[Closed] Evolution, where are we going...?

have you watched wall-e?

[img] [/img]

We are going round in a big circle.

have you watched wall-e?

Aren't we there now?

I suspect that we will become generally sicker, because in evolutionary terms we are allowing people to survive and breed who would otherwise not do so. Let me stress that this is a purely scientific approach, and I'm not suggesting eugenics.

crikey - Member

I suspect that we will become generally sicker, because in evolutionary terms we are allowing people to survive and breed who would otherwise not do so. Let me stress that this is a purely scientific approach, and I'm not suggesting eugenics.

Generally yes, but not always true. For example I believe the prevalence of sickle cell is much higher amongst people who live in areas with high instance of malaria because it offers an element of protection against the disease.

I read somewhere that we will split into two races, one tall, thin, smart the other shorter squatter & better at menial tasks

Not sure when though, however I am encouraging my kids to think tall - just in case

I suspect that we will become generally sicker

I guess it'll be a constant battle with medical science. I suppose we'll live much longer lives too, as our living conditions get easier and medical science advances.

I wonder given birth rates and increases in average age of the population when we'll end up with more people than the planet can support? I guess farming technologies (GM foods etc.) will be a factor in this.

I read somewhere that we will split into two races, one tall, thin, smart the other shorter squatter & better at menial tasks

Looking around my office I think this has also already happened.

Evolution happens in much bigger steps and in more stressful circumstances that people like to imagine. Just because a population does more of something it does physically change to adapt to that activity. A population being driven almost to the point of extinction - whole generations dying in childhood - and just a handful with a specific trait surviving is the way it works. Its not something you'd hope to be a part of.

mrblobby - Member

Saw that program with Alice Robert's bum in it the other day

could someone please explain what this means?!

I read somewhere that we will split into two races, one tall, thin, smart the other shorter squatter & better at menial tasks

Not sure when though, however I am encouraging my kids to think tall - just in case

Aldous Huxley.

evolution is NOT driven by 'survival of the fittest'.

it's driven by 'removal of the least fit'.

'fitness' is determined by breeding success (number of kids).

and 'removal' means death. - nothing will stop you having kids quite so effectively as being dead...

(you don't have to be the fastest lion to catch a zebra, you just don't want to be slower than the slowest zebra)

(you don't have to be the fastest zebra to escape from the lions, you just don't want to be the slowest)

and remember, there is no 'momentum' with evolution, humans may have got taller/more intelligent over time, but that's no reason to think we will continue to get taller/more intelligent.

for evolution to have a 'direction' - you need constant selective pressure.

So, in a nutshell; what's killing us before we have kids? - we'll adapt to suit that.

I read somewhere that we will split into two races, one tall, thin, smart the other shorter squatter & better at menial tasks

Probably in HG Wells 'The Time Machine' - a metaphor for the upper / lower class upstairs/downstairs culture in the late 1800s - quite an amusing punchline in that too.

Or you might have been reading about the Belgian origins of the Rwandan genocide.

could someone please explain what this means?!

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p00jjjw4/Origins_of_Us_Bones/ ]This...[/url]

Population has got to a level that we're due a pandemic soon which will reduce the population hugely.

The resultant gene pool left will steer evolution in a specific direction.

The problem is that we are not removing the least fit, and are therefore altering the standard way that evolution works. The number of medical conditions with a familial or direct genetic component will influence humanity in as yet unknown ways. Interesting..

A population being driven almost to the point of extinction - whole generations dying in childhood - and just a handful with a specific trait surviving is the way it works.

Read somewhere that it can actually happen fairly quickly if there is enough stress on the population. This is why I was wondering about maybe a big extinction event (maybe another meteor strike or a massive volcano) leaving only small pockets of humanity struggling to survive. I guess the direction of evolution in those conditions would depend very much on adaptations that are advantageous to survival in those conditions.

(maybe another meteor strike or a massive volcano)

If you are referring to the extinction of the dinosaurs - the 'sudden' extinction took about 40,000 years to play out. It was only sudden in geological terms.

😯
#shuffles off to stockpile food and weapons in a bunker in the woods#

The problem is that we are not removing the least fit

Thats because we're not under stress - I think in the event of the kind of pressure that would drive an evolutionary change - Universal Healthcare and Social Safety Nets (and Charity Fun Runs) are the sort of thing we might let slip.

Population has got to a level that we're due a pandemic soon which will reduce the population hugely.

The resultant gene pool left will steer evolution in a specific direction.

I suspect the only thing that prevents us from solving much of the diseases and illnesses out there is a lack a investment (or return)... and maybe ethical issues blocking research. If those blockers were removed then I do wonder what could be achieved.

Wings and wheels, hopefully.

double

The thing is with diseases and viruses are that they are constantly evolving as well and becoming resitant too, e.g MRSA

If you are referring to the extinction of the dinosaurs - the 'sudden' extinction took about 40,000 years to play out. It was only sudden in geological terms.

Well, yes. It would be something that would dramatically (in geological terms) change the planet. Probably impacting our food sources and reducing the habitable area of the planet. If it happened over this sort of time period I'd imagine we'd have the technological capability to adapt to the environment.

Antibiotic resistance is a massive, massive timebomb. Bacteria and viruses have been around far longer than humans, and are far better evolved to do what they do than us. The 'war on infection' is not one we can ever win, and as globalization continues, we will see many more problems with essentially untreatable infections.

(you don't have to be the fastest lion to catch a zebra, you just don't want to be slower than the slowest zebra)

(you don't have to be the fastest zebra to escape from the lions, you just don't want to be the slowest)

You don't have to be the [b]cleverest[/b] lion to catch a zebra, you just don't want to be more stupid than the [b]most stupid[/b] zebra (etc, etc).

Lions aren't quick, they are clever and have learnt to work in a pack and use tactics to trap their pray. Perhaps you should have used a cheetah and a gazelle in your metaphor as they have both evolved to be the quickest they can be to catch/escape their natural prey.

Sadly.

[img] [/img]

Have you seen the number of fat kids huffing about?

So is the NHS counter-productive for the evolutionary process?

So is the NHS counter-productive for the evolutionary process?

Yes - but thats a good thing, evolving isn't something you'd hope to be a part of.

I don't think it's counter-productive, I think it is changing the way that evolution will happen because of an effect on the population who can reproduce. In the same way, antibiotics have affected the bacterial population, becoming an external evolutionary pressure which changes the natural way that evolution works.

I read somewhere that we will split into two races, one tall, thin, smart the other shorter squatter & better at menial tasks

Where, in Uncle Adolf's Big Book Of Biological Determinism? 😆

Truth is, as increased mechanisation and advances in housing and heating and stuff has meant there is no longer much need for particular body types according to physical environment, the Human Race will eventually homogenise somewhat and there will be less physical difference between people. Of course, there will be mutations and stuff along the way, but places like Brazil show us a glimpse of the future of Human evolution.

Dwindling food resources, which will result if we continue to breed and keep ourselves alive and pollute the planet, will mean that the more energy efficient body types will prevail; many Asian ethnic groups and some Africans are well suited to a meagre diet and heavy workloads. Many Yerpeans and Merkins are big and tall due to an abundance of food, more than anything else. This will not be the ideal body type if there's not a lot of food to go round, no matter how many wars there are.

Personally I think it's more likely we'll blow each other up long before any of that happens anyway really. 🙂

Just looking within the UK for a minute...

Are there any stats on population growth by socio-economic groupings?

Is there any evidence to suggest that the gene pool is becoming weaker as we artificially ensure the survival of the weakest? Like prevelence of certain diseases or learning disorders?

(I believe whole hearedly in the welfare state BTW)

My hands are starting to curl all of the time into a grip like shape, and my feet are turning into spinny axles. Soon I'll be able to interface with my cranks more directly for more power.

Next, I suppose I'll grow an extendable bottom, to reduce the need for an uppy downy seatpost...

[i]Is there any evidence to suggest that the gene pool is becoming weaker as we artificially ensure the survival of the weakest?[/i]

No, because the time scale needed for such a change is probably in the 2-3-4 million year range.

Where, in Uncle Adolf's Big Book Of Biological Determinism?

and [url= http://www.****/sciencetech/article-489653/Human-race-split-different-species.html ]The Daily Mail[/url] - same thing really.

Is there any evidence to suggest that the gene pool is becoming weaker as we artificially ensure the survival of the weakest?

It always has been - we're not a very genetically strong species compared to our near relatives - unlike other apes we'd die if we could only eat raw food indefinitely - removed from even the most basic of our technologies - fire - we don't have enzymes to live successfully without the means to cook.

but having fires means we need smaller stomachs, making us lighter and faster.

My hands are starting to curl all of the time into a grip like shape, and my feet are turning into spinny axles. Soon I'll be able to interface with my cranks more directly for more power.

[url= http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/why-does-a-bike-fall-over-much-easier-if-it-is-not-moving/page/2 ]Next, I suppose I'll grow an extendable bottom, to reduce the need for an uppy downy seatpost...[/url]

[i]we don't have enzymes to live successfully without the means to cook.[/i]

I'm not sure that that is accurate.

If it is based on who reproduces and who doesn't, and if celebrity culture and a love of porn continues, surely everyone will get better looking.

we're not a very genetically strong species

Really... we've done quite well then!

he means that we're not very diverse...

(there isn't much genetic variation between humans, compared to other species)

Didn't read it in the Daily Mail, possibly Uncle Adolf but he had a different view, pockets of civilization populated by tall, blond, blue eyed, intelligent people with lots of workers outside. Always struck me as odd that he was short, brown haired who appeared to believe in inbreading which would not help much.

Anyway back to the point above something bad will happen, probably biological, maybe caused by us, maybe not. Mankind will get over it and adapt - or not.
If we do get over it chances are it will be the outer edges geographically who do so we may all look like pacific islanders or amazonian indians. At least if its the former there will be good rugby and nobody about calling others mongs 🙂

We do have a very shallow gene pool. Its been suggested that there is more genentic diversity between two groups of chimpanzees in the same forest then the entire human race.

Apparently it due to a near extinction of humans around 50,000 years ago, we are all descended from a very small breeding population.

Not sure what this means for the future of human evolution though.