| From: grace | 21/07/99
20:37:11 |
| Subject: when did we stop evolving? |
post id:
25384 |
| even those who believe in
evolution seem to think that is has stopped, or we can stop it, WHY? we
evolved from nature-we are nature pollution -a natural result of human evolution ---->all we do is nature... | |
| From: sam | 21/07/99
20:50:41 |
| Subject: re: when did we stop evolving? |
post id:
25387 |
| I doubt that we've finished
evolving completely, but I would think the main reason the situation you
describe is that in our world today, we control nature as much as it
controls us (to a degree - please don't jump on me for saying that).
Whereas once we had to change the way we lived our lives to suit our
environment, more and more we seem to changing our environment to suit our
lives... ?? It's only a guess, but it seems to make sense.
:) | |
| From: Martin Smith (Avatar) | 21/07/99
21:25:18 |
| Subject: re: when did we stop evolving? |
post id:
25391 |
We are still evolving, but natural selection is far less dominant than it once was. In fact Unnatural selection may well be taking over. Evolution has to do with those that breed successfully, producing offspring who also breed successfully. This still happens today but the factors controlling breeding patterns are not necessarily naturally/environmentally driven. In fact cultural patterns often determine who breeds the most. I suppose it depends on your definition of evolving. Martin Smith | |
| From: Daryn Voss (Avatar) | 21/07/99
21:28:01 |
| Subject: re: when did we stop evolving? |
post id:
25392 |
| I've never heard anyone say that
we have stopped evolving, nor have I heard of any evidence to suggest
this. A few weeks back, I started a thread on a similar topic. I asked whether anyone thought it was possible that evolution might slow due to the fact that almost everyone (in the wealthy parts of the world, at least) can reach adulthood and breed. The general consensus seemed to be that there are other evolutionary pressures. 8^) | |
| From: bob s | 22/07/99
8:11:54 |
| Subject: re: when did we stop evolving? |
post id:
25417 |
| Politicians seem to like to get
us involved in wars in which the young and fittest are killed off, so the
reversal of survival of the fittest could well be in
reverse. | |
| From: Terry Frankcombe (Avatar) | 22/07/99
12:36:04 |
| Subject: re: when did we stop evolving? |
post id:
25552 |
| Utter Hogwash! Show me any evidence that we (as a species) have stopped evolving! Humans seem to get this wonderful anthropocentric idea that if it doesn't happen when we can watch it, then it doesn't happen. Answer me these questions: How many human generations have passed since, say, the dawn of the Roman Empire? How many generations of an evolving system would it take to evolve from, say, a tree-dwelling primate to a bipedal primate (loosly monkey to human)? | |
| From: Mike | 25/07/99
16:04:02 |
| Subject: re: when did we stop evolving? |
post id:
26113 |
| In our own lifetime we have
observed our own species reach a point where it is no longer dependent
upon being the "fittest" to survive. We are the first species in the
history of life on this planet to achieve that. Humans have developed the
technology to override their physical weaknesses and limitations. If this
is not evolution then what is? | |
| From: Michael Gunter | 25/07/99
16:29:47 |
| Subject: re: when did we stop evolving? |
post id:
26131 |
|
Genetic diversity of the human gene pool must be increasing in the developed world. Babies with big heads who would not have survived without a Caesarian birth are now happily growing, mating, having more babies with big heads. More work for obstetricians, and the Caesarian birth rate is going up all the time. Then there are all the previously fatal diseases which with treatment allow people to grow and reproduce and increase the natural "background" level of that gene in the gene pool. I really do not know, but it seems to me possible that this IS evolution occuring at a MORE rapid rate in the developed world than in the poor parts of the world. But in the sense that it may eventually make the human genome unable to survive in third world conditions, and may well increase our dependence on high-tech medical interventions for such "natural" things as childbirth, it is a rather scary prospect. Especially when nobody seems to give a toss whether all our wonderful high-tech lifestyle really is sustainable (in terms of its direct impact on the environment/biosphere). Could it be that we are evolving up a cul-de-sac? | |