Evolution is obvious

[Riverwolf]

Considering that we're entering into (already entered) artificial hearts, limbs, etc, and perhaps not in the far future brain implants, we're going into a new evolutionary level. A non biological evolution. A borg society is more likely outcome, I think.

The singularity.

Thing is, the nature of that singularity, when all our models for human nature become obsolete overnight, is that we simply cannot predict with certainty what lies beyond it. Maybe we'll eventually become like the borg, maybe not. We can't say.

And brain implants actually are real, now. A couple, from halfway across the world, had chips in their brains connected to the internet, which allowed them to essentially communicate telepathically from across the world.

 

[kashmir]

Considering that we're entering into (already entered) artificial hearts, limbs, etc, and perhaps not in the far future brain implants, we're going into a new evolutionary level. A non biological evolution. A borg society is more likely outcome, I think.

That's not evolution, that is science.
I do believe though, the more we mess with meds and artificial foods and such, it will affect us later.
It has to, if evolution can change species into new species all by itself, everything we do helps affect our future selves.

I tend to think we will become much more thin, with very small muscle structures, as more and more machines do our work for us, the less we will need strong muscles.

 

[Riverwolf]

As for the question of when a species turns into another species, that, like all things, isn't a single point, but a highly fuzzy scale.

Are dogs wolves? No, but they can interbreed and produce viable offspring. Horses and donkeys can produce offspring, but they're infertile. Can humans and chimps produce offspring of any kind? We don't know for sure, at this point, but probably not. There is evidence, however, that we interbred with neanderthals.

Evolution doesn't mean things turn into other things. Small changes over time can lead to breeding incompatibilities in the case of long-term isolation.

In other words, take a group of humans, and put them on, say, another planet, and leave them there for, say, half a million years. They don't physically interact with us in any way during that time. Then, when the time is up, we meet up with them in person. Chances are, we won't be able to breed with them, anymore. There wasn't a single, pinpointable moment in which they became another species, but rather we slowly grew genetically incompatible.

 

[Riverwolf]

That's not evolution, that is science.

Technology, actually.

I tend to think we will become much more thin, with very small muscle structures, as more and more machines do our work for us, the less we will need strong muscles.

I think that's a likely scenario, as well. We've already grown physically smaller than our ancestors. (The doom-and-gloom way to put it would be that we're reaching an evolutionary dead-end, while the people who still live as Stone Age hunters will ultimately win out from an evolutionary standpoint.)

The people who lived in Mediterranean civilizations (Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, etc.) were relatively petite, but the people who lived in Northern Europe, who had smaller, more spread-out cities and less technological sophistication, were massive in structure.

 

[Desert Snake]

Technology, actually.

That affects us anyway. Even if we aren't "Borg", think about how we already affect ourselves with technology.

 

[kashmir]

Technology, actually.

Lol, whats the chances of artificial things we use on ourselves like hearts, ears ect, ever becoming part of the genetic code and becoming an actual part of us?
Imagine if we could speed up the process and have kids born with actual wings.

Yes I am dead serious

 

[Riverwolf]

Lol, whats the chances of artificial things we use on ourselves like hearts, ears ect, ever becoming part of the genetic code and becoming an actual part of us?
Imagine if we could speed up the process and have kids born with actual wings.

Yes I am dead serious

Deus Ex Machina. :yes:

(And I've added something to that post, by the way).

 

[Riverwolf]

That affects us anyway. Even if we aren't "Borg", think about how we already affect ourselves with technology.

I was just being nitpicky, because science and technology aren't the same thing.

Even when we were physically stronger than we are now, we were still relatively unimpressive with regards to other species.

Our tools and our mental ability to use them in creative ways, is the very thing that allows us to survive at all. Without them, we're basically nothing. It's been that way since the Paleolithic times.

 

[Ouroboros]

Given the present manifestation of civilization is unsustainable, in hundreds of thousands of years, I think humanity is more likely to critically shoot itself in the foot (if it hasn't already) with mismanagement of natural resources than what you're suggesting here. But that is probably neither here nor there.

Agree. That's a huge risk that we'll go that way.

 

[Ouroboros]

That's not evolution, that is science.
I do believe though, the more we mess with meds and artificial foods and such, it will affect us later.
It has to, if evolution can change species into new species all by itself, everything we do helps affect our future selves.

I tend to think we will become much more thin, with very small muscle structures, as more and more machines do our work for us, the less we will need strong muscles.

It is a form of evolution. Not biological evolution, but technical, and it is an evolution of the next step of "life". Evolution really means change ultimately. And a huge change it would be.

 

[kashmir]

I was just being nitpicky, because science and technology aren't the same thing.

Even when we were physically stronger than we are now, we were still relatively unimpressive with regards to other species.

Our tools and our mental ability to use them in creative ways, is the very thing that allows us to survive at all. Without them, we're basically nothing. It's been that way since the Paleolithic times.

when I say science, I mean everything.
Even to roll a smoke,hook up speakers,reset the remote control, takes science.

Borgs, are them those people that are like so advanced humans are like an ant to them?

Since we are on this subject.
Isn't it odd that before science even realized the long term affects on human going to outer-space, laymen have already "seen" UFO's and aliens that resemble exactly what long term affects do to the body?
That's quite a remarkable coincidence.

 

[Pegg]

Evolution is obvious.
By looking at micro-evolution, we can guess at macro-evolution..

Prove me wrong!!

macro evolution is unobservable. If you cant observe something you cant' test it and therefore you can't prove it.

So how do you know it happens the way macro-evolution describes when it can't be tested or observed?

 

[Riverwolf]

when I say science, I mean everything.
Even to roll a smoke,hook up speakers,reset the remote control, takes science.

I suggest taking a look at this thread: http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/science-religion/155832-what-science-not.html , so you can see my arguments for why I disagree with that, and we can keep this thread on-topic.

Borgs, are them those people that are like so advanced humans are like an ant to them?

Funny you use ants as the metaphor, since the borg are basically a hive-mind, which ants are.

They're not so much advanced to the point where we're just ants to them, so much as they're probably thespecies that are the most alien to us that Star Trek came up with.

They're basically what ants would be if ants developed creative tool usage.

And to be honest, I can't see humanity as a whole quickly adopting a borg-like mentality, since even in the most collectively-minded cultures, the individual is still highly valued as having inherent and unconditional worth.

Then again, the singularity invalidates everything we know about humanity, so who knows?

Since we are on this subject.
Isn't it odd that before science even realized the long term affects on human going to outer-space, laymen have already "seen" UFO's and aliens that resemble exactly what long term affects do to the body?
That's quite a remarkable coincidence.

...we're not actually going there, are we? *sigh*

What effects are you talking about?

 

[Riverwolf]

If you cant observe something you cant' test it and therefore you can't prove it.

Should we release all criminals who were found guilty via the findings of deductive work because you can't prove something you can't directly observe?

 

[Desert Snake]

macro evolution is unobservable. If you cant observe something you cant' test it and therefore you can't prove it.

So how do you know it happens the way macro-evolution describes when it can't be tested or observed?

Didn't say I could prove it.

 

[Pegg]

Didn't say I could prove it.

ah, so you want something that cannot be proved to be proved wrong.

got it.

 

[Desert Snake]

ah, so you want something that cannot be proved to be proved wrong.

got it.

Ahem, like some other threads we debate on?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

macro evolution is unobservable. If you cant observe something you cant' test it and therefore you can't prove it.

Wrong. We can still test things that aren't observable. We can look at genes, fossils and other pieces of facts in the geological column for evidence of macroevolution. You've got the scientific method completely wrong. The whole point of testing and experimentation is to formulate conclusions and evidence about things we cannot directly observe. That's pretty-much the entire point of scientific inquiry.

 

[fantome profane]

Isn't it odd that before science even realized the long term affects on human going to outer-space, laymen have already "seen" UFO's and aliens that resemble exactly what long term affects do to the body?
That's quite a remarkable coincidence.

I think that has only been since about 1977. The year "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" was released. Remarkable coincidence.

 

[McBell]

macro evolution is unobservable. If you cant observe something you cant' test it and therefore you can't prove it.

So how do you know it happens the way macro-evolution describes when it can't be tested or observed?