Is Natural Selection dead for humans?
0 views
Skip to first unread message
Clogtowner
Nov 28, 2009, 10:47:12 AM11/28/09
to Memphis Freethought Alliance Public Forum
Hi y'all - here is an interesting article which poses the possibility
of natural selection being expired in the case of humans. Other
options are also suggested.
I believe that artificial selection (such as in dog breeds) is a
stronger factor than natural selection in humans, but nevertheless I
don't believe that natural selection is finished with us.
What do y'all think - where is humanity going?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/11/091124-origin-of-species-150-darwin-human-evolution.html
of natural selection being expired in the case of humans. Other
options are also suggested.
I believe that artificial selection (such as in dog breeds) is a
stronger factor than natural selection in humans, but nevertheless I
don't believe that natural selection is finished with us.
What do y'all think - where is humanity going?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/11/091124-origin-of-species-150-darwin-human-evolution.html
Clogtowner
Nov 28, 2009, 10:56:36 AM11/28/09
to Memphis Freethought Alliance Public Forum
Hi y'all - take the Darwin quiz on the above link. I got a 9 - missed
the page number of the finches - guessed.
> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/11/091124-origin-of-spec...
the page number of the finches - guessed.
Orson Zedd
Nov 28, 2009, 11:44:13 AM11/28/09
to memphisfreeth...@googlegroups.com
Selection is always a force. The primary difference between artificial and natural selection is semantics. They're the same thing. Depending on how you view human nature, artificial selection is a KIND of natural selection.
OZ
OZ
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance Public Forum" group.
To post to this group, send email to memphisfreeth...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to memphisfreethoughta...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en.
Clogtowner
Nov 28, 2009, 12:09:25 PM11/28/09
to Memphis Freethought Alliance Public Forum
Hi y'all - I think this is the first time we've disagreed! Artificial
selection imho is chosen by man - all dogs are descended from the wolf
but look at the 1500 different breeds in the recent dog show - all
painstakingly cultivated by humans. The only part that natural
selection played was in the original speciation of wolves. I think
there is more to this than semantics. Had artificial selection not
been employed by humans we would clearly not have had all the
"purebreeds" that currently exist. Who knows what dogs would have been
like - not even domesticated without man.
On Nov 28, 11:44 am, Orson Zedd <nintenfr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Selection is always a force. The primary difference between artificial and
> natural selection is semantics. They're the same thing. Depending on how
> you view human nature, artificial selection is a KIND of natural selection.
>
> OZ
>
> > .
selection imho is chosen by man - all dogs are descended from the wolf
but look at the 1500 different breeds in the recent dog show - all
painstakingly cultivated by humans. The only part that natural
selection played was in the original speciation of wolves. I think
there is more to this than semantics. Had artificial selection not
been employed by humans we would clearly not have had all the
"purebreeds" that currently exist. Who knows what dogs would have been
like - not even domesticated without man.
On Nov 28, 11:44 am, Orson Zedd <nintenfr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Selection is always a force. The primary difference between artificial and
> natural selection is semantics. They're the same thing. Depending on how
> you view human nature, artificial selection is a KIND of natural selection.
>
> OZ
>
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 9:56 AM, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi y'all - take the Darwin quiz on the above link. I got a 9 - missed
> > the page number of the finches - guessed.
>
> > On Nov 28, 9:47 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi y'all - here is an interesting article which poses the possibility
> > > of natural selection being expired in the case of humans. Other
> > > options are also suggested.
> > > I believe that artificial selection (such as in dog breeds) is a
> > > stronger factor than natural selection in humans, but nevertheless I
> > > don't believe that natural selection is finished with us.
> > > What do y'all think - where is humanity going?
>
> > >http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/11/091124-origin-of-spec...
>
> > --
>
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Memphis Freethought Alliance Public Forum" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to>memphisfreeth...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to>memphisfreethoughta...@googlegroups.com<memphisfreethoughtalliance%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > Hi y'all - take the Darwin quiz on the above link. I got a 9 - missed
> > the page number of the finches - guessed.
>
> > On Nov 28, 9:47 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi y'all - here is an interesting article which poses the possibility
> > > of natural selection being expired in the case of humans. Other
> > > options are also suggested.
> > > I believe that artificial selection (such as in dog breeds) is a
> > > stronger factor than natural selection in humans, but nevertheless I
> > > don't believe that natural selection is finished with us.
> > > What do y'all think - where is humanity going?
>
> > >http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/11/091124-origin-of-spec...
>
> > --
>
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Memphis Freethought Alliance Public Forum" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to>memphisfreeth...@googlegroups.com.
> > .
Orson Zedd
Nov 28, 2009, 12:28:21 PM11/28/09
to memphisfreeth...@googlegroups.com
What about human sexual selection with one another? Is that artificial selection, too? Simply because humans are involved in making the choice. If so, how is it not artificial selection when the female magpie chooses the male with the tackiest nest?
OZ
OZ
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to memphisfreethoughta...@googlegroups.com.
ornamentalmind
Nov 28, 2009, 12:34:33 PM11/28/09
to Memphis Freethought Alliance Public Forum
“…What do y'all think - where is humanity going?” – clog
I think that the experiment of the hairless ape has about come to an
end. Our very trait that is most highly tauted, thinking, is most
likely to blame.
When examined, most of our current survival issues are a result of
intellection of a different level than that of the ‘lesser’ animals.
First and foremost is overpopulation. Contemplation here will show
numerous causes from advanced medical treatment and childbirth
methodologies to treaties to end wars. Science itself is a great
contributor with the advance of vaccines as well as the associated
syringe…let alone all of the research to even know what a virus is.
This type of analysis can be continued to cover almost all aspects of
human life.
After overpopulation, the threat of pandemics is on a lot of people’s
minds. Our advances in not only numbers but our mechanized ability to
travel further and faster than merely walking can provide adds to our
lack of security when it comes to survival.
Moving along quickly now, pollution is primarily a result of the
former two, over population and or travel mechanisms. However, here
one can add all sorts of ‘advancements’ such as plastics, carbon based
fuel production and use, stripping the planet of resources, polluting
most water supplies and now even the majority of our oceans. Our lands
retain DDT and our air is unhealthy primarily from technological
‘advances’ again. While we don’t hear about it much these days, acid
rain continues to erode our buildings and monuments as well as our
health.
Now we come to war. In the past, war was a good way to help keep
populations down. Today, again due to our ‘advanced’ state, for the
first time we can actually wipe out all life on the planet. Perhaps we
would only kill off the mammals or perhaps only humanity itself.
Regardless, ‘we’ continue to have the drive to “play thermonuclear
war”. And, with the ease of travel and ability to infiltrate in other
cultures, those who find no solace in living now are reduced to
looking for hope in an afterlife, virgins or not! As they continue to
amass such “WMD”s as well as a lot of the weapons grade biological
warfare resources, a self fulfilling prophecy may evolve…global death.
I haven’t covered plague directly yet. Here I will include famine too.
Our technologically ‘advanced’ genetically engineered food stuff,
created by ignorant but ‘advanced’ people with a vision for the bottom
line only can all too easily lead to famine even though the reverse is
seen in all advertisements for their products. Our use of ‘advanced’
medicines to help ‘kill’ stuff that a hundred years ago would have run
its course and ended the life of the one it inhabited has led to
‘super bugs’ for which science is ill equipped to handle. Yet again,
we have met the enemy and it is us!
So clog, I think that humanity is going to the worms, that is IF they
are not killed off by us too!!!
> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/11/091124-origin-of-spec...
I think that the experiment of the hairless ape has about come to an
end. Our very trait that is most highly tauted, thinking, is most
likely to blame.
When examined, most of our current survival issues are a result of
intellection of a different level than that of the ‘lesser’ animals.
First and foremost is overpopulation. Contemplation here will show
numerous causes from advanced medical treatment and childbirth
methodologies to treaties to end wars. Science itself is a great
contributor with the advance of vaccines as well as the associated
syringe…let alone all of the research to even know what a virus is.
This type of analysis can be continued to cover almost all aspects of
human life.
After overpopulation, the threat of pandemics is on a lot of people’s
minds. Our advances in not only numbers but our mechanized ability to
travel further and faster than merely walking can provide adds to our
lack of security when it comes to survival.
Moving along quickly now, pollution is primarily a result of the
former two, over population and or travel mechanisms. However, here
one can add all sorts of ‘advancements’ such as plastics, carbon based
fuel production and use, stripping the planet of resources, polluting
most water supplies and now even the majority of our oceans. Our lands
retain DDT and our air is unhealthy primarily from technological
‘advances’ again. While we don’t hear about it much these days, acid
rain continues to erode our buildings and monuments as well as our
health.
Now we come to war. In the past, war was a good way to help keep
populations down. Today, again due to our ‘advanced’ state, for the
first time we can actually wipe out all life on the planet. Perhaps we
would only kill off the mammals or perhaps only humanity itself.
Regardless, ‘we’ continue to have the drive to “play thermonuclear
war”. And, with the ease of travel and ability to infiltrate in other
cultures, those who find no solace in living now are reduced to
looking for hope in an afterlife, virgins or not! As they continue to
amass such “WMD”s as well as a lot of the weapons grade biological
warfare resources, a self fulfilling prophecy may evolve…global death.
I haven’t covered plague directly yet. Here I will include famine too.
Our technologically ‘advanced’ genetically engineered food stuff,
created by ignorant but ‘advanced’ people with a vision for the bottom
line only can all too easily lead to famine even though the reverse is
seen in all advertisements for their products. Our use of ‘advanced’
medicines to help ‘kill’ stuff that a hundred years ago would have run
its course and ended the life of the one it inhabited has led to
‘super bugs’ for which science is ill equipped to handle. Yet again,
we have met the enemy and it is us!
So clog, I think that humanity is going to the worms, that is IF they
are not killed off by us too!!!
Clogtowner
Nov 28, 2009, 12:52:51 PM11/28/09
to Memphis Freethought Alliance Public Forum
Hi y'all - yes Darwin and Dawkins both make the point that sexual
selection is important and it exhibits itself in many ways such as the
gaudy peacock whose tail gets so big and bright that the females can't
resist it. Yet when it gets too big and bright, it hinders movement
and survival and is thus selected out to a happy medium. Sexual
selection is generally part of natural selection. Artificial
selection, on the other hand, is a deliberate act by humans to breed a
particular offspring and not just sexual attraction. Hitler started
down this path.
On Nov 28, 11:28 am, Orson Zedd <nintenfr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What about human sexual selection with one another? Is that artificial
> selection, too? Simply because humans are involved in making the choice.
> If so, how is it not artificial selection when the female magpie chooses the
> male with the tackiest nest?
>
> OZ
>
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to>>memphisfreethoughta...@googlegroups.com<memphisfreethoughtalliance%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>> <memphisfreethoughtalliance%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com<memphisfreethoughtalliance%252Buns...@googlegroups.com>
selection is important and it exhibits itself in many ways such as the
gaudy peacock whose tail gets so big and bright that the females can't
resist it. Yet when it gets too big and bright, it hinders movement
and survival and is thus selected out to a happy medium. Sexual
selection is generally part of natural selection. Artificial
selection, on the other hand, is a deliberate act by humans to breed a
particular offspring and not just sexual attraction. Hitler started
down this path.
On Nov 28, 11:28 am, Orson Zedd <nintenfr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What about human sexual selection with one another? Is that artificial
> selection, too? Simply because humans are involved in making the choice.
> If so, how is it not artificial selection when the female magpie chooses the
> male with the tackiest nest?
>
> OZ
>
Clogtowner
Nov 28, 2009, 12:58:19 PM11/28/09
to Memphis Freethought Alliance Public Forum
Hi y'all - what a dismal outlook you espouse. As you point out our
survival and replication tendencies have been enhanced by our huge
brains (relatively.) Isn't there a chance that even larger brains
which can foresee and resolve the problems you list would be selected
to survive?
survival and replication tendencies have been enhanced by our huge
brains (relatively.) Isn't there a chance that even larger brains
which can foresee and resolve the problems you list would be selected
to survive?
Orson Zedd
Nov 28, 2009, 2:37:12 PM11/28/09
to memphisfreeth...@googlegroups.com
But we do select our mates. We don't all agree on the criteria, but we all have some criteria. That is selection.
OZ
OZ
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to memphisfreethoughta...@googlegroups.com.
Clogtowner
Nov 28, 2009, 2:42:43 PM11/28/09
to Memphis Freethought Alliance Public Forum
Hi y'all - we agree! Selecting a mate is sexual selection and humans
have a wide range of criteria that they use. I, for instance, like
women with................ better not go there!
On Nov 28, 1:37 pm, Orson Zedd <nintenfr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> But we do select our mates. We don't all agree on the criteria, but we all
> have some criteria. That is selection.
>
> OZ
>
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to>>>memphisfreethoughta...@googlegroups.com<memphisfreethoughtalliance%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>> <memphisfreethoughtalliance%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com<memphisfreethoughtalliance%252Buns...@googlegroups.com>>>> <memphisfreethoughtalliance%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com<memphisfreethoughtalliance%252Buns...@googlegroups.com>> <memphisfreethoughtalliance%252Buns...@googlegroups.com<memphisfreethoughtalliance%25252Bun...@googlegroups.com>
have a wide range of criteria that they use. I, for instance, like
women with................ better not go there!
On Nov 28, 1:37 pm, Orson Zedd <nintenfr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> But we do select our mates. We don't all agree on the criteria, but we all
> have some criteria. That is selection.
>
> OZ
>
Tom
Nov 28, 2009, 2:45:44 PM11/28/09
to memphisfreeth...@googlegroups.com
To my mind the selection for different dog breeds can be termed artificial, because it is a higher conscious act to produce a certain breed, not simply because it involves humans. Many things humans do, including mating could be considered natural. Just because something involves humans does automatically make it artificial, unless you want to define it that way. Clog, if you pickup a bird at the bar for a shag, is it natural or artificial? Is the women selection for a breed or just selecting a mate with her own personal likes/dislikes in mind?
Anyways there are many selective pressures on humans today whichever label you give them.
Anyways there are many selective pressures on humans today whichever label you give them.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to memphisfreethoughta...@googlegroups.com.
Clogtowner
Nov 28, 2009, 3:12:10 PM11/28/09
to Memphis Freethought Alliance Public Forum
Hi y'all - I agree, when I pick up women from bars (a frequent
occurrence) the last thing on my mind is the kind of offspring that
would ensue. Nevertheless, it is perfectly natural for me to pick up
women in bars. I also agree that artificial selection need not require
human intervention, however, that is the most common type and the dogs
are a prime example. Choosing a mate for reproduction in humans
requires a little more thought. Even after much thought - check out
some families!
PS. I'm not limited to picking up women in bars - almost any location
will do!
On Nov 28, 1:45 pm, Tom <ssoitg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> To my mind the selection for different dog breeds can be termed artificial,
> because it is a higher conscious act to produce a certain breed, not simply
> because it involves humans. Many things humans do, including mating could
> be considered natural. Just because something involves humans does
> automatically make it artificial, unless you want to define it that way.
> Clog, if you pickup a bird at the bar for a shag, is it natural or
> artificial? Is the women selection for a breed or just selecting a mate
> with her own personal likes/dislikes in mind?
> Anyways there are many selective pressures on humans today whichever label
> you give them.
>
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to>>>memphisfreethoughta...@googlegroups.com<memphisfreethoughtalliance%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>> <memphisfreethoughtalliance%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com<memphisfreethoughtalliance%252Buns...@googlegroups.com>>>> <memphisfreethoughtalliance%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com<memphisfreethoughtalliance%252Buns...@googlegroups.com>> <memphisfreethoughtalliance%252Buns...@googlegroups.com<memphisfreethoughtalliance%25252Bun...@googlegroups.com>
occurrence) the last thing on my mind is the kind of offspring that
would ensue. Nevertheless, it is perfectly natural for me to pick up
women in bars. I also agree that artificial selection need not require
human intervention, however, that is the most common type and the dogs
are a prime example. Choosing a mate for reproduction in humans
requires a little more thought. Even after much thought - check out
some families!
PS. I'm not limited to picking up women in bars - almost any location
will do!
On Nov 28, 1:45 pm, Tom <ssoitg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> To my mind the selection for different dog breeds can be termed artificial,
> because it is a higher conscious act to produce a certain breed, not simply
> because it involves humans. Many things humans do, including mating could
> be considered natural. Just because something involves humans does
> automatically make it artificial, unless you want to define it that way.
> Clog, if you pickup a bird at the bar for a shag, is it natural or
> artificial? Is the women selection for a breed or just selecting a mate
> with her own personal likes/dislikes in mind?
> Anyways there are many selective pressures on humans today whichever label
> you give them.
>
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages