Natural selection and humans.

[Flyingdebris]

humans rock hardcore.

We do what we want when we want. We have brains, guns, and bulldozers. We pwnxx0r nature because we can get away with it.

Wait a few years, probably within our lifetime or soon after, we'll screw up big and something will have to change. Me, i'm hoping for post apocalyptic future mad max style. As for now, live it up while you can.

 

[bam23]

It will be George Bush's fault.

 

[15357]

ktimekiller, I just felt the need to remind you that we are also a product of natural selection. If we really do create a huge imbalance in nature, we will go exctinct by our own fault and it will all sort itself out.



Are you telling me that the smarter a species is the better adapted it is at surviving?

Intelligence is one path of evolution, trunks are another (elephants), long necks yet another (giraffes). Undoubtedly, intelligence has proved to be the most successful path, but it is by far the one that all species follow. Just look at the exctinct coelacanth (which I chose because its exctintion has no relation to humans), and now take the absolutely flourshing earthworm (the majority of world population, surpassing humans and even ants). Which one do you think was smarter? The fish or the stringy bit of flesh which, may I remind you, can be split in half and still survive?

We got somehow so lucky that we adapted faster and had better brains.

humans rock hardcore.

We do what we want when we want. We have brains, guns, and bulldozers. We pwnxx0r nature because we can get away with it.

Wait a few years, probably within our lifetime or soon after, we'll screw up big and something will have to change. Me, i'm hoping for post apocalyptic future mad max style. As for now, live it up while you can.

Me too... Kind of....


Actually, the goverment should exist, only if its a little bit.

 

[Raziaar]

We got somehow so lucky that we adapted faster and had better brains.

OUR controller had some WICKED micromanagement skills, that allowed him to focus as much time and energy as he could on technological research advance for our civilization.



Oops. too much Civ 3 :E

 

[TheSomeone]

We got somehow so lucky that we adapted faster and had better brains.

Yuu don't understand... better brains have nothing to do with how much more adapted we are. Earthworms aren't more adapted than coelacanths because they have better brains.

 

[15357]

Yuu don't understand... better brains have nothing to do with how much more adapted we are. Earthworms aren't more adapted than coelacanths because they have better brains.

We got so lucky that we adapted faster.

 

[TheSomeone]

We got so lucky that we adapted faster.

Alright, forget it.

 

[Dog--]

Ok, If the dinosaurs did not die out, Humans would be the lesser species, I read somewhere, I forgot where, That there was a type of dinosaur that had the cranial size much much larger than all of its brother dinasaurs, and if it had another 10 million years to evolve (Dino's died out 65 million years ago remember) It would be as smart as humans are today, and that would be 55 million years ago, imagine if they lived until today? If they had ANOTHER 55 millin years to evolve? They would be like hundreds of millions of years ahead of humans, and that would just be the year 2000! I'm glad the dino's died out, Or this creature would have made like time machines and stuff like that!

 

[15357]

Alright, forget it.

6char

 

[ailevation]

We are here by luck. Just like how the solar system was, our planet and all that crap.

I mean cats could have been the smartest things around.

 

[Greatgat]

Ok, If the dinosaurs did not die out, Humans would be the lesser species, I read somewhere, I forgot where, That there was a type of dinosaur that had the cranial size much much larger than all of its brother dinasaurs, and if it had another 10 million years to evolve (Dino's died out 65 million years ago remember) It would be as smart as humans are today, and that would be 55 million years ago, imagine if they lived until today? If they had ANOTHER 55 millin years to evolve? They would be like hundreds of millions of years ahead of humans, and that would just be the year 2000! I'm glad the dino's died out, Or this creature would have made like time machines and stuff like that!

And I think I also read somewhere that it's not the cranial size that matters, it's the complexity. For instance, we may have the same cranial size as those dino's (don't remember which), but with the overlapping folds and whirls of our brains, the surface area of our brains far surpassses anything even close to what has appeared in the past. Scientists are puzzled (of course) why more emphasis is put upon the area of our cerubellums than shear size, but it does appear to be the case as far as they can tell.

Just one of those wierd psychological things we may not understand for quite some time.

 

[ríomhaire]

ktimekiller, do you think we should plug Stephen Hawkings out and leave him to rot?

 

[Insano]

Ok, If the dinosaurs did not die out, Humans would be the lesser species, I read somewhere, I forgot where, That there was a type of dinosaur that had the cranial size much much larger than all of its brother dinasaurs, and if it had another 10 million years to evolve (Dino's died out 65 million years ago remember) It would be as smart as humans are today, and that would be 55 million years ago, imagine if they lived until today? If they had ANOTHER 55 millin years to evolve? They would be like hundreds of millions of years ahead of humans, and that would just be the year 2000! I'm glad the dino's died out, Or this creature would have made like time machines and stuff like that!

You're taking it a bit too far there

 

[Danimal]

I sometimes think that humans are a bit of a parasite to the Earth.

The planet is our host, we live off it's natural resources then try to move to Mars once it's dead.

 

[Skaadi]

Do I have to recite what Smith said in the Matrix?

 

[jabberwock95]

Humans have replaced Natural Selection with technology (for the most part).

Take the appendix. If everyone who got appendicitus died, within a few million years we might not have appendixes any more. As it is, they simply get treatment and go on to pass their appendixy genes on to others.

I think this replacement is a good thing. Look at the timescale. If we arent adapted to live at the north pole, whats quicker? Stay there and die until you develop fur coats in a couple of hundred thousand years, or trek over to Marks and Spencer and buy up a few 'artic survival' coats.

 

[Tollbooth Willie]

The advantage we developed, above and beyond any amount of claws, teeth, flexibility, etc., is our cognitive functions. Social functions and language to top this off make us, well, the top of the heap. Sure, every once in a while some goofball gets taken by an :a) lion, b) polar bear, c) school of pirahna d) Headcrabs, but if you really didn't want to be consumed by another animal, it wouldn't be a problem. We have only stemmed natural selection - injected some artificial selection perhaps, but we absolutely have not stepped away from it. Is the gene pool becoming contaminated as we allow imperfect genes to remain? Yep. Is that a bad thing? Perhaps. Will it be the downfall of the race? Nope. If things get so bad that the remaining human population is worried about this, they'll do something about it. Now, we don't have to, and we have the luxury of catering to our conscience. We're still coming to equilibrium with our success as a species. If we don't fix things ourselves, nature will. What happens when you put a very successful bacteria in a petri dish with limited (yet renewable) resources? It'll initially grow tremendously fast (as we are now) and reach an equilibrium point and stay there. I don't think we've reached that point yet (debatable), but I think "parasite" is just a point of view. (potāto, potäto). Do you consider plant life to be parasitic? All life strives towards this equilibrium - just because we do it best doesn't mean it's bad. (Although it'll be bad if you're alive when we've overshot the equilibrium and are up for some selection yourself), but the concept itself isn't bad.

We are screwed.:cheers:

 

[kirovman]

Humans have replaced Natural Selection with technology (for the most part).

Take the appendix. If everyone who got appendicitus died, within a few million years we might not have appendixes any more. As it is, they simply get treatment and go on to pass their appendixy genes on to others.

About the appendixy thing, perhaps they would have procreated before the appendix problems?

 

[TheSomeone]

About the appendixy thing, perhaps they would have procreated before the appendix problems?

Yeah, but there would still be a lesser probability that they would, especially since lot's of children get it, and it would definitly have an impact over large periods of time.

 

[kirovman]

Yeah, but there would still be a lesser probability that they would, especially since lot's of children get it, and it would definitly have an impact over large periods of time.

Well, true that.

Anyway, we'll probably be engineering our own genes and hence our own evolution eventually.

 

[Adabiviak]

...we are potentially screwed, if something happens that takes away all of our technology. Possible, but if that happens, we'll have bigger problems.

If dinosaurs were alive today, we'd be living differently to accomodate them ever since we began building homes. If dinosaurs suddenly popped into existence, and I mean an entire population of dinosaurs popped into existence today, do you think the human race would die, or do you think, (as with other big predators) we'd handle them, probably drop their numbers to something that can be managed in a zoo or wildlife refuge?

 

[kirovman]

I think we don't have a problem with less intelligent creatures. We're resourceful enough, in general, to outwit dinosaurs (for example) despite being weaker and slower.

Don't forget, if you don't move, the T-Rex can't see you!
Unfortunately, if you're a Lawyer, on the toilet, in a hut, they can see you all too well

Sorry Angry Lawyer

 

[Tollbooth Willie]

I think we don't have a problem with less intelligent creatures. We're resourceful enough, in general, to outwit dinosaurs (for example) despite being weaker and slower.

Don't forget, if you don't move, the T-Rex can't see you!
Unfortunately, if you're a Lawyer, on the toilet, in a hut, they can see you all too well

Sorry Angry Lawyer

Most people would probably be big enough dumbasses to say "BOMB THEM!" which would show the potential intelligence of the average humans these days, as I have come to realise finally.

My plan:leave 'em alone and cope with them.....otherwise dumbasses will eventually drive them to extinction, like the Dodo and Carrier Pigeons, due to overhunting etc.

 

[Dan]

The whole idea of using Social Darwinism to justify eugenics is simply poor logic and a lack of understanding of what natural selection means. Hitler used it to justify improving the Arian race. Although that is somewhat besides the point. natural selection means just that, NATURAL. If something is unfit to exist in the world, then it won't exist.

In the case of handycapped people, you are saying that YOU THINK they are unfit to exist. This is different than them actually not being able to survive, which they clearly have been doing for centuries in modern societies. And the fact that these same societies which support the handicapped and disabled continue to grow and pretty much dominate the world shows that it does not have a negative effect either. As opposed to the Third Reich which tried to cull "unfit" people and was ultimately destroyed, partially because of their perceived moral wrongdoings.

And how do you get to define who is unfit to survive? You probably wouldn't be doing so well right now if it weren't for the infrastructure of the society that supports you. Probably 80% of the world couldn't survive without the general organization which we have developed. Would you have us try to go back to being cave men, smashing eachother over the head until only the best head smashers are alive? Or should we live like Chinese peasantry?

If the time ever comes where society collapses and disease spreads everywhere or something like that, then we will have much harsher rules for selection, and perhaps then, the weaker members of society might perish. But having more people around until that point is an advantage rather than a disadvantage. Because farming and law and society in general remove many of the pressures of natural selection, the variation of the human gene is allowed to grow with fewer constraints. If it comes down to crunch time, it might be those fringe genes which are able to survive, or resist certain diseases.

Natural selection works itself out, it doesn't need your help. Just leave things be.