Human species 'may split in two'

Post Reply New Topic

Which ones? Homo sapiens sapiens have been around for about 250,000 years, but in the last 300,000 or so, homo erectus, homo neanderthalensis, homo cepranensis, homo floresiensis, homo rhodesiensis, homo sapiens idaltu, homo antecessor and homo heidelbergiensis have gone extinct. So if you look at it that way, there is a 8/9 chance of a human species disappearing within 300,000 years. That's not a very impressive record.

I was going to make a large post explaining why this is unlikely but I decided against it.

ah, thank gawd! I can converse intelligently with you then! So, since so many 'splits' off the various offshoots of 'humanity' another one wouldn't surprise me.

Merle

H. aspergiensis?

I think a question Dr. Curry should answer is if the planet is even going to be habitable in 100,000 years. My personal prediction is that we are going to have a type of "Gattaca' society in which the rich are going to design their children the same way they design their houses. What ever happened to nurture? A person could have the best genes but for what ever reason live way below his or her potential. And of course there are always those who society has deemed inferior but who have shown that they are much more than the remnants of their past and their genetic material.

I find it interesting that Curry correlates height in the equation. I know you Euros over their are getting taller then us Americanas but is height really everything? He kind of reminds of one of those hacks a couple hundred years ago who could predict your penchant for criminality by feeling the lumps on your head. Gimme a break the guy should stop ripping off Aldous Huxley's material.

I hope not... Let's face it, the pretty, but basicly braindead NT's breed faster than anyone else. ((Note: I'm not saying NT's are braindead, I'm talking about braindead NT's)) I'm sure you all know the type...

Too much can happen in 100,000 years to accurately predict. Sounds like a pipe dream. Decide what going to happen then deicide how long it is going to take.

Doesn't take into account many events that will happen in the future, so it's very dodgy to make such predictions.

Humanity will have colonised other planets by then, with many different social systems and new cultures.

It is already divided into subspecies, and has been since humankind spread out across various continents.

Different human subspecies evolved to adapt to different environments. Human psychological and basic physical characteristics remained the same.

There are certain mutations and special adaptations in every human subspecies/ethnic group. Why are Africans generally taller? Why do East Asians tend to be shorter? Why are Latinos physically different to say, Slavs?

im sure at some point that humans will change physically and mentally and have its own evolution.

Too many logical faults:

A) Humans of all sorts interbreed. It's what they do, and the author even acknoweledged this by saying skin colours will all be the same. Most people will breed with anything given the right circumstances, so I doubt even if a gap appeared it would last long.

B) IQ is very little to do with genetics. The brain forms neural connections and clusters based almost entirely on how its used - hence why you see idiot savants, genius taxi drivers and moron business executives. Simply using your brain makes it smarter because of the fact its based on a pattern recognition system, and seeing as thats the fundamental tenet of self-conscious life, I can't imagine that changing.

C) Where on earth is the correlation between mental and physical prowess? Most people who dedicate themselves to ahieve either tend to ignore the other, and their children usually react by ignoring them completely. Again, this lacks any form of coherent reasoning or logic.

My overall impression is this person has a sterotypical "99% sheep, 1% cool people like me" mentality, completely failing to take into account how much innate potential almost everyone has, and just felt like running with it to an extreme.

Precisely!

Once again, an explanation of the British Class System. Using Science again.

Species fail when they become specialized, and change comes. A major meteor strike, and most here will expend their effort putting the NFL back together. A good size meteor has hit every 25,000 years, the last 25,000 years ago. That is just on land, with four out of five hitting the ocean. World flood stories everywhere.

The survivors will be those who are confused by the culture, and have survived by adapting on the edge. While the masses gather to discuss getting TV networks up again, they will wander off looking for roots, berries, water, shelter. They are the type who do not like crowds, noise, and the social part of being around.

25,000 years ago there were three lines, H. Neanderthalenis, H. Erectus, and H. Sapien, one was new and adaptive. A big rock from the sky, a sudden change in the weather, and here we are.

I'm bored so here is my extensive explanation as to why this study is flawed.

#1. "Chins would recede, as a result of having to chew less on processed food."
This is known as the Lamarckian fallacy, e.g. the inheritance of acquired traits. The disuse of a body part will NOT make it disappear or become weaker. The human chin will only recede if we switched to a food source which gave a significant evolutionary advantage to those with shorter chins.

#2. "Racial differences will be ironed out by interbreeding, producing a uniform race of coffee-coloured people."
This is unlikely to occur even if we had perfectly random breeding. Under random conditions skin color fits a classic Bell curve shape going from pure-white to pure-black. While we might see more people with tans, we will never be able to get rid of skin color extremes.

#3. "There could also be health problems caused by reliance on medicine, resulting in weak immune systems. Preventing deaths would also help to preserve the genetic defects that cause cancer."
Cancer genes exist in the human population because most cancers occur way past the average age of reproduction. Evolution simply cannot weed out people who have cancer because by the time they have cancer they will already have spread their genes. The treatment of cancer does nothing to change this. His prediction also fails to take into account the effects of pre-natal screening which would put enormous selective pressure against the spread of deleterious genetic mutations.

#4. "Further into the future, sexual selection - being choosy about one's partner - was likely to create more and more genetic inequality, said Dr Curry."
The end result of sexual selection does not necessarily have to be a speciation event in which we end up with two species of humans. It could easily result in accentuation of certain exterior features.

#5. "However, Dr Curry warns, in 10,000 years time humans may have paid a genetic price for relying on technology."
Again, the use of technology will not weaken us genetically. He also makes the mistake of assuming that human beings will still exist in 10,000 years. Given current global trends it's a distinct possibility that we will not survive that long.

#6. "But in the nearer future, humans will evolve in 1,000 years into giants between 6ft and 7ft tall, he predicts, while life-spans will have extended to 120 years, Dr Curry claims."
We will not, on average, see an increase in either height, intelligence, musculature or physical beauty simply because the mechanisms necessary for natural selection to occur are not present for humans. Without either natural predators or competition for natural resources, everyone is free to make as many copies of themselves as they want. While a genetic upper-class may very well come to exist (or already exists), the amount of genetically unfit humans who are reproducing are enough to keep the average height, intelligence, etc. of the species as a whole at the same level.

Ethnic groups are only very mildly specialised to suit their climates. Different skin pigmentations and such for different temperatures and climates. The changes aren't enough to override human ability to forge new tools, methods, machines, social structures, anything within the human knowledge base and beyond if the resources and abilities are available. You might naturally have a slow metabolism if you live in cold or food-scarce areas. There is also, of course non-genetic psycological adaptation, which can change throughout a lifetime. No matter what the minor adaptations of certain subspecies, humankind has championed most climates, and can technologically, socially, and culturally change the odds against nature. Hot temperatures? Build suitable structures, and don less clothes. Wet, flood-prone environment? Profit from the fertile lands, and build flood measures.
Thus, any physical adaptations we have were mostly because of factors waaay back. We may start to physically adapt again, to suit our advanced technology, in perhaps two centuries, but only mildly. Additional fingers would be cool.

It sounds like Invader Zim, where everyone had to obey the tallests. It would be good to have more fingers, at least so you could have half a chance at those fighting game combos. It does seem like you need extra fingers to acheive one of those.