Was thinking about this the other day and wanted to know other peoples opinions.

Think of the general theory behind evolution, something mutates, or gains another property that helps it survive better in its habitat. It continues, mates, passes its ability onto its offspring. Eventually, the original species cannot compete with the advanced mutated version and dies off. This is the basis behind Natural Selection.

Now put this into context of humans... it doesnt happen. Humans have children generally whether or not they have some ability that makes them dominant over other humans. The geniuses may make more money although the poor and maybe less skilled will most likely still find someone and have children. The Athletes may be able to run faster, or longer, jump higher, throw something more accurately, or futher, but this doesnt matter as the less physically able will still survive, we support them. Does this effectively mean we are not progressing as humans, we are generally staying as the same average. Sure the Smart or strong will pass on their attributes to their children, but the less intellegent or less physically able will still be there, and will pass on these attributes too. Maybe we will progress, the smart will become smarter, the strong, stronger, but this also might make a rift between the human race once, if we live for another million or so years, that the gap between the smart and the dumb or the strong and the weak is so big that we could effectively split the race in half according to Talent (*cough* X-men *cough* (IMG:http://www.glowsticking.com/forums/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif) ), or will we continue to be able to support them.

Now yes this is a touchy subject but don't get offended if you take this the wrong way, i don't mean to start a flame war or anything, just throwing it out there.

Wellllllll something that keeps my hopes up about this thought is the fact that people are constantly breaking records in every aspect of everything.

People starve to death. Groups still die off. Viruses/diseases still Kill people. THe humans with the best genes are not always the most successful (rich/powerful).
We are at the top of the food chain and we more or less control our natural environment so there isnt a need to adapt to those things in the way that we did in the past..but there is still evolution.
Im hoping that in 50 years I can become part supercomputer.

evolution takes thousands and thousands of years. you have to remember that we aren't really going to see much improvement in the last several hundred years (when the principles of evolution started), save for a few minor changes like height and immune system behavior.

the real problem is that there is not any danger, and we do not need to be smarter or have a higher level of fitness in order to survive. if something threatening pops up, we just invent new types of guns or medicine to combat it. so as a result society only breeds a few smart people, and the rest are just cannon fodder. at least those are my thoughts on the subject.

There was a split in human "species" before. The
One theory was that the the Neanderthal went extinct because of violent conflicts with The Cro-Magnons.
Another theory was that they died out because they were more susceptible to pathogens introduced by the Cro-magnons.

But of course like it has already been said it would take millions of years for this to even be possible again.

i personally think the average human potential is growing bigger and bigger.

one thing humans have that other species dont is MEDICINE. if we let people with genetic diseases die off without treatment then its more likely that we wont see that disease or deffect that often. with the exception of the occasional mutation. we humans dont really allow evolution to take effect on us as it does with other animals. if we wanted the human race to evolve, to do so, we would need to compromise some morals.

I think that humans have always been the same as they are now.
The only thing that "evolves" is human intellect.
The big bang is a load of honky. It says the universe was created from nothing. Literally nothing. Now any intelligent person will tell you that it is impossible to make something from nothing.
Science cannot explain where people came from. Same as religion.
I do not believe that my great great great great great great grandfather was an amoebia. Freakin rediculous to think so.
I'm not evolved from a damn ape. I come from a long long long line of humans that look like I do.
People are never gonna look any different than they do now.

(IMG:http://www.boblucky.com/Biking/Dordogne/Day3-1.jpg)

you look like this???

based on reconstructions using bones and mummified remains, institutions have created many different ideas of what humans look liked during prehistoric times. and strangely, none of them look like we do now (except for the most recent ones within the last several thousand years).

and we will change. the primary hair color will be brown. people will be taller, and fatter (the latter is my hypothesis).

This is a prime example that people will believe anything.
So they found bones that look like this. For one, they don't really know how old these bones are. It's a guess.
And how many excavations have you been to and saw all of the skeletons that have been dug up. This could be one case that they based all info in the textbooks about.
So "evolution" takes thousands of years. That means no one has ever been around long enough for it to happen. To actually see it. We leave it up to a bunch of atheists to tell us.
This aspect of science is part of what someone believes, its ther "religion". Nothing more.
Nobody will ever know for real.

Also

To show that all life evolved from a single cell, which itself came from some type of chemical soup, there would have had to be massive genetic information gains.
But evolutionists have failed to show how this gain of new information occurred. Where did the information come from for the first bristles, stomachs, spines, intestines, complex blood circulation systems, intricate mouthpieces to strain special foods out of the water, and so on, when these were not present in the ancestral species?
The theory of evolution teaches that simple life-forms evolved into more complex life-forms, such as fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. There is no natural law known that could allow this to happen. The best that evolutionists can come up with to try to explain how this might have happened is to propose that it happened by mutations and natural selection.
But mutations and natural selection do not show gain in information, just rearrangement or loss of what is already there — therefore there may be beneficial mutations without an increase in genetic information.
Mutations overwhelmingly destroy genetic information and produce creatures more handicapped than the parents. And natural selection simply weeds out unfit creatures. Natural selection may explain why light-colored moths decrease and dark moths proliferate, but it cannot show that moths could ever turn into effective, totally different, non-moth creatures. Moths do not have the genetic information to evolve into something that is not a moth, no matter how much time you give them.
Despite the evidence being pathetic, even if you claim the title of World's Biggest Optimist, evolutionists still tell the story that once upon a time humans evolved from ape-like creatures.
Many years ago this argument seemed credible to a lot of people because there was so little hominid fossil evidence that it was easy to imagine evolutionary links everywhere.
But things have changed. Thousands of fossils and fossil fragments of apes and humans have now been found — and they don't show a steady progression from apes to humans at all. Fossils have been found in the wrong time-frames, put into the wrong categories before all the evidence was in, and what was once thought to be the ape-human family tree now actually has no trunk — just unconnected branches.

humans will split
ravers and nonravers

but if the moth turns into something slightly similar to the original moth, and this moth is different produces offspring, and that moth's offspring changes, and so on and so forth until many generations later you have a moth that is completely different than the original moth.

the theory of evolution contends that species adapt to ensure survival. it could be that the newer moth lives in an area of greater wind speeds and as a result has a greater mass than the original moth, or possibly produces a different enzyme for better digesting of the food in the region.

so just as the moth could change, why not humans? just as whales most likely evolved from a dog-like animal (whales have unnecessary pelvic bones), humans could easily have gained physical characteristics that would have helped them to adapt to more favorable conditions. a rigid skeletal structure of calcium phosphate easily provides for greater mobility as well as a framework for other bodily systems. the greater mobility is immediately useful because of the need for food, and being able to move around helps a lot when searching for something to eat. so you are sitting in your chair typing. what if you wanted something to eat, but you couldn't move out of your chair?

whereas before a basic muscular system existed, multicellular organisms were confined to a single location, and after one was created, movement became a much more prevailing factor in determining the longevity of species.

but stepping away from all of that, think about the evolution of bacteria as compared to the rest of the world. because bacteria multiply so quickly, generations can go by in the blink of an eye. as a result of the increase in human treatment for diseases and the like, bacteria always encounter resistance and adapt accordingly. this is why we need stronger and stronger drugs.

in fact, this has mainly been a problem in low quality russian prisons, where inmates often come in with an illness, only get partial treatment for it, and when the disease recovers, it is stronger than before and resistant to the disease. then the other inmates get it, and it evolves in them too, creating multiple strains of the same disease, so one medication can not cure everything. and then these people are released back into the public, and the disease spreads with little success.

the main point of this is that bacteria have been shown to evolve to survive in their surroundings. now, although i think it highly unlikely that bacteria will sprout legs and start walking around, i do think that it is possible, but over a greater period of time than you or i or anyone in the next hundred thousand years will know. if it is necessary to ensure the survival of the race, then it will happen.

and i think i will claim that title.

And massive war will break out against the Ravers and the Non Ravers... only then will the human race become one. DUN DUN DUN (IMG:http://www.glowsticking.com/forums/style_emoticons/default/biggrin2.gif)

Anyway.



This is my point. Because we have all these things, eveything else will evolve, adapt to changes etc, while we just make machines and use science to solve it. Some may say this is better, its defenatly alot fast but this means humans will never really "evolve" as such.

Evolution happens no different than how we bred dogs in short time or plants etc. Evolution happens likewise in human history. Evolution, can walk on water.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...sus_lizard.html

its ridiculous to not at least acknowledge that evolution is possible.

Go watch the movie Idiocracy =D

its about this very topic.

lol a funny yet scary movie =P

you fail to realize that natural selection IS a natural law.
To rebutle your statement that "complex systems cant be made," it is possible that they can evolve. have u taken biology? the cell contains organelles that resemble similar functions of organs in humans. the formation of human organs could simply be evolved more complex forms of organs derived from that of simpler more primitive cells that have developed over millions of years of natural selection to accomodate an ever changing enviroment.

and mutations do lead to gains in information. mutations are the gain/loss/alteration of a trait. as DNA polymerase copies its strands of DNA it occasionally makes mistakes, leading to alterations in the dna structure, which is what causes mutations. and if you are not aware of how drastic one simple alteration can be you would be amazed. it only takes 1 chromosome to separate a man from a woman. a minor alteration could separate a genius from a mentally challenged person. it all occurs due to chance. if a mutated species gains a trait that aids it in surviving more efficiently, then that species will grow, multiply and mutate some more until it leads up to the creatures we see today.

also, if you believe that humans have been around forever, does that mean u think we existed when the dinosaurs were alive? i dont think the flintstones are a credible source for your claims =P haha just kidding ^^

just a thought...


Is it possible that human kind has reached the pinicle of evolution?

The human mind can invent and create ways to adapt to any environment. If you assume that evolution doesnt mean evolving mutations in physical appearance, but instead evolution of the ability to gain what we want and or need for a species betterment. We as humans can use our minds to adapt in any way that we need. if we want to go to space, we invent things that allow us to be in space, if we want to go underwater we adapt, if we want to jump out of an airplane or fly we invent and adapt, if we want to converse with people all around the world from the comfort of our homes... we have adapted and evolved over the years to do this. evolution doesnt mean that we change appearances or physical abilities, it means that when a being wants or needs to be better than it currently is, and over time if it achieves its goals then it has evolved into a new level of existance.

chea =p