Posted: 4/4/2005 6:40:30 AM EDT
|
Ok people, stop saying we evolve. We dont. A single person will not evolve. (Unless your an X-man/woman) The genetic code you are given when your first concived is the genetic code will die with. When you father a child, your DNA combines with the mothers, giving the child a new set of DNA. So in dummy terms, If im more attractive to you, I can attract more females and inpregnat them. My children have a genetic code that causes them to be more attractive and attract more females. Do this for a million years and see what happens. Looks are not a good example because ugly people still end up with ugly people, usually. You should get my point. Will you wake up tommorow and start growing a 6'th finger on your left hand? No. Humans are evolving, just not at the pace we used to. Modern technology has taken away the survival of the fittest. Before someone asks me to explain why we still have children born with genetic defects, let me explain. Many genetic defects are given to a child because they are conceived past a certain point. Simply waiting one year can increase your chances of having a certain defect from 1 in 500 to 1 in 200. Look at teen pregnancy rates and genetic defect rates, they are much lower than any other group. We are evolving, we have to. Now modern medicine has removed any threats, except cancer and aids and a few other nasties. However I believe this will bring a new form of evolution, Those people that live sedentary lives and eat nasty, will grow up having diabetis and have a higher risk of getting cancer. Anyways, flame away and tell me humans didnt evolve because we were put here 5000 years ago. |
That's my cue! See ya! |
I agree with you 100%... but I'm staying out of this. Just know you have supproter when all the "God Fearing Folk" lynch you. |
RON JEREMEY, nuf said....|
i would like to hear your opinion of human evolution with regard to birth defects and “adaptations”. Do you think working close to computers, writing and doing other detail work for large portions of the day will cause humans to adapt or evolve to be generally more near sighted? Do you think there is a predisposition of certain “human sub species (for lack of a better term) to have dominant and useful characteristics? Take Nerds and Jocks. Nerds tend to have weaker upper bodies and may have more birth defects in their skeletal and musculature systems. The also seem to be near sighted, have less social skills and be more passive. Jocks seem to marry jocks and have jock babies. Sure they can be smart but tend to have a lower intellect and have more athletic frames and musculature while being less disposed to abstract thought. So are these subspecies or just adaptations of individuals to fit into the social strata? ignore the thumpers. this is a good topic.  Ed to say Nerds and Jocks are a modern colloquialism of a ancient division. We could just as easily say philosophers and athletes, farmer/gatherers and “hunters” monks and warriors. |
+1 |
I believe that the only traits that you can expect to "pass" (over the long run) are those that give you a better chance of passing along said genes. (this refers to the alleic frequency in a population, not to individuals in the population) |
