Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 9 to 16 of 53

Thread: what's the next step for mankinds evolution

  1. #9
    ruler of mune667 deaths_raver667 may be famous one day deaths_raver667 may be famous one day deaths_raver667's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    buckingham, near milton keynes england
    Posts
    598
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    i don't think that humans are an evelutionary dead end, i just think we won't as we don't need to in todays life style. we might grow extra lungs with special filters so we don't get killed by pollution.

    but i have heard that man is already evolving where people still work, in certain parts of asia where people fish by swimming and hunting with spears or what ever, the peoples eyes have developed so that they can now see perfectly above and below water.
    Last edited by deaths_raver667; May 08, 2005 at 08:31 AM.
    i am the urban monky
    look to the mune

  2. #10
    Otaku erosennin may be famous one day erosennin may be famous one day erosennin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Redmond
    Posts
    157
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by jaderabbit
    I also think evolution is at a dead in. But as humans want to play god, then within the next 100 hundred years i wouldn't doubt people modifying their bodies for certain conditions. In fact i'm almost certain there is already ways to modify ur body... 1 such as plastic surgery. But how will that effect the future i do not know...
    This is not evolution. A person who gets brest implants or a person who becomes massively strong by weight training will not give birth to buxom or musclebound children. Evolution is a genetic occurance, not something we do to ourselves, and those changes will not be passed on to the next generation.

    As for the people in asia that can see underwater just as well above, I haven't heard about that. All I can say is maybe it's possible. One thing that must be remembered and has been mentioned in other threads is that evolution is not linear, and it doesn't occur because of what we need. I'm finding that this is a rather general misconception about the concept. The same goes for natural selection and survival of the fittest. Survival of the fittest is the mechanism of natural selection, but it refers to the ability to sexually reproduce.

    In a changing environment, sometimes a species will be thrust into a circumstance where it will be hard for it to survive. I'll use the giraffe for this one. Giraffes have always been tall, right? Wrong. There used to be both small and tall giraffes until their more low lying food source died out. The result was that the tall giraffes able to reach leaves on trees survived, and the small ones did not. However, that genetic data still occurs in giraffes, and once in awhile you will still see a short giraffe born. The giraffe didn't survive by changing at this point, it survived because the genetic variance necessary to survive already existed in its species.

    In order for humans to evolve like the giraffes did, something would have to happen that occurs on a world wide scale which threatens the species. Right now, I think the most likely cause of evolution in our species will be AIDS, in which the only people who survive are the ones that lack receptors on the bottoms of their white blood cells and thus are carriers but are immune to the disease. If no cure for aids is discovered (assuming you are unable to controle the spread of the virus) then at one point it is resonable to assume that everyone in the world will have AIDS, and only a certain type of people with the immunity to it will survive. What's funny, is aids will still be around, but it'll be just like any other of the harmless viruses and bacteria in our bodies.

    In order for evolution to occur by mutation, the population would have to be small enough that the mutation doesn't get weeded out because of genetic variance in the group. Well, humans like to travel, humans love eachother, and humans love their sex. I can see mutation occuring in a small fishing village in asia, but we're talking about a pretty hefty mutation here. Mutations are rarely beneficial. I'll do some studying on that tonight.

    Edit: Not to mention most mutations that have a beneficial affect in some scenarious (sickle cell anemia, being one) are kind of a double edged sword. Children born with a homozygous recessive trait for sickle cell don't usually make it to adulthood in the places where having the heterozygous trait is beneficial. For those of you wondering, sickle cell grants some resistance to malaria.
    Last edited by erosennin; May 08, 2005 at 12:51 PM.

  3. #11
    Lady Barronmore Arrianna has become well known Arrianna has become well known Arrianna has become well known Arrianna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    3,259
    Thanks
    19
    Thanked 140 Times in 108 Posts
    Here's a new take on the question, what if were not evolving but devolving?

    What if we were placed here by some being and not creatures that crawled out of some primordial soup?

    What if, because of genetic mutations caused by natural radiations, enviromental changes (pollution), and other materials we are exposed to that affect our genetics and DNA mankind is actually breaking down along gentic lines and intelligence?

    After all, our ancesters were great architects and masterminds. We've discovered that instead of being ignorant savages there have been civilizations that had brain surgens capable of reparing damage considered difficult to survive from now without our "advanced technology". Mathematics were supposedly invented sometime between 2000-5000BC by Egypt/Babylon including geometry. We still can't figure out how many of the great marvels of the world were even made. Cement mixtures that still remain after a thousand+ years that we are incapable of useing. Stones we would be hard pressed to move let alone build with. A full understanding of seasons and astronomy that we are only now starting to understand and decifer. It is only within the last ten years that some of these mysteries are starting to be solved.

    So I ask you, are we really that much smarter or advanced or are we slowly devolving by our own hands or by some natural occurance?

    l Stone Hold l Now We're Cooking! l Thanks to Kaos for the awesome sig!

  4. #12
    Otaku erosennin may be famous one day erosennin may be famous one day erosennin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Redmond
    Posts
    157
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
    While there are certain chromosomes that are deteriorating steadily, I really don't think that has anything to do with intelligence, or the wonders of earlier ages. For one thing, the brain surgery you are referring to is probably the one practiced by the mayans or the aztecs, can't remember which, where the hole was punched in the skull to relieve pressure. That's kind of a trial and error process, which doesn't require any knowledge of how the brain works, it just seems logical. The procedure was neither efficient nor accurate, but did seem to help in some cases. Furthermore, these are people that developed a system for blood transfusion and the above mentioned procedure, but never figured out the wheel beyond putting it on toys.

    Not to mention that the great works of the world even now aren't representations of a society as a whole, it's the representation of one person or a group of people which is built by the masses, who, if anything, only have a rudimentary knowledge of the structure as a whole. Why assume it was any different in ancient civilizations? Davinci barely laid hands on most of his inventions and paintings. Why? He drew up the plans and had apprentices paint/build them. What we see in the world today, both ancient and modern, are the visions of a few select people. If you asked me to design a sky scraper I'd be at a loss, and I would assume the same would go for an ancient aztec farmer who you asked to build a pyramid.

    The cement you're referring to I'm assuming is Roman... and the statement that we're incapable of using similar is absolutely false. Most ancient roman monuments made of their type of cement are long gone, destroyed by man or the natural environment. Only the monuments which were preserved in some form or other are still around, other than the ones actually made out of stone from quarries, and most of them are in bad shape. Further still, a lot of these monuments look nice when you see them because you're seeing them in pictures. I've seen monuments such as aqueducts from ancient Rome, or even later from the Renaissance, and you'd be hard pressed to see them without scaffolding, because they are constantly being remoldled to keep them intact.

    No, I don't think we're devolving in terms of intellect. We understand things now that weren't even possible to be understood one hundred years ago. Humanity as a whole is intellectually making leaps and bounds, and even the uninfluential piece of the masses such as myself are engaging in intellectual discussion. Assuming that an entire ancient civilization was more advanced or intelligent than modern society is illogical and unfounded. However, I would say that they were at least as intelligent as a whole, based upon the actual definition of IQ.

  5. #13
    Strange Times Dark. is making a name for themselves Dark. is making a name for themselves Dark.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    2,172
    Thanks
    17
    Thanked 88 Times in 71 Posts
    I don't think so. devoultion seems kind of far fetched to me. I agree we really aren't too much smarter than those of the past, but that doesn't mean we're in fact getting dumber. We have evolved our minds through education and reason. More people are smarter now than in the B.C.'s. And the origin of these marvels would not have to be struggled with if our ancestors had taken the time to write it down. Afterall, if they were truly that smart, wouldn't they have thought of carving out it's history? or perhaps back then they thought no one of the future would truly care about some dumb structure made 1000+ years ago. But then again, the rulers of the past's philoshy was if they didn't want it to happen, it never happened. Who's to say the events of the past we have in records were not exaggerated in the favor of the emperor? These factors would make it very difficult even for these past genius's s to figure out. Besides, they probably didn't share our burden of trying to deceifer the past as well as plow into the future.

    Riddle me this, do honestly think that as humans are now, that we have reached our maxium evoultionary potential? I doubt so. I believe a transitition of evoultion to devoultion is like a story. Evoultion is the rising action, that builds to a climax( or maxium potential) then falls back down (devoultion) until it is the end. (extinction).

  6. #14
    Lady Barronmore Arrianna has become well known Arrianna has become well known Arrianna has become well known Arrianna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    3,259
    Thanks
    19
    Thanked 140 Times in 108 Posts
    erosennin.... Actually I'm speaking of Eygpt and they didn't just punch holes in someones head. Recent archiology has discovered skeletal remains of workers on the pyramids that showed extensive surgery including brain surgery and the worker living for years afterward.

    As for the cement, there are roads built out of cements and stone block in both the Mediterranian and south/central America that are still being used to this day that are well over a thousand years old. We can't reproduce it and the ony thing we do know is that the roads in the Mediterranian were made with ox-blood.

    I fail to see why specialization would disprove my question. After all, if we specialize now what's the big deal about them doing it then? Mass discussion of intellectual subjects is not a new thing either. It happened both during the Renaissance (hence the title a Renaissance man) and during the "Awakening" in the 1800's, and that's just for Europe/USA. Other parts of the world have their own periods of general educational and intellectual freedom.


    Dark, no I don't think we have reached our maximum "Intellectual" capacity but neither do I believe we have a patent to it. If even after that erosennin admits that "they were at least as intelligent as a whole" can we truly claim to have evolved?

    [opinion] The reason that the information was lost is not because it wasn't written down but because society turned away from it and fell into intellectual darkness through wars or simply by choice. Mankind had had to pull themselves out of darkness several times throughout history, each time trying to rebuild what it has lost, each time the result being a little different then the last. [/opinion]

    l Stone Hold l Now We're Cooking! l Thanks to Kaos for the awesome sig!

  7. #15
    Grouchy Old Anime Otaku LenMiyata has become well known LenMiyata has become well known LenMiyata has become well known LenMiyata's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Silicon Valley, California
    Posts
    5,477
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 172 Times in 147 Posts
    Grumble Grumble Grumble

    As far as the idea of Devolution, something you need to keep in mind is since the start of known civilization, the potential for human intellegence has not shown a significant change. There may have been a few percentage shifts in the Bell curve distribution due to the effects of malnutrition, but other then that, no significant change.

    This topic reminds me of one of the long term projects for computer AI research (I think it was Texas A&M..) where their idea was that if you gave a self modifying AI program a huge data base of human information, and give it guidence on the observations and assumptions it made from the data, that possibly, it could start emulating human thought and behavior. (This is the same project that came up with thee possible interpretations of the phrase 'Time flies like an Arrow'. The first analysis was that time moves quickly, the second is that time flies ballisticlly, and the third was that creatures called 'Time Flies' prefer to consume arrows...) One day, one of it's evening data analysis was. 'Everyone is Famous'. Upon reading the statement, the researchers determined that the only persons in the programs data was from entries from history books, so they started entering data from Phone books and other mundane texts....

    Which brings us back to the topic at hand. Since the potential for human intellegence has not changed significantly, then civilizations of the past must have had their equivalent of their 'Einsteins' and 'Newtons'. And their existence does show up in works of the past, such as the works of 'Plato' and the other Greek Philosophers, and unnamed works such as the astrological observatory at 'Stonehenge', and the Mayan calender. But for every master of the past, you still had thousands of ignorant peasants and commoners, just as we have our ditch diggers, coach potatoes, and hamburger flippers of today...
    FAVOURITE THREADS EXPLAIN why, or risk an infraction.
    Rantings of a Grouchy Old Anime Otaku

  8. #16
    Otaku erosennin may be famous one day erosennin may be famous one day erosennin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Redmond
    Posts
    157
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Arrianna
    erosennin.... Actually I'm speaking of Eygpt and they didn't just punch holes in someones head. Recent archiology has discovered skeletal remains of workers on the pyramids that showed extensive surgery including brain surgery and the worker living for years afterward.
    I have a question about this, actually. I almost got done writing before I realized this. By what method did they ascertain that brain surgery had been attempted on these workers? Even in mumifications, the brain is removed through the nose, it isn't even intact. Not to mention my suspention of disbelief is would be somewhat stretched for an intact, ancient brain, all things considered, without a reference. I obviously haven't heard of these findings, so to me it would seem that they would have to go off of markings on the skull, which leaves an enormous ammount of information to be desired, and actually doesn't prove they did jack to the brain other than cut on the skull.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arrianna
    As for the cement, there are roads built out of cements and stone block in both the Mediterranian and south/central America that are still being used to this day that are well over a thousand years old. We can't reproduce it and the ony thing we do know is that the roads in the Mediterranian were made with ox-blood.
    My mistake.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arrianna
    I fail to see why specialization would disprove my question. After all, if we specialize now what's the big deal about them doing it then? Mass discussion of intellectual subjects is not a new thing either. It happened both during the Renaissance (hence the title a Renaissance man) and during the "Awakening" in the 1800's, and that's just for Europe/USA. Other parts of the world have their own periods of general educational and intellectual freedom.
    First of all, specialization doesn't prove a civilization as advanced, it proves that it had a few gifted individuals. So, like you said, what's the big deal? There's a difference between saying, "Oh, they were so advanced, we can't figure them out" and "There were a few brilliant architects and artists in this region and time period". It means that the vast majority of the population was almost sertainly not as brilliant as those responsible for the designs of ancient monuments. So, I would find myself hard pressed trying to prove am entire civilization not only more advanced, but more intelligent because of supposed de-evolution based on a handfull of individuals.

    Next, lets look at which people up to this point have been having intellectual discussions. When looking at things like the time period of the Renaissance, it's more important to ask yourself why than who. When did the Renaissance happen? Why were people seemingly suddenly able to explode with new art, architecture, and philosophy? Was it because they were genetically more intelligent than the previous batch? Or was it because they're environment suddenly changed to allow them to pursue such endeavors? I pick the latter.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arrianna
    Dark, no I don't think we have reached our maximum "Intellectual" capacity but neither do I believe we have a patent to it. If even after that erosennin admits that "they were at least as intelligent as a whole" can we truly claim to have evolved?
    I believe Cro Magnon was at least as intelligent as the modern human. The difference isn't capacity here. The difference is accumulated knowledge, that which is passed on. Not to mention that humans have evolved several times since the advent of the first Homo Sapiens. These changes, to the best of my knowledge, though, do not include intelligence. They include phenotypes and several genetic diseases, but not intelligence.

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts