Page 1 of 8 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 76

Thread: Human Evolution

  1. #1

    Post Human Evolution

    WARNING! Science Ahead!: Although you are completely entitled to your views, if you donít agree with the fact of human evolution (monkey to man) please do not reply with negative responses, how ever you can reply with positive ones.


    I Had My Human Biology Exam today (It went terribly, but thatís a different story); in it was a question that I actually enjoyed answering! It was along the lines of:

    Now that we live in a modern age, in a modern environment, is natural human evolution still able to work? Can natural selection still take its place?

    Justify your answer.

    Now, human evolution is something that Iím interested in so I wrote down my extended answer here:




    Now itís your turn! What do you think about this question or my answer?? Care to write an answer?

    Snaps.

  2. #2
    Butterfly Mage

    Default

    Actually, I think humanity has entered a period of greatly accelerated reverse evolution. This is evidenced by two factors:

    -- Highly intelligent, gifted, multi-talented individuals are typically having very few children.
    -- Lazy, chronically unemployed, talentless, drug-addicted career criminals seem to have a vast number of children.

    As a whole, the individual human seems less capable, less dynamic, and less adaptable than a human from, say, the 1700s. If you plopped a 1700s human in the middle of a wilderness armed with just a life, he would start developing his own tools, hunt game, build his own home, locate water, locate medicinal herbs, locate plants that could be cultivated for food. By contrast, a 2010 human dropped in the wilderness would starve to death.

    Likewise, a 1950s High School education probably gave more facts than an Associate's degree dies now.

    Further indicators of humanity's devolution can be shown in the utter lack of interest in science or education in modern children. An elementary school student no longer professes a desire to become a doctor, teacher, military tactician, or scientist. Kids nowadays only want to be movie stars, rap stars, or football players.

    I believe in evolution, but I think the human species has resigned from the game.

  3. #3
    Mako

    Default

    W00t. Evolutionary Biology is something I'm extremely fond of as well.

    Before I write my own answer I want to respond to one of yours.



    * Education (Dumb People Don’t Live long :-l)
    The extremely stupid get Darwin awards, but the dimmer and unprepared tend to reproduce more. People in the middle and upper classes will wait later in life for kids, and usually have lesser. Those in the lower class on average tend to have children sooner, and the dimmer tend not to use protection. So lifespan is irrelevant in the face of population.


    Now for my answer, I don't believe it applies to humans anymore. Natural selection dictates on average those with better suited traits of survival or reproduction will become dominant throughout the species. Unfortunately humans have kind have turned this on it's head for the reasons mentioned above. The higher tiers of society reproduce less and at later ages. The only scrap left is those on average born with a specialized trait that is beneficial in our social structure, will rise higher in our society given the right factors.
    As for evolution through natural selection, I also believe this is no longer applicable to our species. Our environments are increasingly homogenized, and mutational traits aren't being isolated but remixed back into the gene pool. So further branching species will not occur in the current state of human society.

    <edit> Also I'm going to ask evolution deniers first attempt to get educated on what evolution, genetic drift, and natural selection is before responding. As if you did, you wouldn't be a denier. And if anyone throws out a misused definition of theory, I'll intellectually disembowel you for speaking before learning what you're talking about.

  4. #4

    Default

    Well done both of you! Both of you have contributed well to the subject!.

    Butterfly Mage: i can see where you're coming from here as i see it all the time



    -- Highly intelligent, gifted, multi-talented individuals are typically having very few children.
    -- Lazy, chronically unemployed, talentless, drug-addicted career criminals seem to have a vast number of children.
    Snaps

  5. #5

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Mako View Post
    The only scrap left is those on average born with a specialized trait that is beneficial in our social structure, will rise higher in our society given the right factors.
    Even that is meaningless unless they produce more offspring than the mental midgets banging everything in sight from the time they're 15.

    Worse, thanks to modern medicine, those with serious genetic defects are surviving long enough to reproduce, thereby propagating those defects. That would be OK if people with things like PKD, MD, Cystic Fibrosis had the discipline to say to themselves "the gene stops here".

    Evolution still operates, but its not doing anything positive for our species at the moment.

    Another scary thought: Our understanding of genetics is getting close to the point where Hitler's concept of a Master Race could be feasible. Another 20 years maybe.

  6. #6

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Butterfly Mage View Post
    Actually, I think humanity has entered a period of greatly accelerated reverse evolution. This is evidenced by two factors:

    -- Highly intelligent, gifted, multi-talented individuals are typically having very few children.
    -- Lazy, chronically unemployed, talentless, drug-addicted career criminals seem to have a vast number of children.
    Totally agree with this, it seems like being intelligent and having a degree of thinking power is no longer desirable, people with intelligence are now all thought to be stereotypically boring, nerdy, are bad in sports and in bed. Unfortunately it seems that our "culture" for lack of a better word means that
    intelligence is no longer valued as an asset and seen more as a liability when it comes to life.




    Quote Originally Posted by Butterfly Mage View Post
    Further indicators of humanity's devolution can be shown in the utter lack of interest in science or education in modern children. An elementary school student no longer professes a desire to become a doctor, teacher, military tactician, or scientist. Kids nowadays only want to be movie stars, rap stars, or football players.

    I believe in evolution, but I think the human species has resigned from the game.
    It's a shame that some children don't want to have good, fulfilling careers and would rather go for easy alternative, although professional sportsman isn't an easy route by any means. It makes me sad when I see statistics that say children would rather become famous because of reality TV rather than become a doctor or teacher.
    It may because role models have changed over time, in the past role models would have been along the likes of Einstein, Newton, Edison etc and this was before footballers and rappers. Nowadays their are fewer well known scientists in the media as they become more anonamous and so children look to those who appear in the media frequently, unfortunately these are useless heiresses with more money than sense and footballers.
    And our benefit culture isn't helping, why go out and perform a useful service when you can live quite comfortably doing nothing and claiming money for it.

    Sadly it does look like humans are dooming themselves through laziness and ignorance.

  7. #7
    Butterfly Mage

    Default

    The problem I see coming in just a few more generations is that of the three-tier caste system.

    Tier 1: Billionaires and other elites that comprise less than 1% of the general population, yet controlling 90% of the wealth.

    Tier 2: Intelligent, blue collar and white collar workers that will be compelled to work exceedingly long hours for low pay, but having to pay high taxes. Tier 2 will comprise 20% of the population and have relatively few children.

    Tier 3: Low-IQ, low-skill, untrainable people who don't work and have no inclination to work. They will be the beneficiaries of the copius labor of the Tier 2 population. They will get free food, free housing, free power/water, and free medical care. They will pay no taxes. They will contribute nothing to society except crime. They will have vast numbers of offspring that will have progressively fewer intellectual capabilities. Tier 3 will comprise 80% of the human population

  8. #8
    Mako

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Butterfly Mage View Post
    Tier 3: Low-IQ, low-skill, untrainable people who don't work and have no inclination to work. They will be the beneficiaries of the copius labor of the Tier 2 population. They will get free food, free housing, free power/water, and free medical care. They will pay no taxes. They will contribute nothing to society except crime. They will have vast numbers of offspring that will have progressively fewer intellectual capabilities. Tier 3 will comprise 80% of the human population
    Horribly over-generalized and just plain wrong. You sound like a republican here. Seriously you're trying to say that 80% of the population doesn't work and are bums. You're only accounting for western society here as well.

  9. #9

    Default

    alright NOW watch the sparks fly people.

    first interesting point; a few of my professors are of the opinion that humans are in themselves a selecting factor on other creatures. though this isnt that new as predation was always a factor, the diffrence is that we, one species is selecting which environments and thus which organisms make it through, examples are mostly r selective organisms these are like rats and insects, small, produce huge numbers of offspring but often not many make it through, these are often pioneer species after events like a massive bushfire. they often always have short lifespans.

    as for humans,

    we are eaffecting natural selection one way, as noted already before we had lots of inherent 'illnesses'
    tat we are allowing to survive.

    an xample of where natural selection is effecting us is reactions to, for example, malaria.

    in africa, africans have a much greaterprevelance of sickle celledanemia and otherdisorders of blood cells which coincidently make them well suited against malaria, the density of people with it is greatest in malaria prevelent areas, and is greatly more prevelant in africans than african americans
    another example was in cyprus, thalassemia is also noted to be anti malaric.

    those 'defects' are in the right circumstances, anything but. and my above examples show how this is so. natural selection is about finding an advantage. for example the sickle celled anemia in that sitation the benefits of the malarial resistance outweigh the effects of the anemia

    that higher net intellect equals better fitness thats not how it works EITHER.

    inteligence is not necessarily a favourable trait it has been in the past, but in future it might be a bettertolerance to certain toxins. or better temperature thrsholds.

    one thing you guys have gotten right is that we are homogenising the environments in which we live. and populations. however, in the grand scheme, these wont last, examples of the irish potato famine are one of them.


    illbe frank and say socioeconomics dont matter too much in the long runin terms of natural selection. what will matter is whosurvives when for example, the yellowstone caldera goes off (this isnt some wishy washy 2012 scenario either, geologists are intensely watching it)

  10. #10

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by silent deadly alchemist View Post
    ...

    illbe frank and say socioeconomics dont matter too much in the long runin terms of natural selection. what will matter is whosurvives when for example, the yellowstone caldera goes off (this isnt some wishy washy 2012 scenario either, geologists are intensely watching it)
    Wouldn't a near extinction event just weaken gene diversity making each subsequent one more likely to kill us off entirely?

    I'm hoping our technological efforts will lead to trans-humanism ultimately liberating everyone from inequality and material economics.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 38
    Last Post: 22-May-2010, 14:31
  2. Evolution of Bodybuilding (picture intensive)
    By Chillhouse in forum Off-topic
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 18-Mar-2010, 03:53
  3. Dragon Ball Evolution (Full Movie)
    By Takashi in forum Off-topic
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 24-Mar-2009, 03:54
  4. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
    By Takashi in forum Mature Topics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 24-Feb-2009, 21:54
  5. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 05-Oct-2008, 13:46

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
ADISC.org - the Adult Baby / Diaper Lover / Incontinence Support Community.
ADISC.org is designed to be viewed in Firefox, with a resolution of at least 1280 x 1024.