Evolution Shmevolution

Gloves-off political rumpus for those into that sort of thing.

Moderators: happywaffle, arclight

Evolution Shmevolution

Postby York99 » March 28th, 2007, 10:12 pm

Kidding.
"Every cat dies 9 times, but every cat does not truly live 9 lives."
-Bravecat

Image
User avatar
York99
 
Posts: 1998
Joined: April 12th, 2006, 8:47 am
Location: There

Postby York99 » March 28th, 2007, 10:17 pm

But seriously, I was reading an article today that mentioned evolutionary changes. Are there any picture projections about how humans will evolve from now to the distant future? I have looked, but come up with nothing of substance.
"Every cat dies 9 times, but every cat does not truly live 9 lives."
-Bravecat

Image
User avatar
York99
 
Posts: 1998
Joined: April 12th, 2006, 8:47 am
Location: There

Postby ratliff » March 29th, 2007, 12:54 am

What does Sean Hannity say? He's sort of your main source of scientific information, isn't he?
"I'm not a real aspirational cat."
-- TJ Jagodowski
User avatar
ratliff
 
Posts: 1602
Joined: June 16th, 2006, 2:44 am
Location: austin

Postby York99 » March 29th, 2007, 1:24 am

From what I can figure out, any time the evolution topic comes up on Mr. Hannity's show, he is conveniently not there or they have guests debate and he stays out of it... then again, I don't know if they've ever discussed future evolution.

I guess it's up to God's whim, may he rest in peace.
"Every cat dies 9 times, but every cat does not truly live 9 lives."
-Bravecat

Image
User avatar
York99
 
Posts: 1998
Joined: April 12th, 2006, 8:47 am
Location: There

Postby Marc Majcher » March 29th, 2007, 2:17 am

York99 wrote:Are there any picture projections about how humans will evolve from now to the distant future?


Giant heads. Long fingers. Silver jumpsuits.
The Bastard
Improv For Evil
"new goal: be quoted in Marc's signature." - Jordan T. Maxwell
User avatar
Marc Majcher
 
Posts: 1621
Joined: January 24th, 2006, 1:40 am
Location: Austin, TX

Postby The Frightful Turpentine » March 29th, 2007, 8:49 am

My wife's former postdoc adviser (a top geneticist) once told her that the current general scientific consensus is that humans are through evolving because there are no more "population bottlenecks," i.e., events in which significant numbers of the population are killed or prevented from reproducing, allowing those few with advantageous mutations the opportunity to become a large part of the breeding pool. For more detail, you can check here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_bottleneck

Of course, one can imagine any number of apocalyptic scenarios that might give rise to a population bottleneck. And, of course, there's also the hypothesis put forth by Mike Judge in "Idiocracy," that stupid people will eventually take over because they're so much more fecund than smart people.
"But surely a hermit who takes a newspaper is not a hermit in whom one can have complete confidence."

-Tom Stoppard, "Arcadia"
User avatar
The Frightful Turpentine
 
Posts: 51
Joined: October 21st, 2006, 9:52 pm
Location: Trapped in a world I never made

Postby Wesley » March 29th, 2007, 9:20 am

We're hardly through evolving, we're just going to start controlling the way we do it through medical advances, like robotic limbs, artificial organs, and genetic modifications.

You thought tattoos were hardcore? Wait until you cn graft genes for giant bat wings right on to your DNA.
"I do."
--Christina de Roos . . . Bain . . . Christina Bain
:-)

I Snood Bear
Improvised Theater
User avatar
Wesley
 
Posts: 2307
Joined: August 23rd, 2005, 2:05 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Postby vine311 » March 29th, 2007, 9:58 am

Image
"Have you ever scrapped high?" Jon Bolden "Stabby" - After School Improv

http://www.improvforevil.com
User avatar
vine311
 
Posts: 2415
Joined: February 23rd, 2006, 5:27 pm
Location: Austin

Postby shando » March 29th, 2007, 10:06 am

vine311 wrote:Image


There's whole speculative book dedicated to this kind of thing by Dougal Dixon. I haven't read it, but his other specualtive evolution books, one called After Man, about evolution 50 million years in the future and what kind of critters might be around, and another one about what the present might look like had the dinosaurs not been killed are pretty cool.

Image
http://getup.austinimprov.com
madeline wrote:i average 40, and like, a billion grains?


"She fascinated me 'cause I like to run my fingers through her money."--Abner Jay
User avatar
shando
 
Posts: 2875
Joined: August 31st, 2005, 5:20 pm

Postby The Frightful Turpentine » March 29th, 2007, 10:17 am

Wesley wrote:We're hardly through evolving, we're just going to start controlling the way we do it through medical advances, like robotic limbs, artificial organs, and genetic modifications.

You thought tattoos were hardcore? Wait until you cn graft genes for giant bat wings right on to your DNA.


Actually, if anything, advanced medicine, robotic limbs, artificial organs, and so on, hold back evolution by enabling people who might otherwise be weeded out of the gene pool to live and reproduce. As for artificially enhancing our genes through recombinant DNA- that probably will happen at some point (and I have to say, bat wings would be pretty freakin' cool- and I'd personally throw in a prehensile tail. And poison fangs.), but (a) will these modifications be passed on from generation to generation (what if you get bat wings and marry a woman without them?), and (b) will this happen on a large enough scale that genetically modified people out-reproduce plain old vanilla homo sapiens? Maybe we'll just spin off some subspecies.
"But surely a hermit who takes a newspaper is not a hermit in whom one can have complete confidence."

-Tom Stoppard, "Arcadia"
User avatar
The Frightful Turpentine
 
Posts: 51
Joined: October 21st, 2006, 9:52 pm
Location: Trapped in a world I never made

to kill the thread.

Postby deroosisonfire » March 29th, 2007, 10:20 am

York99 wrote:But seriously, I was reading an article today that mentioned evolutionary changes. Are there any picture projections about how humans will evolve from now to the distant future? I have looked, but come up with nothing of substance.


evolution isn't forward-thinking. it's the result of random mutations which are passed on to the next generation in greater relative number than alternative alleles.

and there's the time thing. 10,000 years is almost nothing when thinking about evolution. there are pressures in the current human environment that will favor certain genotypes, but those pressures need to be constant for long periods of time (like hundreds of thousands of years) to have much effect. what aspects of today's human life do you think will still be present in 100,000 years?

that said, there are certainly things that are evolving in humans. the gene for the enzyme that breaks down cow's milk shows evidence of evolution. this makes sense - it is a relatively new things for humans to continue to drink cow's milk into adulthood.

i'll look for articles in free journals this afternoon and try to post some links of genes we have strong evidence are evolving in humans.
"There's no such thing as extra pepperoni. There's just pepperoni you can transfer to another person."
-Wes
User avatar
deroosisonfire
 
Posts: 553
Joined: September 10th, 2005, 4:49 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Postby York99 » March 29th, 2007, 10:25 am

The Frightful Turpentine wrote:
Actually, if anything, advanced medicine, robotic limbs, artificial organs, and so on, hold back evolution by enabling people who might otherwise be weeded out of the gene pool to live and reproduce.


I have actually heard that this might be causing us to devolve in some ways. For example, it used to be that people with poor sight would die off and not pass those genes on. Since we now have glasses (and those with poor eyesight are our smartest and most virile) those genes are being passed on and that is becoming more widespread.

Of course, if we all start developing ESP, telekinisis (sp?), etc. we won't need good vision and that's not devolving at all. I want to bend a spoon with my mind.
"Every cat dies 9 times, but every cat does not truly live 9 lives."
-Bravecat

Image
User avatar
York99
 
Posts: 1998
Joined: April 12th, 2006, 8:47 am
Location: There

Re: to kill the thread.

Postby York99 » March 29th, 2007, 10:33 am

deroosisonfire wrote:[1]evolution isn't forward-thinking. it's the result of random mutations which are passed on to the next generation in greater relative number than alternative alleles.

[2]and there's the time thing. 10,000 years is almost nothing when thinking about evolution...
that said, there are certainly things that are evolving in humans.

[3]i'll look for articles in free journals this afternoon and try to post some links of genes we have strong evidence are evolving in humans.


1. My thinking was that because there is so much evidence from the past, that there might be some intelligent speculation on the future. That's what they do in finance, so I thought maybe some similar principles could be employed in genetics.

2. Of course, but even in the past few hundred years, isn't there evidence that we're getting taller as a human race? That's at least something, right?

3. Please don't do homework on my account. You've got enough going on, I'm sure.
"Every cat dies 9 times, but every cat does not truly live 9 lives."
-Bravecat

Image
User avatar
York99
 
Posts: 1998
Joined: April 12th, 2006, 8:47 am
Location: There

Postby Marc Majcher » March 29th, 2007, 10:47 am

The Frightful Turpentine wrote:Actually, if anything, advanced medicine, robotic limbs, artificial organs, and so on, hold back evolution by enabling people who might otherwise be weeded out of the gene pool to live and reproduce. As for artificially enhancing our genes through recombinant DNA- that probably will happen at some point (and I have to say, bat wings would be pretty freakin' cool- and I'd personally throw in a prehensile tail. And poison fangs.), but (a) will these modifications be passed on from generation to generation (what if you get bat wings and marry a woman without them?), and (b) will this happen on a large enough scale that genetically modified people out-reproduce plain old vanilla homo sapiens? Maybe we'll just spin off some subspecies.


The keyword you're looking for is "posthuman". There's a fairly significant amount of speculation happening on this subject - sci-fi and non-fiction, crazy-ass and not-as-crazy-ass. I can throw plenty more pointers your way if you're interested.
The Bastard
Improv For Evil
"new goal: be quoted in Marc's signature." - Jordan T. Maxwell
User avatar
Marc Majcher
 
Posts: 1621
Joined: January 24th, 2006, 1:40 am
Location: Austin, TX

Re: to kill the thread.

Postby deroosisonfire » March 29th, 2007, 10:54 am

York99 wrote:1. My thinking was that because there is so much evidence from the past, that there might be some intelligent speculation on the future. That's what they do in finance, so I thought maybe some similar principles could be employed in genetics.

2. Of course, but even in the past few hundred years, isn't there evidence that we're getting taller as a human race? That's at least something, right?

3. Please don't do homework on my account. You've got enough going on, I'm sure.


1. we can't really speculate on which genes will mutate and how they will mutate. we don't understand enough about dna and proteins yet to really be able to predict this well. surprising, huh? i'll give a better answer to this when i'm not due in class in 7 minutes.

2. that's mostly due to better nutrition, not evolution.

3. naw, there's not much to do since i'm leaving school. and i think this stuff is fun and interesting, anyway.
"There's no such thing as extra pepperoni. There's just pepperoni you can transfer to another person."
-Wes
User avatar
deroosisonfire
 
Posts: 553
Joined: September 10th, 2005, 4:49 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Next

Return to The Stump

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron