Human evolution kicks into high gear

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
User avatar
GabonX
Posts: 899
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 10:38 am
Gender: Male
Contact:

Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by GabonX »

For decades the consensus view — among the public as well as the world’s preeminent biologists—has been that human evolution is over. Since modern Homo sapiens emerged 50,000 years ago, “natural selection has almost become irrelevant” to us, the influential Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould proclaimed. “There have been no biological changes. Everything we’ve called culture and civilization we’ve built with the same body and brain.”

This view has become so entrenched that it is practically doctrine. Even the founders of evolutionary psychology, Leda Cosmides and John Tooby, signed on to the notion that our brains were mostly sculpted during the long period when we were hunter-gatherers and have changed little since. “Our modern skulls house a Stone Age mind,” they wrote in a background piece on the Center for Evolutionary Psychology at the University of California at Santa Barbara.

So to suggest that humans have undergone an evolutionary makeover from Stone Age times to the present is nothing short of blasphemous. Yet a team of researchers has done just that.

They find an abundance of recent adaptive mutations etched in the human genome; even more shocking, these mutations seem to be piling up faster and ever faster, like an avalanche. Over the past 10,000 years, their data show, human evolution has occurred a hundred times more quickly than in any other period in our species’ history.

The new genetic adaptations, some 2,000 in total, are not limited to the well-recognized differences among ethnic groups in superficial traits such as skin and eye color. The mutations relate to the brain, the digestive system, life span, immunity to pathogens, sperm production and bones — in short, virtually every aspect of our functioning.

Many of these DNA variants are unique to their continent of origin, with provocative implications. “It is likely that human races are evolving away from each other,” says University of Utah anthropologist Henry Harpending, who co-wrote a major paper on recent human evolution. “We are getting less alike, not merging into a single mixed humanity.”

Harpending theorizes that the attitudes and customs that distinguish today’s humans from those of the past may be more than just cultural, as historians have widely assumed. “We aren’t the same as people even a thousand or two thousand years ago,” he says. “Almost every trait you look at is under strong genetic influence.”

Not surprisingly, the new findings have raised hackles. Some scientists are alarmed by claims of ethnic differences in temperament and intelligence, fearing that they will inflame racial sensitivities. Other researchers point to limitations in the data. Yet even skeptics now admit that some human traits, at least, are evolving rapidly, challenging yesterday’s hallowed beliefs.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29123062//

This is part of a much longer, and very interesting article.
Spazz Arcane wrote:If birds could swim and fish could fly I would awaken in the morning to the sturgeons cry. If fish could fly and birds could swim I'd still use worms to fish for them.
saxitoxin wrote:I'm on Team GabonX
User avatar
Nobunaga
Posts: 1058
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 10:09 am
Location: West of Osaka

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by Nobunaga »

GabonX wrote:
Not surprisingly, the new findings have raised hackles. Some scientists are alarmed by claims of ethnic differences in temperament and intelligence, fearing that they will inflame racial sensitivities. Other researchers point to limitations in the data. Yet even skeptics now admit that some human traits, at least, are evolving rapidly, challenging yesterday’s hallowed beliefs.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29123062//

This is part of a much longer, and very interesting article.


... They will inflame racial sensitivities only if caucasoids measure higher than the others.

... Neanderthal and Homo-Erectus were once the same animal, before they split into the two groups, were they not? And that wasn't so long ago.

...
PLAYER57832
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Gender: Female
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by PLAYER57832 »

Nobunaga wrote:
GabonX wrote:
Not surprisingly, the new findings have raised hackles. Some scientists are alarmed by claims of ethnic differences in temperament and intelligence, fearing that they will inflame racial sensitivities. Other researchers point to limitations in the data. Yet even skeptics now admit that some human traits, at least, are evolving rapidly, challenging yesterday’s hallowed beliefs.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29123062//

This is part of a much longer, and very interesting article.


... They will inflame racial sensitivities only if caucasoids measure higher than the others.

... Neanderthal and Homo-Erectus were once the same animal, before they split into the two groups, were they not? And that wasn't so long ago.

...

I would guess that the changes have less to do with race and more to do with other factors. I am not sure it will decrease or increase discrimination, it could just lead to new discriminatory criteria, perhaps create distinctions more valid than race, if it continues.

But, the thing about evolution is that while it moves forward, the idea that what results is always better, in a purely objective sense, is debateable. More changes than we ever imagined are likely pure "random". Others might provide a slight benefit in a particular situation , but may not be that great in the long run. (to clarify "random", in this context, means "multiple undetermined factors humans do not yet understand" not true mathematical randomness)

My real thought is that this is happening because we are nearing the edge of a long expansion/relative state of evolutionary quiescence and are about to experience huge changes. Sort of the way oaks often produce more acorns before a bad winter. Nature has a way of "predicting" events (changes likely spur increased mutations).
AAFitz
Posts: 7270
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:47 am
Gender: Male
Location: On top of the World 2.1

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by AAFitz »

PURE SPECULATION:

I have always assumed people were evolving, albeit slowly. It only makes sense if evolution happened at all. I believe that since reproductive cells are created though out life, their composition changes as does the persons. In this theory, it would mean that since the female eggs are already created, it would mean the male dna would be the contributing factor.

As a person lives and grows, the body is affected greatly by its surroundings, and changes to meet those demands as much as possible. Some use strength, some art, some music, some computer skills etc. As that person works toward those goals, its cells are all reproduced towards that goal to some degree. The bones are all replaced, to provide support for heavy lifting, sitting, or running, and every combination of those activities. In doing so, it is very possible that some genes are affected in the process. If those genes are affected, then they would possibly be transferred to the reproductive cells as well. Now, there are millions of reproductive cells, and all are unique, so the odds of any one little change is masked by the sheer quantity of cells created, and in the end, the fastest swimmer gets the egg.

Now, it would stand to reason, that if I live my whole life, struggling with one factor, such as intelligence, that my body would respond and put all efforts towards this goal, and in doing so, its possible that my reproductive cells are similarly affected by how I live my life, and what factors most importantly stress my mind or body or reproductive system enough to actively affect it. It would then be possible, that because I relied on my strength for my whole life, that by the time I reproduced, that my cells were somewhat disposed to strength, and the genes regulating strength are somehow turned on and more likely to be transferred.

Since there are obvious change that have taken place with humans, its obvious these changes had to have happened at some point, such as a group living on a small island, and effectively growing smaller to adapt to the evironment. Is it possible that such a change is only accidental, and that all the big people died...possibly, but its unrealistic to assume someone would actually die just because they were stronger and larger...It would be more likely to assume those people would actually do better, by having a physical advantage over the smaller ones. However, the body and the genes cant know this. All they can know is that they dont have enough food, that they dont have enough water, and they adjust to meet the demands as much as they can...and also, because they dont have as much food and water, they could evolve smaller, simply because of nutritional limits also. Obviously, many factors would come into play, but when hundreds of generations are involved, clearly, changes do happen, for a number of reasons, and reproduction is affected.

This is very easy to poke holes in of course, and it is just speculation, but I would consider it odd, for an animal not to have the ability to affect its ability to pass on the useful genes to its offspring, and it seems to me that it would help explain evolution of individual characteristics, and why there does tend to be somewhat of a balance in some ecosystems, that would not necessarily be expected with simple random changes in species.

The biggest hole would be of course that why doesnt a computer programmer have kids with 6 fingers on each hand to become more efficient, or an olympic athlete produce an even better Olympic athlete every time...but its also obvious that any changes would be very subtle, and would be averaged out by the unchanged dna in the egg, which was produced via this effect, but unchanged throughout the live of the woman.

Without much proof, I do believe this is a distinct possibility, and for me, makes more sense, but also fully recognize that changes really could be completely accidental as natural selection, but find it hard to believe that as animals and humans do evolve to fit their environment, that there is some actual process to gauge the said environment and affect the dna to adjust as much as it can on a small scale.

Unfortunately, if this did happen to be true, Its announcement could be titled "Male Controls Human Evolution", and Ill bet that wont be a popular headline. Except: " a new study published in the March 11 issue of Nature shows that female mice continue to produce eggs to replace damaged ones after birth.

Researchers say the discovery indicates that females may share the ability to replenish reproductive cells during life, and if the same process occurs in humans it may also help explain why female fertility declines rapidly after age 30."

But that's a different subject altogether.

Oh, and I painstakingly avoided a word- Sperm.
I'm Spanking Monkey now....err...I mean I'm a Spanking Monkey now...that shoots milk
Too much. I know.
User avatar
Neoteny
Posts: 3396
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 10:24 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Atlanta, Georgia

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by Neoteny »

*foams at the mouth*

I didn't get past the misquoting of Dr. Gould. I don't want to deal with whatever is after it...
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
User avatar
Snorri1234
Posts: 3438
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 11:52 am
Location: Right in the middle of a fucking reptile zoo.
Contact:

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by Snorri1234 »

Neoteny wrote:*foams at the mouth*

I didn't get past the misquoting of Dr. Gould. I don't want to deal with whatever is after it...


There isn't much interesting stuff after that anyway.
"Some motherfuckers are always trying to ice skate uphill."

Duane: You know what they say about love and war.
Tim: Yes, one involves a lot of physical and psychological pain, and the other one's war.
User avatar
GabonX
Posts: 899
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 10:38 am
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by GabonX »

PLAYER57832 wrote:I would guess that the changes have less to do with race and more to do with other factors. I am not sure it will decrease or increase discrimination, it could just lead to new discriminatory criteria, perhaps create distinctions more valid than race, if it continues.


Race is the visible manifestation of human evolution. There are many invisible characteristics which coincide with race as well.

PLAYER57832 wrote:But, the thing about evolution is that while it moves forward, the idea that what results is always better, in a purely objective sense, is debateable. More changes than we ever imagined are likely pure "random". Others might provide a slight benefit in a particular situation , but may not be that great in the long run.


I can agree with this. Can I ask, did you read the whole article? It's a bit long, 5 pages, but there is a lot of information there. Everything from skin color to sperm production/competition to how mathematical ability may have affected human evolution, particularly among oriental asians, is discussed..

It's definately worth a look.

Neoteny wrote:*foams at the mouth*

I didn't get past the misquoting of Dr. Gould. I don't want to deal with whatever is after it...

Please explain. If he was misquoted it falls upon you to show that this is the case, because as of now there is no reason to think that this is the case.

Rather it looks like you are rejecting science because of your ideology, an act which the Christian right is highly criticized for by the left..
Spazz Arcane wrote:If birds could swim and fish could fly I would awaken in the morning to the sturgeons cry. If fish could fly and birds could swim I'd still use worms to fish for them.
saxitoxin wrote:I'm on Team GabonX
User avatar
john9blue
Posts: 1268
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:18 pm
Gender: Male
Location: FlutterChi-town

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by john9blue »

GabonX wrote:Rather it looks like you are rejecting science because of your ideology, an act which the Christian right is highly criticized for by the left..


It's only wrong when Christians do it. Get with the program. :roll:
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)
User avatar
Snorri1234
Posts: 3438
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 11:52 am
Location: Right in the middle of a fucking reptile zoo.
Contact:

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by Snorri1234 »

GabonX wrote:
Neoteny wrote:*foams at the mouth*

I didn't get past the misquoting of Dr. Gould. I don't want to deal with whatever is after it...

Please explain. If he was misquoted it falls upon you to show that this is the case, because as of now there is no reason to think that this is the case.


I think it's a disbelief in the fact that Gould could make such a mistake.

He actually said it though. http://www.leadertoleader.org/knowledgecenter/journal.aspx?ArticleID=64

Should be mentioned that he said it in the context of cultural vs biological evolution.
"Some motherfuckers are always trying to ice skate uphill."

Duane: You know what they say about love and war.
Tim: Yes, one involves a lot of physical and psychological pain, and the other one's war.
User avatar
thegreekdog
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Gender: Male
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by thegreekdog »

Snorri1234 wrote:
GabonX wrote:
Neoteny wrote:*foams at the mouth*

I didn't get past the misquoting of Dr. Gould. I don't want to deal with whatever is after it...

Please explain. If he was misquoted it falls upon you to show that this is the case, because as of now there is no reason to think that this is the case.


I think it's a disbelief in the fact that Gould could make such a mistake.

He actually said it though. http://www.leadertoleader.org/knowledgecenter/journal.aspx?ArticleID=64

Should be mentioned that he said it in the context of cultural vs biological evolution.


Hey, even Gould makes mistakes.
Image
User avatar
Neoteny
Posts: 3396
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 10:24 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Atlanta, Georgia

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by Neoteny »

Snorri1234 wrote:
GabonX wrote:
Neoteny wrote:*foams at the mouth*

I didn't get past the misquoting of Dr. Gould. I don't want to deal with whatever is after it...

Please explain. If he was misquoted it falls upon you to show that this is the case, because as of now there is no reason to think that this is the case.


I think it's a disbelief in the fact that Gould could make such a mistake.

He actually said it though. http://www.leadertoleader.org/knowledgecenter/journal.aspx?ArticleID=64

Should be mentioned that he said it in the context of cultural vs biological evolution.


It's not so much disbelief that he could make mistakes, but more of the context. I'm writing a longer post to address this more specifically, but, regardless of whether he said it (he obviously did), the nature of his opinions do not reflect the point that the quote is being used to reinforce.
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
User avatar
Neoteny
Posts: 3396
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 10:24 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Atlanta, Georgia

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by Neoteny »

GabonX wrote:
Neoteny wrote:*foams at the mouth*

I didn't get past the misquoting of Dr. Gould. I don't want to deal with whatever is after it...

Please explain. If he was misquoted it falls upon you to show that this is the case, because as of now there is no reason to think that this is the case.

Rather it looks like you are rejecting science because of your ideology, an act which the Christian right is highly criticized for by the left..


I suppose Gould might be a little over your head, which is kinda sad, since he was an excellent communicator. Stephen Gould was one of the main developers of the theory of punctuated equilibrium, which is an evolutionary model that addresses the hitch and go phenomenon that many evolutionary trends exhibit. There is often long periods of relative stasis ("relative" being the key word for this discussion), the equilibrium, followed by bursts of rapid evolutionary change, the punctuation. This theory is diametrically opposed to the concept of gradualism, which proposes that evolutionary change occurs slowly over time, which is a common view held by non-scientists and scientists alike. Gould was a paleontologist, and he knew his stuff about evolution.

The quote from Gould is from this interview. Let's compare that to a quote from his book on Punctuated Equilibrium.

Stephen Jay Gould wrote:Stasis does not mean "rock stability" or utter invariance of average values for all traits through time.


This is his opinion as he published it, and it demonstrates that he does not think that during these events of stasis, there is no evolutionary change. That's why I feel that using Gould to support the idea that scientists think humans aren't evolving is dishonest. Additionally, like snorri said, that quote is in the context of comparing cultural and biological change, so it seems, to me, a bit more like he was making a point. Anyhow, like thegreekdog said, Gould can be wrong, but I think that were Gould still alive, he would object to his words being used in such a manner. That's my case for that.

Moving on, even if Gould did think humans haven't changed biologically, I would love to see where the hell these people are getting a "consensus" that says humans have stopped evolving. That's just ridiculous. There's no reason we should stop. If we're in a relative stasis, that's one thing, but stopping altogether is not a factor because we are still susceptible to selection pressures (particularly in less developed areas) so evolution by natural selection is going to occur.

Finally, because there is no consensus that says humans have stopped evolving, even if Hawks' publications are valid, he isn't contributing anything particularly new to science. He's just confirming what we already know, and (following statement is my opinion) then cashing in on lay misconceptions about evolution for publicity. If you seriously think scientists think humans aren't evolving, you should click here, but I hope you're wearing a hat so you don't make a mess when I blow your mind!

As to your comment about me rejecting science for ideology, I bet you were saving that up for a while. It's not letting ideology getting in the way; it's knowing what is bullshit and what isn't, and me getting less and less surprised about the nonsense people like you believe. When it comes to science, I know what I'm talking about it, and individuals such as yourself should really just take my word for it.

john9blue wrote:
GabonX wrote:Rather it looks like you are rejecting science because of your ideology, an act which the Christian right is highly criticized for by the left..


It's only wrong when Christians do it. Get with the program. :roll:


:-({|=

Still getting manhandled in these scientific arguments, I see? Don't worry, maybe your religion will get one right someday.
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
User avatar
GabonX
Posts: 899
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 10:38 am
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by GabonX »

Yes, things are over my head :lol:

Your reaction to this article was to reject it on the basis that a quote, which was accurate, is somehow false. The quote is almost IRRELEVANT in the context of the larger article, so moving on...
Spazz Arcane wrote:If birds could swim and fish could fly I would awaken in the morning to the sturgeons cry. If fish could fly and birds could swim I'd still use worms to fish for them.
saxitoxin wrote:I'm on Team GabonX
User avatar
john9blue
Posts: 1268
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:18 pm
Gender: Male
Location: FlutterChi-town

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by john9blue »

Neoteny wrote: :-({|=

Still getting manhandled in these scientific arguments, I see? Don't worry, maybe your religion will get one right someday


How are science and religion mutually exclusive?

Oh I get it. All religious people must be dumb, because if we weren't, it would put shades of gray into your black and white worldview.

Anyway, on topic, I think a good point was made about the increasing interconnectedness of human culture producing mutations at a faster rate. Whether this is true or not, it's foolish to think that humans are done evolving, or evolving at a slower rate. There have been greater changes to our lifestyle in the past several millennia than in the rest of human history (easier access to food/shelter, increasing amounts of stimuli, etc.) and it does not seem to be stopping. However, I have a hard time believing that Hawks is the first to promote these ideas. :|
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)
User avatar
GabonX
Posts: 899
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 10:38 am
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by GabonX »

I found this to be particularly interesting:

How math furthered evolution
The rise of settlements also promoted the breakdown of labor into specialized jobs. That, coupled with food surpluses from farming, led to systems of trade and the need to track the flow of resources, which in turn could have selected for individuals with specific cognitive strengths.

“Mathematical ability is very important when it comes to keeping track of crops and bartering,” Wang says. “Certainly your working memory has to be better. You have to remember who owes you what.”

The researchers point to China’s Mandarin system, a method of screening individuals for positions as tax collectors and other government administrators. For nearly 2,000 years, starting in A.D. 141, the sons of a broad cross section of Chinese society, including peasants and tradesmen, took the equivalent of standardized tests. “Those who did well on them would get a good job in the civil service and oftentimes had multiple wives, while the other sons remained in a rice field,” Moyzis says. “Probably for thousands of years in some cultures, certain kinds of intellectual ability may have been tied to reproductive success.”
Spazz Arcane wrote:If birds could swim and fish could fly I would awaken in the morning to the sturgeons cry. If fish could fly and birds could swim I'd still use worms to fish for them.
saxitoxin wrote:I'm on Team GabonX
User avatar
john9blue
Posts: 1268
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:18 pm
Gender: Male
Location: FlutterChi-town

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by john9blue »

Sometimes I think I would rather live anywhere else, at any other time in history.

Then I remember the Internet. :D
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)
User avatar
GabonX
Posts: 899
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 10:38 am
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by GabonX »

The great technological singularity of our time ;)
Spazz Arcane wrote:If birds could swim and fish could fly I would awaken in the morning to the sturgeons cry. If fish could fly and birds could swim I'd still use worms to fish for them.
saxitoxin wrote:I'm on Team GabonX
User avatar
hecter
Posts: 14632
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:27 pm
Gender: Female
Location: Tying somebody up on the third floor
Contact:

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by hecter »

GabonX wrote:Yes, things are over my head :lol:

Your reaction to this article was to reject it on the basis that a quote, which was accurate, is somehow false. The quote is almost IRRELEVANT in the context of the larger article, so moving on...

Are you really so dense? It's pretty easy to misuse a quote. All you have to do is take something they really did say and put it in a context that it wasn't intended for. And to do so is simply dishonest and takes away your credibility. I mean come on, this is ridiculous that you don't get that.
GabonX wrote:I agree, this is ridiculous.

Oh, I'm glad we're in agreement then. The debate is over?
In heaven... Everything is fine, in heaven... Everything is fine, in heaven... Everything is fine... You got your things, and I've got mine.
Image
User avatar
GabonX
Posts: 899
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 10:38 am
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by GabonX »

The quote isn't really relevant to the article itself. It was included to set the tone in the introduction.

The ironic thing is that you guys are acting as though the article was in support of his claim (which he did make) when in actuality the article goes on to give a variety of testimonies which show that humans have developed in different ways in different regions to address the unique challenges presented by their circumstances.

Gould is not the focus of this article as some here seem think he is. Rather it is about the collective work of a number of scientists, most proportionally anthropologists..
Spazz Arcane wrote:If birds could swim and fish could fly I would awaken in the morning to the sturgeons cry. If fish could fly and birds could swim I'd still use worms to fish for them.
saxitoxin wrote:I'm on Team GabonX
User avatar
Symmetry
Posts: 9255
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:49 am

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by Symmetry »

thegreekdog wrote:
Neoteny wrote:Should be mentioned that he said it in the context of cultural vs biological evolution.


Hey, even Gould makes mistakes.


Solid Gould
User avatar
GabonX
Posts: 899
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 10:38 am
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by GabonX »

Many scientists apparently worry that proof of divergent brain evolution could be so racially polarizing that we, as a society, would almost be better off in the dark. Hawks responds that the best safeguard against bigotry is educating the public. He thinks we understand enough about human genetics to know that the notion of racial superiority is absurd. Intelligence, he argues, is not a single trait but a vast suite of abilities, and each ancestral environment may have favored a different set of talents. What is sorely needed, he says, is “an ecological framework” to interpret the results. “Groups are best adapted to their own environment, which eliminates the question of superiority.” Even he concedes, though, that communicating the nuances will be no easy task.

Paralleling the constant war against pathogens, human sperm may also be evolving at high speed, driven by the race to get to the egg before another man’s sperm. “It could be that cities create more sexual partners, which means fiercer competition among males,” Hawks says. Because sperm can fertilize an egg up to 24 hours after being ejaculated in the vagina, a woman who copulates with two or more partners in close succession is setting up the very conditions that pit one man’s sperm against another’s.

Hawks infers that “sperm today is very different from sperm even 5,000 years ago.” Newly selected mutations in genes controlling sperm production show up in every ethnic group he and his team have studied; those genes may affect characteristics including abundance, motility, and viability. The selection for “super sperm,” Hawks says, provides further corroboration that our species is not particularly monogamous — a view widely shared by other anthropologists.
Spazz Arcane wrote:If birds could swim and fish could fly I would awaken in the morning to the sturgeons cry. If fish could fly and birds could swim I'd still use worms to fish for them.
saxitoxin wrote:I'm on Team GabonX
User avatar
Hologram
Posts: 345
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 8:49 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Armpit of America

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by Hologram »

AAFitz wrote:PURE SPECULATION:

I have always assumed people were evolving, albeit slowly. It only makes sense if evolution happened at all. I believe that since reproductive cells are created though out life, their composition changes as does the persons. In this theory, it would mean that since the female eggs are already created, it would mean the male dna would be the contributing factor.

As a person lives and grows, the body is affected greatly by its surroundings, and changes to meet those demands as much as possible. Some use strength, some art, some music, some computer skills etc. As that person works toward those goals, its cells are all reproduced towards that goal to some degree. The bones are all replaced, to provide support for heavy lifting, sitting, or running, and every combination of those activities. In doing so, it is very possible that some genes are affected in the process. If those genes are affected, then they would possibly be transferred to the reproductive cells as well. Now, there are millions of reproductive cells, and all are unique, so the odds of any one little change is masked by the sheer quantity of cells created, and in the end, the fastest swimmer gets the egg.

Now, it would stand to reason, that if I live my whole life, struggling with one factor, such as intelligence, that my body would respond and put all efforts towards this goal, and in doing so, its possible that my reproductive cells are similarly affected by how I live my life, and what factors most importantly stress my mind or body or reproductive system enough to actively affect it. It would then be possible, that because I relied on my strength for my whole life, that by the time I reproduced, that my cells were somewhat disposed to strength, and the genes regulating strength are somehow turned on and more likely to be transferred.

Since there are obvious change that have taken place with humans, its obvious these changes had to have happened at some point, such as a group living on a small island, and effectively growing smaller to adapt to the evironment. Is it possible that such a change is only accidental, and that all the big people died...possibly, but its unrealistic to assume someone would actually die just because they were stronger and larger...It would be more likely to assume those people would actually do better, by having a physical advantage over the smaller ones. However, the body and the genes cant know this. All they can know is that they dont have enough food, that they dont have enough water, and they adjust to meet the demands as much as they can...and also, because they dont have as much food and water, they could evolve smaller, simply because of nutritional limits also. Obviously, many factors would come into play, but when hundreds of generations are involved, clearly, changes do happen, for a number of reasons, and reproduction is affected.

This is very easy to poke holes in of course, and it is just speculation, but I would consider it odd, for an animal not to have the ability to affect its ability to pass on the useful genes to its offspring, and it seems to me that it would help explain evolution of individual characteristics, and why there does tend to be somewhat of a balance in some ecosystems, that would not necessarily be expected with simple random changes in species.

The biggest hole would be of course that why doesnt a computer programmer have kids with 6 fingers on each hand to become more efficient, or an olympic athlete produce an even better Olympic athlete every time...but its also obvious that any changes would be very subtle, and would be averaged out by the unchanged dna in the egg, which was produced via this effect, but unchanged throughout the live of the woman.

Without much proof, I do believe this is a distinct possibility, and for me, makes more sense, but also fully recognize that changes really could be completely accidental as natural selection, but find it hard to believe that as animals and humans do evolve to fit their environment, that there is some actual process to gauge the said environment and affect the dna to adjust as much as it can on a small scale.

Unfortunately, if this did happen to be true, Its announcement could be titled "Male Controls Human Evolution", and Ill bet that wont be a popular headline. Except: " a new study published in the March 11 issue of Nature shows that female mice continue to produce eggs to replace damaged ones after birth.

Researchers say the discovery indicates that females may share the ability to replenish reproductive cells during life, and if the same process occurs in humans it may also help explain why female fertility declines rapidly after age 30."

But that's a different subject altogether.

Oh, and I painstakingly avoided a word- Sperm.
The problem with your theory is that genes don't change in a single lifetime, except in a very few instances which usually result in death (radiation causing a mutation in a gene causing cancer, for instance). So while your understanding of the long term process of evolution is right, i.e. it's not always the smartest and strongest, it's the most fit to survive in the environment, your idea that the male somehow chooses which genes to pass is completely absurd.

The organisms that have genes that aren't viable in their environment will simply die off.
The inflation rate in Zimbabwe just hit 4 million percent. Some people say it is only 165,000, but they are just being stupid. -Scott Adams, artist and writer of Dilbert
User avatar
GabonX
Posts: 899
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 10:38 am
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by GabonX »

This has been proposed before. You may be interested in Jean-Baptiste Lamarck and his theory on inheritance of acquired traits AKA Lamarckism.

Though the theory is largely considered to be discredited, there is apparently some minor data to support it..
In the 1920s, Harvard University researcher William McDougall studied the abilities of rats to correctly solve mazes. He found that offspring of rats that had learned the maze were able to run it faster. The first rats would get it wrong 165 times before being able to run it perfectly each time, but after a few generations, it was down to 20. McDougall attributed this to some sort of Lamarckian evolutionary process.

Click
Spazz Arcane wrote:If birds could swim and fish could fly I would awaken in the morning to the sturgeons cry. If fish could fly and birds could swim I'd still use worms to fish for them.
saxitoxin wrote:I'm on Team GabonX
User avatar
Phatscotty
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm
Gender: Male

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by Phatscotty »

GabonX wrote:This has been proposed before. You may be interested in Jean-Baptiste Lamarck and his theory on inheritance of acquired traits AKA Lamarckism.

Though the theory is largely considered to be discredited, there is apparently some minor data to support it..
In the 1920s, Harvard University researcher William McDougall studied the abilities of rats to correctly solve mazes. He found that offspring of rats that had learned the maze were able to run it faster. The first rats would get it wrong 165 times before being able to run it perfectly each time, but after a few generations, it was down to 20. McDougall attributed this to some sort of Lamarckian evolutionary process.

Click

no shit?
User avatar
GabonX
Posts: 899
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 10:38 am
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: Human evolution kicks into high gear

Post by GabonX »

Apparently the experiment has even been successfully duplicated, but the people who duplicated it came to a different conclusion as to why this was the case..
This is the final report of an experiment of 20 years' duration, in which we have repeated, in its essentials, the well-known experiment of William McDougall purporting to reveal a Lamarckian inheritance of the effects of training on rats. The test is one involving light discrimination, and McDougall recorded a steady improvement in the rate of learning on a succession of 32 generations; but he omitted to check the results against a properly conducted control.

Our experiment confirms McDougall to the extent that we too have obtained long duration trends of improvement in learning-rate (Figs. 2, 3); but we find that the effect is not sustained, and that it is, moreover, shown also by a control experiment, using animals of untrained ancestry. This forbids a Lamarckian interpretation.

Statistical analysis of the data indicates that the ‘condition’ of the rat markedly affects its speed of learning, and that progressive changes in learning-rate, over a succession of generations, are in reality correlated with the health of the laboratory colony, which is subject to periods of decline and recovery.

http://jeb.biologists.org/cgi/content/abstract/31/3/307

So like I said before, there is limited evidence to support Lamarck's views, but they are largely considered to be discredited..
Spazz Arcane wrote:If birds could swim and fish could fly I would awaken in the morning to the sturgeons cry. If fish could fly and birds could swim I'd still use worms to fish for them.
saxitoxin wrote:I'm on Team GabonX
Post Reply

Return to “Acceptable Content”