Will humans evolve further?

Genetic engineering, Biorobotics and cybornetics can take us furth then you think!

What do you mean once we have full use of are brain?

Humans won't evolve unless there is pressure to evolve. There is no pressure to evolve because all of use seem to be repoducing just fine!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Humans might have found thier niche in the global environment. Just like sharks, who have barely changed because they are so suited for their environment. Humans are unlike most species because we are able to control practically ever aspect of our environment. Many animals do this too, but not to the extent that humans do. An example would be a beaver. They build a dam on a river because it's their ideal home, rather than let their species die off until their genes allow them to have a well suited home off the river. Humans can make their home anywhere and control what they can. Our species doesn't rely on genetics for survival as much as it does what we call "techonology" or tools. That's why I see the future of our change in technology rather than a forced evolution. There could always be a chance of us evolving from "natural" causes but I think that would have to involve our own species, like a war. But just like Bebelina said in the beginning, "Yes, we will, unless we kill ourselves first."

I can only see a few ways for humans to evolve. Either because of radiation or some unforeseen thing, some genes get repressed and we change. Or some "hidden" genes are expressed and give us something new. These would take time. And then there's the mass extinction so that our gene pool is severly limited enough to provoke change. That scenerio would probably have to do with us losing control of our environment.

Humans don't have parts of their brain that are "locked" and hold special powers for us. That is a myth. Here's a site for some proof:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Dont you think that because we are weakening the genetic make up of our species that we are eventually in danger of creating our own downfall? think about it, nature is based on survival of the fit, we as humans now manage to prolong life, we are starting to dable in our own genetic makeup, we assist in the procreation between people that would otherwise be childless, there are growing numbers of people with everyday faults that are getting more and more everyday.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

wow...ever heard of eugenics?

http://www.africa2000.com/ENDX/endx.htm

you fit right in

 

well

what humanity is doing would not be a good thing for a normal species, but we no longer have survival of the fittest nor do we need it. A very important distinction of genetics and eugenetics is that with genetics we can fix things that are wrong, and not just sterilze/kill people who belong in a group we deem to be unfit.

 

what about all the genious people
Einstein, Mozart, Beethowen
people who can multiply 13 digit numbers in 5 seconds
and what about that 4 year old kid that learned to read (before he learned to talk) at 1.5 years and now, when he's 4, he's brilliant violin player and learns astrophysics

our brains have the potency, meybe we just need to learn how to "unlock" them

 

Thats just from having the right genes and appropriate pathway development. A combination of genetics and environment makes a genius.

 

so maybe with genetic engineering we can unlock our brains
I don't believe that environment plays so big role, because all kids have a very simmilar environment up to the age of 1 or 2
and there have been such talanted kids also from India, where the environment isn't the best you would want for a child

 

I'm new here so please be patient and don't call me an idiot (a term I've noticed an overuse of in other posts!)

On the matter of evolution: We will continue to evolve, ever so slowly and unnoticeably, as long as we steer away from 'sameness'. Anyone ever hear about the potato blight in Ireland and the mass starvation as a result? Well, part of the problem was that the Irish planted one species of potato. They did not have a diversity of species planted. The potato, which was a dietary mainstay, was wiped out by a microbe. If their had been gentic variation, this would have been less devastating to the population.

Today, we have companies trying to patent plant seeds. They want control over who can use them and even whether they can be used at all. Some organizations are taking an active role in keeping genetic plant variation alive. But, through genetic engineering, we may end out creating 'sameness' and this is dangerous for people and plants alike.

We are not much different than the potatoes of Ireland in that if there is not enough genetic variation, we risk being wiped out. let's say someone does not like the behavioral trait of depression or aggression in humans. let's say we discover the responsible gene and we decide that humans are better off without it. Well, perhaps the genetic trait that causes bipolar or even schizophrenia also protects a person from death from a certain type of microbe? Decreasing 'sameness' to make our lives cozy is dangerous business. As long as we use technology wisely, we may prevent the extinction of the human species.

 

So with a diversified human species we - as a species - have an increased chance to survive disease, biological catastrophe, etc..

So much for modern globalization. If/when we finally learn to get along with one-another we'll find ourselves staring down the barrel of a biological gun of sorts.

Damned either way ...

 

We will continue to evlove, but not in the classical sense. We will lose parts of ourselves that modern society can replace (assuming that in the future all countries have such a society). Basically we will lose out teeth(dentures), appendix(not needed), hair(clothing), and based on future developments: skin color.
Skin color's main cause right now is to make B-12 and protect us from the sun. Clothes do that just as well, and the more time we spend inside, the less it will matter.

So basically we'll all be teethless, hairless, albino freaks.

This is all assuming that people with these problems are not shunned, and that they have a chance to get their groove on.

 

I also think there is the potential to be genetically modified to become short (less pressure on the environment). We will lose muscle mass (we no longer will need a great deal of muscles to fight because fighting will probably be selected out). Our heads will be large and the mouth/lower part of the face small (the head will only be able to handle a certain amount of weight. Mass will be redistributed to favor a large brain. And yes, the teeth will be diminished because we need more room for brain growth. We will be small/scrawny/and smart. And...given enough time, we will probably not waste our energy on verbal communication. We will probably tap into intuitive abilities. And we probably will not want to waste our energy on nonsense ways of socializing. We will behave in a much more serious manner. Sarcasm, jokes, and small talk will probably be viewed as a waste of energy, as well as primitive behavior which aided an individual in adapting to their social environment; kindof the way we view primates grooming eachother! We will no longer be dependent on social groups the way we are today for collective protection because we will no longer be threatened by big and brawny people. They won't exist. The diminished food supply will select them out, probably through genetic manipulation.

 

I personally believe genetic manipulation, cybernetics and biorobotics will soon out pace normal Darwinian evolution in humans. So this conversation is rather null to me unless we ask what we can do to improve are selves rather then what nature can do.

 

Well, in askng how we can improve ourselves we cannot leave the nature part out. We can outsmart nature, for awhile. But we must deal with circumstances such as outcompeting microbes, which evolve alot quicker than we do. They are more diverse and probably more fit than we are. And I do agree that genetic manipulation will outpace Darwinian evolution as long as we do not ruin ourselves before we get to that point of using it wisely. We cannot look at only ourselves in this equation. Self Centeredness may be our demise.

We must fully understand the impact genetic manipulation has on nature. For example, in the race of humans and microbes, our tendency toward wanting 'sameness' may give them the upper hand. Or, they may evolve to have a symbiotic relationship at a cost which is what I see happening now, with the advent of antibiotics in the 1940's.. We kept a population alive with antibiotics but we have alot of psychiatric/neurodegenerative/and autoimmune diseases today. These buggers are probably in our bodies, but they aren't killing us anymore. They know where to hide. And the brain is a good hiding place. If we have a good plan, we might outwit nature. But we cannot do it without first understanding nature and all of the consequences. We cannot leave "what nature can do" out of the equation.

 

I’m sorry but I don't see what relevance microbes have to a supercomputer in an asteroid.
Microbes won’t have much of an effect on “humans” of the future because we will most likely not be made out of organic or biological components by then.

 

First, when this starts happening it will be resisted he same way abortion and cloning are... aka bombs/protests/laws.
Also, the microbe problem still exists, unless we stop reproducting altogether. After 1000 years as a computer in an asteroid I'd get kinda bored.

 

True: those fundamentalist will remain on earth and anyone of cybernetic, robotic or just plain technological persuasion will run as far way as possible. Asking what happens to those close-minded Homo Sapiens on Earth will be like asking what the next stage in squirrel evolution will be. As for boredom when you have total control of all emotions that you can perceive if your bored you just turn the boredom off. Also I’m not talking about thousand of years here… more like millions and billions! Homo Sapiens will most likely not be around when the sun burns out but our successors will!

 

How far can you run? metal rusts. What you're talking about has no resemblance to human beings, nor does it resemble a living thing any more than a rock does. And if we get to a point where matter doesn't break down, doesn't rust, what do you think the effect of increasing masses of 'thinking metal', or whatever it is you propose our successors will be made of, floating around the universe will be?

 

Have you heard of "indigo children"? Rather than debating the possibility of their ever existing, check out one of tons of sites such as www.indigochild.net . There are also many books. These children are everywhere. I have not only taught them, I raised three of them! I invite you to check it out!

 

I'm at a loss to see what indigo child have to do with our evolution. The basis for them seems to be more enviromental then genetic.

For those who can't find it... here's the description