I just recently had a thought regarding evolution and humans; the whole idea of evolution is survival of the fittest, if you have a weakness or vulnerability in the wild you don't survive and your genes don't get carried on to the next generation, that's all nice and simple. But what about humans? Today we have great technology and medicine; excluding people in third world countries, almost every person will survive and have their genes pass on to the next generation. If humans were to carry on being successful for millions of years (i.e. we don't get blown up by an asteroid, run out of resources etc. ), In theory wouldn't that mean our evolution would stop?

Sorry this isn't the best place to post it, I didn't know where to put it.

Evolution in it's complete simplicity is just adaptation to an environment. Technically, technology is a form of human evolution.

We will adapt someway to our society. If the atmosphere gets more polluted, we may adopt some way to sort out the dust and carbon monoxide by some organ in our lung. If we keep eating McDonalds, maybe our body will remember to tell our brain "no!"

I suppose you are right about that; but physical evolution would still stop or at the very least slow down rapidly, right?



No wonder it takes millions of years.

Physical evolution will always continue regardless of how perfect we make society for ourselves. Our bodies may no longer see the need for certain organs and get rid of them, or may feel the need for other organs to help filter pollutants, for example.
I firmly believe that in a couple million years we will only have two toes, because as it is now we have the big toe and then the four toes which all fit into each other and act as one unit. Maybe because we become more and more dependant on computers we will adapt our fingers, they will become longer or shorter. Appearance will change to suit the needs of the opposite sex, we have become fully dependant on our eyes for physical attraction so we will become more and more pleasing to them.
Etc etc etc.

Well, in my opinion the fossils only show that there was change. How exactly do we know WHY the change happened >.>

People say that we've gotten taller due to evolution, but why? Why would short people die off? Is it natural selection? If not, was it adaption? Why'd we need to be taller?

I don't see how we're any taller. Most people around my area are short, my entire family is short, in asia the average male is pretty short as well and Asia is pretty damn populated, lol.

Maybe, but even that isn't the true process of evolution though, is it? Because the people with 'faults' will still pass on their genes. By the way, cool theory about the toes.


@Zeroshadow, I wouldn't say the change in height is an evolutionary result, I think it's much more likely that it's something which just happened as humans began to provide more for themselves and were able to take in a greater amount of food.


If you went back in time by just a few hundred years you would see a fairly big difference in height, if I remember right in the Middle Ages the average person was around 5'6" or so.

I'm 5'7" =D

Good for you.

- Pats himself on the back -

Once we get past physical evolution we will begin to work on more important pieces of our evolution. We have manipulated the physical world about as much as we can - we are beginning to work on "other" things, things that do not revolve around physicality, collectively as a race. We are more than our physical bodies. Once we truly accept that then another sort of evolution will occur. It has already started actually. It is a very exciting and scary time, truths exposed.....

it is survival of the fittest in a way bud! - I.E the fittest of genes, im sure if you have to choose a 'mate' then you would pick the leggy blonde with cracking norks (and a university degree) over a lass with only one leg, one eye and big scars over her body. So you are picking the best genes that you can pass on to the next generation.

Plus many people you have an illness cannot reproduce anyway (people with Downs)
Its why as well really attractive people tend to go out with actractive people and a study was shown that two poeple that say they are in love have simialr facual features.

Ah, I didn't think of it like that. Great reply, thanks for the response.

What is "fittest"?.
What are survival traits.?

Can you explain, in those terms, how people like Stephen Hawkings survive today, when in the past they would have dissappeared from the gene pool. Is the "Gaian" form of evolution working to give us what we need when we need it ?

Sometimes I wonder if we know anything at all.

In Hawkin's case, his intelligence gives him a value that gets other people to take care of his basic needs in return for them. Whereas intelligence wasn't as important (don't get me wrong, it's always been important, just not as important at the levels that Hawkin's thinks at), today intelligence is much prized, and therefore gives him an advantage over those in his situation who do not have his intelligence.

Since when did humans stop dying?

Imagine this scenario:

Someone has a gene that makes them very daring. Because of this they make a home-made parachute and jump off a bridge. They die, preventing them from passing on their genes of a dare devil. In the future there will be no more dare devils.

And bad drivers. In the future there will be no more terrible drivers because their terrible driving genes have left the human gene pool cause they died in car accidents.

The Darwin Awards are all about this. Read the Darwin Awards book and you will understand it perfecty.


We will never get past physical evolution. We have not manipulated the physical world as much as we can. If any other aspect of evolution was more important than the ones we have undergone and are undergoing, the human species would be extinct. We are nothing more than our physical bodies. If we did "accept" the false thaught that there is a non-physical type of evolution, it would not occur. Evolution does not occur because you want it to. I would like to be able to fly, but just because I want to, doesn't mean evolution will grant me this gift. How has it started? How is it an exciting and scary time?

The fact is, if there existed an important, non-physical form of evolution, we would now be communicating by thaught or something.


Actually, it was Hawkin's money that got him people to take care of his basic needs. If he was an intelligent and crippled bum living on the streets with no money, would his intelligence have saved him? Hmm... but now that I think about it, it was partly his intelligence that got him that money in the first place. Good point.

Umm, speak for you own sex only on that please.
My sex is still attracted by smell and sound as well.

'Wombat'
You bring to mind what my Sociology teacher said in college; the human race stopped evolving when we started protecting our weak and stupid.
Good catch.
Scary to.

What your sociology teacher said lacked in truth, it more than made up for in evil.


Not quite so. Physical attractiveness has all to do with health and ability to support offspring. This means that whatever indicates good health and good ability to take care of the offspring will be considered attractive. Let me explain briefly:

Males are generally attracted to young females with beautiful faces, large brests and a wide hip area. This is because:
Youth: if a young female has a child, she will be able to take care of that child for longer than an older female.
Face: a beautiful face indicates good health, meaning that that it is less likely for the female to die before the child is independant.
Breasts: large breasts mean that they are able to nourish a child well
Wide hips: this means that the female is more able to give light to the child.

Females are generally attracted to fit, strong men because these were generally the types that were able to provide for and protect their families. These days the male's financial and social condition are important factors.

As superficial as this is, it has kept the species going until today.

maybe you shouldn't exclude the third world countries, they may be evolving in a more 'natural' way than the more 'advanced' countries, I believe we are letting far too many 'defective' gene's to continue reproducing... I think we are weakening the gene pool...

did the horseshoe crab stop evolving?, it looks the same today as it did before the dinosaurs... or the coelacanth, or a number of other flora and fauna that appear unchanged over many millions of years...

it's been explained that these things found a 'niche' and haven't needed to change, perhaps we'll find a 'niche' too...

Where is the lack in truth?
You sounded like you knew what you were talking about here, but quickly proved otherwise.
I like smaller beasts for many reasons, but larger breasts are not indicative of better milk production.
She may well also be less experienced and less likely to be able to handle what comes.
She may well also be selfish.
Light? She may have more room for birthing and thus less chance of cephalo-pelvic-disproportionality, and no need of a C-section. But in olden days, those children would not have survived to even be considered.

Likely true, but unlikely to win you any dates.

How do we help the weak and stupid? Those as mentally or physically deficient enough to be helped in mental hospitals and clinics don't spread their genes anyway.


You may be right, I read this in a book. Your preference is not the general.

Experienced? Experienced in what? Practice child birth?

What do you mean selfish?

Umm... also read this in a book. But do you think that a woman with smaller hips is more able to deliver than a one with large ones?

Why so?

I have to admit. Alot of my attraction is from smell as well. A girls voice tone can do it too.

So attractiveness means healthy? I don't think so. Most guys and girls these days, you know, the younger ones, are attracted to only "hot" guys or girls. What happened there?

I think it's funny when a scientists tries to tell others about sex LOL. They think they know what everyone likes, when they have no clue. I know many many people who like big women. Is that a sign of health? Hell no.

Dolche Vita (sp) by Christian Dior brings me to my knees. I rarely smell it, but when I do, I literally cry. It is a long story...

They are "hot" because.. jeez, did you even read what I said? ><

It sounds to me you're just connecting the dots. Oh wait, let's try to fit this in with evolution! Guys are attracted to pretty faces because..... they're healthier!....


Well you know what? I know alot of guys who'd have sex with just about any girl as long as they're willing. I also know alot who are attracted to many different types of women. Some with long noses, some chubby, etc...

My mom prefers men with long noses and a small underbite... O.o

Yes, having sex with a girl and starting a family with one is different. Yes, our primal instincts make us look for girls with pretty faces because they are healthy and young. You would not want a sick partner with high chances of dying whilst or after giving birth would you? No, you would want a partner that can deliver your child safetly and take care of it.

The reason we find a girl pretty is because she displays these characteristics. If giant warts covering 90% of a morbidly obese, masculine, short body was good for the child, we would consider that hot.

Generally, men prefer "hot" women over the ones your friends like.

Personality plays a giant part in selection of a partner, but I am not talking about that. I am talking about the physical aspecst.

Just gimme a girl who can put up with me and I would be happy right about now!

You'd be surprised how many men like women who don't fit the norm "hot" category. And being pretty doesn't necessarily signify health.

Any links, evidence or anything else to prove this?

As I said, personality is a huge factor, and that is the reason that people choose other people who are not "hot".

I AM STATING WHY WE SEE HOT PEOPLE AS HOT!

Being pretty does not mean being healthy, but it is a sign that they are more able to bear our children. The only reason we see a woman as pretty is because they are physically the most fit to bear our children.

Yes, I think I have the book here somewhere, and I will post the information for you to view once I find it. You could also search it on google or something.

Please, I beg you to read all this before you throw more **** at me that I already addressed.

Don't forget that losers and basement dwelling nerds get little chance to breed. Rockstars and millionaires get to spread their wild oats, so I say that evolution is going well underway. I wouldn't say that 3rd world countries are not participating in the evolutionary race. Judging by their death rate and competitiveness within society, they are surely fit better than their 1st world cousins.

We humans would never stop changing and that because it`s impossible to get anything perfect ! As I see it in the future humans would be higher, weaker fysical, smarter and fatter. As the time goes we will also change pshycical. Because it`s a scientific fact that when you become smarter you also become even more crazy !

Why would we be weaker? Women love jocks! Why should we be smarter, dumb people have more kids than smart professionals! Why will we be fatter? We will be, but not because of genetics, but because we are gluttonous pigs. Are you a lamarkian?

About the jocks: women might love them for their social status rather than their compatability as a father etc..

It is more likely for a dumb person, and his dumb kids to die, because they are dumb, therefore removing themselves from the genetic pool. Dumb people get a worse job and worse salary and therefore are less capable of carrying a family and as a consequence, might not do so.

Again, since when have humans stopped dying?

In the game of competitive reproduction, it is the quantity that counts. The lack of parenting qualities mean that they seldom become parents, that in turn allows them greater chance to spread their "seed".

Dumb people do not die in the first world, they have plenty of subsidies, they can even afford cable! Worst job means that they breed only with their loser kind. Like attracts like! A dysfunctional family means more teenage pregnancy and less birth control. If you check any national statistic, its usually the lower income that has more children. Of course a lower income does not necessary mean stupid loser people....

Good points.

Stupid people die more than intelligent people around the world.
But if someone doesn't become a parent, how does he have greater chance of spreading his seed?

I'm not talking about personality!!!!

I'm talking about physical attraction. You'd be surprised how many guys are PHYSICALY attracted to girls who don't fit what you think most guys call "hot".


Seems to me as people throw things at you, you try to find a way to fit them in with evolution!


"Jocs.... umm... uhh.. it's their social status.. yeah, that's it!"

You don't have to be a parent to father many children, the onus is on the female to bear the young. By breeding earlier, dumbies have a faster breeding cycle than smarties, that is a dumby may be a grandad before forty, while a smarty may have to wait till he is in his 60. Wow! the dumby will overpower the smarties in no time at all! Still it may be debatable that a smarty remains viable as breeding stock even when its decreipt. Biologically a woman's chance to conceive drops to almost nil at 50. Therefore half of the equation is shaved off for the smarties, another point is that a smarty tends to remain more celibate, thus decreasing the male's chance of fertilising younger women. A dumby male is not so constrained, it will ahhh fertilize anything that is available

I`ve checked every single woordbook I can find and still I haven`t found out what lamarkian means so... what means lamarkian ?

It refers to Jean-Baptist Lamarck, an early proponent of evolution. One of his beliefs was in the inheritance of acquired traits, meaning that traits that a creature developed through their own actions would be passed on to their children (for instance, the giraffe would have developed it's long neck by the parents stretching up towards the highest leaves, thus passing on a slightly longer neck to their offspring, who in turn stretched more until you arrived at the giraffe neck we know today). Lamarkian generally is used somewhat negatively, to refer to an idea that has been long since replaced with more modern data, but is still used as if it was current.

I disagree with many things in this thread. I do believe that since we started to protect our weak and stupid, that we have stoppred evolving, at least in a positive way of evolving. Con sider this...
Generally, the smarter, better educated people are waiting until well into their twenties, or even later to have children. And then, they tend to have 1 or 2, perhaps 3. The people for whom working is not a way of life start reproducing at very early ages. As young as 14 in some countries and they push out kids for as long as they can. We are dumbing down our gene pool.
We are dumbing down our gene pool. In 50 or 100 years, we may be back in the caves.