| (Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7) | |
Natural selection is the idea that the unfit are killed off before breeding age. This isn't true for humans anymore. In fact, smarter more educated people are more likely to have kids later in life if at all. | |
I actually did something similar in an assignment for English class. You had to make a future city, so I decided to put all of the intelligent people in it.
They also have a tendency to have less kids than uneducated hicks, for whatever reason. | |
Humanity is evolving. The average height two hundred years ago was a lot smaller then the standard height today. Survival of the Fittest is gone (for now...) but that doesn't mean we are not changing as a species. | |
I think I see your problem. It's this:
This sentence, essentially, betrays your lack of understanding of evolution. Evolution does not mean becoming "stronger, faster, smarter, etc.", it means becoming more suited to the environment in which a species lives. Humans will continue to evolve to match the environment we have created for ourselves. | |
Aren't Pedigree dogs generally drooling morons who look nice but aren't really useful for much else (they're 'fey' for lack of a better term) whereas mongrels are tough, hardy and can take punishment? Forgive me if I'm wrong, my expertise on dog breeding isn't that incredible, but I was under the impression that generally pedigree dogs are there for show whereas mongrel dogs are more useful for actual tasks that matter. As for humanity evolving...do we need to? I fully endorse any sort of evolution which will give me a planet which has catgirl humanoids running around, be it via freak accident or forced genetic manipulation (however one would do that, again, not an expert). Besides my slightly creepy fetish however, what cause do we have to evolve? Yeah we could be stronger, faster, smarter etc. but what's the point? Why bother? | |
You've been playing too much Bioshock. Anyway, are there that many of the world's "Best and Brightest" who are willing to be locked in a box with a bunch of horny smart guys? Anyway, you can't just cut the population of the world in half. Japan and the US are both staring down the barrel of having to support a retiring generation bigger than the current breadwinners. And I know I'm not gonna get any meticaid. | |
You know what the real reason that humanity is not evolving is? We're not at the point where resources are stretched throughout the world. While places in Asia and Africa have populations which have limited resources, the developed world suffers from such a glut of cheap, easy-to-digest food that it's inevitable that there is no real competition to evolve. Also, has it not occurred to you that perhaps the sort of intelligence that you would no doubt support may not be an evolutionary trait which would be useful in the future? Indeed, creative intelligence, when it is not applied to the creation of tools and machines, would probably lead us towards a pretty horrific evolutionary dead end. I have no doubt that I would likely be one of the first ones killed off by resurgent natural evolution, and yet I would be likely selected by a forced breeding program for various traits. I don't oppose the idea out of principle, but more for a lack of practicality. | |
Worse than that. Purebreed pedigree dogs almost always have serious health problems, arthritis especially is common in lots of breeds, but many are susceptible to other things like cancer as well. This is always the problem with a restricted breeding pool. You might get one or two desired traits, but you can't eliminate the unpleasant things that come with them. | |
Eventually, mankind will start colonising outer space. The first colonies are going to be people who have been hand-picked to survive the rigours of space travel and are skilled at something required for space travel. The first terraformers will be hardy specimens indeed, trained in biology, geology and other fields that would be suited to taking a patch of alien soil and making it support human life. These pioneers will be our first steps into outer space, the elite, those who make it past the required screening processes. By the time space travel advances to the point that they can cart off a few thousand dirt farmers and throw them on some backwater planet and see if they do alright, earth will have destroyed itself in nuclear fire and the descendants of those colonists will be the only humans left. | |
Our next step in evolution will propably be the better use of abundant energy many of us have on our weist. I vote for more brain power | |
I think that's how Hitler started, what with his master race and all. | |
Look up "Idiocracy" a nice movie with a good explanation of what "Human Evolution" has become. If your too lazy I'll provide the description: Thanks to science and such things as welfare even dumbest of the dumb can survive, and since they are dumb they reproduce like rabbits (more than 3 kids) without thinking of the impact a child will have on their life. Smart ones on the other hand limit their reproduction to a number that hey can support (1-3 on average). => Population of smart people will decrease with time and population of stupid will grow. | |
That's mostly the consequence of better nutrition, not genetic drift. -- Alex | |
Godwinned in 12 posts. G'night folks. | |
humans used to have this problem but we got rid of it (mostly) when we banned incest (except in hentai...). humans have come to far in the cushy-must-save-everyone-especially-those-with-disabilities mindset to "purge" the species and make it better. so now we have to go "forward" and wait until we can artificially modify genes or give cybernetics to enhance the species. but we have to figure it out soon before we "de-evolve" as a result of lower intelligent humans mass producing and intelligent humans have been having few or none. | |
We wouldn't evolve anyway, we change our enviroment to suit us. | |
Eugenics is the concept of only allowing the intelligent, healthy, etc people to breed. It is also considered horribly unethical to use on humans. After all, the last significant group to attempt this is now so vilified you can't bring them up in a debate, even if they are the perfect example, without Godwinning a thread. However... the US tried to do just that near the turn of the century. However, the proposal was forced sterilization of the 'mentally handicapped' and - get this - 'morally handicapped'. In one sterling example, a mother and her daughter were forcibly sterilized by court order, because said mother was of 'loose morals' - even though the daughter was just a child! Evolution will happen in whatever way it will, no matter what we try. Smart people seem to prefer smart people, while idiots breed with idiots. It's entirely possible that the idiots will choke the smart people off the planet by sheer numbers, but it is equally plausible that, eventually, the idiots will breed themselves into starvation while the smart people, having used their smarts to get into positions of power, wealth, and authority, have sufficient resources to survive beyond them. And for those who do not believe in evolution, you can always say that whatever happens is what was meant to happen. | |
Forced breeding to make humans awesome? that doesn't sound like what nazis were after in the least. -_- | |
And we also have millions of fat people, who need scooters to get around malls, yea, we own, because now we all just have "Big bones." =P But asides that, I agree, diet has more to do with our height than genetics do, although theres always that one family you know that are all freakin massive because they got it from both sides of the family or something. | |
"Medical science" isn't out saving "the stupid". It's out saving people with vision problems or heart defects or weak knees or asthma or arthritis or diabetes.
We can't just make whatever we want out of a dog given a few hundred years. Since rather little mutation occurs over that period of time, we're still strongly restricted by the overall possibility space of their genes. Even the first domesticated dogs had the potential to be a very small dog or a very big dog or a fat jowly dog -- we've just made it astronomically more common through selective breeding. We can't just up and breed a dog that flies or a dog that has opposable thumbs or a dog with horns or a dog that breathes pure nitrogen in any reasonable amount of time, because no combination of the Canis lupus familiaris DNA can produce these traits. You know, you could probably be a lot stronger, faster, and smarter with the genes you had if you just worked on it right now. With just the genes you have. So, why aren't you training for marathons and reading a book a day? -- Alex | |
Thats true but I still feel like humans are evolving just very slightly. | |
I am a eugenicist, but only in a particular fashion. I'm not about to say "You! Out of the pool!" as much as I would dearly like to, because I believe it is someone's right to fuck themselves up with kids as much as they want. Instead, I take the more subtle approach of encouraging good partner choices, and encouraging intelligent people to breed. In response to the OP, we are still evolving, it's just in a different way. There is a delusion that evolution holds to a set past, and that it -must- rely on natural selection to function. This isn't true, per se. We have a social evolution which works much faster than genetic evolution, but that doesn't mean the latter isn't happening. More that we just don't notice because the changes are so slow and slight. Evidence of actual evolution is in fact present. There is a bone in the base of the skull where the spine connects to the head which pretty much dictates the entirety of human posture and facial structure. This Sphenoid bone is held responsible for the structure of teeth as well. To my knowledge there have been several studies done on skulls recovered from both digs and from bodily donations to show that the angle of the Sphenoid is shifting, generation by generation. Other things such as the mental capacity of individuals leads to either greater or lesser succession of their genes. What you are referring to is the fact that you have a whole bunch of IT professionals who are not having children because they prefer their lifestyle otherwise; as opposed to the lower social demographics including the people in the third world who have more offspring. In particular, third world families will see another child as not just one more mouth to feed, but two more hands and two more feet to feed the rest of the family with. Our generation (I'm speaking broadly here.) is the first to really decide that we don't particularly want children. An entire gentry demographic known as DINKS (Double-income no kids) has sprung up because of this. I believe I've gotten off topic a little. Evolution then. Yes, it still happens. It's just that it's no longer survival of the fittest in the strict Darwinian in-the-wild sense. We are the only species to actively promote the well-being of the lame and the elderly, but that doesn't remove us from the evolutionary ladder which relies on genetic mutations. Interbreeding between races just promotes the variety of the gene pool. Remember: Only 10% of our genes separate us from cabbages. There is more genetic variation between one social group of chimpanzees and another than there is in the entire human race. | |
We're not animals; we work above the "survival of the fittest" and change it to "survival of as many as possible plzthx". Of course this means a lot of complete retards make it through, but I for one would much rather have the eejits who sue McDonalds on a daily basis than have some kind of perfect humanity. If you wanted to, you could argue that humans are already fully evolved; after all, we adapt to basically any situation with relative ease, and we're intelligent enough to survive pretty harsh conditions - we just *don't*, because our cities and houses protect us from any need to. [Note: not trying to flame here, sorry if it comes across as one.] | |
Well-bred dogs are not always so. My dog is a pure white miniature schnauzer. These dogs had a few encounters with some other breeds, which gives them a bit more resilience. And a softer coat than most terriers. Of course, the AKC won't acknowledge the White miniature schnauzer... *sigh* | |
If I learned anything from Stargate, we are going to continue evolving until we turn all glowy and ascend, thus shedding our physical form and existing as pure energy on a "higher plane" of existence. This new state of being grants us god-like powers and there are very clearcut rules on how to do it. Ascension can happen in one of two ways: evolutionarily or spiritually. Ascension can occur when a human evolves the ability to use approximately 90% of their brain capacity. Spiritual Ascension can occur through meditation when one is pure of spirit and in the search for enlightenment, has a fully opened mind, and has shed one's fears and attachment to the mortal world. So we all really need to start working hard. | |
Well, humanity's evolution has stopped being a means of adapting better to its environment, but adapting more and better ways to adapt the environment to its desires. So as long as science is being done, humans are evolving. | |
Disregard everything I just said, this is far more intelligent and much, much cooler. | |
maybe when we are hyper advanced energy beings we can figure out what the hell "furlings" were | |
I thought ethics and morals *were* progress. Which is better progress for the human race: people who are "stronger, faster, smarter" and only as 'ethical and moral' as the human race is today, or people who are the same strength, speed, and intelligence as we are today, but are more moral and ethical? Would we rather have a future of horribly inefficient Orgazmorators, or wonderfully efficient torture droids? Which group is more likely to wipe itself off the face of the planet with wars using nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons? When it comes to evolution, isn't killing yourself off the most epic of fails? | |
"Race of better people" That is not even a decent argument. The niche that a species occupies has nothing to do with good or bad and canīt be judged on ephemeral human values or moral standards. Strong and smarter or being faster is certainly not the base line recipe for success when it comes to every organism and ecosystem and humans adhere to a vast multitude of traits/rudiments that could facilate survival and reproduction. Seen from within itīs pure adaption to the system under an extreme period of time. The end result itself being very hard to predict, variables being to many and "all". OP seem to be talking about "social" darwinism in much they same way as the fairytales about hitlers conception of the world and presumed rationale. We are certainly adapting as we speak, but just for comparison we are still endowed with "pretty much" the same basic boundaries within our psyche as the first hominoids/humans especially in regards to the psychological dispostion of the primitive man with the adaption of the neo cortex. But as someone said we are probably going to be extinct by our own doing before we can perceive any substantial evolution within ourselves, since we are currently destroying the systems which we live in and on top of that we are capable of self extinction by political and military actions and the unforeseeable concept of stocastic relations which certainly has a major place in evolution. edit:sp | |
Forthought - planning, assesing the viability of bringing another life into the world, considering finance, politics, will my kid have any decent games to play in 10 years time...these are all important questions, ones that educated or at least self aware people may well ask, the 'hicks' as you call them (affectionately known as Chav's in the UK) don't think beyond 'the plunger goes in the hole, feels nice, sleep' that may be grossly unfair and I am calling an entire section of our population neaderthals but thats my point - I think we're DEVOLVIING because of the available genetic soup has anyone seen that film about all this - it came out about 4 years ago, with Luke Wilson in it - he's Mr Joe Average and gets frozen in a time capsule experiment (there's also a hooker) and they wake up in the future and everyone is just plain retarded. It wasn't a great film, but I thought it was funny and very philosophically poignient | |
Huh, I didn't know what that meant, so I went ahead and looked it up. According to Godwin's Law, I've just lost. Guess I'll have to be more careful in the future. But hey, at least I've learnt something. :D | |
Actually, I think it's a survival strategy. If you're well-off, you can afford to only have a couple of kids--when you've got access to prenatal vitamins and pediatric medical care and can afford to send them to college, it makes sense to pool all your resources in a small number of attempts to pass on your genes. On the other hand, if you live somewhere that your kids might get shot just for standing on the wrong corner at the wrong time, and your landlord might not turn your heat on until after your kid has had his resistance lowered and caught some horrible infection, well, best to have a bunch of kids--chances are one of them will make it through. Just look at how economic prosperity and social welfare correlate with low birth rates, while the birth rates in impoverished countries are so high. I actually think there's some kind of human adaptation to environment going on. In fact, it's a cause to be optimistic--imagine if we can solve the problem of overpopulation by eliminating poverty. Talk about doing good and doing well at the same time! | |
There are numerous aspects of the Human anatomy and genes that in our modern fabricated society are more or less useless (the tail bone, bi-polar disorder, SAD, the appendix etc.), you would think that we would have lost these by now but they have been reduced to the point that they are benign (our tail bone doesn't help us significantly but it doesn't get in our way either) so they aren't selected against (we only use roughly 10% of our brains but we still posess the 90% that we don't use, it doesn't harm our chances of survival). Human evolution has more or less come to an end since we face any challange our environment gives us by building around the location and by using technology, adaptation in the traditional sense is no longer nessercary for us. The idea behind breeding a 'master race' would work in theory but a) it would take thousands of years (evolution is a slow process) and b) it is highly unethical to create a 'superior' sub-species of mankind (does that mean that we, the normal folk, have been replaced?). | |
| (Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7) | |
Extra Punctuation
MovieBob: Intermission
Experienced Points
First Person
Miracle of Sound: Encore
Exploding Barrels
Loading Time
No Right Explanation
Backchat
Drinking Games
Escape to the Movies
Escapecraft
Escapist Podcast
Feed Dump
GinxTV
Jimquisition
LoadingReadyRun
Mahalo
Meatbag and Co
Media Sandwich
Miracle of Sound
No Right Answer
Pro-Gamer Gauntlet
Reviews
Space Janitors
Tales from the Table
The Big Picture
The Escapist Presents
The Retro Show
Trailers
Unskippable
Zero Punctuation
Max Payne 3 Review
Company of Heroes 2
XCOM Enemy Unknown
Black Ops 2
Diablo 3 Review
TERA Review
Firefall Beta Preview
Starhawk Review
Critical Miss
Name Game
Since the current escapist fad is on gender and species I think this is fitting.
Humans can' evolve, we have too many people with too many random genes able to breed. Even when inferior humans would die off, medical science saves them so they can breed and spread their stupid throughout humanity.
The only way Humanity will evolve to be stronger, faster, smarter etc is to force the World's best and brightest to breed in an enclosed environment for several generations until we have a race of better people that can spread their favourable genes through out the gene pool. We already know that this will work because we have thousands of years of practice on dogs so all we need is public approval which won't happen, why won't the public approval?
The public won't approve because ethics and morals are geting in the way of progress; progress which could be easily made if we stop letting people breed with who ever they want rather than who is best for humanity.
I post this knowing full well that I will be flamed/banned but just know that when you whine your loss of faith in humanity, it is because you don't support forced breeding.