the de-Evolution of Humans...

My g/f and i recently had a heated discussion about the human gene pool. so ofcourse i'm going to read up on the subject and try win the argument (guys, y'know how it is ;)) - anyway, just thought it was an interesting article, seems to make a lot of sense to me...

Quote:

---

Evolution of the human
What is evolution? It is change. Change during our lifetime and change after it has expired. Darwin strongly believed in survival of the fittest. An evolutionary process that removes the weakest from the gene pool. Humans evolve a bit differently. Since we are not overly strong, nor do we have any form of natural defense or offense (unless you consider burping and farting offensive) we evolve by survival of the smartest. An entire race based on intellectual survival. Since we couldn’t survive on out own we needed to develop tools and weapons to defend ourselves with.
With the intellect of humans we have created science. Science has given us cures for disease, neat gadgets and other things in life. We have created great cures for disease that would have taken evolution another few thousand years to achieve. So science is accelerated evolution? In a way it is. Since we now have a 99% survival rate evolution has taken a nose dive. It’s like everyone is urinating in the gene pool now. What was once clean and pure is now getting polluted corrupted. But that does not answer what life is. No not yet.

Evolution is a major part of what life is. We live, we learn and we evolve. Adaptability is one form of evolution. A human can adapt to many different environments during a lifetime. From harsh colds, to extreme heat. That is a part of our evolutionary chain leading back millions of years. Since we have generally long lives we needed someway to adapt to our environments. A bacteria on the other hand adapts to an environmental change through death and rebirth. The survivors evolve and adapt after a mass cycle of death. Like the antibacterial we use in our homes. It kills 99.9% of bacteria. What about the 0.1%? They live on and mutate to become more resistant to the antibacterial, eventually becoming immune.

So how does the bacteria have to do with what life is? It has a lot to do with the cycle of life, but on a much faster and larger scale. Humans live naturally 60 to 100 years. About 200 years ago that was more like 40 to 60 years of age. What happened was our scientific minds created more and more cures to disease. We learned to live longer. This has an effect on the gene pool. There was a rush to get married young 200 years ago. Humans would have 8 to 12 children per family in hopes 2 or 3 would survive long enough to marry and procreate. In modern times there is no rush so we marry at around 30 and have 1 to 5 children now. What this means is evolution now has lost 10 years and a bigger mix of gene combinations to try out. Slowing down our natural evolution.

So now we have slower evolution. But there’s more to it now. Instead of having 12 children and 2 or 3 of the strongest survive, we have 1 to 5 children and they ALL survive. Sure that’s mentally good for us. But now not only do the strong survive, but the weak can live on as well. The weak can then go on and wreak havoc on our gene pool. Millions of years of evolution dumped down the drain in the name of science. So now with the generations of people pissing in the gene pool we’ve gone U-turn in our evolutionary process. But here comes the ethical side. We can’t just go on and kill off the weak, the dumb or the ugly. They’re alive and have the right to live a natural life. We can’t take away their ability to breed either. Science to the rescue.

So since science has given us better and longer lives, perhaps it can fix the accidental corruption of the gene pool. We didn’t try to poison our futures, and corrupt the gene pool. We as a race wanted to prolong our existence. Gene therapy is the way to fix our unfortunate dilemma. But we need to put aside it’s economical aspect. We need to start thinking of the future and survival of our race. Sure we’ve got the “I won’t be here in 50 years” mentality, but we need to wash away our arrogance. Focus more time and attention to gene therapy. In simple terms gene therapy is taking the bad gene and replacing it with the good gene. Natural evolution is over. We’re in the age of de-evolution.

There is no immediate solution. But the first step to anything is realization. We must realize there is a problem and to not deny there is a problem. Denial is a serious epidemic as well. “I’m not fat”, “my son is not a killer”, “He’s not cheating on me”. Once we stop denying ourselves things, we can move forward as a race. Otherwise the human race is in serious trouble…

---

Taken from -> http://www.chaosrift.com/articles/evolution.html

I would have issues with the first statement, every thing about humans make us better at doing what prehistoric humans needed to do to survive. We where scavengers so no need to waste energy on claws, they slow you down in the long run anyway. We have a mix of teeth so we can eat anything we find. No body hair so we can cover distances faster than any other animal (with the poss. exception of the elephant). Standing upright so we can see greater distances. good eyes so we can find the dead animals (or at least the birds circling).

As for the future of our race, well I doubt evolution is reversing, but it is poss. slowing down for humans, on the other hand how many babies do sharks have? they have been around for a very long time and a low population hasn't hurt them (well until we intervened). Also note that the average height is going up and the average life span is increasing (the second is probably due to science though). I doubt that we need to resort to tweaking our genes to survive as a race. There have always been plagues and unstoppable bugs we have gotten a lot better at dealing with them. if it happens again we will be set back a little much like the dark ages but we will continue, I would worry about us killing us off before I would worry too much about bacteria evolution doing us in,

As for the future of our race, well I doubt eveloution is reversing , but it is poss slowing down for humans, on the other hand how many babies do sharks have? they have been around for a very long time and a low population hasn't hurt them (well untill we interviened). Also note that the average hight is going up and the average life span is increasing(the second is probably due to science though). I doubt that we need to resort to tweaking our geenes to survive as a race.

As for killing off the dumb and the ugly...well evolution has never done that for us...the ickly yes, the dumb have an amazeing ability to survive. Remember beauty is in they eye of the beholder at one time it was considered very appealing to be overweight. Now if we are talking about actual genatic disorders I will agree that gene theropy is the way to go.

Did you know that Darwin was wrong? The strong aren't the only ones to survive. I mean think about it, what Darwin didn't count on was stupid people propigating faster than nature can kill them off.

But as far as gene therapy goes, we need to understand more about ourselves and our "condition" before we start tweaking with genes. IMHO.

On this one I agree wit hyou fully, but I feel that it is an area that needs to be explored. Too much good can come out of gene thropy to block reasearch in this area, a cure for downs, Muscular Distorfy (sp?), and Lou Gariags dasiese to name a few.

Oh don't get me wrong I'm all for stem cell research and that level of medicinal research but when you push the bleeding edge, you usually end up bleeding.. ya know?

In New England we had a problem with a porcupine overpopulation so Fisher Cats were introduced as that was the only species that would prey upon porcupines. Now fisher cats eat anything as it has no fear.

If memory serves me correctly when cattle was introduced in Australia, they had a dung buildup as none of the indigenious dung beetles ate cattle dung. So they introduced a European beetle. Now they have to figure out a way to contain the beetle.

Some scientists and doctors thought thalidomide would cure mourning sickness in pregnant women and a lot of children were born with defective limbs.

Newton wrote about physics but his law would apply to biology as well. For every action there is an equal reaction.

For every plus, there will be a minus. Do the research but hold off on the tinkering of the overall gene pool. I work with students that have "disabilities", some of them usually have a talent or skill bank to make up for it. If you doubt me, one name.... Stephen Hawkings

The article that pr0letariat pasted sounds to me like something from a utilitarian bio-ethics journal. For those of you who don't know what Utilitarian Bio-ethics are:

Quote:

---

This pilosophy embodies the antihuman essence of fascism, expresses the contempt for individual freedom and for the disabled and the frail that has in the past marked every form of totalitarianism.
Source: Dean Koontz - Authors Notes in One Door Away From Heaven

---

For a non-fiction book on the subject, check out Culture of Death: The Assault on Medical Ethics in American by Wesley J. Smith. I have yet to read it, but it's on the top of my "to buy" list and comes highly recommended.

I think that stem cell research and gene therapy is a great idea. However, I'm not sure if humanity is ready for gene therapy. Once we are fully capable of modifying (engineering) gene's for specific causes, i.e to save people with MS, ALS and other diseases, what is to stop humanity from playing with the genome while a child is still in the womb. Modifying the genetic sequence to produce the perfect baby. It's a great theory, but it's like a spear. Created with the best of intentions (to hunt for food), but used in the worst of situations (war). What would stop governments from engineering "super soldiers".

I agree with KorpDeath on this one, we have to leave some things alone until we have a much better understanding.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by fourdc
In New England we had a problem with a porcupine overpopulation so Fisher Cats were introduced as that was the only species that would prey upon porcupines. Now fisher cats eat anything as it has no fear.

If memory serves me correctly when cattle was introduced in Australia, they had a dung buildup as none of the indigenious dung beetles ate cattle dung. So they introduced a European beetle. Now they have to figure out a way to contain the beetle.

Some scientists and doctors thought thalidomide would cure mourning sickness in pregnant women and a lot of children were born with defective limbs.

Newton wrote about physics but his law would apply to biology as well. For every action there is an equal reaction.

For every plus, there will be a minus. Do the research but hold off on the tinkering of the overall gene pool. I work with students that have "disabilities", some of them usually have a talent or skill bank to make up for it. If you doubt me, one name.... Stephen Hawkings

---

There are a large number of sucesses as well as failures in intordueing animals (the sucessis have a lot more research done before they are implamented that may be the difrence). Look at the Pray mantis introduction into the midwest t ocut down on pestisides. the Flacons introduced into Chicago to controll the pigion population, the black rhinos reintorduced t othe northern african planes to help save the white rhionos.

As for the gene theropy...yes it needs to be researched before implamented, but thats waht is in danger right now, people want todo away with the reasearch.


[edit]
Is it jsut me or do most of us seem to be arugeing through agreement on this one...it seems that we all agree on the basic idea that reasearch is good but the result could be used poorly.
[/edit]

Speaking of Genes did anyone read about how scientists finally finished mapping the human genome? I did some searching but couldn't find any articles about in on the web yet.

Scientists Finish Mapping Human Genome

Quote:

---

Scientists from all over the world have made an announcement they say could open a whole new era in biology and medicine. They have completed the map of the human genetic code. It's a project that started in 1990, cost under $3-billion, and finished about two years faster than expected. Researchers here in Tucson have played a big part in mapping the human genome.

---

There ya go schoolsucks

Human de-evelution seems somewhat likly to me, if not yet soon. It's the fact that not only do the stupid survive, but there the ones spending most of there time making more stupid people. I nature the stupid would hunt more poorly and so the whole dumb family would die of hunger or get eaten. Now there is to much support. We need to seperate the weak from strong and smart. We can't kill them, it's wrong, but we can let them kill eachother off. Pinal colonies and "Special Cities" is the way to go.

As for messing with our genes, sounds cool. I'd love wings or eye lazers. But no good will come of trying to evolve faster, well end up with two human races that would segragate eachother. Those with rich parents and superhuman powers and the poor weaklings.

Repairing defects is all good, and research if properly controlled is good. But let us evolve naturally, preferably without those who won't stop pissing in the pool.

PS: Why are French pools always yellowish? They have a sign in front that says Pisc-ine.

That was exactly what I was looking for. Thank you for finding that HTRegz.

Quote:

---

It’s like everyone is urinating in the gene pool now. What was once clean and pure is now getting polluted corrupted. But that does not answer what life is. No not yet.

Evolution is a major part of what life is. We live, we learn and we evolve. Adaptability is one form of evolution. A human can adapt to many different environments during a lifetime.

---

The whole premise is wrong. Even the most doctrinaire of evolutionary scientists
admit that, in all of recorded human history, there has been no observed
evolution. Evolution, if it happens at all, is theorized to develop over hundreds of
millions of years. There is nothing we can do in our lifetime to affect the course of
evolution.

False popular assumptions about evolution dovetailed in to traditional racism led
to the 20th century scandal of eugenics Hitler and his fiendish minions
borrowed many of their ideas from respectable American and British academics.

Right here in my own beloved state of Virginia, public officials engaged in a policy of
forced sterilization of local rednecks who had been deemed to be feeble-minded.
Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood was an avowed racist
who pushed contraception and abortion as a way of eliminating undesirable ethnic
groups.

All because, in the popular mind, evolution is confused with breeding. Breeding only
affects the mix of already existing genetic characteristics. Evolution is
supposed to be the actual alteration of the species, by spontaneous mutations
that only happen rarely, and are not under our control.
So relax.
:cool:

Aren't breeding and evolution closly linked. Let's say a probablem comes by and wipes out a bunch of organisms. The ones that survive (OrgA) did so by building ammunities. OrgA moves about growing in population and visiting new places. OrgA meets some creatures of the same species that never experianced the orginal problem and so never built any ammunities(OrgB).
If OrgA and OrgB spend a few late nights together and OrgC comes out, there is good chance the OrgC will hold OrgA's aumunties. If the mingleing continues the whole race will be stronger. It the whole race is stronger, isn't that evolution?

I think evolution and breeding are very closely related. Take someone from 100 years ago and put them in todays society, they would probably choke on the air, but we are being born with higher tolerance levels. Tolerance levels are raising in lots of areas.... to pollution, diseases (some of them), etc.... IMO this is a small form of evolution.

How about people who are born without Wisdom teeth, they aren't needed today. In a time when more chewing was required to deal with the coarser foods, humans had 32 teeth. This meant we had a longer jaw, now we have a shorter jaw and can usually only accomodate 28 teeth, so the wisdom teeth often have to be removed. The fact that now people are being born without them is another sign of evolution to me.... we're making changes and adapting to our environment.

Another cexample would be the vermiform appendix. It is basically a useless organ. A human can live just fine without it, it can easily become infected and if not treated surgically, it can burst and kill you. There have been document cases of people being born without the vermiform appendix, again we're adapting and changing. Maybe these changes are exremely evident, but they are slowly occuring and isn't that a part of evolution? It takes place over many, many years.... It seems to me that that is what is slowly happening.

not to mention whether you have attached earlobes or not!

If we did start to rapidly evolve it would probably be termed cancer or some disease and get fixed by science, or it would be a minority of people at the beginning and the masses of rednecks with guns and crosses to burn would select them to be weeded out.
Never underestimate the stupidity of people. Sometimes species just disappear because their environment is irrevocably change beyond their means of adaptation..., if anybody has the power to do that, it is ourselves.

But, hey, if anything "realism" is just fear of the unknown, and it is silly to dread the inevitable.

Dhej

Hey Hey everyone.. instead of starting a new thread I think this kind of goes along with de-evolution.

Is it just me or has everyone else been noticing a rise in the number of stupid people in the world.

I was in McDonalds yesterday and this man came in with three kids. He made each child order and pay seperately, even tho there was a line-up behind him. One of kids (about 15 or so) started calling another one of them (a girl prolly about 10 or 11) a bitch, repeatedly telling her she was a stupid bitch and a dumb little bitch and the man just stood their smiling. Then he didn't like the change he got back so he started and argument at the counter and made the cashier get out a calculator to double check the math. Then after me and my roommate grabbed our food and sat down the guy behind us turned around to his girlfriend who had just sat down and said "Can you deposit change in the bank machine?" I wanted to punch the guy... It was such a stupid question.

Then Today I was watching TV and I saw a Rogers Cable commercial and it was talking about how in the old days when they had to sail across the ocean the sailors would get sick and get scurvy and their teeth would fall out.. and it's this lil like 10 year old girl saying this and then she says.. I guess that's what dial-up is like... I'm sitting here thinking.. "WTF... do people really listen to this stuff."

I could ramble on and on about other incidences..... but yeah, I just wanted to pose the question to my fellow AOers.. is the world getting stupider (man that sounds wrong.. I had to look it up to see if stupider was a word)... or are we just getting more intelligent and leaving everyone else behind?

Maybe it's a way to solve the population problem.. kill the stupid people.. no one needs them.... They just make life harder for the rest of us. Maybe we are evolving beyond them, so let's leave them behind... There'd be no rednecks left.. but hey I don't think anyone would complain.

Anyways. just my 2 cents.

HTRegz,

Though I can't attest to the intelligence of the man in your story, I have made my children pay for their food in McDonalds or their purchases in a store. It teaches them budget skills and how to count money. Though it doesn't sound like an educational experience in your story.

About 2 centuries ago (feels like anyway) I worked in McDonalds, as a cashier I had to memorize the prices, I had to memorize the tax chart, the register was manual. Nowadays, you're lucky if the cashier can handle change correctly and he's given the figure from his fully automatic cash register.

7 days until Matrix Reloaded.... Maybe the machines are gettiing smarter.

No there isnt an dumbaning of the world, it has allways been this bad. Remember Gilligans Island and The Brady Bunch used to be prime time TV. People truly believed that gods wlaked among us. The British men wondered why their women ran off with the Vikings (the Nores bathed and washed their hair, the British didn't). If you truly look at history you will see that the masses are stuipd and allways have been.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by HTRegz
Hey Hey everyone.. instead of starting a new thread I think this kind of goes along with de-evolution.

Is it just me or has everyone else been noticing a rise in the number of stupid people in the world.

I was in McDonalds yesterday and this man came in with three kids. He made each child order and pay seperately, even tho there was a line-up behind him. One of kids (about 15 or so) started calling another one of them (a girl prolly about 10 or 11) a bitch, repeatedly telling her she was a stupid bitch and a dumb little bitch and the man just stood their smiling. Then he didn't like the change he got back so he started and argument at the counter and made the cashier get out a calculator to double check the math. Then after me and my roommate grabbed our food and sat down the guy behind us turned around to his girlfriend who had just sat down and said "Can you deposit change in the bank machine?" I wanted to punch the guy... It was such a stupid question.

Then Today I was watching TV and I saw a Rogers Cable commercial and it was talking about how in the old days when they had to sail across the ocean the sailors would get sick and get scurvy and their teeth would fall out.. and it's this lil like 10 year old girl saying this and then she says.. I guess that's what dial-up is like... I'm sitting here thinking.. "WTF... do people really listen to this stuff."

I could ramble on and on about other incidences..... but yeah, I just wanted to pose the question to my fellow AOers.. is the world getting stupider (man that sounds wrong.. I had to look it up to see if stupider was a word)... or are we just getting more intelligent and leaving everyone else behind?

Maybe it's a way to solve the population problem.. kill the stupid people.. no one needs them.... They just make life harder for the rest of us. Maybe we are evolving beyond them, so let's leave them behind... There'd be no rednecks left.. but hey I don't think anyone would complain.

Anyways. just my 2 cents.

---