are we still evolving?

Discussion in 'Science & Society' started by charles brough, Dec 1, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. shichimenshyo Caught in the machine Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,110
    Yes...but at a much slower rate

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. jpappl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,985
    Interesting that the OP suggests we are stagnating and provides a link which the first few lines of contradicts the OP.

    "Hu*man ev*o*lu*tion has been speed*ing up tre*mend*ous*ly, a new study con*tends—so much, that the lat*est ev*o*lu*tion*ary changes seem to large*ly ec*lipse ear*l*ier ones that ac*com*pa*nied mod*ern man’s “ori*gin.”
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. ChildofYahweh Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1
    On a minor level, yes. But macro evolution, I doubt penises have gotten any bigger since the days of the cave men.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. takethewarhome midnatt klarhet Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    625
    Penises haven't but the ongoing male pissing contest has. Ha.
     
  8. Xylene Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,398
    I contend that the very different and challenging environments that we encounter in space will lead to a speeding up of Human evolution.
     
  9. DRZion Theoretical Experimentalist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,046
  10. Carcano Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,865
    Humans will always be evolving faster than other species...as long as we continue to make war and commit suicide.
     
  11. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    Faster than any other species ?
     
  12. Carcano Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,865
    Good point...lets amend that.

    Faster than any other species with a similar rate of reproduction.
     
  13. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    That's way better.. lol
    Now, do you have any sources ?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  14. Carcano Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,865
    Sources for my statement?

    No, but even if I was right there still wouldnt be any sources.
     
  15. DRZion Theoretical Experimentalist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,046
    You have to be careful about generation times.. HIV can evolve over the course of several days because of the very quick reproductive cycle and very poor proofreading mechanisms present in viruses.
     
  16. Dub_ Strange loop Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    156
    Nice necro post. I wish I had been around for the original go at this thread, but since it's already been revived, I'll toss in my two cents.

    Yes, we are still evolving. The only two conditions necessary for evolution to occur are:
    • Genetic variation
    • Differential reproductive success between individuals (note: doesn't have to be systematic)
    Clearly modern humans meet both of these conditions, so it's safe to say that we are still evolving.

    The important thing to remember is that natural selection is not the only mechanism that drives evolution. I suspect that the topic of this thread would have been more accurately stated as, "Are we still undergoing natural selection?" -- which is a far more interesting question than whether we are simply evolving.

    So how about it? Is human evolution still driven by natural selection? I think that the answer to this question is 'yes' as well. I noted above that the requisite differences in reproductive success didn't necessarily have to be systematic. But when success does differ in a systematic way, this represents natural selection. While I think that the factors that determine reproductive success have certainly changed since civilization -- becoming both very different and much less deterministic -- I would say that they still affect reproductive success in a systematic fashion.
     
  17. DRZion Theoretical Experimentalist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,046
    Yes, certainly.

    Genetic differences and weaknesses will soon be adjustable using gene therapy. Gluten intolerance used to be deadly when cereals were the main source of nutrition. However, nowadays such an intolerance would be detected and dealt with, through dietery planning or gene therapy or etc.

    It seems that nowadays anyone can have children and bring them up at least physically healthy, so natural selection is weakened. There must be a lot of non-genetic factors that determine family size and reproductive success. There are probably genetics that influence acquisition of non-genetic factors (conformity, creativity, etc), and these are perhaps selected for.

    I definitely agree that these factors change and are much less deterministic.
     
  18. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,426
    Moderator note: 149 off-topic posts have been deleted, including all posts from the sock puppet troll.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page