Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,914 Year: 4,171/9,624 Month: 1,042/974 Week: 1/368 Day: 1/11 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Have we halted our own Evolution?
U can call me Cookie
Member (Idle past 4983 days)
Posts: 228
From: jo'burg, RSA
Joined: 11-15-2005


Message 28 of 79 (296640)
03-19-2006 5:42 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Heathen
03-17-2006 1:37 PM


The hamster's wheel will always turn
To say that we have halted evolution would be quite incorrect.
Taken in its broad sense, biological evolution is basically change in allele frequencies from one generation to the next. This is regardless of natural selection (NS), however NS is one of the main (and certainly most famous) factors contributing to evolution.
Genetic Drift (GD) is also an important factor in evolution. Still though, evolutionists argue over which contributes more - NS vs GD.
Basically, GD refers to random (a better word, stochastic) changes in allele frequencies from one generation to the next, depending on who contributes "gametically".
This argument aside, as has been said, recent work has shown that humans have been subject to NS during the past few thousand years, at least.
When it comes to medical advances, while it is true that they have resulted in the possibility of saving more lives, as Crash has pointed out, this happens mainly in the first world, and most people on this planet don't live first world lives. Actually, the March of Dimes has recently released its global report on birth defects. It's clear that these are still a serious problem.
At the most, the filter has been removed (as Jar said), meaning that the possibility of these "affected" people contributing to the next generation is now higher, since they've not been killed off by their affliction. However, it should be noted that the majority of disease alleles are present, not in the afflicted, but in "healthy" carriers, and so would still possibly be passed on regardless of whether or not the afflicted survive to reproduce.
And still while we have affected the environment, we still have to live in it. Many of the things that have been done, have been inadvertant, and so still could exert selective pressure on us in the future.
To sum it up, evolution doesn't stop with the removal of NS; which arguably, has not been removed.

"The good Christian should beware the mathematician and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of hell." - St. Augustine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Heathen, posted 03-17-2006 1:37 PM Heathen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by Heathen, posted 03-20-2006 4:57 PM U can call me Cookie has not replied

  
U can call me Cookie
Member (Idle past 4983 days)
Posts: 228
From: jo'burg, RSA
Joined: 11-15-2005


Message 29 of 79 (296641)
03-19-2006 5:47 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Percy
03-18-2006 10:35 AM


There seems to be some difference of opinion among evolutionary scientists about whether we're still evolving significantly. Interestingly, if the scientists who think we're evolving rapidly are correct then that contradicts an oft-stated position of evolutionists here at EvC Forum, that it is small populations that evolve quickly.
It could be, Percy, that the rate of evolution among populations is relative. So, while humanity could possibly be evolving rapidly, small "isolated" populations could be evolving even faster, due to the increased effect of genetic drift on their gene pool.

"The good Christian should beware the mathematician and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of hell." - St. Augustine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Percy, posted 03-18-2006 10:35 AM Percy has not replied

  
U can call me Cookie
Member (Idle past 4983 days)
Posts: 228
From: jo'burg, RSA
Joined: 11-15-2005


Message 44 of 79 (298537)
03-27-2006 5:36 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by Phat
03-27-2006 4:18 AM


Re: Speculation
Morphologically, we haven't changed all that much in the last, say, 200 000 years. i don't expect 5000 years to make that much of a difference.
The real question would be, however, whether or not we are still here in 5000 years. I'd say we'd be extinct in under 1000 years, barring colonization of the moon and other planets.

"The good Christian should beware the mathematician and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of hell." - St. Augustine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Phat, posted 03-27-2006 4:18 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Phat, posted 03-27-2006 6:42 AM U can call me Cookie has replied

  
U can call me Cookie
Member (Idle past 4983 days)
Posts: 228
From: jo'burg, RSA
Joined: 11-15-2005


Message 46 of 79 (298550)
03-27-2006 7:26 AM
Reply to: Message 45 by Phat
03-27-2006 6:42 AM


Re: Speculation
Physically, Phat, we look pretty much the same as we did then.
IF we became extinct, only the speculative ego-centrism of the human animal can imagine a universe going on its merry way without us and yet somehow stubbornly refusing to believe that God sent His one and only Son to save us. Yes....we are that special and paradoxically that needy!
Not really sure what you mean by this. Are you saying that it is the ego that allows us to envision a world without humanity? Could it not be said that it is the ego that causes such a humanless world to be unpalatable, if not unimaginable?
I do not deny that we are special, yet no more special than that atom floating past your nose right now. And i kinda agree, we need all the help we can get!
Of course, as you emphasised, this is speculation; however, based on the direction humanity has taken. U wanna bet me i'm wrong?

"The good Christian should beware the mathematician and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of hell." - St. Augustine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Phat, posted 03-27-2006 6:42 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by ramoss, posted 03-27-2006 1:00 PM U can call me Cookie has replied
 Message 54 by Phat, posted 03-27-2006 4:14 PM U can call me Cookie has replied

  
U can call me Cookie
Member (Idle past 4983 days)
Posts: 228
From: jo'burg, RSA
Joined: 11-15-2005


Message 52 of 79 (298743)
03-27-2006 3:26 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by ramoss
03-27-2006 1:00 PM


Re: Speculation
I don't know about that. According to Y chromosome and mtDNA data, the extant population closest to the hypothetical ancestral human population are the San, of south west Africa. If you've seen these people, you'd see that they are quite fine-boned; possibly one of the most gracile people on the planet.
If we ignore the diversity, genetic and morphological, of Africa (since it, as yet, has not been adequately explained), a significant amount of human diversity might be due to isolation by distance. Since, nowadays, this has become less of a factor, it could be hypothesised that human populations are not going to be differentiating as fast as they have in the past.
Who knows, maybe places like SA and the US might each end up becoming one heterogeneous, admixed population, once the cultural barriers are broken down

"The good Christian should beware the mathematician and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of hell." - St. Augustine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by ramoss, posted 03-27-2006 1:00 PM ramoss has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by Mammuthus, posted 03-28-2006 6:31 AM U can call me Cookie has replied

  
U can call me Cookie
Member (Idle past 4983 days)
Posts: 228
From: jo'burg, RSA
Joined: 11-15-2005


Message 60 of 79 (298972)
03-28-2006 10:43 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by Phat
03-27-2006 4:14 PM


Re: Speculation
Ok , i think i get what you're saying.
However i don't think that the extinction of humanity presupposes the non-existence of God.
At the most it implies that God didn't make everything especially for us.

"The good Christian should beware the mathematician and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of hell." - St. Augustine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Phat, posted 03-27-2006 4:14 PM Phat has not replied

  
U can call me Cookie
Member (Idle past 4983 days)
Posts: 228
From: jo'burg, RSA
Joined: 11-15-2005


Message 61 of 79 (298973)
03-28-2006 10:53 AM
Reply to: Message 57 by Mammuthus
03-28-2006 6:31 AM


Re: Speculation
You know, if you think about it, those pockets of humanity, with really negligible amounts of natural selection would make pretty good experimental cohorts, aimed at "confirming" Neutral Theory
Would be a really long term study tho'.

"The good Christian should beware the mathematician and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of hell." - St. Augustine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Mammuthus, posted 03-28-2006 6:31 AM Mammuthus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by Mammuthus, posted 03-29-2006 4:31 AM U can call me Cookie has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024