Evolution - but not the same issue you are expecting... - PbNation
Find fields & stores near you!
Find fields and stores
Zipcode
PbNation News
PbNation News
Community Focus
Community Focus

 
Archived Thread - Cannot Edit  
Old 07-09-2007, 02:31 PM #1
eatafetus
knows you love it.
 
eatafetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: I Chill in Ill
Annual Supporting Member
 has been a member for 10 years
eatafetus is one of the top 1000 posters on PbNation
eatafetus supports Empire
Evolution - but not the same issue you are expecting...

Ok, im bored at work, and i just discovered this forum, so heres an idea ive been kicking around in my head. Just an OP's note...this issue is not about religion, so please dont clutter with religious issues, thanks.

I was riding the train the other day, and i strange idea came into my head. man certainly has evolved. Not to say that we werent created, but thats a whole other headache.

As we evolved, have we lowered our rate of evolution? Let me explain.

As you know, evolution relies on a basic principal...the fittest survive. The weaker contributers die off, as do their lesser contrabutions to the gene pool. Stronger individuals are assumed to have more desirable traits, and those traits are allowed to continue to aid others in the future.

But, as we evolved, we got smarter, stronger, and more able to predict what will happen next. We grew up from hitting things with clubs to shooting people into orbit. While this may seem like the advance of technology, in contrast to traditional evolution, i think they are one in the same. Brains got bigger, people were able to grasp abstract ideas better, and the world as a whole improved.

However, with his new-found sence of self and intelligence, we developed medicines that coul extend human life. a century ago, a 50 year old man was in his twilight years. Now if we hear of someone having a heart attack at 40, we say "what a shame, they were so young."

All these improvements has made it significantly easier to stay alive. This allowed the "lesser" contributors to continue to add their genes to the gene pool. Has this slowed evolution?

By lesser contributors, i dont mean what many of you think i mean. Skin color is not a "lessor factor." If you are black, white, red, purple, yellow, or whatever you can (and do) still bring valuable traits into the gene pool. Im talking about people that have deficienties like genetic diseases or inherited conditions. Do their contributions slow evolution and the process of our species?

Issue to consider:
1. Im not advocating killing or eliminating anyone. This is just a discussion to pick the collective brain of pbnation and not a plan for a holocaust of any kind.
eatafetus is offline  
Old Sponsored Links Remove Advertisement
Advertisement
Old 07-09-2007, 03:02 PM #2
snowpaint
Somewhere In The Between
 
snowpaint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
 has been a member for 10 years
physically we have not really evolved much from hitting things with clubs, evolution takes millions of years. However thinking processes and concepts have been invented overtime, people take for granted how we think today but things like the socratic and scientific method had to be invented.

Also a big thing that your kind of ignoring is that the thing that influences evolution is having offspring. Most of the scientific advances towards aging wont really have much affect on evolution because 40 year olds and up arent exactly prolific in producing offspring.

The point about lesser contributors is really nullified by the fact that like older people they do not usually have kids. In most cultures there is an inbuilt stigma for the very reason that they would be bad for the gene pool. The reason why genetic diseases like cystic fibrosis exist is because they carriers are only identifiable by genotype and not phenotype.

Really though any of these evolutionary changes that might come about will probably be erased by the fact that humans(probably within 50 years) will be able to change any desired genes and the advent of gene therapy.
snowpaint is offline  
Old 07-09-2007, 03:08 PM #3
eatafetus
knows you love it.
 
eatafetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: I Chill in Ill
Annual Supporting Member
 has been a member for 10 years
eatafetus is one of the top 1000 posters on PbNation
eatafetus supports Empire
true but arent young children that have these conditions destined to grow up and reproduce?
eatafetus is offline  
Old 07-09-2007, 03:18 PM #4
RamboPreacher
Player not a Pro.
 
RamboPreacher's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Central Iowa
RamboPreacher is a founding member
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by eatafetus View Post
...Just an OP's note...this issue is not about religion, so please dont clutter with religious issues, thanks....
so you are looking at some kind of philosophical discussion? (this is ST: Religion/Philosophy)
__________________
Brent "RamboPreacher" Hoefling
Founder of the CPPA - Christian Paintball Players Association
Member of: † Christ † Krew † #82

"I believe, in order to understand" or "I understand in order to believe": Augustine/Anselm (paraphrase)
"Science, and especially physics is not about 'truths' - It's about forming beliefs that are less false"; Dr. S. James Gates, Jr.
RamboPreacher is offline  
Old 07-09-2007, 03:48 PM #5
eatafetus
knows you love it.
 
eatafetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: I Chill in Ill
Annual Supporting Member
 has been a member for 10 years
eatafetus is one of the top 1000 posters on PbNation
eatafetus supports Empire
yea sorta. I just dont want to have a bunch of people start the whole evolution vs intelligent design argument.

on a side note, i remember the old apg article about you preacher... Nice to meet you
eatafetus is offline  
Old 07-09-2007, 05:11 PM #6
QuantomToast
 
 
QuantomToast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Nashville, TN
Quote:
Originally Posted by eatafetus View Post
true but arent young children that have these conditions destined to grow up and reproduce?
Yes, but i think that the people with these diseases ultimately wont effect evolution much at all seeing as, i would imagine, they would contribute a very small percent to our population. So all in all the mass of the population would continue to evolve as normal.
__________________
Reason Krew #3

"I do not intend to tiptoe through life only to arrive safely at death."

“Life is for the living. Death, too, is for the living. If you are fascinated or entertained by death, make the most of it while you’re alive. When you really are dead, it won’t hold any interest at all.” - Anton Szandor LaVey
QuantomToast is offline  
Old 07-09-2007, 10:43 PM #7
RamboPreacher
Player not a Pro.
 
RamboPreacher's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Central Iowa
RamboPreacher is a founding member
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by eatafetus View Post
yea sorta. I just dont want to have a bunch of people start the whole evolution vs intelligent design argument.

on a side note, i remember the old apg article about you preacher... Nice to meet you
In that case, I would like to say that I believe in evolution. evolution is a fact. however the various theories within the overall concepts that most perceive when they discuss evolution is not fact. micro-evolutions and adaptations are commonly observed in scientific method.

I believe what you may be considering in your initial post is whether or not we are at or nearing the pinnacle of our physical (mental?) achievements. maybe not there, but significantly close enough to be able to consciously choose various variables to "dictate" (for a lack of a better expression) an outcome in our physiology.

I am not sure I agree with that paradigm, as it seems to assume that earlier-mankind didn't do the same things (choosing a direction in our paths of human achievement and physiology). Granted, technology is at a different level, but I won't say "higher", since it is relative and we also have the byproducts of our current "achievements" in technology as well (many of which are negative to our very environment as far as affecting our physiology).

Now don't get me wrong, I am not a "tree-hugger", my point is that this current levels of technology has, in my opinion, a very much higher level (as in greater - or more of) of negative recourse and byproducts that we need to deal with, with more/different tech, releasing more/greater byproducts, etc...

AND neither am I condoning an ascetic lifestyle, necessarily, but rather a personal balance in being satisfied, and being comfortable in the state that you find yourself, measuring success by family and relationships, not by money and self-made-wealth-caste.

and OT - yea, I had stopped writing for APG a few years back when I stopped being able to play every weekend. I will still write now and again, but it has been a while.
__________________
Brent "RamboPreacher" Hoefling
Founder of the CPPA - Christian Paintball Players Association
Member of: † Christ † Krew † #82

"I believe, in order to understand" or "I understand in order to believe": Augustine/Anselm (paraphrase)
"Science, and especially physics is not about 'truths' - It's about forming beliefs that are less false"; Dr. S. James Gates, Jr.
RamboPreacher is offline  
Old 07-09-2007, 11:13 PM #8
mynameisjonathon
This is the new sound..
 
mynameisjonathon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: TN
 has been a member for 10 years
I posted something like this a few months ago, but it "had no relation to the forum" at the time. I kind of agree

I honestly think that technology will allow us to over come any gap and that we are probably the end of evolution on earth.
__________________
aim yooler
Rain down, rain down
Come on rain down on me
From a great height
From a great height... height...
Rain down, rain down

http://www.bestpanamacitybeachcondo.com

Last edited by mynameisjonathon : 07-09-2007 at 11:15 PM.
mynameisjonathon is offline  
 




Posting Rules
Forum Jump