Read Latest Entries..: (Post #21) by Rap_Speedy on Nov 25 2006, 03:46 PM. (Line Breaks Removed)
QUOTE *I have a theory about the next evolution of *person* sapiens (correct terminology for humans). Well actually 3 theories.Theory one:Humans will not evolve one more time before the end of the world. But instead deevolve because we have had it in the spot light for far to long. *person* sapiens have been the most dominent creatures on the planet.Theory two:Humans have evolve thousands of times... read more.
I have a theory about the next evolution of *person* sapiens (correct terminology for humans). Well actually 3 theories.
Theory one:
Humans will not evolve one more time before the end of the world. But instead deevolve because we have had it in the spot light for far to long. *person* sapiens have been the most dominent creatures on the planet.
Theory two:
Humans have evolve thousands of times already. Every time we get smarter and smarter and make a great stride in any field whether it is Science (mostly science though) to Language Arts. Like the first human in space we evolve enough to get the inteligence of building a rocket or space craft that will go in space.
Theory three:
Humans will be wipped out before we have a chance to evolve. Like the dinosaurs lay live as the dominent creatures of the planet for millions of years. We are going to be the dominent creatures of the planet for millions of years too then be wipped out. Mostly by the climate changing far to fast for humans to adapt too.
nehmanator333: Evolution is indeed a theory. It hasn't been proven decisively, though it has much evidence towards it (I myself believe in evolution, all the way).
MTGaming:
Theory no. 1 I'm not sure what you mean about humans having "it ... in the spot light." Perhaps you mean that because humans have been the dominant species on the planet for so long, that we shall collectively be dethroned, so to speak, to be replaced by some other species. If that's truly what you're saying, I don't agree. Firstly, there has to be another species capable of overpowering h o m o sapiens (pardon the spacing, but the filters are cruel and unusual). This species would obviously have to possess immense amounts of intelligence. As of right now, the most intelligent creatures on the planet, next to humans, are creatures such as dolphins, whales, and chimpanzees—none of which seem ambitious enough to claim dominion over the earth. If you're saying that humans are bound for deevolution, that is highly unlikely, regardless of species or situation. I agree with you on the point that humans may regress, but not deevolve, and only insofar as our physical stature. As you say in your second theory, humans have progressed in achievement and cognitive skills, so I think it's fairly safe to assume that the cerebral facet of human evolution will continue it's trend, don't you?
Theory no. 2 I can't seem to find what the theoretical part of your statements is. It sounds like you're saying that humans are always evolving, and they are always evolving to higher ranks of intelligence.—Sounds pretty solid to me.
Theory no. 3 The fundamental problem here is that dinosaurs weren't as powerful as humans. Dinosaurs were the dominant species because they were the best adapted to their environment, for evolution had been very kind to them. Humans are different in that if we were stripped of our societies and higher intelligence, we wouldn't survive in the wild nearly as well; we maintain any superiority through our technological and social sophistication. We aren't as well developed to our environment, and it's not our trend to adapt to the environment, rather, it's our trend to adapt the environment to ourselves. Right now there is global warming, the source of which is controversial. No matter what the source, chances are, at our current rate of technological advancement, that by the time that global warming would have been a serious problem, we'll have developed technology to counteract the effects, whether eliminating global warming altogether or devising new tools to survive on an ecologically unsound planet. As long as we continue to make advancements like we have been, our dominance is quite likely to continue.
Something you all failed to mention is that human evolution seems to be leading towards a combination of a biological and technological synthesis.
Humans have been using technology to alter their own bodies, to make themselves faster, smarter, quicker, and better adapt for centuries. Technology is now evolving at such a rapid pace in this century that there are real fears about technology getting out of hand. Humans augmenting their bodies with mechanical parts is around the bend, people that have lost body parts will soon start replacing those parts with mechanical parts. Due to the advancement of technology human beings genetically altering their body is not that far off. Imagine a world where people can design their babies. Then imagine a world where you can design your own body to be whatever you like.
Human beings will be able to replace organic parts with mechanical parts and alter their own biology. The future that is coming is one where humans if allowed by law or if not done illegally will be able to alter themselves into becoming some kind of new lifeform. This is an uncharted territory that we are venturing towards.
Something you all failed to mention is that human evolution seems to be leading towards a combination of a biological and technological synthesis.
Humans have been using technology to alter their own bodies, to make themselves faster, smarter, quicker, and better adapt for centuries. Technology is now evolving at such a rapid pace in this century that there are real fears about technology getting out of hand. Humans augmenting their bodies with mechanical parts is around the bend, people that have lost body parts will soon start replacing those parts with mechanical parts. Due to the advancement of technology human beings genetically altering their body is not that far off. Imagine a world where people can design their babies. Then imagine a world where you can design your own body to be whatever you like.
Human beings will be able to replace organic parts with mechanical parts and alter their own biology. The future that is coming is one where humans if allowed by law or if not done illegally will be able to alter themselves into becoming some kind of new lifeform. This is an uncharted territory that we are venturing towards.
well...thats not really evolution, because humans will be born being normal but then can alter themselves later.
I honestly think that we will not evolve anymore. Evolution is based on a part of a species being killed because they could'nt adapt or weren't fast enough to outrun predators, or anything like that. The threat of being killed is now gone. All of those that normally can't adapt to the environment have clothing, or shelter to shield them from the elements. People who wouldn't be able to outrun a predator no longer have the need to run from a predator because they have weapons or a vehicle or there are no predators to run from. So all of the people that are supposed to be killed off so that the species can evolve... don't. So the human species in my mind will stay the same, in looks and natural ability.
well...thats not really evolution, because humans will be born being normal but then can alter themselves later.
I honestly think that we will not evolve anymore. Evolution is based on a part of a species being killed because they could'nt adapt or weren't fast enough to outrun predators, or anything like that. The threat of being killed is now gone. All of those that normally can't adapt to the environment have clothing, or shelter to shield them from the elements. People who wouldn't be able to outrun a predator no longer have the need to run from a predator because they have weapons or a vehicle or there are no predators to run from. So all of the people that are supposed to be killed off so that the species can evolve... don't. So the human species in my mind will stay the same, in looks and natural ability.
Yes, but then humans that alter themselves so much that they become a new lifeform, may then become capable of having children that are not human but instead this new lifeform.
Humans are still evolving naturally to a degree though, their bodies are still changing according to the climate and temperature but as you said the evolution of current man is much more lax and different from that of their ancestors. However war, natural distasters, and global warming may change modern man potentially destroying modern societies and plunging the world into a dark age. If this were to occur humans living on different parts of the earth may then begin to evolve differently into new separate and diverse species.
True evolution takes countless generations of mutation. Humans haven't even been around long enough for the races to become seperate species. And it will never happen cause we move around and mix 2 much which is healthy. It will take at least 300 thousand years of consistency in where we live to truly evolve. Man is too impatient though and will find a way to manipulate the process and choose evolutionarily how we will change. which some members of society will reject. Thus creating different kinds of humans. That is biological, there will also be cybernetic evolution the more we integrate nano technologic and bionics into our bodies and existence. And space travel might affect our evolution if we choose to migrate to another planet it make take a few hundred thousands years of space travel to get to that planet. And a few hundred or thousand of generations of living in space. Hell look at dogs, We have chosen there evolution and so far..... they are no more than wolves with the violence bred out of them. But they are wolves genetically none the less. and they live 1 tenth our life span. If we evolve anytime soon it will be of our doing. Its either that or wait another few hundred thousand years lol.
As Xugal said, evolution is the improvement of a species through multiple genetic mutations - cyborg inplants wouldn't be evolution because it wouldn't be a trait that would pass on to one's offspring.
As for humans constantly evolving, no, since h o m o sapien first evolved (if you believe in evolution, that is), there has been no change. True, we've acquired knowledge, but knowledge in itself does not constitute evolution. We're still the same species and are no smarter than our ancestors (perhaps even a little dumber due to incest, genetic breakdown, etc.). Better educated, maybe, but not necessarily smarter (and the education comment is in debate as far as the US education system goes).
Humans have not physically changed pretty much since we started walking upright. This is fact. It has been shown that our brains have not changed since the caveman days. The way we use it has.
One generation learns something new and passes it on to the next generation. Though we are technically not genetically passing it along, it is still being passed. The definition of evolution should include this.
To expand a bit more...
The last "evolutionary" change in humans was when we started walking upright. For the last 20 or so years though, we have undergone a different type of evolution.
The information age has transformed humans. the next evolution of human beings will be done using technology as an enabler. For example, when virtual reality comes and we are all plugged into a "matrix" like environment, we are no longer humans in the traditional sense. We "evolve" to a new form of life, that is being played out only in our minds.
In this way, humans physically will not change but they will harness technology to enable them to move into another stage of evolution.
This is just one possibility. There are many more. Look at genetic engineering. Technology and the information age (human genome project) has allowed humans to understand what we are made of and how we are built. Right now, if we can genetically modify people... or "evolve" them to something different.
But then there is, of course, the ethical questions that come along with that. How does one know that giving people an extra arm is actually the way we should go? Isn't genetically modifying people to be smarter, faster, stronger, etc. cheating to a degree? What about those who were born without modifications? They would become like retards compared to enhanced humans, forcing them do to menial tasks as the genetically superior people took on the jobs of intellectual value. The list goes on.
* I have a theory about the next evolution of *person* sapiens (correct terminology for humans). Well actually 3 theories.
Theory one: Humans will not evolve one more time before the end of the world. But instead deevolve because we have had it in the spot light for far to long. *person* sapiens have been the most dominent creatures on the planet.
Theory two: Humans have evolve thousands of times already. Every time we get smarter and smarter and make a great stride in any field whether it is Science (mostly science though) to Language Arts. Like the first human in space we evolve enough to get the inteligence of building a rocket or space craft that will go in space.
Theory three: Humans will be wipped out before we have a chance to evolve. Like the dinosaurs lay live as the dominent creatures of the planet for millions of years. We are going to be the dominent creatures of the planet for millions of years too then be wipped out. Mostly by the climate changing far to fast for humans to adapt too.
1- Sorry I didn't notice this topic before, so I will respond to the original post first.
2- We again in cycle. The poster must define what he/she means by "evolution" and what the poster means by "theory". Is "theory" the scientific theory or any hypothesis or direction. I guess the poster uses "theory" in public definition i.e. the second option up. That all these three theories are suggestion, hypotheses or thought. Then there are long way to prove these these hypotheses to become theory [I will quote from some previous postings in this forum before:] QUOTE - The hypothesis or the theory in the common meaning will be considered scientific theory if it satisfied many requirements among them:
logically "OR" Empirically tested and based upon Controlled, Repeated Experiments . A theory which cannot be tested empirically is useless for researchers.
lead to predictions or reproductions that are testable. A theory which has not made any actually verified predictions might prove useful in the future when its predictions are verified, but not currently. A theory which cannot provide reproductions (to utilise present information or ideas to infer or explain a past event or state of affairs) may also be useful in the future, but not currently. If a theory's results cannot be reproduced, it is impossible to determine if those results were ever actually valid (rather than the result of error or fraud).
falsifiable (i.e., cases must exist in which the theory can be imagined to be invalid). For example saying "Things fall down" will be invalid if we find an object fall up. When a theory is not falsifiable, it is impossible to tell if it is true or not, and thus it won't be possible to correct it via experimentation. & Falsifiable
So one important requirement to be a theory is to help us to predict future events. For example When we launch a satellite we know from our theories where it will be after 2 days for example or when it will arrive to its planned position.
3- There are many types of evolution. So it is better to count the types of the evolution. . There are six types of evolution in my accumulated knowledge base from many sources]: I will quote them from my previous posting: QUOTE There are 6 types of evolution known to me:
(i) Cosmic Evolution (the origin of space, time, matter and energy from nothing, there are 5 different theories competing . Each has its strength or weakness. The famous one the "big bang" theory does not address the major question, "where did everything come from?" . How did this explosion cause order, while every explosion causes only disorder and dist ructions? Also the Big Bang also violates two out of three Laws of Thermodynamics);
(ii) Chemical Evolution:(the development of the higher elements from hydrogen- assumptions);
iii) Stellar and Planetary Evolution (the origin of stars and planets amount to anything more than "fairy tales," and imagination has no part in real science);
iv) Organic Evolution (the origin of organic life. Spontaneous Generation as the Origin of Life, despite the apparent contradiction to empirical science). Francesco Reid and Louis Pasteur have succeeded in disproving Spontaneous Generation long time ago.
(v) Macro Evolution (Large-scale, or major changes from one kind of life form to another (assumption) involving innovations in structure or body plan, or new organs. Nothing approved that happen and is still lack of transitional fossils in the fossil record, and the harmful trend of genetic mutation. ,
(vi) Micro Evolution (small-scale, or minor changes and adaptations within a population of life forms i.e. the variation within the kinds). This observed and documented. It does not result in leaps between one kind of life form and another, but in a wide variation of types of this same form. Although we observe many varieties within the group, a finch remains a finch, a virus a virus, a moth a moth, etc. We are familiar with breeding process to produce various kinds of horses, cows, cheep, dogs, cats,...etc.. The "variation within a kind" is what Darwin observed in the mid-1800's, and what we still observe today... Also We all know and recognise the viruses and bacteria development as well as the development of the defence system But no scientist has ever seen a host animal develop a new defence mechanism causing it to evolve into a higher life-from; similarly, no one has ever witnessed a parasite develop a new, improved attack method that ultimately resulted in its transformation into a new species. (macro evolution if occurred) .
4- How can the poster proves the first theory or hypothesis? what he/she means by "human evolution"?. What he/she means by "the end of the world". Is that what some religions are teaching. I don't think there are any scientific point for the "end of the world"
5- Also from where that human be characterised as "the most dominant creatures on the planet. "?
6- In what called theory two[i.e. hypothesis 2, I can not tolerate calling it theory]: "Humans have evolve thousands of times already". From where came "human evolved these many times?"
7- Getting smarter or the discoveries in science , exploration of space, building rockets, launching satellites, landing on the moon, sending robots to some planets can not be considered as "evolution". They are achievements, conclusions, deduction or engineering of our accumulated knowledge. They are mutual progress using our brains given to us and advantage knowledge stored in our brain or documented in books, magazines, research, theses etc.... Deduction theory from previous theories is not evolution but deductions.
8- Theory three or hypothesis 3 is an imagination that the Human will be wiped up "Humans will be wiped out before we have a chance to evolve. Like the dinosaurs lay live as the dominant creatures of the planet for millions of years." It is the poster who think that i.e it is his/her belief., expectation or imagination. .
I have a theory about the next evolution of *person* sapiens (correct terminology for humans). Well actually 3 theories.
Theory one: Humans will not evolve one more time before the end of the world. But instead deevolve because we have had it in the spot light for far to long. *person* sapiens have been the most dominent creatures on the planet.
Theory two: Humans have evolve thousands of times already. Every time we get smarter and smarter and make a great stride in any field whether it is Science (mostly science though) to Language Arts. Like the first human in space we evolve enough to get the inteligence of building a rocket or space craft that will go in space.
Theory three: Humans will be wipped out before we have a chance to evolve. Like the dinosaurs lay live as the dominent creatures of the planet for millions of years. We are going to be the dominent creatures of the planet for millions of years too then be wipped out. Mostly by the climate changing far to fast for humans to adapt too.
1- Sorry I didn't notice this topic before, so I will respond to the original post first.
2- We again in cycle. The poster must define what he/she means by "evolution" and what the poster means by "theory". Is "theory" the scientific theory or any hypothesis or direction. I guess the poster uses "theory" in public definition i.e. the second option up. That all these three theories are suggestion, hypotheses or thought. Then there are long way to prove these these hypotheses to become theory [I will quote from some previous postings in this forum before:]
QUOTE
- The hypothesis or the theory in the common meaning will be considered scientific theory if it satisfied many requirements among them:
logically "OR" Empirically tested and based upon Controlled, Repeated Experiments . A theory which cannot be tested empirically is useless for researchers.
lead to predictions or reproductions that are testable. A theory which has not made any actually verified predictions might prove useful in the future when its predictions are verified, but not currently. A theory which cannot provide reproductions (to utilise present information or ideas to infer or explain a past event or state of affairs) may also be useful in the future, but not currently. If a theory's results cannot be reproduced, it is impossible to determine if those results were ever actually valid (rather than the result of error or fraud).
falsifiable (i.e., cases must exist in which the theory can be imagined to be invalid). For example saying "Things fall down" will be invalid if we find an object fall up. When a theory is not falsifiable, it is impossible to tell if it is true or not, and thus it won't be possible to correct it via experimentation. & Falsifiable
So one important requirement to be a theory is to help us to predict future events. For example When we launch a satellite we know from our theories where it will be after 2 days for example or when it will arrive to its planned position.
3- There are many types of evolution. So it is better to count the types of the evolution. . There are six types of evolution in my accumulated knowledge base from many sources]: I will quote them from my previous posting:
QUOTE
There are 6 types of evolution known to me:
(i) Cosmic Evolution (the origin of space, time, matter and energy from nothing, there are 5 different theories competing . Each has its strength or weakness. The famous one the "big bang" theory does not address the major question, "where did everything come from?" . How did this explosion cause order, while every explosion causes only disorder and dist ructions? Also the Big Bang also violates two out of three Laws of Thermodynamics);
(ii) Chemical Evolution:(the development of the higher elements from hydrogen- assumptions);
iii) Stellar and Planetary Evolution (the origin of stars and planets amount to anything more than "fairy tales," and imagination has no part in real science);
iv) Organic Evolution (the origin of organic life. Spontaneous Generation as the Origin of Life, despite the apparent contradiction to empirical science). Francesco Reid and Louis Pasteur have succeeded in disproving Spontaneous Generation long time ago.
(v) Macro Evolution (Large-scale, or major changes from one kind of life form to another (assumption) involving innovations in structure or body plan, or new organs. Nothing approved that happen and is still lack of transitional fossils in the fossil record, and the harmful trend of genetic mutation. ,
(vi) Micro Evolution (small-scale, or minor changes and adaptations within a population of life forms i.e. the variation within the kinds). This observed and documented. It does not result in leaps between one kind of life form and another, but in a wide variation of types of this same form. Although we observe many varieties within the group, a finch remains a finch, a virus a virus, a moth a moth, etc. We are familiar with breeding process to produce various kinds of horses, cows, cheep, dogs, cats,...etc.. The "variation within a kind" is what Darwin observed in the mid-1800's, and what we still observe today... Also We all know and recognise the viruses and bacteria development as well as the development of the defence system But no scientist has ever seen a host animal develop a new defence mechanism causing it to evolve into a higher life-from; similarly, no one has ever witnessed a parasite develop a new, improved attack method that ultimately resulted in its transformation into a new species. (macro evolution if occurred) .
4- How can the poster proves the first theory or hypothesis? what he/she means by "human evolution"?. What he/she means by "the end of the world". Is that what some religions are teaching. I don't think there are any scientific point for the "end of the world"
5- Also from where that human be characterised as "the most dominant creatures on the planet. "?
6- In what called theory two[i.e. hypothesis 2, I can not tolerate calling it theory]: "Humans have evolve thousands of times already". From where came "human evolved these many times?"
7- Getting smarter or the discoveries in science , exploration of space, building rockets, launching satellites, landing on the moon, sending robots to some planets can not be considered as "evolution". They are achievements, conclusions, deduction or engineering of our accumulated knowledge. They are mutual progress using our brains given to us and advantage knowledge stored in our brain or documented in books, magazines, research, theses etc.... Deduction theory from previous theories is not evolution but deductions.
8- Theory three or hypothesis 3 is an imagination that the Human will be wiped up "Humans will be wiped out before we have a chance to evolve. Like the dinosaurs lay live as the dominant creatures of the planet for millions of years." It is the poster who think that i.e it is his/her belief., expectation or imagination. .
i think you may be correct in that we could devolve. I would hope that we are going to evolve a few more times. I dont know how but i would like to believe we will. Reality steps in though and i see us blowing the hell out of eachother in some war or something senseless because we cannot treat each other with respect. There will always be one idiot out there who is hellbent on taking over the world or someone who cannot just settle for what they have and want more. We are destroying the world and we all know it since we see the ice caps melting and we even know what is causing it. But are we truly doing anything about it? No! Until we actually stop using oil and go to something that is plentyfull and easy to produce we will continue killing ourselves. But nobody is taking any real action to stop it. I find it hard to believe that the United States and other countries with all it technological prowess cannot put in place an alternative to todays oil. I used to drive a car that got 58 miles a gallon. That car is now off the market and youd be lucky to find one that gets anything close to it now. Thats truly sad.
Now, all of you who comented evolution bring *person* sapiens as the only one who can evolve. All you thought of is evolution of yourself or how can you be stronger, faster, smarter. Well i think that is not the point of evolution. I think that evolution is process that lasts from the begining of the universe. All of nature as it egzists now in our minds is what "evolved" from big bang.
So what do you think the next step is?
I think that we should divide our evolution in two ways.
1. Evolution that we can be part of. To be more precise, it is combining all of our knowlege into making US more powerfull (whatever it would me from mechanical implants, to Matrix enviroment)
2. Evolution that we dont want to be part of. End of the world!!! Who wants to be here when it happens? Nobody. Even the Pope it self would split if he would have a chance.
Both of these will happen sooner or later, and the point is not to be "afraid" of any version of events. When the time comes we will be ready.
Evolution is deeply connected to survival. From nature who wants to survive our exploatation, from us who want to survive in nature.
We are all tested on evolution every day and we don't even realize that. Some samples: 1. How can we encounter an alien race when we hate each other beacouse of the color of our skin? 2. Imagine that Aliens really come here and that they are all gay that would be awsome...
Evolution is nothing more than giving the best from your self every day!!!
I have a theory about the next evolution of *person* sapiens (correct terminology for humans). Well actually 3 theories.
Theory one:
Humans will not evolve one more time before the end of the world. But instead deevolve because we have had it in the spot light for far to long. *person* sapiens have been the most dominent creatures on the planet.
Theory two:
Humans have evolve thousands of times already. Every time we get smarter and smarter and make a great stride in any field whether it is Science (mostly science though) to Language Arts. Like the first human in space we evolve enough to get the inteligence of building a rocket or space craft that will go in space.
Theory three:
Humans will be wipped out before we have a chance to evolve. Like the dinosaurs lay live as the dominent creatures of the planet for millions of years. We are going to be the dominent creatures of the planet for millions of years too then be wipped out. Mostly by the climate changing far to fast for humans to adapt too.
isnt theory one and three the same? but i think that we will evolve into something super-human, or super-natural, whichever. We are supernatural to apes so what we evolve into will be super-natural (human) to what we presently are. What causes evolution? is it just one mutation on someone who has babies, who has babies, and so on and so forth? cause that would take millions of years, so who knows? there may not even be another big change before we are all killed. well thats a theory. have fun with this topic everyone
I'd like to first start out by writing a little about this topic. First off, if you didn’t
read this topic ALL THE WAY THROUGH, DO NOT EVEN THINK ABOUT POSTING BELOW. Secondly, I’m sure
what I’m about to write here has probably been thought up by many scientists and mathematicians, but
I would like to emphasize I did not get these theories anywhere. I personally came up with every
single one of them through my own logic. I have been thinking of this for 3 years and a few months
ago decided that I was going to post it on trap17, so here I am. This post is so si....
Has it ever occurred to you that someone, somewhere knows something you don't and they're
having a good time at your expense? Call it conspiracy theory or whatnot but I have always had the
nagging feeling that shaving creams and/or after-shave lotions might have hair growth stimulants. If
it were so, there is nothing we consumers could do about it since, after all, they never were
supposed to inhibit hair growth nor did they advertise doing so. Still, it is a pretty darned smart
way to ensure that their customers will keep on buying their products. To us, they a....
Oil is a tremendous commodity. The few oil barons who have dominion over the entire earth's oil
supply are making exorbitant amounts of money at the expense of the rest of the world's
population. As the scarcity of oil rises, so does the price of oil. The capitalist system is such
that the oil goes to the highest bidder; that is, if China is willing to pay $70 a barrel whereas
the United States is willing only to pay $65, then the oil company is most benefitted by selling the
oil to China. Other nations, who need oil as well, are forced to offer greater sums ....
that would be awsome...