Why are some humans evolving faster than others?

  • Thread starter Thread starter grimlove527
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the question of human evolution, specifically why some individuals may appear to be evolving faster than others. Participants explore concepts related to evolutionary processes, genetic diversity, and the impact of environmental factors on human development. The conversation touches on both theoretical and practical aspects of evolution, including physical traits, genetic mutations, and societal influences.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the visibility of human evolution, suggesting that significant changes occur over millions of years and may not be apparent in the short term.
  • There are claims that intelligence and societal structures have mitigated evolutionary pressures, leading to a more uniform genetic pool.
  • A participant references a study suggesting a common ancestor for all humans, proposing that this indicates substantial evolutionary history, yet doubts further evolution due to increasing interracial marriage.
  • Another viewpoint suggests that evolution is ongoing, citing examples such as increased height and genetic mutations that may not be harmful.
  • Some argue that traits like violence may no longer be necessary for survival, raising questions about the future of such characteristics in human evolution.
  • Participants discuss the subjective nature of "superior" traits, with some asserting that physical attributes like height are not universally advantageous.
  • There is mention of specific genetic mutations, such as sickle cell anemia, that provide benefits in certain environments, indicating ongoing evolutionary processes.
  • One participant proposes that adaptation to extreme environments, such as zero gravity, could drive future evolutionary changes.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the pace and nature of human evolution, with no clear consensus. Some believe that evolution is ongoing and observable, while others argue that societal factors may inhibit significant evolutionary changes. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of interracial marriage and societal norms on evolutionary processes.

Contextual Notes

Limitations in the discussion include varying definitions of evolution, differing interpretations of genetic traits, and the complexity of societal influences on evolutionary pressures. Some claims rely on assumptions about the relationship between physical traits and survival, which may not be universally applicable.

grimlove527
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Question: Why aren't humans evolving? I know this might sound stupid, and I can see the progression from caveman to common day man, but we have lived, looking kind of the same, for sooo many years?(please correct me if I'm wrong

Are the people who have scientific mysteries with their bodies the ones who are evolving?
 
Last edited:
Biology news on Phys.org
You have to wait millions of years.

Shor term, you can look at all the inter-racial people of the world.
 
Because, so far, our intelligence has allowed us to trump evolution, giving to everyone more or less the same chances of passing on his or her genes. There can't be evolution without enough pressure for it to happen.
 
I saw some (journalist's summary of a) study that suggested that a person that is the ancestor of every living human being could have lived as early as the end of the ice age. Assuming some veracity to that and that that person came from a homogeneous group of people, that's a lot of evolving we've done. However, I don't think humans will evolve too much farther because there is already a lot of interracial marriage which tends to bring the races together. Brasil is a good example.

Edited for clarity
 
Last edited:
Cyrus said:
You have to wait millions of years.
I don't think homo sapiens has been around that long.
 
Cyrus said:
You have to wait millions of years.

Shor term, you can look at all the inter-racial people of the world.
Well, thousands anyway.

But we are taller than people just a few hundred years ago. That's mostly a matter of nutrition, though.
 
We are evolving.

Evolution is very difficult to see on a human timescale. You have to see it on the scale of hundreds or thousands of generations.

We are taller than we were a few thousand years ago, we have cross-breeding happening everywhere, we have genetic mutations that are becoming more and more common in the population (suggesting that those particular mutations are not harmful.)
 
russ_watters said:
Well, thousands anyway.

But we are taller than people just a few hundred years ago. That's mostly a matter of nutrition, though.
Doh!
 
  • #10
Im tall. Evolution works! I am biologically superior to you peons.
 
  • #11
Sickle cell anemia (mostly in African races) making for a partial immunity to malaria is a common beneficial mutation cited.
 
  • #12
jhicks said:
However, I don't think humans will evolve too much farther because there is already a lot of interracial marriage which tends to bring the races together. Brasil is a good example.

Short of extinction, a species never stops evolving. Changes are always happening; they don't need to be huge and obvious to the naked eye to be part of evolutionary processes.
 
  • #13
We still have an affinity for violence that is probably not necessary for survival anymore.
I hope we don't have to go through thousands of years to get rid of that trait.
 
  • #14
You're judging evolution based on just physical appearance. I don't know much about biology, but I think the genetics that determine how we look are a very, very small part of our total genetic make-up.

Think of all the microbes that assault our species every day - MRSA, flu, HIV, on and on. Some unlucky people die from these infections, some get sick but don't die - there's natural selection, right there.
 
  • #15
jhicks said:
However, I don't think humans will evolve too much farther because there is already a lot of interracial marriage which tends to bring the races together. Brasil is a good example.

I'm not understanding why that would stop anything.

Moreover, as someone pointed out, we no longer care about superior traits like nature does in the wild. Today, people who are born disabled or otherwise "inferior" (say naturally shy or small-statured) still have a good change of having kids. The miracle of Society!
 
  • #16
DaveC426913 said:
Doh!
You'll have to learn to make shorter posts... :-p
 
  • #17
Poop-Loops said:
I'm not understanding why that would stop anything.

Moreover, as someone pointed out, we no longer care about superior traits like nature does in the wild. Today, people who are born disabled or otherwise "inferior" (say naturally shy or small-statured) still have a good change of having kids. The miracle of Society!
Your term "superior" is subjective and only meaningful in context. In the human eco-system, able-bodied is not a survival trait.
 
  • #18
grimlove527 said:
Question: Why aren't humans evolving? I know this might sound stupid, and I can see the progression from caveman to common day man, but we have lived, looking kind of the same, for sooo many years?(please correct me if I'm wrong

Are the people who have scientific mysteries with their bodies the ones who are evolving?

Mainly evolving is for addapting to are sorrounding's... for example if you were to breed 5 gen's of people in 0gravity in space, are heads would expand and we would start evolving to addapt to are new sorrounding's.. mainly the it's what drive's the need for change for self presaverance of are self's and collectivly.
 
  • #19
DaveC426913 said:
Your term "superior" is subjective and only meaningful in context. In the human eco-system, able-bodied is not a survival trait.

Being tall isn't a superior trait? Okay, hot-shot, remind me about that next time you can't reach something on the top shelf.
 
  • #20
Poop-Loops said:
Being tall isn't a superior trait? Okay, hot-shot, remind me about that next time you can't reach something on the top shelf.

The Information form the DNA could not create itself to its preset from, because of the lack of Folic acid's in there diet's, mainly dark-greens, vegetables, liver, dried beans and pea's are primary source's, and they lacked them which leads to a deficiency disorder which would create stunted growth (especially of the fetus during pregnancy and of infant's) that's one of meany reason's why they lacked are fine looks :)
 
  • #21
Poop-Loops said:
Being tall isn't a superior trait? Okay, hot-shot, remind me about that next time you can't reach something on the top shelf.

Long and lean builds aren't so good for those dwelling in very cold climates.
http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_091.html

Eskimos are compactly built, which minimizes loss of body heat. The average Eskimo's height is only about 5'2", and most of that consists of a massive torso. The lower portions of their arms and legs are shorter than the upper halves, and their hands and feet are distinctly petite. That means they don't lose a lot of heat through their extremities, which are most vulnerable to the cold.
 
  • #22
Math Is Hard said:
Long and lean builds aren't so good for those dwelling in very cold climates.

It would be if they had any tall shelves.
 
  • #23
Poop-Loops said:
Being tall isn't a superior trait? Okay, hot-shot, remind me about that next time you can't reach something on the top shelf.

And you remind me the next time you bump your head or walk into a spider web :eek: .
 
  • #24
Poop-Loops said:
Being tall isn't a superior trait? Okay, hot-shot, remind me about that next time you can't reach something on the top shelf.
I alway get a tall person to reach for me. They're the first to know if it's raining and the last to know if there's a flood.
 
  • #25
Noone said:
Mainly evolving is for addapting to are sorrounding's... for example if you were to breed 5 gen's of people in 0gravity in space, are heads would expand and we would start evolving to addapt to are new sorrounding's.. mainly the it's what drive's the need for change for self presaverance of are self's and collectivly.
It's considered very bad netiquette to criticize spelling and grammar but your posts are almost illegible. Is English not your native language?

(And just to keep it on-topic, skill in communication is a survival trait. :biggrin: )
 
Last edited:
  • #26
Eskimos are compactly built, which minimizes loss of body heat. The average Eskimo's height is only about 5'2", and most of that consists of a massive torso. The lower portions of their arms and legs are shorter than the upper halves, and their hands and feet are distinctly petite. That means they don't lose a lot of heat through their extremities, which are most vulnerable to the cold.
An excellent example of manifest evolution.
 
  • #27
DaveC426913 said:
It's considered very bad netiquette to criticize spelling and grammar but your posts are almost illegible. Is English not your native language?

Hehe that never stops anyone. But it's true, I think it's fine to ask for clarification if you can't understand what someone means, but pointing out it should be you're not your, is pretty petty really. Everyone makes mistakes, the worst example I've seen is someone taking someone to task for a typo :rolleyes:. If it's any conselation I'm not sure of his drift either.

In English I think he means in humans the drive to change or evolve is ourselves. Rather than the environment as it is more commonly in animal species, or something like that.
 
  • #28
Schrödinger's Dog said:
Hehe that never stops anyone. But it's true, I think it's fine to ask for clarification if you can't understand what someone means, but pointing out it should be you're not your, is pretty petty really. Everyone makes mistakes, the worst example I've seen is someone taking someone to task for a typo :rolleyes:. If it's any conselation I'm not sure of his drift either.

In English I think he means in humans the drive to change or evolve is ourselves. Rather than the environment as it is more commonly in animal species, or something like that.
Well, the 'are's instead of 'our's really threw me. I rolled with them but kept tripping over all the apostrophes. I'm not sure asking for clarification would have eliminated the problem.

I'm not trying to bash him. He's got intelligent ideas, I just think they're getting lost in translation.
 
Last edited:
  • #29
Since I spell everything how I hear it, it seldom proves a problem to me, poor grammar and spelling are pretty much the norm in my familly.

But yeah there's nothing wrong with asking someone to be more clear at all. In fact that's good netiquette not bad nettiquette.
 
  • #30
Cyrus said:
Im tall. Evolution works! I am biologically superior to you peons.

I never had "wisdom"teeth (or as I call them, "knuckle-draggers' teeth").
 

Similar threads

Why cats are smarter than dogs
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
9K
Why do we consider Neanderthals a different species than humans?
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
How are ancestors classified in a cladistic system?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Why is life so much more resilient than machines?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Humans Lost Body Hair: What Happened & Why?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Evolution and preservation of endangered animals
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Is modern medicine causing human genetic degeneration?
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
6K
Why Does Ham Spoil Faster Than a Living Human Body?
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
On evolution of humans and that of other animals: any discrepancy?
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
7K
Human evolution - From sperm to ape
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K