Are we still evolving?

[Pah]

From NewScientist, September 4-10, 2004
The 10 Biggest Mysteries of Life

HUMANS are not like other animals. We have contraceptives to control the number of children we produce, aspirations beyond reproduction, medicines to sustain life and postpone death, and the potential to engineer our own DNA. It is tempting to think that we have moved beyond the clutches of evolution. Tempting, but wrong.

Evolution is built on two cornerstones: heritable variation and selection. Plainly, humans vary. The source of that variation is genetic mutation, which still occurs at around the same rate today as it has throughout our evolution.

But what about selection? In the west we certainly seem to have wriggled free of natural selection. It is no longer just the fittest who survive and reproduce. Modern medicine allows people to overcome diseases and injuries that would once have killed them. Birth control and reproductive technology make reproduction a matter of choice, not adaptive quality. Likewise, the power of sexual selection has been blunted because the mass media has a strong influence on who we find attractive, and because "beautiful" people do not necessarily have the most children.

But that still leaves artificial selection, the force more usually associated with the domestication of animals and plants. Obviously, we do not systematically direct the evolution of our own genome in the way our ancestors did to produce high-yield wheat or miniature poodles, but there is a parallel: many human traits only exist because they have been selected for artificially. The invention of spectacles has allowed myopia to proliferate, dairy farming has given many adults the ability to digest milk sugar, and stone tools allowed our earliest ancestors to extend their physical abilities without evolving bigger muscles. These and countless other innovations have affected our gene pool.

Other forces are at work, too. Humans are changing the environment, altering the climate, filling the world with pollution and creating the conditions for new diseases to emerge - changes that are almost certainly driving human evolution.

And while we may think that genetic technology will give us control over our future, it may actually send human evolution in unexpected directions. It is hubris to think that we can engineer our genome to a particular end. We know so little about how our genes interact that any attempts at engineering sperm or eggs may well have unpredictable results. All we can say for sure is that our gene pool is changing, perhaps faster than ever. But where evolution will take us remains a mystery.

 

[painted wolf]

humans evolve new resistances to diseases and other minor changes to the genome all the time. Most people expect dramatic changes, like extra fingers or something equilly wierd, but in truth evolution is a more subtle thing.

One can only wonder what the next 1000 years will hold for our species.

wa:do

 

[Green Gaia]

I think we are absolutely still evolving. Kindof a let down if this is as advanced as humans get.

 

[Druidus]

There are a couple possibilities for us to still be evolving. If Darwinian evolution is true, then no, not really. We have lost many of the selecting factors of evolution. For instance, now that we help people with disease, we will gain no new immunities or resistances. Humans evolving through Darwinian evolution is impossible.

There are other ways however. Viruses may leave bits of DNA in us, possible affecting us physically or mentally. The one that I fear most is that we will be genetically altered. The last possibility, is the opposite of Darwinian evolution. The gist of it is that we evolve in leaps and bounds, and not the baby steps of Darwinian evolution. It also doesn't nescessarily need a driving force in the environment.

 

[painted wolf]

Druidus, we are evolving new resistances to diseases.... most notably hart disease and even AIDS. A recent mutation on one of the genes has given those who have it increased resistance to heart disease.

Here is a link of recent bennificial mutation on the genome, most involving increased resistance to various diseases and illnesses.
http://www.gate.net/~rwms/EvoHumBenMutations.html

hope this helps.

wa:do

 

[Druidus]

Mutations aren't a part of Darwinian evolution though. They are covered in the leaps and bounds place. And, of course, we will evolve resistances to diseases we have no cure for, as long as you die before reproducing.

 

[painted wolf]

yes, mutations are part of Darwinian evolution... its a vital part of adaptation.
the leaps and bounds are part of a mistaken view of how evolution works.

wa:do

 

[Druidus]

"Leaps and bounds" are mutations. For instance, if I had a kid, and he was immune to, say, cancer, that's a leaps and bounds evolution. Pure Darwinian evolution focuses only on natural selection.

 

[Lightkeeper]

Yes, we are still evolving on all levels, physical, mental, and spiritual. If we have to leave Earth and find another place in the Universe to live, we could evolve into something unrecognizable to us.

 

[painted wolf]

yes, and naural selection favors those mutations that are bennificial to the organisms survival. Thus mutation is a vitial part of 'survival of the fittest'.

more than likely the child would be born with a greater resistance to cancer than an acutal immunity

I would consider leaps and bounds to be say, fin to foot in one jump not the minor changes in the genome.

wa:do

 

[Damori]

Hopefully in a thousand years we can become more rational creatures, or at least be able to access more of our brains.

 

[Lightkeeper]

I think we will access more of our brains. I thought of something interesting today. Picture bread in the oven baking. I thought, what if we are still being created, we aren't the finished product. Time is a human dimension, but there is no time in eternity. It reminds me of the Hansel and Gretel story. Maybe we are still in the lab.

 

[Druidus]

We already have access to 100% of our brains. We don't have anymore then we currently use. Evolution wouldn't create a large brain without reasons, as it takes a lot of calories to run. We only use 10% of our brain for certain tasks because we only need that much brain for that task. For instance, I don't feel my clothes on my skin unless I think about it. I'm not using my touch 100%.

 

[Ceridwen018]

Lol, evolution isn't an entity--it isn't 'planning' anything for us. It merely provides potential. The fact that we only use 12% of our brains is extremely interesting, though. I agree that future evolution of humans may involve increased brain activity. What do you guys think using more of our brains would warrant? ESP?

 

[Druidus]

http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/10percnt.htm

The ten percent (or 12) myth is just that, a myth. Read the link.

 

[Lightkeeper]

Whatever you want to call it we have capacity to learn a lot more than we know. I don't think we use the full potential of our brains. And, yes, ESP could be developed. How about mind travel?

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Thank you, Druidus, for exposing that myth.

 

[Yerda]

If evolutionary science is correct then I would ask how any living organism can escaping selective pressure? I personally view it to be likely that life can never stop evolving, it's part of life.

 

[painted wolf]

We are ofcource assuming that inteligence will continue to be the primary factor in our evolution... it would be nice but it is equilly likely that evolution will lead us away from it, or ignore it alltogether. Should the circumstances of our future evolution warrant it we could adapt away from the need for all this extra brain-power.
My guess is that we already have all the brain power we can resonably expect from evolution... we already need collapable skulls just to be born, wich places our infants at terrible risk untill the skull hardens. Any more and birth itself would become to dangerous. (we already have the highest risk births of any species both for mother and child, barring of cource speices such as salmon )
If we are to continue to evolve I would guess it would be in terms of our social evolution, unless by some fluke we were reduced back to pre-industrial tecnology.
Then we would continue to evolve to suit our individual environments as we had been doing for the past 30,000+ years.

wa:do

 

[Lightkeeper]

Sometimes we can look to science fiction to see possibilities for the future. Much of science fiction has shown brain power increasing. Many times the aliens are more evolved than we are. I see us using more brain power. As for size we have already created machines to do thinking for us.