How much further can humans evolve?
- Thread starter Dominic Burchnall
- Start date
Recommended Videos
As soon as we make technology an extension of us as opposed to a tertiary entity, we will see a pocket of humans explode forward in evolution and essentially cement themselves and their ancestors as the top tier of humanity.
Those that are rich now are most likely the future leaders of our world indefinitely - we're not far from it, the recent English man living with a plastic heart proves it. Unwieldy at the moment but as soon as something becomes viable its development reels off exponentially.
Those that are rich now are most likely the future leaders of our world indefinitely - we're not far from it, the recent English man living with a plastic heart proves it. Unwieldy at the moment but as soon as something becomes viable its development reels off exponentially.
Why did we ever have a tail bone then? Because we used to have tails. Its a vestigial at this point, but once was not. By that logic we would still have tails for mobility.ash-brewster said:
I know this is from a Wikipedia article, but to go through each of its sources would make this post unnecessarily long. This is an excellent example of that though. Here we have a tiny tendon in the arm which has no function any longer. Also, it is actively disappearing from humanity.
From the 'Human Vestigiality' article:
"The palmaris longus muscle is seen as a small tendon between the flexor carpi radialis and the flexor carpi ulnaris, although it is not always present. The muscle is absent in about 14% of the population, however this varies greatly with ethnicity. One study has shown the prevalence of palmaris longus agenesis in 500 Indian patients to be 17.2% (8% bilateral and 9.2% unilateral).[32] The palmaris is a popular source of tendon material for grafts and this has prompted studies which have shown the absence of the palmaris does not have any appreciable effect on grip strength.[33]
The levator claviculae muscle in the posterior triangle of the neck is a supernumerary muscle present in only 2?3% of all people[34] but nearly always present in most mammalian species, including gibbons and orangutans"
Probably a whole lot sexier.
See, when populations of other species have found themselves in a land and time of plenty with more than enough resources for everyone, the main determinant of genes is sex: who has the nicest plumage.
So that means bigger hoo-hahs and longer shlongs. Probably we are going to adapt to maintain a healthy/sexy weight as all the fatties never get laid.
But humanity is no where close to be universally free from want, many of us as a species still struggle to survive long enough to pass on our genes successfully (that means to both have children and keep them alive so they can have kids of their own once older). But adaptations to that are mainly biochemical. It is likely that in parts of the world large populations will develop immunity to HIV unless the health authorities find a way to eradicate the disease.
See, when populations of other species have found themselves in a land and time of plenty with more than enough resources for everyone, the main determinant of genes is sex: who has the nicest plumage.
So that means bigger hoo-hahs and longer shlongs. Probably we are going to adapt to maintain a healthy/sexy weight as all the fatties never get laid.
But humanity is no where close to be universally free from want, many of us as a species still struggle to survive long enough to pass on our genes successfully (that means to both have children and keep them alive so they can have kids of their own once older). But adaptations to that are mainly biochemical. It is likely that in parts of the world large populations will develop immunity to HIV unless the health authorities find a way to eradicate the disease.
Evolution is kinda tough for me since I'm a Christian, but at the same time I acknowledge scientific fact, but I still believe in God. I believe God gave humanity(if not all sentient species in other galaxies) gave each of the divine spark. The ability to be creative and think. I think that's where evolution came in, maybe subconsciously the early homo erectus' DNA realized the need to evolve and started changing.
Man may try to see it's self as separate from nature, but we are still classified(according to the age old Animal, Mineral, Vegetable chart) as not only animals but mammals. We're still a living species not deities. We'll evolve either at our own rate, the need to evolve, or by scientific means. Who knows, maybe in 50 or so odd years when man has mastered FTL travel so we can colonize livable planets in other galaxies, someone could have invented a serum that changes the DNA of the colonists to let them live there(like making them capable of breathing something that's not oxygen or betting gils). Man is a species, not separate from nature.
Man may try to see it's self as separate from nature, but we are still classified(according to the age old Animal, Mineral, Vegetable chart) as not only animals but mammals. We're still a living species not deities. We'll evolve either at our own rate, the need to evolve, or by scientific means. Who knows, maybe in 50 or so odd years when man has mastered FTL travel so we can colonize livable planets in other galaxies, someone could have invented a serum that changes the DNA of the colonists to let them live there(like making them capable of breathing something that's not oxygen or betting gils). Man is a species, not separate from nature.
I think you're misunderstanding a little something about genetics. A dominant trait is not something that's simply more prevalent. It's a trait that is expressed if you have it. Period, end statement. A given gene isn't dominant because it's common, it's common because it's dominant.Raioken18 said:
Please enlighten us oh great master of scientific law. prove Macroevolution to be law instead of the theory that it currently is. Also explain how it was Mutation when in fact most mutations result in the death of the creature instead of it becoming a new species or better. Take the four winged fruit fly. its extra 2 wings are useless and cripple it. We have never once found an anatomical mutation that benefits any species in any way. Also almost every "missing link" that has been found has generally come up as a severe case of rickets disorder.Artic Xiongmao said:
I guess by "studies" you mean "a lot of weird people making up equally weird theories with no basis"... Nothing will happen 2012. Besides, we evolve right now. We ALWAYS evolve. It is a gradual process that continues as long as a species exists.DJ_DEnM said:
we will probably evolve to better suit machines and computers doing 80% of our work for us. so maybe we will grow weaker but much smarter
Not significantly. Survival selection in most of the world is effectively done; we've conquered our environment so thoroughly that nothing particularly threatens us anymore.
A really major new disease might have some minor shift in genetics in the survivors, but barring a complete societal collapse as a result, modern medicine will cure it before it can really winnow through the gene pool.
Some minor selection for secondary characteristics is ongoing (appearance, intellect, etc), but that would take an exceedingly long time to really shift the genome as a whole, and there's enough hybridization among the various ethnic groups and randomness in that part of the gene pool anyway as to keep it from making any truly significant headway.
The next true stage of human evolution will be the one we enact upon ourselves through genetic engineering.
A really major new disease might have some minor shift in genetics in the survivors, but barring a complete societal collapse as a result, modern medicine will cure it before it can really winnow through the gene pool.
Some minor selection for secondary characteristics is ongoing (appearance, intellect, etc), but that would take an exceedingly long time to really shift the genome as a whole, and there's enough hybridization among the various ethnic groups and randomness in that part of the gene pool anyway as to keep it from making any truly significant headway.
The next true stage of human evolution will be the one we enact upon ourselves through genetic engineering.
We are evolving, but far slower than we could be.
Evolution is a selective progress, where bad genes are breeded away. But, due to keeping idiots doing things that would kill them and thus allowing their genes to passed on to future generations, we are held back from actually evolving. I believe that if certain people were stopped from having children (e.a. Paris Hilton, plain idiots (which, while I think about it, involves Paris) and people disabilities) we'd evolve better and quicker.
I'm not saying shoot them, but if we'd keep them from getting kids, the future human race would be far better than what we have now.
Evolution is a selective progress, where bad genes are breeded away. But, due to keeping idiots doing things that would kill them and thus allowing their genes to passed on to future generations, we are held back from actually evolving. I believe that if certain people were stopped from having children (e.a. Paris Hilton, plain idiots (which, while I think about it, involves Paris) and people disabilities) we'd evolve better and quicker.
I'm not saying shoot them, but if we'd keep them from getting kids, the future human race would be far better than what we have now.
Geez, we really HAVE come a long way. next thing we know we'll all have instant messaging communicators implanted into our brain and everyone has a portable laser rifle. the times they are a-changin'.
This was pretty much what I was going to say. Of course, I was also thinking that we might grow a sixth or seventh finger... somehow.Slayer_2 said:
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.
