How much further can humans evolve?
- Thread starter Dominic Burchnall
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Well, give us a while and we'll lose the appendix and the smallest toe, because they have no use whatsoever.
Wow, the future looks good...for insurance companies.rhizhim said:
I guess compared to this stuff we can legitimately say we still have some privacy left. I wonder what breaches of privacy and other rights people will tolerate in the name of "enhancing the quality of life".
"Don't you want to be happy?" the corporations will ask you. "Well, we can make you happy...but only if you become completely dependent on us."
Yeah...as long as they don't become overly invasive like Origin.rhizhim said:
Mind you, we're talking digital entertainment here. Imagine not being able to start your car without server authentication from the manufacturer...and all your travel data being recorded in order to "provide a better service".
Genetically we wont be evolving much since even the weak links in out breed can and are kept are alive. There is no longer "the strongest Alfa male's genes gets passed to the next generation with the help of the Omega female) Any weakling with any genetic disease or disease in general bad trait or anything can breed with anyone.
But as a society and as a culture we can.
But as a society and as a culture we can.
You're correct in that first world countries don't really have any evolutionary pressure any more.
That said, with pressure and time, we could evolve in countless ways. Enhanced distance or night vision, more efficient lungs, all kinds of things.
It's too late now, but if simply of the two primary tubes in our throats, the one for air was in the back surrounded by muscle and the one for food was up front and vulnerable, we wouldn't really have strangulation deaths. Poor design, there.
I see future human evolution coming back into play only under one of two ways:
1) Overpopulation, environmental damage, etc. bring about a scenario where evolutionary traits come back into play.
or
2) Genetic engineering advances to the point that we can splice in traits from other species. Then we have self-selecting evolution.
That said, with pressure and time, we could evolve in countless ways. Enhanced distance or night vision, more efficient lungs, all kinds of things.
It's too late now, but if simply of the two primary tubes in our throats, the one for air was in the back surrounded by muscle and the one for food was up front and vulnerable, we wouldn't really have strangulation deaths. Poor design, there.
I see future human evolution coming back into play only under one of two ways:
1) Overpopulation, environmental damage, etc. bring about a scenario where evolutionary traits come back into play.
or
2) Genetic engineering advances to the point that we can splice in traits from other species. Then we have self-selecting evolution.
Of course. Every species has.Dominic Burchnall said:
We tent to move less, dont need our rest of fur , we tread illnesses and allergies with medication (which leads and already led to an explosion of genetical diseases and allergies, we dont do our gene-pool very good with that).
We aren't going the way to the survivalist predator, but to the etheral, fragile thinker, muscles will be less important, so will be the bodies immune system. The human of future will be probably a hairless slender creature whos survival is 100% depending on technology.
That's not how evolution works.Its not improvement, its adaptation.And the creation of the thing we call 1st world is a pretty new thing in history , we hadnt had the time to adapt to it yet we got A BIG amount of evolutionary pressure (= change in environment) here.Belaam said:
Evolution isn't on a scale of 0-100. Evolution is a constant change and will never ever stop because it is simply genetic mutation. It doesn't mean each generation was better than the last from some objective standpoint, but that it did better in the environment it found itself in as a result of a random lottery in genetics.
Depends on what you mean by evolve. Certain directly heritible genetic traits such as the gene which causes Huntingtons will likely be slowly phased out due to our developing ability to detect them.
Technology and behavioural conditioning have largely replaced the 'survival' aspect of evolution, but in terms of 'who reproduces, wins' there could be some traits which are difficult to trace but are being expressed more and more in our society.
Technology and behavioural conditioning have largely replaced the 'survival' aspect of evolution, but in terms of 'who reproduces, wins' there could be some traits which are difficult to trace but are being expressed more and more in our society.
I think that humanity cannot evolve any further, so we must evolve our technology so we may live better and have a brighter future. (well until the point where everyone rebels)
Cephalopods have incredible (you don't want to play them in an FPS) reaction skills. Their entire brain, in fact, is wired for speed and nothing else... but they have no efficiency and as such do not have the ability for "long" problem solving or deep thought. They have impeccable spur of the moment reaction but nothing else.Wushu Panda said:
This was an interesting paper in Science a couple of years back which talked about how cephalopods were the basis of brain studies for close to a century (because they were so big and easy to dissect) and where the misconception about human brains arises. Humans have one of the most highly efficient brains (as do mammals in general) and also have speed that is (considering the efficiency) equally fantastic. On the initial firing of our neurons we have something like 15% efficiency but this allows us to react quickly; however, sustained thought/activity racks up 90+-% efficiency depending on the person.
I'm still waiting for me wings to sprout. Genetic material unfortunately is pretty resilient against whining though.
Not many thats for sure, though I think a big one (negative evolutionary pressure that is) will be success. More intelligent, wealthy, successful people are tending to have less kids, or none at all.... Where as those at the bottom of society sprout children like they're going out of fashion.Dominic Burchnall said:
Your lack of understanding pains me. Pray tell, how exactly do you think evolution works?TimeLord said: