Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 53 (9179 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: Anig
Post Volume: Total: 918,042 Year: 5,299/9,624 Month: 324/323 Week: 168/160 Day: 4/38 Hour: 3/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   THE END OF EVOLUTION?
alaninnont
Member (Idle past 5542 days)
Posts: 107
Joined: 02-27-2009


Message 139 of 284 (505868)
04-18-2009 7:03 PM


The original question in this thread was about the end to evolution. I've been wondering whether evolution has reached a dead end in homo sapiens. It seems to me that we should be seeing more homo species. Homo sapiens have only been around about 130 000 years but there have been more of us on the planet than other homo species. Homo habilis, homo ergaster, and homo heidelbergenisis were around for longer but were relatively few in number. At 10000 BC we were 5 million and that was only due to agricultural techniques. Now we are close to 7 billion. With the depletion of the ozone, toxic chemicals, pollutants, and radioactive waste there should be a higher degree of mutation but we have seen no new homo species. Are we the end of the line?

Replies to this message:
 Message 140 by Percy, posted 04-18-2009 7:25 PM alaninnont has not replied

  
alaninnont
Member (Idle past 5542 days)
Posts: 107
Joined: 02-27-2009


Message 142 of 284 (505887)
04-19-2009 8:23 AM
Reply to: Message 141 by Coyote
04-18-2009 8:17 PM


Re: End of evolution??
Change the environment that much and you are sure to get changes in the genome...
We have changed our environment drastically in the last thousand years. You mentioned pesticides and aids. Think of the changes in the makeup of the atmosphere, radiation, crowded conditions with increased competition, and the differences in our diet due to large scale farming, chemicals, ingested pills of all sorts, immunizations, etc. There have also been many changes in the water we drink. If it hasn't happened by now, I don't think it's going to.
Speciation only occurs when populations become separated...
Why is that? What actually qualifies as "separated?" We have had the separation of aboriginal peoples in the Americas. There have been other group separations for long periods. How large a population does it need to be?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by Coyote, posted 04-18-2009 8:17 PM Coyote has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 143 by Percy, posted 04-19-2009 8:54 AM alaninnont has replied

  
alaninnont
Member (Idle past 5542 days)
Posts: 107
Joined: 02-27-2009


Message 146 of 284 (505903)
04-19-2009 9:04 PM
Reply to: Message 143 by Percy
04-19-2009 8:54 AM


Re: End of evolution??
So it seems like we're talking hundreds of thousands of years. I'm still having trouble wrapping my head around why you need separation. Are you saying all species that evolved were separated from a main group with which they could mate (same species)? How many would have to be separated? What do you mean by genetic intermingling? Every new human is the result of genetic intermingling.
While trying to find an estimate on the population of homo habilis I came across an article (Nature 448, 668 - 691) that indicated that homo habilis and homo erectus coexisted. I know that habilis has been under some debate, at least some specimens were being argued over. Am I out of date? Is my order in post 339 still more or less accepted? Has habilis been kicked out of the line up?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by Percy, posted 04-19-2009 8:54 AM Percy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 147 by Coyote, posted 04-19-2009 10:11 PM alaninnont has replied
 Message 156 by Taq, posted 04-20-2009 3:54 PM alaninnont has not replied

  
alaninnont
Member (Idle past 5542 days)
Posts: 107
Joined: 02-27-2009


Message 157 of 284 (505965)
04-20-2009 5:11 PM
Reply to: Message 147 by Coyote
04-19-2009 10:11 PM


Re: End of evolution??
One example is a series of related groups of salamanders found around the central valley of California. Each adjacent group can interbreed with the next group, but where the "ring" joins at the far end the two adjacent groups do not interbreed. So what you have is a species that has separated such that the extremes can't interbreed--geographic speciation (with all of the "transitionals" still in place).
Percy said in post 143 that it is required that genes not intermingle. The salamanders at either end are interbreeding with other groups.
You said that the two adjacent groups do not interbreed. Does that mean that they cannot interbreed?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by Coyote, posted 04-19-2009 10:11 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by Taq, posted 04-20-2009 5:16 PM alaninnont has not replied
 Message 160 by Coyote, posted 04-20-2009 8:49 PM alaninnont has not replied
 Message 161 by Percy, posted 04-21-2009 6:37 AM alaninnont has replied

  
alaninnont
Member (Idle past 5542 days)
Posts: 107
Joined: 02-27-2009


Message 162 of 284 (506017)
04-21-2009 7:03 PM
Reply to: Message 161 by Percy
04-21-2009 6:37 AM


Re: End of evolution??
Clearer. Thanks. Is there a situation where A to I are alive today or is this just speculation?
I'm a little confused by "they are not exactly the same species, nor are the they different species." How do you define a species?
That the salamanders in this ring species do not interbreed is sufficient to attest to speciation.
Wouldn't that have to be unable to interbreed to make them different species?
Getting back to my original point, I think homo sapiens are the end. We have had incredible opportunities to become a new species with the exponential population growth, competative pressure beyond any homo, environmental stresses that no other homo has been exposed to, mutanogenic substances galore, and still no new species. If it was going to happen, it should have by now.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by Percy, posted 04-21-2009 6:37 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by Coragyps, posted 04-21-2009 7:35 PM alaninnont has replied
 Message 164 by Percy, posted 04-22-2009 8:06 AM alaninnont has not replied
 Message 165 by LucyTheApe, posted 04-22-2009 8:35 AM alaninnont has not replied

  
alaninnont
Member (Idle past 5542 days)
Posts: 107
Joined: 02-27-2009


Message 191 of 284 (506318)
04-25-2009 8:21 AM
Reply to: Message 163 by Coragyps
04-21-2009 7:35 PM


Re: End of evolution??
I check taxonomy and the greenish warblers are all the same species. Are there any examples where ring species have created different species?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by Coragyps, posted 04-21-2009 7:35 PM Coragyps has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 193 by Wounded King, posted 04-25-2009 5:40 PM alaninnont has replied

  
alaninnont
Member (Idle past 5542 days)
Posts: 107
Joined: 02-27-2009


Message 197 of 284 (506393)
04-25-2009 11:08 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by Wounded King
04-25-2009 5:40 PM


Re: End of evolution??
I googled and looked under a number of sites and they put greenish warbler in Phylloscopus trochiloides. Is there new information that is not yet posted? What other species are there in this ring series that greenish warblers have become?
Trying to get back to the original thread and my previous submission it still seems to me that because
a) the number of homo sapiens that have existed I believe is larger than the number of homo habilis or homo ergaster or homo heidelbergenisis that have existed (I tried to find numbers for these but couldn't. I'm infering that since they were limited geographically and had no agricultural techniques their numbers were small. Anyone know?)
b) there are far more mutanogens today
c) the competative stresses are stronger on sapiens than any other homo group
d) the environmental stresses are stronger
e) there have been no new homo species in the last 100 000 years
that we are the end of evolution. If it was going to happen, it should have happened by now.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by Wounded King, posted 04-25-2009 5:40 PM Wounded King has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 198 by Coyote, posted 04-25-2009 11:30 PM alaninnont has replied
 Message 199 by Wounded King, posted 04-26-2009 6:19 AM alaninnont has replied

  
alaninnont
Member (Idle past 5542 days)
Posts: 107
Joined: 02-27-2009


Message 200 of 284 (506443)
04-26-2009 9:34 AM
Reply to: Message 198 by Coyote
04-25-2009 11:30 PM


Re: End of evolution??
You are confusing evolution with speciation.
I believe that was infered in the question "End of evolution." We have been talking about whether new homo species will emerge. Do you think they will? If so, why?
And your assumption that "it should have happened by now" is baseless.
Here is the base for my assumption:
"a) the number of homo sapiens that have existed I believe is larger than the number of homo habilis or homo ergaster or homo heidelbergenisis that have existed (I tried to find numbers for these but couldn't. I'm infering that since they were limited geographically and had no agricultural techniques their numbers were small. Anyone know?)
b) there are far more mutanogens today
c) the competative stresses are stronger on sapiens than any other homo group
d) the environmental stresses are stronger
e) there have been no new homo species in the last 100 000 years"
With a smaller evolutionary potential the homo genus created three new species if you accept the habilis to ergaster to heidelgenisis to sapiens model. Why haven't new homo species appeared? I think that we are a dead end. (present company excluded)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by Coyote, posted 04-25-2009 11:30 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by Coyote, posted 04-26-2009 12:50 PM alaninnont has not replied
 Message 203 by DrJones*, posted 04-26-2009 3:28 PM alaninnont has replied

  
alaninnont
Member (Idle past 5542 days)
Posts: 107
Joined: 02-27-2009


Message 201 of 284 (506444)
04-26-2009 9:51 AM
Reply to: Message 199 by Wounded King
04-26-2009 6:19 AM


Re: End of evolution??
Yes, I saw the subspecies but again, no new species. Science basically asked two questions: What is it called and how does it work? Those scientists making a career in taxonomy have established a maze of rules for KPCOFGS. I'm not an expert in taxonomy but I think their setup is reasonably sound. I know that there is still argument but there always will be when you put scientists in a room.
You also seem to assume that humans are the be all and end all of everything. Even if there were no further evolution of humans that wouldn't be the end of evolution in other animals. There is plenty of evidence that humans are still evolving though, just not speciating as Coyote pointed out.
I am just talking about humans. I don't think humans are the be all and end all. Sometimes, looking at our current crop of sapiens, I feel like we devolved from Pan. (tic) I don't see any evidence of further speciation in homo sapiens. Change - yes. Speciation - no.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by Wounded King, posted 04-26-2009 6:19 AM Wounded King has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 206 by Wounded King, posted 04-26-2009 7:23 PM alaninnont has replied

  
alaninnont
Member (Idle past 5542 days)
Posts: 107
Joined: 02-27-2009


Message 207 of 284 (506496)
04-26-2009 8:35 PM
Reply to: Message 203 by DrJones*
04-26-2009 3:28 PM


Re: End of evolution??
Really? Who do you think had it harder, the H. ergaster who had to hunt and forage for food or the H. sapiens who can just walk down the block to the megamart?
Almost seven billion people currently on the planet. 1.4 billion in China and 1.1 billion in India. Around 70 % of the world's population don't have enough to eat. Just because we can enjoy the marvels of the West Edmonton Mall, doesn't mean it's available to the rest of the world.
Really? Who do you think had it harder, the H. ergaster who lived in a crude shelter by a small fire or the H. sapiens who lives in a modern home?
By environmental pressures I meant changes in diet, immunizations, changes in weather, changes from nomadic to settlements, changes in the water we drink, changes in the composition of the atmosphere.
Really? when did you complete your exhaustive survery of all humans past and present? I admit that it is very very unlikely that there is another species of Homo out there but until each and every human past and present is examined it can't be 100% ruled out.
No, it can't be 100 % ruled out but it seems unlikely since nobody has found a fossil record and it should be easier to find than habilis, ergaster, and heidelbergenisis.
How's the weather out there? We still have snow in our backyard!!!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by DrJones*, posted 04-26-2009 3:28 PM DrJones* has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 210 by DrJones*, posted 04-26-2009 9:06 PM alaninnont has replied

  
alaninnont
Member (Idle past 5542 days)
Posts: 107
Joined: 02-27-2009


Message 208 of 284 (506497)
04-26-2009 8:43 PM
Reply to: Message 206 by Wounded King
04-26-2009 7:23 PM


Re: End of evolution??
Wow, well your inane repetition really won me round.
Rainy weather out there making you a little grumpy?
Let me attempt to annoy you further with more inane repetition.
I posit that no new species will come from homo sapiens. Hit me with the actual research that I've been ignoring and convince me otherwise.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 206 by Wounded King, posted 04-26-2009 7:23 PM Wounded King has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 209 by Coyote, posted 04-26-2009 9:05 PM alaninnont has replied
 Message 217 by Taq, posted 04-27-2009 4:10 PM alaninnont has not replied

  
alaninnont
Member (Idle past 5542 days)
Posts: 107
Joined: 02-27-2009


Message 220 of 284 (506590)
04-27-2009 6:38 PM
Reply to: Message 209 by Coyote
04-26-2009 9:05 PM


Re: End of evolution??
Is this the "kind" or "baramin" belief that you're pushing? The belief that micro-evolution is fine, but macro-evolution is verboten?
I am not talking about micro or macro in general. I'm talking about a new species coming out of homo sapiens. Percy said in post 143 that for speciation to occur it is required that genes don't intermingle. How can that happen with homo sapiens in todays global village?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 209 by Coyote, posted 04-26-2009 9:05 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 223 by Percy, posted 04-27-2009 7:11 PM alaninnont has not replied
 Message 224 by Coyote, posted 04-27-2009 7:12 PM alaninnont has not replied
 Message 229 by Taq, posted 04-27-2009 10:30 PM alaninnont has not replied

  
alaninnont
Member (Idle past 5542 days)
Posts: 107
Joined: 02-27-2009


Message 221 of 284 (506591)
04-27-2009 6:43 PM
Reply to: Message 210 by DrJones*
04-26-2009 9:06 PM


Re: End of evolution??
Around 70 % of the world's population don't have enough to eat.
How many of those are living in situations that are still far better than H. ergaster could hope for?
There are approximately seven billion homo sapiens living on the planet today, 70 % of that is almost five billion. How many ergaster lived during the entire era of their existance on earth?
How would you test a fossil that looks like modern H. sapiens for inter-fertility with modern H. sapiens?
Are you saying that you have discovered other species that have come out of homo sapiens? Prepare you Nobel speech. I'm submitting your name.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 210 by DrJones*, posted 04-26-2009 9:06 PM DrJones* has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 225 by Wounded King, posted 04-27-2009 7:14 PM alaninnont has replied
 Message 226 by DrJones*, posted 04-27-2009 9:01 PM alaninnont has not replied

  
alaninnont
Member (Idle past 5542 days)
Posts: 107
Joined: 02-27-2009


Message 227 of 284 (506608)
04-27-2009 10:20 PM
Reply to: Message 225 by Wounded King
04-27-2009 7:14 PM


Re: All this and anti-vax too?
Why do so many arguing against evolution seem not only to not understand evolution but also to not understand simple arguments, or even plain English.
Who is arguing against evolution? Perhaps you have not been following the thread but the discussion is about whether homo sapiens are an evolutionary dead end or whether another species will come from the homo sapien line.
That is most definitely notwhat I'm saying. What I'm saying is: How would you test a fossil that looks like modern H. sapiens for inter-fertility with modern H. sapiens?
I don't think you could. There is some work being done on replicating DNA from an extinct species using Polymerase Chain Reaction or splicing genes into the genome of another animal. This process is far from creating a replica of the extinct living thing.
I maintain that it is highly unlikely that any species split from homo sapiens during the last 100 000 years and has not been discovered.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 225 by Wounded King, posted 04-27-2009 7:14 PM Wounded King has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 228 by DrJones*, posted 04-27-2009 10:28 PM alaninnont 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