Is human evolution over?

2009-02-15 00:37:00

#1

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5889

Was linked this article from a wiki I occasionally contribute to.
http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/ … ic=ancient

Professor Steve Jones argues that the human race is in decline.

Stock markets, crime, education; every day, in every way, things seem to get worse and worse. If the doomsayers have it right, the human race is in decline — socially, morally, and in the end biologically. Now science can test at least the last of those claims.

Because we understand how evolution happens we can guess where it will go next. It is, in Darwin's words, "descent with modification": genetics plus time. The process turns on differences: in genes themselves, and on inherited variation in the ability to copy them, on natural selection.

Declining fertility = declining diversity

Natural selection on the way out

Health, birth control, and the healing power of lust conspire to tell us that, at least in the developed world, and at least for the time being, evolution is over. So, if you are worried about what Utopia is going to be like, cheer up — you are living in it now.

Pretty short read by a Professor of genetics. This reminded me of another story I read awhile ago.

Evolution is going in reverse in some places.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/177709?from=rss

Newsweek wrote:
When hunting is severe enough to outstrip other threats to survival, the unsought, middling individuals make out better than the alpha animals, and the species changes. "Survival of the fittest" is still the rule, but the "fit" begin to look unlike what you might expect. And looks aren't the only things changing: behavior adapts too, from how hunted animals act to how they reproduce. There's nothing wrong with a species getting molded over time by new kinds of risk. But some experts believe problems arise when these changes make no evolutionary sense.

Other species are shrinking, too. Australia's red kangaroo has become noticeably smaller as poachers target the largest animals for leather. The phenomenon has been most apparent in harvested fish: since fishing nets began capturing only fish of sufficient size in the 1980s, the Atlantic cod and salmon, several flounders and the northern pike have all propagated in miniature.

So what is everyone's thoughts?

2009-02-15 01:05:01

#2

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6456|what

Evolution doesn't end til the species is extinct.

2009-02-15 01:10:25

#3

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5889

AussieReaper wrote:
Evolution doesn't end til the species is extinct.

Yeah cool, but in the first article he's stating that because of medical advancements, lower fertility and other things the amount of genetic diversity is slimming. There really would be any gentic advancemnt in awhile.

The second one claims that evolution is going backwards because the weak ones are actually reproducing because the strong ones are getting killed.

2009-02-15 01:13:25

#4

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6904|132 and Bush

Declining fertility = declining diversity, sounds like an adaption all in itself.

I personally don't think so. We've just hit a major milestone in mapping the Neanderthal Genome. http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=121360 . We're heading to a point that will allow us to genetically manipulate ourselves .. with intent.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2009-02-15 01:17:53

#5

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5889

Kmarion wrote:
Declining fertility = declining diversity, sounds like an adaption all in itself.

I personally don't think so. We've just hit a major milestone in mapping the Neanderthal Genome. http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=121360 . We're heading to a point that will allow us to genetically manipulate ourselves .. with intent.

I really hope that never happens. As nice as it would be to take out certain defects it would create a whole host of "I want my child to come out like x" issues.
We would end up defining people's sexuality, beliefs, and a whole range of other things.
Beside that being the romantic type I am, I think that when a loving couple has a child seeing the results of mixing the genes is a amazing thing.

2009-02-15 01:23:09

#6

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6904|132 and Bush

I think it's inevitable. Maybe not in our lifetime. But sometime in the future. We might need to do it if we are forced to explore other planets to survive. (I'm being really ambitious here)

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2009-02-15 01:31:26

#7

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5889

Kmarion wrote:
I think it's inevitable. Maybe not in our lifetime. But sometime in the future. We might need to do it if we are forced to explore other planets to survive. (I'm being really ambitious here)

Then I assume in the future we as a species has to come to a decision. Do we sacrifice the randomness and chance in life in order to continue our survival or do we happily die out and let time take it's course.

Since you said the explore other planets part. It's going to be one really interesting war when the genetically modified people of other planets start to go to war with the normal humans and people of Earth.

o and inb4 mutant Martin Luther King.

2009-02-15 01:33:59

#8

ATG: Banned; +5,233|6832|Global Command

Everything humans do is nature, including affecting natural progression and making species extinct.

2009-02-15 01:34:18

#9

Lai: Member; +186|6454

Think of it this way: the principles of evolution are based on the concept that the most fortunate/gifted/intelligent individuals produce more ofspring. With the introduction of birth control we have practically turned matter around as the less fortunate/gifted/intelligent generally produce more ofspring than the fortunate/gifted/intelligent. Afrika booms like shit while Europe is getting grey. Chavs breed like bunnies while the middle and upper classes make career first and stick with one to three at a higher age. As such we've basically entered a stage of devolution. One could argue that this is a adaptation in itself, but whether it's a possitive one is something else. Cockroaches are one of the most adaptive species on the planet, yet I would classify them lower on the evolutionary scale.

2009-02-15 01:38:20

#10

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6904|132 and Bush

ATG wrote:
Everything humans do is nature, including affecting natural progression and making species extinct.

Instinct number one in all species.. survival. Even when it's self sacrifice they are doing it for the advancement of the species.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2009-02-15 01:43:13

#11

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6904|132 and Bush

Macbeth wrote:
Kmarion wrote:
I think it's inevitable. Maybe not in our lifetime. But sometime in the future. We might need to do it if we are forced to explore other planets to survive. (I'm being really ambitious here)
Then I assume in the future we as a species has to come to a decision. Do we sacrifice the randomness and chance in life in order to continue our survival or do we happily die out and let time take it's course.

Since you said the explore other planets part. It's going to be one really interesting war when the genetically modified people of other planets start to go to war with the normal humans and people of Earth.

o and inb4 mutant Martin Luther King.

Tougher skin (UV protection), advanced lungs (Low or no oxygen environments), stronger frame (gravity variations). Yes that would be an interesting battlefield.

I've said it before. We humans are born from stars. Maybe we are the universe just trying to explain itself.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2009-02-15 01:48:11

#12

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6456|what

ATG wrote:
Everything humans do is nature, including affecting natural progression and making species extinct.

"Mankind is like a virus" - Agent Smith

2009-02-15 02:07:02

#13

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6978|Canberra, AUS

AussieReaper wrote:
ATG wrote:
Everything humans do is nature, including affecting natural progression and making species extinct.
"Mankind is like a virus" - Agent Smith

Ironic given he becomes a virus himself, but anyway.

Evolution doesn't follow human ideas of progress or advancement. Evolution happens while a species exists.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2009-02-15 02:15:41

#14

BVC: Member; +325|6999

Evolution is the process of adaption to one's environment. In order for evolution to work "in reverse", a species would have to become less suited to it's environment. In the case of humanity, earth is becoming overpopulated - our environment requires a lower population, hence the lower breeding rates of the developed world.

2009-02-15 02:17:16

#15

..teddy..jimmy: Member; +1,393|6952

Imo humans are always evolving to adapt their environment just like other animals. We eat more, exercise less and have completely different lifestyles to our counterparts 200 years ago.

https://www.piffe.com/images/evolutionofman.jpg

2009-02-15 02:18:13

#16

rdx-fx: ...; +955|6894

We know a fair bit about the laws of physics, math, and mechanics.

We know precious little about the laws of life. There is very fundamental research just starting to take place in the last 50-100 years. Hell, we haven't even been able to define 'life' without getting the religious zealots all up in arms.

Will be interesting when evolution is taken out of the hands of chance and natural selection, and is a matter of conscious thought and/or good engineering practice... with a healthy dose of practicality and aesthetics thrown in, just because.

Would be very interesting to see the implications if death was made optional, and only a matter of conscious decision, accident, or violence. Think people would take wars a little more seriously.

2009-02-15 02:28:53

#17

rdx-fx: ...; +955|6894

Kmarion wrote:
I've said it before. We humans are born from stars. Maybe we are the universe just trying to explain itself.

Well said. you're probably 50 years ahead of the times with that one. you've got the "what", and the implications of "how" and "why" will probably be staggering. Max Plank and Albert Einstein kinda fundamental staggering.

Like Plank and Einstein, we heard what they said - we still haven't completely grasped what they meant.

2009-02-15 02:29:46

#18

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6774

To OP:

Evolution never stops, it's an onwards rolling machine. There's no such thing as the 'evolution of humans being in decline', it's more like us beginning to fall on the wrong side of the survival of the fittest principle. If our lifespan starts to shorten and we eventually become inherently weaker, that's not evolution 'declining', that's evolution advancing in a way that simply doesn't benefit one particular species.

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2009-02-15 03:03:01

#19

Flecco: iPod is broken.; +1,048|6968|NT, like Mick Dundee

Wonder if mechanical augmentation of the human body for improved functionality will take off at all if the technology becomes avaliable...

Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.

2009-02-15 03:10:47

#20

rdx-fx: ...; +955|6894

Flecco wrote:
Wonder if mechanical augmentation of the human body for improved functionality will take off at all if the technology becomes avaliable...

Let me go take off my jacket, my shoes, and my contacts.. then i'll try and respond to that.

Our species is pretty much defined by our use of intelligence to find ways to mechanically augment our abilities. Spears, Fire, Language, Tools, Medicine.

Hip replacement, artificial heart valves, surgical titanium inserts, artificial joints, pacemakers, etc..

The NFL would be full of bionic men, but Grandma beat 'em to the doctor's office.

2009-02-15 03:15:30

#21

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,060|7075|PNW

I'm not sure if I agree with either article. There are plenty of counterarguments out there.

It's still going to take awhile for our species' gene pool to converge and by the time it becomes a problem, science may already have a solution in genetics and/or biomechanical augmentation. Plus, there is radiation and other environmental factors to take into consideration, as well as the possibility that we'll simply make the transition into another (similar) species(ii) adapted for whatever the world(s) holds in store.

There's also the 'big ears' thing. When I look over photos of US soldiers during WW2, I notice that all those guys have huge honking ears. In general, they're noticeably smaller now. Not exactly an X-Men revolution, but I'd still call it nature running its glacial course.

2009-02-15 03:59:54

#22

DrunkFace: Germans did 911; +427|6984|Disaster Free Zone

Macbeth wrote:
Kmarion wrote:
Declining fertility = declining diversity, sounds like an adaption all in itself.

I personally don't think so. We've just hit a major milestone in mapping the Neanderthal Genome. http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=121360 . We're heading to a point that will allow us to genetically manipulate ourselves .. with intent.
I really hope that never happens. As nice as it would be to take out certain defects it would create a whole host of "I want my child to come out like x" issues.
We would end up defining people's sexuality, beliefs, and a whole range of other things.
Beside that being the romantic type I am, I think that when a loving couple has a child seeing the results of mixing the genes is a amazing thing.

Awesome movie watch it.

2009-02-15 05:45:54

#23

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6708|North Carolina

Gattaca is one of my alltime favorite movies. Andrew Niccol is an amazing director overall.

Anyway, Gattaca is a great example of what the future may look like in a few decades. At this point, evolution is slowly becoming something we can control. With DNA, we can create new species or perfect existing ones.

2009-02-15 06:14:26

#24

andy12: Banned; +52|6960

Humans are the only species where their only defence isn't teeth, or an armoured skin, or claws, but a brain that allows us to advance. We're top of the Food chain not because we can beat the shit out of Lions with our bare hands, but because we have developed assault rifles. So until the defining factor of humans being able to grow smarter is finished, we are evolving slowly. Any noticeable differences in evolution can't be seen in the amount of time we have been recording history, what, 4000 years? Try 1000 times that to see any change, maybe.

And how is us "Declining morally and socially" anything to do with a reverse of evolution? They are man made ideals which are defined but what the majority think. When China hurry up and change the meaning of morals to existing to serve the state rather than living then we'll be as "moral" as you like...

Last edited by andy12 (2009-02-15 06:15:05)

2009-02-15 07:02:16

#25

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6708|North Carolina

andy12 wrote:
Humans are the only species where their only defence isn't teeth, or an armoured skin, or claws, but a brain that allows us to advance. We're top of the Food chain not because we can beat the shit out of Lions with our bare hands, but because we have developed assault rifles. So until the defining factor of humans being able to grow smarter is finished, we are evolving slowly. Any noticeable differences in evolution can't be seen in the amount of time we have been recording history, what, 4000 years? Try 1000 times that to see any change, maybe.

And how is us "Declining morally and socially" anything to do with a reverse of evolution? They are man made ideals which are defined but what the majority think. When China hurry up and change the meaning of morals to existing to serve the state rather than living then we'll be as "moral" as you like...

Great post.. +1

BF2S Forums Is human evolution over?

Newsweek wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

ATG wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

ATG wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

ATG wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Flecco wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

andy12 wrote:

Board footer