Nothing controversial there. It's going to be interesting to watch the great infectious agent v. antibiotic race during our lifetime. What happens when vancomycin begins to fail on a large scale?Spots wrote:Brockman, you may be looking at environment through antiquated glasses. The environment 200 years from now may be effected by pollution, cataclysmic events, socio political doctrines, disease, famine, lack of resources, extinction of various species, slight changes in climate, pop culture OR lack of all these things. Each of them represents a wide spectrum of possibility. A wide wide spectrum of possibility.
Heck, a couple of generations of Mars-g-bred humans would be all it would take to have 9 foot tall kids! Yikes! If we managed to generate some sort of thin atmosphere over a few centuries we'd get the Andean chest depth adaptation plus some, too. Can we send our pollution there? Hydrocarbons would help. Ooooh - better idea. Nudge a carbonaceous chondrite asteroid into an orbit in which it would burn up in Mars atmosphere. Add H2O vapor and carbon at the same time!Spots wrote:It's very well possible that we will all reside in clay huts. Then again a few us may live in colonies on Mars, representing new ecosystems of their own.
You're right. I'm borrowing a bit from Dan Dennett and (if you go back far enough) Doug Hofstadter and playing around with the definition of "evolution" to include non-biological or biological-but-brought-about-by-synthetic-environmental-means et al. I find it entertaining - and I think that technology can, as extension, arguably be considered a part of human evolution.Spots wrote:Maybe you are referring to bootstrapping extragenetic & extrasomatic information. These concepts are not synonymous with the common term "evolution."
What you basically told me was that I'm only thinking of biological evolution in regards to biology.
Well, Guilty as charged.
I'm not taking issue with any of what you've said regarding the continuing evolution of the neocortex or any other biological system. It might shortly be very advantageous to be able to breathe high concentrations of CO2. I'm simply trying to throw in/broaden ("bootstrap", if you like) some other sources of information.
I would like to hear you speak a little more about how you think "pop culture", given it's transient nature, plays a role in evolution. I would think pop culture trends would tend to even and cancel each other out over time.
Unless, of course we're going 'butterfly effect" and dragging chaos theory in here as well.