|
|
Post by Sysop3 on Nov 9, 2014 21:57:39 GMT -5
Is there a Homo superius just around the next corner, waiting to take our place? Let’s think about what it would take: If we were to give rise to a new species, something would have to happen to us to create a bottleneck or isolated place for a founder-person and her or his mate to show up and get separated from you and me and our offspring. In the modern world, that is very unlikely. We have airplanes and ships and the Internet. What if there were an enormous war and all of our intercontinental means of transportation were destroyed? Perhaps then an isolated population of people would live apart from the rest of us for so long that they would no longer be able to successfully interbreed. Just listen to all the dialects we have for speaking English. When human populations are even a little bit separate, they start talking differently. Other bigger changes might happen with more profound separation. Perhaps this could happen somewhere beyond Earth, even, such as in a colony on Mars. Without geographic isolation, I am not sure we can get a new species of hominid, not ever. But that is not the same thing as saying that humans are no longer evolving, because we surely are. We cannot step away from evolution. Our genomes are always collecting mutations, and we are always making mate selections. Are humans preferentially mating with other humans who are tall? Blonde or not blonde? Are smart people actually producing significantly smarter offspring, who end up making more money and ever so slowly outcompeting other families? Or is intelligence a losing trait, because highly educated couples tend to have smaller families, so when something goes wrong there are fewer siblings left to carry the genes forward? Or since highly educated men and women have babies later in life than those that don’t squander their best childbearing years in universities, do the babies of the highly educated enter the world with more trouble in childbirth, and are they prone to more subtle gene troubles that result from later mother and fatherhood? Cue the spooky music. More likely than a future race of hyper-smart people who outcompete the rest of us is a strain of Homo sapiens that can beat a disease. Probably the most important evolutionary sieve that any future person is going to have to get through is going to have to do with germs and parasites. Recall that in the Spanish Flu epidemic of 1918–1919, some 50 million people were killed by something far too small to even see, let alone hunt and destroy. The Black Death of the fourteenth century may have killed up to 200 million. You and I are descendants of people who just happen to have the genes to fight off deadly viruses and bacteria. Those who survive into the future will probably have resistance to certain diseases that none of us have today. There are a lot of other ways that evolutionary change will march on, no matter what. Those that survive may have a higher tolerance for drinking milk. Babies in industrialized societies have access to milk like no one before us. Maybe a genetic tolerance for milk will slowly help more of those babies survive until they have kids of their own. There is evidence that people with both especially high and especially low blood sugar levels have fewer offspring. So subtle changes at least will make their way into the human population’s gene pool. It’s going on right now. Then there is a whole other category of possible human futures that are influenced by our own technologies. I give a great many talks or lectures at universities and for general audiences. I enjoy performing, the part where I’m doing the talking and all, but my favorite part of any evening is when audience members come up to microphones and ask me questions. One of the most common themes is what people call “The Singularity.” This is a supposed imminent time (2029, in some versions of the story) when computers will become as sophisticated as human brains. From there, it is proposed, machines will be able to outcompete humans at just about everything. There will be superior car-parking algorithms, disaster-relief coordination, legal briefs, rocket science, great thinking in general. Taking it to the next logical step, this artificial intelligence will have to be managed carefully, because after all, any of these future brain machines will outthink and outmaneuver us at every practical turn. Bill Nye More with animated pic and audio, here. www.popsci.com/article/science/human-species-still-evolving |
|
Tempus Fugit
Global Facilitator
Contributing Member
Science - making religion look stupid since the 17th century.
Posts: 7,474 
|
Post by Tempus Fugit on Nov 10, 2014 4:00:45 GMT -5
When I look at the caveman-like uncivilised manner a lot of our younger generation behaves I'd say that, in the UK at least, we're devolving.
|
|
|
|
Post by beth on Nov 10, 2014 12:57:58 GMT -5
Don't you suppose it's a little of both. Since we have no freedom of choice when it comes to which gene pool we fall into ... feel fortunate you were born on the up-side.  |
|
ladylinda
Moderatorz 
Poetry Editor
July 2011 Member of the Month, May 2014 Member of the Month
Posts: 4,901
|
Post by ladylinda on Nov 11, 2014 17:52:22 GMT -5
I sometimes wonder if we're going backwards!
|
|
|
|
Post by beth on Nov 11, 2014 17:54:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on Nov 11, 2014 22:12:07 GMT -5
May I suggest that the often referred to term, 'evolution' in the context of a species evolving ahead or devolving backward is an incorrect understanding and use of the term, as to biological evolution. Sociological definitions might result in different understandings.
It is true that individual members of a species (any species) change due to dispersal of genetic material through breeding and this is comprised primarily of Mendelian and classical genetics and molecular genetics which are today accepted and understood as the primary motivators in the inheritance of traits. There is also some degree of genetic mutations which can enter variables.
None of the preceding can be considered as causing species advancement or devolving in species biological advancement or devolution. Rather, these biological variations (occurring all of the time) are normally not evident unless they (by chance) meet new environmental demands which are significant.
This can be seen in such as the segment of Homo Sapiens which live in the Andes as their ability to process greater quantities of air at high altitudes. Or, at the end of the last Ice Age Homo Sapiens Sapiens which did not need to develop the large fleshy nose of Cro Magnon which assisted breathing in cold climates.
There are many such species examples as with the Peppered Moth which was originally white or a light gray and with the advent of the industrial revolution which dispersed large amounts of coal smoke, the trees which the moth lived on changed to a darker color which made the lighter moths stand out for prey of birds. The darker months continued to remain unseen on the trees.
The point here is that none of these changes can be seen as anything other than existing genetic variation responding to environmental changes and none of them have anything to do with evolving up or devolving down.
Today's Homo Sapien Sapien is essentially the same as the earliest findings. If such changes were to occur (and they could) for it to become a stable variation it is most likely that breeding between (Homo Sapiens Sapiens and whatever) them would produce no off spring.
|
|
Jessiealan
xr
Member of the Month, October 2013
Posts: 8,726 
|
Post by Jessiealan on Nov 12, 2014 0:45:27 GMT -5
Noticeable evolution will happen, but it will not happen quickly. My husband believes it will go in 2 directions. One will be mentally evolved humans, and the other, physically evolved or the physically adept. The first the minds behind extreme innovations in science and technology while the otherr will be our athletes and outdoors men. Only time will give the answer.
.
|
|
Jessiealan
xr
Member of the Month, October 2013
Posts: 8,726
|
Post by Jessiealan on Nov 12, 2014 0:50:23 GMT -5
Thank you for the link, Beth. We are at the beginning of the technological evolution of the future, right now.  |
|
|
|
Post by annaj26 on Nov 16, 2014 16:31:19 GMT -5
Is The Human Species Still Evolving?
Yes, of course! Who would doubt it. We're young, moving toward adulthood.
It's a great time to be alive!
|
|
|
|
Post by annaj26 on Dec 5, 2014 16:44:09 GMT -5
May I suggest that the often referred to term, 'evolution' in the context of a species evolving ahead or devolving backward is an incorrect understanding and use of the term, as to biological evolution. Sociological definitions might result in different understandings. It is true that individual members of a species (any species) change due to dispersal of genetic material through breeding and this is comprised primarily of Mendelian and classical genetics and molecular genetics which are today accepted and understood as the primary motivators in the inheritance of traits. There is also some degree of genetic mutations which can enter variables. None of the preceding can be considered as causing species advancement or devolving in species biological advancement or devolution. Rather, these biological variations (occurring all of the time) are normally not evident unless they (by chance) meet new environmental demands which are significant. This can be seen in such as the segment of Homo Sapiens which live in the Andes as their ability to process greater quantities of air at high altitudes. Or, at the end of the last Ice Age Homo Sapiens Sapiens which did not need to develop the large fleshy nose of Cro Magnon which assisted breathing in cold climates. There are many such species examples as with the Peppered Moth which was originally white or a light gray and with the advent of the industrial revolution which dispersed large amounts of coal smoke, the trees which the moth lived on changed to a darker color which made the lighter moths stand out for prey of birds. The darker months continued to remain unseen on the trees. The point here is that none of these changes can be seen as anything other than existing genetic variation responding to environmental changes and none of them have anything to do with evolving up or devolving down. Today's Homo Sapien Sapien is essentially the same as the earliest findings. If such changes were to occur (and they could) for it to become a stable variation it is most likely that breeding between (Homo Sapiens Sapiens and whatever) them would produce no off spring. I don't think it's breeding as much as it is adapting. Individual computer use was a turning point I think. I read recently that in 3 or 4 years, schools will make computer use the norm with "paperless classrooms". That, with drones, robots and driverless cars coming into common use is going to make the 20th century obsolete. Humans will benefit but they will also need to evolve to make the adjustments. |
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Dec 5, 2014 18:06:09 GMT -5
Are we evolving or adapting? The simple answer is all organisms evolve adaptations to their environment. But it's glacially slow in terms of a human lifetime. A decline in the average age of menarche from 17 to 13 in Europe from 1850 to 1960 is well documented. The age now is a little lower. The argument here is what has caused this. The difference in living standards and conditions means most are well nourished and housed today. Either way, its a change over time. One that is a real headache for the law. But there are different forms of evolution like the explosive radiation of the Cambrian era. Beginning around 542 million years ago, most major animal phyla appeared, as indicated by the fossil record. Lasting for about the next 20 million years, it resulted in the origin of the body plan of modern animals Additionally, the event was accompanied by major diversification of other organisms. Prior to the Cambrian explosion, most organisms were simple, composed of individual cells occasionally organized into colonies. Over the following 70 or 80 million years, the rate of diversification accelerated by an order of magnitude and the diversity of life began to resemble that of today. Many of the present phyla appeared during this period, with the exception of Bryozoa, which made its earliest known appearance in the Lower Ordovician.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambrian_explosion |
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on Dec 6, 2014 0:44:38 GMT -5
Anna said, " . . . I don't think it's breeding as much as it is adapting. Individual computer use was a turning point I think. I read recently that in 3 or 4 years, schools will make computer use the norm with "paperless classrooms". That, with drones, robots and driverless cars coming into common use is going to make the 20th century obsolete. Humans will benefit but they will also need to evolve to make the adjustments. . . "
Your point about the paperless society and computers in schools is interesting, but here we have a citizen's group which is working as hard as possible to get the computer involvement minimized.
|
|
|
|
Post by beth on Dec 6, 2014 1:48:02 GMT -5
Anna said, " . . . I don't think it's breeding as much as it is adapting. Individual computer use was a turning point I think. I read recently that in 3 or 4 years, schools will make computer use the norm with "paperless classrooms". That, with drones, robots and driverless cars coming into common use is going to make the 20th century obsolete. Humans will benefit but they will also need to evolve to make the adjustments. . . " Your point about the paperless society and computers in schools is interesting, but here we have a citizen's group which is working as hard as possible to get the computer involvement minimized. I think this is the article Annie is refering to (link below). Unfortunately, Time is a pay site, but you might get enough information here to do a google search and find out more. It's possible some schools will choose this route and others will not. After I read this thread, earlier, I asked around here and discovered the middle school of an independent school distract near me will be issuing each student an iPad starting next fall. Apple had helped them launch this program and the cost will be no more than all the books that are usually part of the curriculum. They seem very enthusiastic about it - both facility and kids. Parents will take more convincing to feel comfortable. I got most of this information from one of my daughter's friends who will be doing her student teaching in that school system ... one of the highest rated in the state, btw. I'm more like the parents and would need to be convinced. I DO think it's part of the future, though. time.com/3483905/the-paperless-classroom-is-coming/ |
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on Dec 6, 2014 8:05:39 GMT -5
I suspect that you have the right of it Beth. Here our citizen group got involved initially due to the bond issue which has 8 different plans going from a low of 72 million to a high of 275 million. In our discussions with them we ask specifically how this would improve education results and after many meeting there is no proof that such spending will change anything in the education results. It is more of a we must do something and spending this money is something.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dex on Dec 6, 2014 19:22:48 GMT -5
Are we evolving or adapting? The simple answer is all organisms evolve adaptations to their environment. But it's glacially slow in terms of a human lifetime. A decline in the average age of menarche from 17 to 13 in Europe from 1850 to 1960 is well documented. The age now is a little lower. The argument here is what has caused this. The difference in living standards and conditions means most are well nourished and housed today. Either way, its a change over time. One that is a real headache for the law. But there are different forms of evolution like the explosive radiation of the Cambrian era. Beginning around 542 million years ago, most major animal phyla appeared, as indicated by the fossil record. Lasting for about the next 20 million years, it resulted in the origin of the body plan of modern animals Additionally, the event was accompanied by major diversification of other organisms. Prior to the Cambrian explosion, most organisms were simple, composed of individual cells occasionally organized into colonies. Over the following 70 or 80 million years, the rate of diversification accelerated by an order of magnitude and the diversity of life began to resemble that of today. Many of the present phyla appeared during this period, with the exception of Bryozoa, which made its earliest known appearance in the Lower Ordovician.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambrian_explosion I'm thinking wiithin a century's time. By 2114 there should be differences that can be seen in humans if only because of the time spent at computers. We ought to start now with exercises designed to keep our backs straight and the rest of us in good proportions. The brain might evolve, too, changing the way we see things and learn. |
|
Omega
