There is no fossil

[Nearly Sane]

What odd things we are.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-39842975

[floo]

It would appear to prove humans evolved into the species we are today. I wonder if we will carry on evolving?

[Nearly Sane]

It would appear to prove humans evolved into the species we are today. I wonder if we will carry on evolving?

you are an example of evolution from your parents. Your children are also evolved from you.

[floo]

you are an example of evolution from your parents. Your children are also evolved from you.

I am an example of my parent's procreation, the evolutionary process takes many thousands of years, not a few generations.

[BeRational]

you are an example of evolution from your parents. Your children are also evolved from you.

It's just that natural selection is not applicable to us at the moment.

We have to a large extent got around it, and good thing too.

[Nearly Sane]

It's just that natural selection is not applicable to us at the moment.

We have to a large extent got around it, and good thing too.

We may have reduced environmental pressures but the idea that natural selection isn't applicable currently is a basis misunderstanding of evolution.

As to whether the above is a 'good thing', would seem to only make sense if you think natural selection is a bad thing, which seems an odd idea.

[Nearly Sane]

I am an example of my parent's procreation, the evolutionary process takes many thousands of years, not a few generations.

And yet to do that process, it is a fact that you are different from your parents. Evolution happens continually.

[floo]

And yet to do that process, it is a fact that you are different from your parents. Evolution happens continually.

I am not sure that is evolution though?

[Nearly Sane]

I am not sure that is evolution though?

Change in gene alleles over time, one generation is time

[BeRational]

We may have reduced environmental pressures but the idea that natural selection isn't applicable currently is a basis misunderstanding of evolution.

As to whether the above is a 'good thing', would seem to only make sense if you think natural selection is a bad thing, which seems an odd idea.

Yes natural selection is in some areas a bad thing.

Do you want blind people to live, deaf people to live, disabled people etc.

Natural selection would kill them quickly

[Nearly Sane]

Yes natural selection is in some areas a bad thing.

Do you want blind people to live, deaf people to live, disabled people etc.

Natural selection would kill them quickly

Apart from being obviously untrue in that blind, deaf and disabled people have existed through human history, this ignores the most obvious category of humans that would die if natural selection  worked in the rather crude way you portray it, babies.

As to whether the what happens through natural selection as being 'bad', I suggest you need some criteria and justification for them. Got any?

[BeRational]

Apart from being obviously untrue in that blind, deaf and disabled people have existed through human history, this ignores the most obvious category of humans that would die if natural selection  worked in the rather crude way you portray it, babies.

As to whether the what happens through natural selection as being 'bad', I suggest you need some criteria and justification for them. Got any?

Babies have parents.

You make my point, we work together to counter what natural selection would like to do.

[Nearly Sane]

Babies have parents.

You make my point, we work together to counter what natural selection would like to do.

Yes, and babies are different from their parents. Woo, it's evolution!
And what do you think 'we' work together together on? In what way is what humans do not 'natural'?

[BeRational]

Yes, and babies are different from their parents. Woo, it's evolution!
And what do you think 'we' work together together on? In what way is what humans do not 'natural'?

I appreciate that, but the nature red in tooth and claw we try to eradicate.

If a child is born with a 'defect' our human brains deem this worthy of equal treatment. Our brains have allowed us to ignore and roll back natural selection to some extent.

[Dicky Underpants]

What odd things we are.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-39842975

Looks a bit like Homo habilis, or Australopithecus africanus - yet the scientists have dated it much more recently than those. I note that some boffins have suggested that it evolved from Homo erectus, and then devolved to exhibiting more 'primitive' characteristics.
Whatever - it's all evolution, whether there be micro-intervals in the process, or whether there appears to be a degenerative change, or whether there is relative stasis (even living fossils like the coelocanth show features which are different from their incredibly ancient forbears).

[Nearly Sane]

I appreciate that, but the nature red in tooth and claw we try to eradicate.

If a child is born with a 'defect' our human brains deem this worthy of equal treatment. Our brains have allowed us to ignore and roll back natural selection to some extent.

How is that not 'natural selection'?  In what way can you break out of  that?

[Dicky Underpants]

How is that not 'natural selection'?  In what way can you break out of  that?

I'm sure the answer is that we can't - but it helps to understand that 'natural selection' should never be applied simplistically to mean 'survival of the fittest' (wasn't that Spencer's phrase?) Even Darwin, I think. suggested that in the more recent evolutionary past, the law of 'natural selection' meant that the most intelligent creatures survived. Which in turn promoted the survival of those species which developed 'altruistic' habits. But everything remains 'natural' and everything is in evolution.

[Nearly Sane]

I'm sure the answer is that we can't - but it helps to understand that 'natural selection' should never be applied simplistically to mean 'survival of the fittest' (wasn't that Spencer's phrase?) Even Darwin, I think. suggested that in the more recent evolutionary past, the law of 'natural selection' meant that the most intelligent creatures survived. Which in turn promoted the survival of those species which developed 'altruistic' habits. But everything remains 'natural' and everything is in evolution.

Yet, that seems to be BeRational's whole approach that we are 'stopping' evolution and changing it?

[torridon]

It would appear to prove humans evolved into the species we are today. I wonder if we will carry on evolving?

Even if we are masked from environmental selection pressures (which we are not, completely) sexual selection is still alive and kicking; last I checked, pretty girls were still prettier than ugly girls. Or someat like that. A recent study I saw suggested that there are dozens of regions of the human genome under current selection pressure, and it is Asians and Europeans that are mostly subject to that, whereas Africans (we are an African species) are at an adaptive peak already and so under less pressure.

[jeremyp]

It's just that natural selection is not applicable to us at the moment.

We have to a large extent got around it, and good thing too.

What evidence do you have for that?

[jeremyp]

And yet to do that process, it is a fact that you are different from your parents. Evolution happens continually.

You have the cart before the horse. Descent with modification doesn't happen because of evolution. Evolution happens because of descent with modification (and selection of course).

[Nearly Sane]

You have the cart before the horse. Descent with modification doesn't happen because of evolution. Evolution happens because of descent with modification (and selection of course).

You have the straw before the point. Didn't say it happens because of evolution. Just that it does and is evolution.

[jeremyp]

You have the straw before the point. Didn't say it happens because of evolution. Just that it does and is evolution.

Evolution doesn't happen to individuals. Natural selection happens to individuals. Floo is correct when she says her being different to her parents is not evolution. Evolution is an emergent phenomenon.

[Nearly Sane]

Evolution doesn't happen to individuals. Natural selection happens to individuals. Floo is correct when she says her being different to her parents is not evolution. Evolution is an emergent phenomenon.

This is the same nonsense where creationists think about crocoducks. Evolution as a change in alleles over time happens every generation. Note that doesn't say it happens to individuals.

[jeremyp]

This is the same nonsense

No it is not nonsense at all. I recommend "Why Evolution is True" by Jerry Coyne to educate yourself.

where creationists think about crocoducks. Evolution as a change in alleles over time happens every generation. Note that doesn't say it happens to individuals.

It's the change of the distribution of alleles in populations over time. Individuals do not evolve. The difference between an offspring and its parents is not evolution.

A molecule of helium colliding with the rubber skin of a balloon is not pressure.

This pixel here ^ is not the web page.