Will humans evolve?

mitsur · #1 04-02-2002, 01:09 AM

Do you think humans(us)will evoleve?(not like becoming adults)

Joe the Intern · #2 04-02-2002, 01:21 AM

I may be wrong, so someone with more knowledge correct me if I am. I think humans have become so advanced they don't need to evolve. Animals need evolution to adapt to their environment. Humans adapt their environment to them.

mitsur · #3 04-02-2002, 01:31 AM

:

Originally posted by Joe the Intern
I may be wrong, so someone with more knowledge correct me if I am. I think humans have become so advanced they don't need to evolve. Animals need evolution to adapt to their environment. Humans adapt their environment to them.

We may evolve though

Al the Vykker · #4 04-02-2002, 01:37 AM

It all depends on what happens to us indeed we could evolve, but in what type of situation. Or if we didn't blow ourselves up first.

abe22 · #5 04-02-2002, 01:54 AM

I don't think humans will evolve. It really depends what will happen to this earth. As Joe said Us humans adapt the environment to suit us.

Majic · #6 04-02-2002, 02:22 AM

My guess is we will seperate more into groups that do the things. Like maybe one group will stay stronger and take care of the food supply, or build structures. Then the other parts of society, like the business area, will evolve more weaker but more intelligant for the paticular use of the position. People that work in hot areas like a steel mill may become more resistent to heat and develope a much tougher strand for skin. Like creating custom people to fill each postition prefectly, but a the econimy constantly changes there will always be a different road to improving. A "perfect" human isn't really possible, as that would require more than the body could handle in ways of pressure, different skills and mental ability. Well, actualy if you take the plant term "perfect" then its possible, I mean through genetics we could make a human with both parts for reproduction...

Sydney · #7 04-02-2002, 06:23 AM

Majic_Abe, I like your idea on groups evolving seperately. I've noticed physical features that are specific to certain class groups, such as people who live in areas of low income possessing exclusive physical attributes. This might be exmplained in non-genetic ways, nutrition for example. But who knows?

As the question of whether or not humans will continue evolving, they will. As others have said, the environment is the guiding hand in evolution, but rather than letting the environment change us, we change the environment to suit us. I think the only evolution humans will undergo will be at their own hands via genetic engineering.

Sl'askia · #8 04-02-2002, 09:09 AM

Actually...humans are evolving as we speak. There's an article I read about it...let me find it...its fairly old so I might not be able to...

Crud I can't find it now...

Well I'll try to describe what was in it...

It wasn't a big thing...but study's show that in many humans, particularly those around 20 and younger (if I remember right) the thumb has become the most dexterous finger on the hand instead of the index finger. This was due, they said, to the use of things like mobile phones (and video game control pads

), where many use their thumbs instead of their fingers to dail the numbers.
So yes humans created those items...but they have started to evolve so they could use those items better

. And this was just in the last couple of decades...

*still wishes she could find that article...* if ya want to try to find it...it was either on abcnews.com or cnn.com

Doug · #9 04-02-2002, 10:44 AM

:

Originally posted by Dragadon
Actually...humans are evolving as we speak. ... study's show that in many humans, particularly those around 20 and younger (if I remember right) the thumb has become the most dexterous finger on the hand instead of the index finger. This was due, they said, to the use of things like mobile phones (and video game control pads, where many use their thumbs instead of their fingers to dail the numbers.

I don't doubt that this is true, but if it is, it's from practice, not evolution. It is situational adaptation, not biological adaptation.

Gluk Schmuck · #10 04-02-2002, 10:56 AM

I very much doubt that humans will evolve much.
This is mainly because of technology which allows environmental modification (not very much but Dubya seems to want to prove that he can cause global warming on his own) and personalised environments (i.e. submersables and space suits).

Genetic modification isn't evolution, Sydney.

paramiteabe · #11 04-02-2002, 11:14 AM

I think that actually some of us might be devolving. Look at all the violence in this world. To me it looks like we are showing signes of Barberic nature. We are killing for fun and thats scary! But I also think some of us are evolving. There are people out there who do good works and are very smart! A far cry to the nomadic behavior of Violence.

mitsur · #12 04-02-2002, 11:32 AM

Majic_Abe's theroy could happen.I also agree with it.

Lets say a space rock(I can't spell the other word for it)hits.....lemme think.....Right in the middle of the US?From that day on,it sends burning heat to the surface.We may evolve to somthing that will not be bothered by the heat maybe.

Sydney · #13 04-02-2002, 11:50 AM

:

Originally posted by Gluk Schmuck
Genetic modification isn't evolution, Sydney.

I disagree.

The environment includes all species, us too. Humans have been selecting characteristics in other species for thousands of years (crops, cattle etc). Genetic modification via current technology is simply taking it one step further.

Gluk Schmuck · #14 04-02-2002, 12:26 PM

:

Originally posted by mitsur
Lets say a space rock(I can't spell the other word for it)hits.....lemme think.....Right in the middle of the US?From that day on,it sends burning heat to the surface.We may evolve to somthing that will not be bothered by the heat maybe.

Asteroid?

It's far more likely that an asteroid hitting the Earth would cause cold rather than heat.
Yes, that is possible but it is more likely that humans will find a way to make their environments colder (currently) and it is possible that in the future genetic engineering could be used to make all new babies posess a trait which makes them less vunerable to the heat (or cold) and gene therapy could be used to apply that trait to the rest of the population.

Gluk Schmuck · #15 04-02-2002, 12:40 PM

:

Originally posted by Sydney
I disagree.

The environment includes all species, us too. Humans have been selecting characteristics in other species for thousands of years (crops, cattle etc). Genetic modification via current technology is simply taking it one step further.

I disagree.

:

Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species.
( http://www.dictionary.com )

Genetic modification is directly modifying the genotype of an organism while evolution is the indirect modification of a population's genotype through natural (unlike some, I belive humans are part of nature) selection (by letting the mRNA accidentally copy the DNA incorrectly or by the genes which kill the organism not being inherited).

This selection can be either as a result of being selectively bred or by the old-fashioned evolutionary processes.

(Ah, my neck isn't hurting as much now - I can do my homework. Hoorah)

mitsur · #16 04-02-2002, 12:44 PM

:

Posted by GluckSmuck:It's far more likely that an asteroid hitting the Earth would cause cold rather than heat.

I mean the asteriod would create a crack in the earth and the inside heat and the heat would come to the surface.

Statikk HDM · #17 04-02-2002, 01:47 PM

The thumb thing s irrelevant because the people with the most dextrous thumbs, muscular biceps etc. must obviously usee them a lot. Hasn't La Marck taken a lot of shit for advancing a theory like this? Anywho, humans will never evolve past the present state. We can't become superpowerful gods if we all try hard and "transcend a plane" or some such New age hoohockey.

Doug · #18 04-02-2002, 02:06 PM

:

Originally posted by mitsur

I mean the asteriod would create a crack in the earth and the inside heat and the heat would come to the surface.

An asteroid impact large enough to release internal heat beyond a local volcanic disturbance would completely obliterate life on earth. Remember all the dust and detritus that spread for blocks when the WTC towers collapsed? Multiply by a bazillion or so, and think about trying to breathe, that is, if the immediate effects of the impact didn't get you. No sun, no crops. Heat will be the last of our worries.

You are getting at the gist of one of the misunderstandings about adaptation and evolution, though. Evolutionary pressures are ones that cause those carrying certain genes to be more likely to reproduce than those without those genes, thereby increasing the occurrence of that particular gene within the population (gene pool). On the other side of the coin, evolutionary pressures will tend to weed out, by killing or otherwise preventing reproduction, other types of genetic makeups.

Humans tend to be impatient and irritable about things that threaten their ability to reproduce, and react accordingly. If there was a large heat source, we wouldn't stand around to see who had genes that were resistant to heat such that they reached the age of reproduction -- we'd all get the hell out of there. That's situational adaptation, and has absolutely no direct effect on evolution, at least with respect to heat resistance. However, moving to already populated areas might cause crowding and increased competition for resources. Now those are evolutionary pressures.

If there's enough to go around for survival, then no genetic makeup has a greater probability of reaching the age of reproduction. If you have to fight for food or shelter, genetically being a big badass (not to suggest that it is the only trait that would help survival), is going to make your survival -- to the age of reproduction -- more likely, and increase the probability that those big badass genes will increase in the gene pool over the generations. That doesn't mean nobody else reproduces, and so the increased occurrence of a particular genetic makeup increases slowly over time.

***Wil*** · #19 04-02-2002, 02:31 PM

If you're talking about physical evolution, like, what you can see, well, right, maybe not. The thing about the thumb is interesting - because we've developed devices that require more agile movement of this digit, out thumbs will adapt. That's not really evolution, but from an alien's point of view it might appear to be. Kinda. Perhaps?

However, I believe humans will continue to evolve. Years ago, in prehistoric times (the 50s for example) humans didn't live as long. I heard from an old teacher that in a couple of generations, people's expected life-span could easily be 200 years. Of course, that could be a result of medical breakthrough and the like, but I doubt they'll actually find a cure for old age...old age will merely be pushed back in life.

I suppose he could have been having me on, or be making a reference to gentic engineering.

And also the mind. I think our minds will continue to develop, to be able to take in much more information, to be more logical and more rational. Or at least have to potential to, because you just need to watch 5 minutes of the National News to throw that theory out the window.

And also, I think childhood will last a lot longer, because of the growing amount we try to teach our children. Childhood in humans is already a lot longer than in 'creatures', which we, seemingly, once were.

And that's Max's nonsense for the day (although I could produce more if you wanted me to).

Danny · #20 04-02-2002, 04:00 PM

You have all been looking solely at one method of Evolution, that of Survival of the Fittest. Although this has, in the past, proven to be the dominant method, it is now all but non-existant among humans. You can talk about us become more physically strong or cleverer, but that is not going to happen through Evolution, since there is no longer a hostile environment to kill off those who are too weak or stupid. Survival of the Fittest no longer applies to Humans.

However, there is another method of Evolution that is still very much in effect among us. I don't know the technical term for it, but I will do my best to explain.

Survival of the Fittest leads to genetic traits that make an organism more likely to survive being passed on, as the organisms are more likely to survive long enough to mate. However, survival isn't the only factor that might make an organism more likely to mate, there is also the matter of Attractiveness to the opposite sex.

Now, for many animals, this is practically indistringuishable from Survival of the Fittest, since most female animals tend to prefer to mate with the males who seem most likely to survive. However, in certain animals, the female does not just look for characteristics that enable the male to survive better, but also for other characteristics. Male Birds of Paradise, for example, have evolved elaborate and colourful feathers to make themselves attractive to the opposite sex, even though Survival of the Fittest ought to cause the birds to evolve dull camouflage colours. The reason for this deviation is that female birds of paradise prefer to mate with the more colourful males, rather than the dull males (even though the dull ones might have a better chance of surviving).

I don't think I explained that well, but it'll have to do. It is clear that this sort of evolution is the only kind that can still affect humans, as I explained in my first paragraph.

Q: How will Humans evolve in future?

A: We will become gradually more attractive.

I think that sums it up effectively...

Doug · #21 04-02-2002, 04:35 PM

:

Originally posted by Danny
survival isn't the only factor that might make an organism more likely to mate, there is also the matter of Attractiveness to the opposite sex.

This makes sense in theory, but it presupposes that unattractive people don't have an equal opportunity to reproduce. In a very limited population that might be true, but I don't think it is today. Very few people are so goddawfully unattractive that no one would have them. It also raises the question of what constitutes attractiveness, which for many people is not limited to physical beauty.

Danny · #22 04-02-2002, 04:58 PM

:

Originally posted by Doug
This makes sense in theory, but it presupposes that unattractive people don't have an equal opportunity to reproduce. In a very limited population that might be true, but I don't think it is today. Very few people are so goddawfully unattractive that no one would have them. It also raises the question of what constitutes attractiveness, which for many people is not limited to physical beauty.

I agree, but it's still the most likely form that Evolution of humans could take. I personally don't consider physical attractiveness to be that important at all, but there are people who do...

Steve · #23 04-02-2002, 07:05 PM

there is a reason why attractiveness is sought after, stability. way back when we were cro-magnon men (and before, but they were our species not pre-our-species) you would only find 1 or two attractive memebers of the opposite sex, thus the atractive ones were likely to stay together and create more stable enviroments for their children. which brings another point, if a child is abused it is more likely to abuse their kids and children are less likely to survive thus cutting out the genes.

Doug · #24 04-02-2002, 11:36 PM

:

Originally posted by Danny
I agree, but it's still the most likely form that Evolution of humans could take.

I don't disagree that most evolutionary pressures, particularly the "survival of the fittest"-types, are pretty much gone. I was more concerned about the common confusion that physical changes that occur in response to the environment, rather than genetic mutations that serendipitously provide a reproductive advantage, have evolutionary significance.

BiddaMD · #25 04-04-2002, 08:24 PM

Humans will never evolve, really.... Nowadays we value so much more in mating than just natural selection that we can never spot an evolutionary mutation. If any of you guys know how evolving works, it happens by all of the sudden something giving birth to a superior species. In human society we would classify these people as freaks. Because of our intelligence, humans have avoided nature's way and done their own thing. Nothing will ever change dudes.

Danny · #26 04-04-2002, 08:43 PM

:

Originally posted by BiddaMD
If any of you guys know how evolving works, it happens by all of the sudden something giving birth to a superior species.

No, it doesn't, it's a much slower, step-by-step process. A Species isn't so much a single division as an arbitrary cut-off point placed by us to split creatures into two different races. Random mutations happen all the time, which is why we are not all identical. It's not a sudden occurance.

The rest of what you said was true, I am just picky...

mitsur · #27 04-04-2002, 11:29 PM

I saw somthing weird!A guest is repliying to this!

Sydney · #28 04-05-2002, 02:06 AM

Gluk Schmuck,

Evolution doesn't necesarily have to conform to that single, rigid definition you've provided. If in a few million years time we look at the earth's species and see descendants of animals that we'd earlier altered via genetic modification, we're going to consider it all natural selection. Humans are animals, and whether we influence the evolution of other species through selective breeding or otherwise, it's ultimately still evolution.

Lampion · #29 04-05-2002, 07:37 AM

In terms of biologic evolution, there is not a concept such as superior species or inferior species. All kinds of living beings evolve (in other words, adapt) depending on what environment they live.

Take for instance, a Shark, and a Lion. Who is the superior species? And who is the inferior one? It is impossible to compare if you don't take into account the environment where they live. Put a Shark in the middle of the savana, and it will die pretty fast. Put the Lion in the middle of the ocean, and it will also die pretty soon.

It makes me think of a definition of superiority... Maybe it can be measured by the capacity of adaptation in the most diferent kinds of environments. Thinking this way, we can say that humans are one of the most superior species on Earth, since they are everywhere, from the cold poles to the hot sands of the equatorial deserts.

The fact that the human species can adapt to all sorts of diferent environments is not explained by his biological constitution. Actually, humans are a very weak species. Without our tools and our brains, we couldn't survive in a wild world. In a distant past, our ancestors were stronger, more resistant, more agile, and faster. When the humans became more inteligent, they were able to change the environment around them, by building safe shelter, and weapons to gather food more easily, developing a strong social behavior. All of those achievements leaded us to the formation of a global civilization capable of adapt the environments to our needs. This development made us to evolve to a weaker primate, with less muscular mass, less fur covering our bodies, and weaker senses (touch, taste, hearing, sight and smell).

If we keep following this pattern, we can imagine that probably in the future, the evolved humans will look like the gray aliens we see in science fiction movies.

Conclusion: Biologicaly, humans are evolving, they've always been evolving, but this will not necessarily lead us to a more superior species. Moraly (or spiritualy, if you like) speaking, humans are and will always evolve to a more superior species.

Teal · #30 04-05-2002, 08:28 AM

Question = Will humans evolve?

Answer = Yes (especially if humans go off and live in space, where they will gradually physically adapt to the microgravity until they can no longer come back to Earth because the gravity would crush every bone in their bodies.)

Evolution happens all the time, to everything, just very, very slowly - think how many years it took humans to go from Australopithecus to the modern Homo sapiens (3.9 million, I believe - I don't think anyone lived long enough to watch it happen)...