Can human evolution negate evolution?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-06-2013, 07:34 PM
Can human evolution negate evolution?
Humans can now genetically alter species to the way they want, negating "natural" selection. We can also foster species to grow where they otherwise wouldn't or completely kill off a species.

Does the more humans evolve more and more negate natural selection?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-06-2013, 09:50 PM
RE: Can human evolution negate evolution?
(15-06-2013 07:34 PM)I and I Wrote:  Humans can now genetically alter species to the way they want, negating "natural" selection. We can also foster species to grow where they otherwise wouldn't or completely kill off a species.

Does the more humans evolve more and more negate natural selection?

Who's to say what humans do is unnatural? Aren't we part of nature?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like BryanS's post
15-06-2013, 09:51 PM
RE: Can human evolution negate evolution?
(15-06-2013 07:34 PM)I and I Wrote:  Humans can now genetically alter species to the way they want, negating "natural" selection. We can also foster species to grow where they otherwise wouldn't or completely kill off a species.

Does the more humans evolve more and more negate natural selection?

Has Anyone Really Been Far Even as Decided to Use Even Go Want to do Look More Like?

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-06-2013, 06:17 PM
RE: Can human evolution negate evolution?
(15-06-2013 09:50 PM)BryanS Wrote:  
(15-06-2013 07:34 PM)I and I Wrote:  Humans can now genetically alter species to the way they want, negating "natural" selection. We can also foster species to grow where they otherwise wouldn't or completely kill off a species.

Does the more humans evolve more and more negate natural selection?

Who's to say what humans do is unnatural? Aren't we part of nature?

The belief in natural selection implies that there is an unnatural selection.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-06-2013, 06:24 PM
RE: Can human evolution negate evolution?
(15-06-2013 09:51 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  
(15-06-2013 07:34 PM)I and I Wrote:  Does the more humans evolve more and more negate natural selection?
Has Anyone Really Been Far Even as Decided to Use Even Go Want to do Look More Like?

Well, that is two groups of words, alright. Blink

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like kim's post
17-06-2013, 05:22 AM
RE: Can human evolution negate evolution?
(15-06-2013 07:34 PM)I and I Wrote:  Humans can now genetically alter species to the way they want, negating "natural" selection. We can also foster species to grow where they otherwise wouldn't or completely kill off a species.

Does the more humans evolve more and more negate natural selection?

While it is true that humans are rapidly becoming adept at small-scale genetic modification that is where our abilities currently rest, unfortunately we can only alter individual units and develop an altered community from the individuals, as opposed to altering an entire species, perhaps we might even be able to create entirely new species from the originally altered individuals, but it would be prohibitively expensive and time consuming, unless it is simply bacterial cultures, and of course you have all the "ethical issues" of creating Genetically Modified Organisms which few people want to seem to touch. (Frankly I don't get ethics; just get the ethics out of my face and let me get back to sciencing, okay Biology teacher!?)

As for the fostering or destruction of species; I would argue that humans themselves, have at this stage become Selective Pressures in our own right and a force of evolution, as opposed to a subversion of it. It is not unknown for species to adapt and end up wiping out competitor or 'civilian' species in the process which could not adapt and compete successfully. In fact, some species adopt and take other species into their charge, protecting them in a symbiotic relationship. As such, I argue that humans are simply fulfilling a role in the ecosystems we infects evolutionary cycles; we encourage rapid development and adaptation of organisms in said ecosystems, lest they fall victim to what Darwin described as "The Struggle For Existence", falling prey to better adapted organisms such as ourselves and ultimately being supplanted. Our stunning ability to change the environment around us, and thus drastically change pressures is an evolutionary marvel; it certainly shows which species can tough it out and continue and those which would remain static in the face of drastic change.

So long as Selective Pressures and mutation continue to effect and occur (respectively) in humans, we are still subject to evolution. Besides, even with GMOs we create mutation will still occur with each replication of the DNA and Pressures will likely still apply.


As a rounding off statement; At our current stage, I feel we are still subject to evolutionary pressures and mechanisms and cannot prevent our being so at this point in time. In time however, this could change; we may yet in the future develop technologies and skills which would allow us to subvert the mechanisms of evolution, prevent mutations. But doing so would ultimately lead to our species destruction and I dread the day that such a possibility may occur.

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-06-2013, 01:25 PM
RE: Can human evolution negate evolution?
(16-06-2013 06:24 PM)kim Wrote:  
(15-06-2013 09:51 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  Has Anyone Really Been Far Even as Decided to Use Even Go Want to do Look More Like?

Well, that is two groups of words, alright. Blink

I felt like his question was silly.

Many people get this idea that humans are killing human evolution with scientific progress.

The truth is simple. If you remove all natural barriers to a species proliferation, it will increase it's diversity. Then when natural selection pressures reapply the species will become several subspecies.

Not complicated stuff. In a nut shell, humans are become more diverse, and thusly more able to adapt.

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes fstratzero's post
17-06-2013, 03:58 PM
RE: Can human evolution negate evolution?
I'm afraid that:
- Since humans are so focused on the stage we are at now
and
The massive number we have now
We might have seen the end of human evolution.

There are cases of an extra toe here, an extra flexible there.
But since those are only 1 or 2 of 6 billion, their traits will never be passed on to a substantial number of people to affect the entire race.
Or, worse, people will fear the change and label them freaks and those that are more evolved will die out.

Aspiring optimist
Eternal Pragmatist.
With the uncanny ability to see all sides in every argument.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-06-2013, 04:04 PM
RE: Can human evolution negate evolution?
That may be the wrong question to ask.

The idea of the extended phenotype that Dawkins put forward essentially says that whatever we do is part of us.

The simple examples are the beaver's dam, the bird's nest, the spider's web are all part of the expression of that organism's genotype.
All of human activity is an expression of our genotype, hence subject to selection and is the product of evolution.

So the short answer is 'no'. Evolution is still in force; in fact, human evolution is in hyperdrive.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-06-2013, 07:22 PM
RE: Can human evolution negate evolution?
(16-06-2013 06:17 PM)I and I Wrote:  
(15-06-2013 09:50 PM)BryanS Wrote:  Who's to say what humans do is unnatural? Aren't we part of nature?

The belief in natural selection implies that there is an unnatural selection.

Well, I much prefer the unnatural selection of a friendly dog over the more natural wolf. One makes a better pet than the other.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: