Evolution..

[IllLiterature]

THIS IS NOT A DEBATE ABOUT CREATION VS EVOLUTION SO PLEASE DONT TURN IT

I was reading an interesting magazine article earlier today that theorized our improvements in technology and the medical field has brought human evolution to a near stand still. It basically says that since we have effectively removed so many parts of natural selection (disease, natural enemies etc.) that human evolution has stopped more or less. Thoughts?

[STRONGARM]

Sounds resonable. In Nature, species evolve based on the need to. If there's no need to, they don't. We've essentially evolved our technology to the point that we don't have to evolve anymore as a species. Good or bad that's debateable. I think the only way human beings would evolve further would be to eventually travel to and then inhabit other worlds. I've mentioned this before, but for instance if we inhabited something like the moon over as few as 2 to 3 generations the humans who lived there would be vastly different than Earthlings because of the enviroment, gravity, etc. So as it stands.. as far as our physical make up I think our evolution is at a standstill but our technology will continue to evolve...

[Plot]

thats pretty interesting.
global warming will probably affect us

[Veracious]

cept cancer and aids still kicks our ass...

[Chris The Man]

I was sorta thinking on those lines, cept I never really went in depth wit it like that cuz Im lazy.

I knew humans coulda flown :(

[Pembroke]

I have gills.

[IllLiterature]

Originally Posted by Pembroke

I have gills.

KEVIN COSTNER!!! OMG!! I THOUGHT YOU WERE DEAD!?!?!

"think the only way human beings would evolve further would be to eventually travel to and then inhabit other worlds. I've mentioned this before, but for instance if we inhabited something like the moon over as few as 2 to 3 generations the humans who lived there would be vastly different than Earthlings because of the enviroment, gravity, etc."

true that at strong.. that could become an interesting time.. i wonder if it would result in new divisions as there would be almost different species instead of different races.. interplanetary warfare between different branches of human evolution?

dibs on making the movie

[STRONGARM]

Well one astrophysicist theorized that, for instance in Star Trek, every planet the earth crew visited had "Aliens" that basically looked like humans. Two arms. Two legs. Head. Just minor differences. His point was if in the future human beings were to travel to other galaxies.. other star systems.. inhabiting those worlds.. eventually it would be like Star Trek because in the future when you visited these worlds.. you'd see creatures that resembled humans like in the show Star Trek.. head, two arms, legs.. but of course due to the particular planets gravity and enviroment they might look slightly or even vastly different as far as height, musculature, maybe even skin color, eyes, ears who knows. But even though they looked different.. they would have ALL came from the same source: Earth. So maybe that's the reason in Star Trek they made all the aliens like that.. or maybe they couldn't afford better make-up.!? That show sucked anyways...

BEST DOCUMENTARY ABOUT THIS SUBJECT IF YOU CAN FIND IT..!

Space Colonies : Living Among The Stars

[Malil]

wow...

*starts dipping weed*...

tries to think hard

!?!?!

mine isnt working!

[A.L.B.]

Survival of the fittest doesn't have a purpose when it's tampered with.

[STRONGARM]

^^^which is exactly what Humans have done. Kinda unfair to go into a claw, teeth, horn fight with a submachine gun..!

[A.L.B.]

Also, messing with the life expectatancy changes the naturalness of certain things.

Where do we draw the line between brillance, and altering the natural order of life? That's how do decide, cause there's always hypothetic situations

[STRONGARM]

But can't that be considered a form of evolution..? We've evolved mentally to the point of understanding and in most cases, altering our own mortality.

[IllLiterature]

Originally Posted by A.L.B.

Also, messing with the life expectatancy changes the naturalness of certain things.

Where do we draw the line between brillance, and altering the natural order of life? That's how do decide, cause there's always hypothetic situations

that was one of the main points in the article

it basically said as soon as your basic midwives tribal priests leaders etc learned how to help the young through birth and basic medicine was implemented it started a drastic reduction in our evolutionary pace until you reach today where it is at near standstill

and as far as mental evolutino that is a form of evolution i believe and one we are probably still undergoing to a degree.. we are probably far more ready for the higher sciences and less adapted to natural knowledge i.e. survival type skills mentally than many years before

but a big part of the recent drastic increase in technology is mainly in the globalization weve experienced which allows fast transfer of data and the fact were no longer losing knowledge as civilizations fail or collape etc combined with the increased availability of food and less need to worry about other factors.. which is admittedly the result of improved techniques over the years

those factors probably more than any mental evolutino have resulted in the outburst of new technology weve experienced which could then shoot a hole in the mental evolution theory and just be attributed to a lessenign of factors that inhibited transfer of ideas and knowledge and resulted in the destruction of them combined with an increased freedom to pursue further advancements

[jube jube]

[quote=DEMISE.;1259609]global warming will probably affect us[/quote]

? Are you serious ?

Humans evolve continuously, and that will never change. Strongarm was incorrect when he quoted that if we were to move to the moon, humans would evolve and appear drastically different from those on Earth in 2 to 3 generations. Evolution takes millions of years for any species to change even a little bit. The Waterworld/Star Trek comparisons are expected in any scientific discussion about futuristic physical alterations that are resulted from environments our bodies grow accustomed. In Waterworld, for example, notice the primitive technology used by the people, and the year that Kevin Costner grew gills. By the time he would truly grow gills in an evolutionary sense, it would take an incalculable length of time to occur. It shouldn't be taken too seriously, being a movie and all. To reiterate, humans will continue to evolve, even if there is no need to. It's part of life. X-Men, Star Trek, and Star Wars are all far fetched works of science fiction. Possible, yes, but highly improbable.

It's not gonna happen!