead of the other way around. If there comes a particularly nasty disease, instead of breeding, and eventually finding individuals who are resistant, we just engineer a cure, and the epidimeic is over in weeks.

This is why i dont think we're evolving. I would say that if we chose to live outside of our protected world, we would once again carry on evolving, but liklihood is that most of us wouldnt last a week without what we have now. Myself included.

 

[MassiveGeek]

To do so little as to imagine that evolution could ever possibly end is... Mind boggling.

Both, human technology and evolution (Ninja'd on both! Aagh!) is skyrocketing in speed. Faster than ever before, and it will continue to go faster and faster.

Exactly.

We can't exclude ourselves from evolution unless we stop reproducing, since you know, evolution essentially is descent with modification.
Which would mean we'd just go extinct.