Subject:
|
Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 30 Oct 2001 15:57:55 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
904 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
>
> > What I'm getting at is that evolution is a
> > natural process that produces changes in organisms in response to changes in
> > environment (including the changes that occur in other organisms) but that
> > we are now choosing, at least in part, what environmental factors to
> > completely disregard. I am not saying that humanity will not change at all
> > any more. I am just saying that barring a collapse in civilisation, our days
> > of changing involuntarily are more or less over. (that doesn't mean we're at
> > a dead end... well it sort of does but not in a BAD way)
>
> Not a bad point, but it must be stipulated that since humanity is *part*
> of nature, then the traits we, as agents of nature, elect to favor will
> survive and be passed on in a manner exactly consistent with evolution. I'm
> not sure that the "involuntary" part, while true, is significant; we've been
> breeding domesticated animals for millennia, but no one would claim that
> evolution has "stopped" for them.
> Again, though; I think we have no real way to assert with confidence that
> any conscious changes made to the genome will have significant long-term
> evolutionary impact (short of species extinction, of course!)
I thought this was an interesting perspective:
From the OU
==+==
Infant mortality is a thing of the past, major diseases are treatable and
natural disasters largely avoidable, so the merciless selective forces of
nature are something of an irrelevance.
Certainly, but that doesn't necessarily mean human evolution has stopped.
I'd argue that technologically developed societies have merely slowed
evolution down. But we can only keep nature at bay for so long.
Take disease as an example; HIV is far from under control in the developed
world and many experts predict that old enemies like influenza and
tuberculosis are poised to make a comeback.
After enjoying a century or two of the good life, with "bad genes"
accumulating in our population, we will be a very soft target for a new
disease outbreak or an unforeseen natural disaster. If our technologies fail
to protect us against these forces of nature our genetic heritage could fail
us too, meaning human evolution will return with a vengeance.
==+==
The whole thing is here:
http://www.open2.net/truthwillout/evolution/article/evolution_article.htm
Scott A
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
| (...) Not a bad point, but it must be stipulated that since humanity is *part* of nature, then the traits we, as agents of nature, elect to favor will survive and be passed on in a manner exactly consistent with evolution. I'm not sure that the (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
133 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
