What would be the end result of human evolution?

From being bacteria until we are in our present forms it is known that we have came a LONG way.All this was done in a couple billion years.I think the end result of human evolution after only a few billion years would be machines.They ARE the next step.I think a time will come when we will be forced to pass on the evolutionary "torch" to the new bad boy on the block.I'm asking what would they be???

That question is not presently answerable, IMO.

The end result of human evolution will be extinction.It is the only possible 'end result' of any evolutionary
process.

Peter, the "end result" I'm talking about would refer to a period of time after a few billion years had passed. (Hopefully we won't be extinct by then.) By this time I'm asking,If we keep on the same track we're on now what would be the dominant species at the end of those few billion years.Would it be us,some form of a smart octipus ect. ect.Edit)I was very unclear in the question.I was hoping to get some fictionous replies but I guess imagination is limited to only a select few.[This message has been edited by Number_ 19, 06-26-2003]

I think I found the answer [This message has been edited by Mammuthus, 06-26-2003]

I think it is likely that as time progresses we will be more and more able to overcome environmental pressures. This doesnt mean that evolution will come to a halt. Only that it is more probable that we will stay more or less in our present form. Unless of course some strange disease comes by that kills of everyone who doesnt look like Tinky Winky or Bo

Yes, we may well stay in our present form, if for no reason other than nostalgia. But, there have been other ideas that for example we can build nanotech devices that ct on a cellular level and use them to sculp our own biology. We could probably build genetic or nanotech devices that allow us to breathe certain other gasses. One thing that has been suggested fairly frequently is that in amicrogravity environemnt there is no point in having legs; so why not rebuild them as arms, and have 4 hands? All of them can be used in a microgravity environment. Why not modify the genome so that it gives us gills? Why not add a photosynthetic organelle to the skin? Or photoluminescent cells?Number_19, iof you are looking for IMAGINATIVE proposals, it would be better to explore science fiction. Although not much aimed at humans, the Uplift series by David Brin is an interesting piece of work which addresses a number of these thoughts.All that said, millions or billions of years isstill far too far for use to be able to imagine. I'm not confident that Hom. Sap. will still be Hom. Sap. by the year 3000 at the latest. What it weill be in the year 1 billion could only be described as "nothing we could comprehend" at the moment.

quote:

---

The "end result" I'm talking about would refer to a period of time after a few billion years had passed.

---

That's not an end result, but I think I see what you are talking about.From a purely non-fiction perspective I would have to guess that
we WILL be extinct in a few billion years. The longest lived
'kind' of animal we know about were the dinosaurs and they
managed to last on the order of 100's of million years.If modern life could have arisen with 3.5 billion years, then
what changes will be wrought in the next few billion .... assuming
that the sun hasn't fizzled and that the 65Myear asteriod hits
leave something for evolution to work with.From a fictional POV I would expect that the universe would
be seeded with a vast variety of 'descendents' of humanity. Within
the next 200-250 years we are likely to be delving into space
with vehicle technoogies capable of getting us to undreamed of
distances (OK OK they are dreamed of since the 1930's .... I was
just trying to be poetic ).If purely evolutionary process were involved then I guess we would
see adaptations to the varied environments ... on earth this would
be UV-proof skin, lower oxygen requirement respiratory systems,
... and if our view of pre-history is correct then some compeletly
unassuming animal of the modern world will have given birth to
the most dominant, destructive and positively vile species yet
known Maybe the cockroach....

IMO, you have been watching too many terminator and matrix movies. The end result will be determined on how we adapt to our new environments, not how we evolve.

Isnt this ultimately the same problem as trying to test abiogenesis as it occurred? I make a distinction between the principle of abiogenesis and the abiogenesis that actually occurred. We don't know what the exact environment and selective pressures were on the first replicating molecules (much less what they were i.e. RNA, DNA). Potentially we could experimentally form self replicating molecules in a lab with characteristics of biological life forms or the potential to become life...but this would not mean it is how it happened billions of years ago. Extrapolating forwards presents the same type of problem..how do we know what the selective pressures on humans will be in the next 10 years much less billions of years from now....if you started today with the last common ancestor of all life and let evolution proceed again, it would certainly not play out the same way it did the first time around....therefore, I will stick to my above post...we will become teletubbies

Isn't that what I just said ? ... with the proviso that the
only 'end result' of an evolutionary process is extinction.

quote:

---

therefore, I will stick to my above post...we will become teletubbies

---

I believe that here in the US, the general population is well on the way to that end.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

Hi John,
Here in Germany, I think they may have already reached that point
At least the government certainly has...I can hear the debate on tax reform now...Gerhard Schroeder says "la la hee hee ta ta"
oposition.."po po ha ha ho ho bye bye"

I enter this thread because the one I was on got mysteriously screwed up and then closed by adminnemooseus. I wonder if it will ever be rectified. My own view, shared by Broom, Huxley and Grasse is that macroevolution above the subspecies is no longer in progress. salty

I wrote to moose to ask about the thread. I am hoping that they will restore it (if it had a backup) and then re-open it. Don't know what happened either but it deleted all the posts except for a couple at the very end of the thread.