• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Human evolving faster

JTsyo

JTsyo

Lifer
Article

Seems with a larger population there are more variations in the gene pool. I wonder if humans will ever branch into a different species. Probbaly only if a population is isolated from the rest.
 
"For example, Africans have new genes providing resistance to malaria. In Europeans, there is a gene that makes them better able to digest milk as adults. In Asians, there is a gene that makes ear wax more dry."

Yay Asians! 😛
 
Originally posted by: Crono
"For example, Africans have new genes providing resistance to malaria. In Europeans, there is a gene that makes them better able to digest milk as adults. In Asians, there is a gene that makes ear wax more dry."

Yay Asians! 😛
Click to expand...

That's the author's way of down playing our outrageous intelligence 😀
 
I would have though the exact opposite, considering that medicines now allow people that normally would not be allowed to reproduce, to reproduce; like in-vitro.

Though, maybe aren't evolving faster but maybe just differentiating.
 
Originally posted by: scott
soon you won't even have to knuckle-walk or pick bugs outta your fur, or scent-mark your territory
Click to expand...

great. Good thing I just pissed around my fence. :thumbsup:
 
Originally posted by: AmpedSilence
I would have though the exact opposite, considering that medicines now allow people that normally would not be allowed to reproduce, to reproduce; like in-vitro.

Though, maybe aren't evolving faster but maybe just differentiating.
Click to expand...

Evolution isn't about changing for the better, but changing. Just because an genetic change does not provide an advantage or even provides a disadvantage does not mean it doesn't fall under evolution.
 
Originally posted by: Born2bwire
Originally posted by: AmpedSilence
I would have though the exact opposite, considering that medicines now allow people that normally would not be allowed to reproduce, to reproduce; like in-vitro.

Though, maybe aren't evolving faster but maybe just differentiating.
Click to expand...

Evolution isn't about changing for the better, but changing. Just because an genetic change does not provide an advantage or even provides a disadvantage does not mean it doesn't fall under evolution.
Click to expand...

I wish Creationists would start believing that they aren't allowed to reap the benefits of the science they don't believe in.
 
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
Originally posted by: Born2bwire
Originally posted by: AmpedSilence
I would have though the exact opposite, considering that medicines now allow people that normally would not be allowed to reproduce, to reproduce; like in-vitro.

Though, maybe aren't evolving faster but maybe just differentiating.
Click to expand...

Evolution isn't about changing for the better, but changing. Just because an genetic change does not provide an advantage or even provides a disadvantage does not mean it doesn't fall under evolution.
Click to expand...

I wish Creationists would start believing that they aren't allowed to reap the benefits of the science they don't believe in.
Click to expand...

And if they believe that God allowed/purposed these evolutions?

That is a pretty self centered statement.
 
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
Originally posted by: Born2bwire
Originally posted by: AmpedSilence
I would have though the exact opposite, considering that medicines now allow people that normally would not be allowed to reproduce, to reproduce; like in-vitro.

Though, maybe aren't evolving faster but maybe just differentiating.
Click to expand...

Evolution isn't about changing for the better, but changing. Just because an genetic change does not provide an advantage or even provides a disadvantage does not mean it doesn't fall under evolution.
Click to expand...

I wish Creationists would start believing that they aren't allowed to reap the benefits of the science they don't believe in.
Click to expand...

Are you calling me a creationist? I would be pretty insulted if that was the case!
 
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
Originally posted by: Born2bwire
Originally posted by: AmpedSilence
I would have though the exact opposite, considering that medicines now allow people that normally would not be allowed to reproduce, to reproduce; like in-vitro.

Though, maybe aren't evolving faster but maybe just differentiating.
Click to expand...

Evolution isn't about changing for the better, but changing. Just because an genetic change does not provide an advantage or even provides a disadvantage does not mean it doesn't fall under evolution.
Click to expand...

I wish Creationists would start believing that they aren't allowed to reap the benefits of the science they don't believe in.
Click to expand...

It took 13 posts for the trolling brigade to get here? 😕
 
Originally posted by: RapidSnail
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
Originally posted by: Born2bwire
Originally posted by: AmpedSilence
I would have though the exact opposite, considering that medicines now allow people that normally would not be allowed to reproduce, to reproduce; like in-vitro.

Though, maybe aren't evolving faster but maybe just differentiating.
Click to expand...

Evolution isn't about changing for the better, but changing. Just because an genetic change does not provide an advantage or even provides a disadvantage does not mean it doesn't fall under evolution.
Click to expand...

I wish Creationists would start believing that they aren't allowed to reap the benefits of the science they don't believe in.
Click to expand...

It took 13 posts for the trolling brigade to get here? 😕
Click to expand...

ATOT: always alert for a situation worth scoffing at, imaginary or not.
 
Originally posted by: paulxcook
Originally posted by: RapidSnail
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
Originally posted by: Born2bwire
Originally posted by: AmpedSilence
I would have though the exact opposite, considering that medicines now allow people that normally would not be allowed to reproduce, to reproduce; like in-vitro.

Though, maybe aren't evolving faster but maybe just differentiating.
Click to expand...

Evolution isn't about changing for the better, but changing. Just because an genetic change does not provide an advantage or even provides a disadvantage does not mean it doesn't fall under evolution.
Click to expand...

I wish Creationists would start believing that they aren't allowed to reap the benefits of the science they don't believe in.
Click to expand...

It took 13 posts for the trolling brigade to get here? 😕
Click to expand...

ATOT: always alert for a situation worth scoffing at, imaginary or not.
Click to expand...

I blame them for our chunk of humanity devolving. Have you seen Idiocracy? Those people are the ones having 10 kids with in-vitro fertilization, not using protection because God wants them to "be fruitful and multiply", thereby reducing average intelligence, and then home schooling their kids.
It's like a powerful feedback loop for stupidity.
 
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
Originally posted by: paulxcook
Originally posted by: RapidSnail
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
Originally posted by: Born2bwire
Originally posted by: AmpedSilence
I would have though the exact opposite, considering that medicines now allow people that normally would not be allowed to reproduce, to reproduce; like in-vitro.

Though, maybe aren't evolving faster but maybe just differentiating.
Click to expand...

Evolution isn't about changing for the better, but changing. Just because an genetic change does not provide an advantage or even provides a disadvantage does not mean it doesn't fall under evolution.
Click to expand...

I wish Creationists would start believing that they aren't allowed to reap the benefits of the science they don't believe in.
Click to expand...

It took 13 posts for the trolling brigade to get here? 😕
Click to expand...

ATOT: always alert for a situation worth scoffing at, imaginary or not.
Click to expand...

I blame them for our chunk of humanity devolving. Have you seen Idiocracy? Those people are the ones having 10 kids with in-vitro fertilization, not using protection because God wants them to "be fruitful and multiply", thereby reducing average intelligence, and then home schooling their kids.
It's like a powerful feedback loop for stupidity.
Click to expand...

😕

What the hell do large families and home schooling have to do with "reducing the average intelligence" and stupidity? Close-mindedness is the source of idiocy not large families or home schooling, and I'd say there's just as much of that (close-mindedness) within the conventional schooling system as there is with the blindly faithful.
 
Humans are devolving really. Instead of natural selection killing off the worst and letting the best reproduce, the worst are the ones reproducing in mass numbers while the better humans have fewer, if any, children. Idiocracy is the future.
 
Originally posted by: Chiropteran
Humans are devolving really. Instead of natural selection killing off the worst and letting the best reproduce, the worst are the ones reproducing in mass numbers while the better humans have fewer, if any, children. Idiocracy is the future.
Click to expand...

Idiocracy. . .awesome movie 🙂 :thumbsup:


Dry earwax huh? How. . .underwhelming.

Get back to me when people start exhibiting traits like the characters on Heroes.
 
Originally posted by: JTsyo
Article

Seems with a larger population there are more variations in the gene pool. I wonder if humans will ever branch into a different species. Probbaly only if a population is isolated from the rest.
Click to expand...

Larger populations are only part of the story. A greater magnitude of disconnect from the ancestral environment to which we're adapted (i.e. hunting & gathering in Africa to sedentary agriculturalism) plays a key role. More variation is meaningless unless something (selective pressures) brings it to higher frequencies in the population.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top