Humans not evolving any more?

[Abaddon]

With things such as the NHS and charity.. are humans still experiencing any evolution, or has it slowed down to negligable levels. Selection pressure, which is the driving force in evolution is devoid in our lives.


...and why we arnt telepaths yet

 

[Truronian]

I think if a gene came into being that caused humans to be more hardy to disease, it would propagate quite quicky. Bear in mind that evolution is a long scale phenemenon.

 

[Abaddon]

yes, but with our population so large, would any new gene ever pass through all the population.

Also, mutating a gene for "hardy to disease" just doesnt happen. If anything one could become everso slightly more resistant to one particular disease.

 

[stormbind]

Evolution works where ever there is a selective gene pool: only the preferred genetic traits are passed to the next generation.

This is why modern society encourages all the smartest women to work, leaving only the dumbest women to raise large families: the preferred genetic trait being?

 

[Little Raven]

Of course humans are still evolving. There's still selection pressure. It's just not working quite the way some people envision it should.

 

[Abaddon]

Well what is a positive trait?

certainly physial apperance matters little
intelegence is questionable?


can anyone put a finger on something that might be an advantagous trait?

 

[RoddyVR]

it is unfair of the current generation to pass on its ailments and defects to the next and future generations.
so we should disallow any medical care whatsoever to anyone under the age of 16.
if you survive to 16, then you're geneticaly healthy enough to pass on your genes. then you get medical treatment and are allowed to have children of your own.
yes, we'd have to sacrifice quite a bit of the current generation's children, but immagine the long term benefits for the human race.

alternative is duel to the death in gym class in highschool.

can anyone put a finger on something that might be an advantagous trait?

Greed. or the ability to spend less money then you make/have. pennypinching. whatever you want to call it.
if you are able to have a savings account in a bank when you're 20, then you have an advantageous trait.

 

[Little Raven]

can anyone put a finger on something that might be an advantagous trait?

The desire to have lots of children?

 

[stormbind]

Well what is a positive trait?

certainly physial apperance matters little
intelegence is questionable?


can anyone put a finger on something that might be an advantagous trait?

From the perspective of mother nature, stupidity and an inability to work are the more advantageous traits

 

[Little Raven]

Greed. or the ability to spend less money then you make/have. pennypinching. whatever you want to call it.
if you are able to have a savings account in a bank when you're 20, then you have an advantageous trait.

Not unless that bank account helps you father children.

Evolution doesn't care what kind of life you led, only whether or not you were successful in creating more life.

 

[stormbind]

The desire to have lots of children?

How many women choose many children over a successful career?

(the issue does not affect men equally)

 

[~Corsair#01~]

I would imagine the devolution of our culture and growing laziness/obesity would pretty much mean devolution of the species as a whole.

 

[Mark1031]

Greed. or the ability to spend less money then you make/have. pennypinching. whatever you want to call it.
if you are able to have a savings account in a bank when you're 20, then you have an advantageous trait.

Actually this is a negative trait. I believe that economic success is (on average) negatively correlated with reproduction rate world wide.

 

[Little Raven]

How many women choose many children over a successful career?

Not enough, if Europe is to be any example. And who could blame them?

 

[stormbind]

Actually this is a negative trait. I believe that economic success is (on average) negatively correlated with reproduction rate world wide.

Indeed. Most wealthy families have one child (or none) while the poorest families have many children.

Selfish behaviour might also discourage having children, because children are expensive (both time & money), but I have made no observation to explicitly back that up.

 

[Kozmos]

it is unfair of the current generation to pass on its ailments and defects to the next and future generations.
so we should disallow any medical care whatsoever to anyone under the age of 16.
if you survive to 16, then you're geneticaly healthy enough to pass on your genes. then you get medical treatment and are allowed to have children of your own.
yes, we'd have to sacrifice quite a bit of the current generation's children, but immagine the long term benefits for the human race.

alternative is duel to the death in gym class in highschool.

I agree but would you survive if you were without medical care until 16?Still the duel to the death in gym class sounds nice,there are many people I want to terminate.

 

[Abaddon]

so we should disallow any medical care whatsoever to anyone under the age of 16.
if you survive to 16, then you're geneticaly healthy enough to pass on your genes.

Why not push it all the way up to 45. Anyone surviving that long + still fertile would see within a few generations an increase in how long we live.

 

[Urederra]

...and why we arnt telepaths yet

I keep trying...

Edit: Stormbind, Can you read me? I repeat, Can you read me?

 

[stormbind]

Not enough, if Europe is to be any example. And who could blame them?

I am not sure what you mean by blaming. Is it fair to blame them for the absence of their genetic code in the next generation?

 

[stormbind]

I keep trying...

Edit: Stormbind, Can you read me? I repeat, Can you read me?

Please quit spamming me with messages about sun flares