Are we evolving?

Sinful2B

Regular Member
Dec 12, 2007
469
8
✟8,145.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Private
:wave:Hi Everyone

I'm not sure that I have the answer to this question, so I thought I'd throw it out to you all to chin-wag it into some kind of definitely agreed consensus.

Evolution is an all encompassing phenomina of the universe. Absolutely everything within it, is seen to evolve. Agreed?

Secondly, is it possible to remove something from the evolutionary effect, by placing it outside of evolution?

Thirdly, have we in fact, done that to ourselves?

And fourthly, by way of example, by keeping animals in zoos, etc, are we in fact preventing them from evolving?

I base all these thoughts on the fact that anything within evolution is connected to everything in evolution. Knock-on effects so to speak.

Ultimately, is humanity's intelligence and it's development therefore, the ultimate reason why eventually other life forms will evolve into something that our technology will just not be able to defeat, thereby creating the scenario that humanity will eventually render itself extinct by nature of it's inability to evolve?

So: Are we dooming ourselves to extinction by seperating ourselves from evolution, or will we manipulate evolution for our own gain, because we cannot evolve?

Have we already doomed ourselves to extinction?

ps - I hope you enjoy this one. I don't intend for it to be anti or pro anything. Just a neutral discussion of the possibilities of being outside of evolution.
Enjoy.
:wave:
 

ArnautDaniel

Veteran
Aug 28, 2006
5,295
328
The Village
✟14,653.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Are we evolving: That depends

Evolution is a response to outside stimulus. It only really works by members of the group not reproducing, or reproducing much much less than other members (thus causing their genes to be weeded out).

So if you live in a population where everyone has about the same number of kids, there is no evolution occuring.

If you live in a population with a very high mortality rate, there probably is some occurring.
 
Upvote 0

Bombila

Veteran
Nov 28, 2006
3,474
445
✟13,256.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
I'll stick to expressing an opinion about the evolution of living things. No species stops evolving. Species may change/evolve very slowly, but they continue to interact with the environment, whether that be exclusively zoos or the natural setting.

It might be that species present only in zoos slowly evolve (or at least be human selected) to be more suited to that environment. For example, elephants that attack keepers are usually removed from the breeding population/euthanised. You could argue that the zoo environment, including the humans that maintain it, are the environmental niche these animals find themselves surviving in, and being less prone to violent behaviour will give them an edge in reproducing and surviving. Give it a few thousand years, zoo elephants might be very non aggressive (with a possible side effect of being very stupid). But that's a sticky example, because essentially, the humans are doing the selecting.

Humans are certainly evolving. I suspect wisdom teeth will become a thing of the past eventually. Already, some humans don't develop all their wisdom teeth, or they are not fully developed. Mine, for example, and most of those of my direct family members were either little rootless nubs, or one or two had roots, or they were deficient in enamel, or one or more never appeared at all. But that could be strictly a familial genetic error, and I don't know how widespread that is. Certainly many people must have them removed, as the jaw doesn't really have room for them.
 
Upvote 0

sunflowershower

Junior Member
Jan 24, 2008
43
2
✟7,673.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Technically speaking, for zero evolution to occur, five things have to be true:

1. Incredibly large (~infinite) population
2. Completely random mating
3. No genetic mutation
4. Individuals cannot/do not leave or become isolated from the population (except by death)
5. There is no natural selection

If any one of these conditions is violated, evolution in the sense of changing allele frequencies does occur. As we know that the human population violates more than one of these conditions, it is evolving.
 
Upvote 0

Molal

Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Supporter
Feb 9, 2007
6,080
2,288
United States of America
✟38,405.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Conservative
I'll stick to expressing an opinion about the evolution of living things. No species stops evolving. Species may change/evolve very slowly, but they continue to interact with the environment, whether that be exclusively zoos or the natural setting.

It might be that species present only in zoos slowly evolve (or at least be human selected) to be more suited to that environment. For example, elephants that attack keepers are usually removed from the breeding population/euthanised. You could argue that the zoo environment, including the humans that maintain it, are the environmental niche these animals find themselves surviving in, and being less prone to violent behaviour will give them an edge in reproducing and surviving. Give it a few thousand years, zoo elephants might be very non aggressive (with a possible side effect of being very stupid). But that's a sticky example, because essentially, the humans are doing the selecting.

Humans are certainly evolving. I suspect wisdom teeth will become a thing of the past eventually. Already, some humans don't develop all their wisdom teeth, or they are not fully developed. Mine, for example, and most of those of my direct family members were either little rootless nubs, or one or two had roots, or they were deficient in enamel, or one or more never appeared at all. But that could be strictly a familial genetic error, and I don't know how widespread that is. Certainly many people must have them removed, as the jaw doesn't really have room for them.
I'll look for the paper, but I read recently a genetic study of wisdom teeth in a population of humans whom do not grow wisdom teeth and have a particular gene that is turned "off". Let me look for it tonight.

But yes, humans are evolving. But remember, the theory of evolution is only for existing biological life - not the universe, cosmology, inanimate objects, etc.
 
Upvote 0

Skaloop

Agnostic atheist, pro-choice anti-abortion
May 10, 2006
16,332
899
47
Burnaby
Visit site
✟29,046.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-NDP
:wave:Hi Everyone

I'm not sure that I have the answer to this question, so I thought I'd throw it out to you all to chin-wag it into some kind of definitely agreed consensus.

Evolution is an all encompassing phenomina of the universe. Absolutely everything within it, is seen to evolve. Agreed?


Not at all. Evolution applies to populations of living organisms. Everything in the universe may be changing but change in and of itself is not evolution.

Secondly, is it possible to remove something from the evolutionary effect, by placing it outside of evolution?

If any and all selective pressures were removed, I suppose so. But that's not reasonably doable.

Thirdly, have we in fact, done that to ourselves?

Since we are still subject to selective pressures, no.

And fourthly, by way of example, by keeping animals in zoos, etc, are we in fact preventing them from evolving?

No. We are merely altering how they evolve compared to how they would evolve if in the wild.

I base all these thoughts on the fact that anything within evolution is connected to everything in evolution. Knock-on effects so to speak.

Ultimately, is humanity's intelligence and it's development therefore, the ultimate reason why eventually other life forms will evolve into something that our technology will just not be able to defeat, thereby creating the scenario that humanity will eventually render itself extinct by nature of it's inability to evolve?

We are not unable to evolve, so no. We may inadvertently cause some sort of super-virus outbreak that devastates us too quickly to evolve a defense to, but we would still have the ability to evolve.

So: Are we dooming ourselves to extinction by seperating ourselves from evolution, or will we manipulate evolution for our own gain, because we cannot evolve?

Have we already doomed ourselves to extinction?

Pretty much every species is doomed to extinction. We may bring about our own more rapidly than what would occur naturally, but it's not for an inability to evolve.
 
Upvote 0

Sinful2B

Regular Member
Dec 12, 2007
469
8
✟8,145.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Private
:wave:Hi and welcome

Hey - some good thoughts - this could be fun.
Let's see:
AD =
Evolution is a response to outside stimulus. It only really works by members of the group not reproducing, or reproducing much much less than other members (thus causing their genes to be weeded out).
Bomb =
Species may change/evolve very slowly, but they continue to interact with the environment, whether that be exclusively zoos or the natural setting.
So, in some sense here, we are in agreement, in that both of you confirm that there has to be an interaction on behalf of evolution to affect evolution of anything within it.
So, what is humanity doing? Is it interacting within it's evolutionary environment. or is it operating within it's own humanity?
What about designer babies?
Husband or wife selection based upon designer criteria?
How far away from genetic selction are we?
People already choose genetically by hair colour, or race or whatever, but it almost assuredly will become more detailed as technology and morality changes. Some choose the time of year; the position on earth; magnetic fields; lunar influence. Knowledge is narrowing down natural selction.

SFS = natural selction? Was it ever natural? Will it become "unnatural?"

MLL =
I suppose it's not the wisdom tooth gene being turned off that is interesting, but the gene that turned it off, and why.
the theory of evolution is only for existing biological life - not the universe, cosmology

I would take cosmology as a study of the cosmos, as such, would you not consider that this study is evolving?
And what about the Universe. If everything within it is evolving, then surely it is evolving too? Stars are not "just there"; they are being born, and they live and die, in that manner, just as we do, and everything else living does. Over time, with the interaction of evolution, we evolve. Why should stars be any different?
In fear of going off topic with this, is the Big Bang not just an evolution event? What evidence is there that it is not, and how can it not be, if everything within it, does, except ever increasingly, us?

Thanks for your responses - good stuff :thumbsup:
 
Upvote 0

Wiccan_Child

Contributor
Mar 21, 2005
19,419
673
Bristol, UK
✟31,731.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
:wave:Hi Everyone
Yo.

I'm not sure that I have the answer to this question, so I thought I'd throw it out to you all to chin-wag it into some kind of definitely agreed consensus.

Evolution is an all encompassing phenomina of the universe. Absolutely everything within it, is seen to evolve. Agreed?
Evolution is the change in allele frequency in a population of replicators over time. Since not everything in the universe is a population of replicators, not by a long shot, I disagree.

Secondly, is it possible to remove something from the evolutionary effect, by placing it outside of evolution?
Evolution is an phenomenon that emerges from population dynamics. It's not some physical 'thing' that can be moved about.

Thirdly, have we in fact, done that to ourselves?
No. We still replicate. For example, when my little sister was born, the frequency of the 'brown hair' allele increased by one (arguably, it increased when she was conceived, but that's another topic altogether). So no, we're still evolving.
And fourthly, by way of example, by keeping animals in zoos, etc, are we in fact preventing them from evolving?
Only if we stop them breeding.


I think you have a fundamentally different idea of what evolution is from most other people. Could you share it?
 
Upvote 0

Sinful2B

Regular Member
Dec 12, 2007
469
8
✟8,145.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Private
:wave: Hi and welcome

Hi Wiccan - I was dreading meeting you - and now it's happened. Such knowledge = respect.

Evolution is the change in allele frequency in a population of replicators over time.

Clarify please: If it's not living it cannot evolve?

Evolution is an phenomenon that emerges from population dynamics.
Can that more openly be expressed as evolution's dynamics?

So no, we're still evolving.

But within the same parameters that existed before our developing technologies?

Only if we stop them breeding.
But access to what kind of gene bank do they ultimately have in their zoological confines?

I think you have a fundamentally different idea of what evolution is from most other people. Could you share it?
It's difficult enough trying to share it with myself, less alone share it with another. Suffice to say, that I am seeking illumination on how creation evolves.

Anyway Wiccan - are you particularly expert with genetics? If so, and your willing, can we chat out of thread?

Thanks for your input :thumbsup:
 
Upvote 0

Patashu

Veteran
Oct 22, 2007
1,303
63
✟16,793.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
If 'social evolution' (the spread and mutation of memes, ideas, concepts, outlooks on life, etc) becomes a more important factor in the chance you have of reproducing than your genes then evolution will be replaced by genetic drift as NS becomes less and less important. Your genes have some, but not complete control over how your mind will develop.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

sfs

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2003
10,675
7,744
64
Massachusetts
✟339,441.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Technically speaking, for zero evolution to occur, five things have to be true:

1. Incredibly large (~infinite) population
2. Completely random mating
3. No genetic mutation
4. Individuals cannot/do not leave or become isolated from the population (except by death)
5. There is no natural selection

If any one of these conditions is violated, evolution in the sense of changing allele frequencies does occur. As we know that the human population violates more than one of these conditions, it is evolving.

As far as evolutionary biology is concerned, this is the correct answer.(*) In a finite population evolution will occur, even if there are no selective pressures causing it to occur in any particular direction. In fact, since the main effect of natural selection is to prevent evolution, by weeding out deleterious mutations, removing selective pressure will generally increase evolution rather than slow it down.

At present humans have relatively low (but hardly zero) selective pressures operating on us. We also have a very large population size. That means there is little directional evolution happening, little overall change in frequencies for common variants (i.e. our population is large enough that it is starting to look a little like an infinite size), lots of accumulation of new, rare mutations, and more accumulation of mildly deleterious alleles than at most points in our history.

Animals in the zoo are a somewhat different story. They may be experiencing a tight genetic bottleneck, if the zoo population is genetically isolated from the outside population, or if the outside population is threatened with extinction. If that is true, they are evolving rapidly, with all allele frequencies changing. They are under less selection pressure for some traits that are important in the wild (e.g. speed, stealth), so those abilities are likely to slowly decay, while they may be under new selective pressure for other traits (e.g. docility, willingness to mate in captivity).

(*)I'm not really certain about the need for #2, at least in the context of an infinite population. Assortative mating will cause genotype frequencies to depart from those expected under Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, but it's not obvious to me that it will cause allele frequencies to change in the population. I have the flu at the moment, however, and I'm trying to avoid thinking too hard about infinities.
 
Upvote 0

Sinful2B

Regular Member
Dec 12, 2007
469
8
✟8,145.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Private
:wave: Hi sfs

At present humans have relatively low (but hardly zero) selective pressures operating on us. We also have a very large population size. That means there is little directional evolution happening, little overall change in frequencies for common variants

Absolutely, and so eloquently put, and the directional evolution will be minutely less tomorrow, and so on.
What of the future?
hey are under less selection pressure for some traits that are important in the wild (e.g. speed, stealth), so those abilities are likely to slowly decay, while they may be under new selective pressure for other traits (e.g. docility, willingness to mate in captivity).
How would you apply this thinking with humanity's zoo and seperation from the wild?
 
Upvote 0

sfs

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2003
10,675
7,744
64
Massachusetts
✟339,441.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
:
Absolutely, and so eloquently put, and the directional evolution will be minutely less tomorrow, and so on.
What of the future?
The future is hard to predict.

How would you apply this thinking with humanity's zoo and seperation from the wild?
I'm not quite sure what you're asking. Many traits that were of importance for humans in the wild are likely decaying slowly. Examples would include eyesight, speed, sense of smell. Maybe even intelligence. To some extent decay in some of them may be offset by sexual selection for the same traits (e.g. athletic men get more women than couch potatoes, and may end up producing slightly more babies on average).

I have no idea what the long-term future holds. Once humans develop the ability to manipulate our own genomes, I really don't know what is going to happen.
 
Upvote 0

LordTimothytheWise

Fides Quaerens Intellectum
Nov 8, 2007
750
27
✟8,542.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Yes. There is plenty of genetic variation within humanity, at this time, and the alleles in the population are fluctuating. But even more than that, it can't not be happening. Selection is always active. Whether that is stablizing selection, disruptive selection, directional selection. There is always selection, because some people reproduce, and some do not, and different traits are favored.
 
Upvote 0

LordTimothytheWise

Fides Quaerens Intellectum
Nov 8, 2007
750
27
✟8,542.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
So: Are we dooming ourselves to extinction by seperating ourselves from evolution, or will we manipulate evolution for our own gain, because we cannot evolve?

I think at some point, we are going to be able to fix our genetic defects like Hemophilia and Phenyl Keytone Uria, but that is not necessarily manipulating Evolution. There will always be evolution, but if there are those that are beyond medicine and technology's ability to help will simply not survive. Thus Natural selection, and Evolution.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

FishFace

Senior Veteran
Jan 12, 2007
4,535
169
35
✟13,130.00
Faith
Atheist
Evolution is an all encompassing phenomina of the universe. Absolutely everything within it, is seen to evolve. Agreed?


Uh, disagreed? Evolution is the change in allele frequencies over time. I don't notice any alleles in dirt, or in planets, or galaxies.

But we are evolving. AIDs resistance, lactose persistence, malarial resistance via heterozygous sickle cell.
 
Upvote 0

Wiccan_Child

Contributor
Mar 21, 2005
19,419
673
Bristol, UK
✟31,731.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
:wave: Hi and welcome

Hi Wiccan - I was dreading meeting you - and now it's happened. Such knowledge = respect.
Haha, you're too kind! I think we're both up debating dad in the 'Palaeosols destroy the flood and Genesis'. I was looking forward to talking to you. Small world, huh? :wave:

Clarify please: If it's not living it cannot evolve?
Depends on what you mean by 'living'. Personally, I define something to be alive if it is a replicator, so yes, non-life cannot evolve.
Some people call something living if it replicates and has a metabolism, so by that definition something can be non-life and evolve (since metabolism isn't a requirement for populations to evolve).

That said, a living system cannot itself evolve. A population of this system can, but the individual systems cannot.

Can that more openly be expressed as evolution's dynamics?
It can, but that would be a bit circular; " Evolution is an phenomenon that emerges from evolution's dynamics."
But within the same parameters that existed before our developing technologies?
Hmm, doubtful. Our selection pressures have changed, certainly (e.g., foraging skills are no longer beneficial for survival, but large breast size is).

But access to what kind of gene bank do they ultimately have in their zoological confines?
That depends on the variety of mates made available to them. Safari parks, for instance, often have whole herds of animals in the natural habitat (or near enough).

But human intervention will change who they mate with, and so the evolution of their species will change by our hand.

Anyway Wiccan - are you particularly expert with genetics? If so, and your willing, can we chat out of thread?
I'm no expert (my forté is physics and maths ^_^), but I'd be more than happy to continue this discussion.
 
Upvote 0

Sinful2B

Regular Member
Dec 12, 2007
469
8
✟8,145.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Private
Once humans develop the ability to manipulate our own genomes, I really don't know what is going to happen.

Ah yes, and not only it's own genome too!!!
Playing with the instructions of the universe.
Hmmn?
We elevate ourselves to what I wonder.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Sinful2B

Regular Member
Dec 12, 2007
469
8
✟8,145.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Private
:wave: Hi and welcome

I think we're both up debating dad in the 'Palaeosols destroy the flood and Genesis'. I was looking forward to talking to you. Small world, huh?
Debate? I'm not so sure. Certainly you were trying to debate, but that demands a listener, yes?

non-life cannot evolve.
Ok, so you are talking about biological evolution. Now, if we assume that anything else in creation is able to change albeit over a much longer period of time, is that not also an evolution, because it will take on board, just like living matter does, characteristics of any interacting environment. Just because the method is different, does that not make the outcome any less different?

Our selection pressures have changed, certainly (e.g., foraging skills are no longer beneficial for survival, but large breast size is).

Oh no - you've taken me off topic - back later
;)
 
Upvote 0