Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
Human Evolution Has Stopped, Says Scientist
Share:
by Terri Potratz | October 7, 2008 at 12:21 pm
1782 views | 19 Recommendations | 16 comments
Photos
University College London Professor Steve Jones believes that human evolution has come to a head because the forces that drive evolution - natural selection and genetic mutation - no longer play important roles within human life.
The people living one million years from now, should Man survive, will resemble modern-day humans.
'We now know so much about the process of evolution that we can make some predictions about what might happen in future,' said Professor Jones in a lecture on Monday.
The struggle to survive is no longer a great feat for humans in the developed world, and therefore gene mutations offer little to no competitive edge anymore. Genetic mutations don't evolve into lasting adaptive traits unless they provide some sort of advantage over a competitor. Natural selection is likewise a moot point; the children of our descendants would have faced significant difficulties and many died before reaching adolescence, therefore those who were fitter and more likely to survive would pass their good genes on to offspring.
Jones' argument is that in a modern world of central heating and plenty of food, the same mutation is far less likely to give a child any advantage. A baby born today can expect to live a long and healthy life, which in turn works against the evolutionary tool of natural selection.
Referring to mutation, Jones expounds the view that it too is slowing down. It is because there are fewer older fathers in the West. Older men's sperm deteriorates and contains more genetic mistakes which in turn can lead to mutations in their children.
Without these two mechanisms working together, evolution does not take place.
A third factor - randomness - is also an important ingredient in evolution. Small populations that are isolated can change at random as genes are accidentally lost, he said. But as the world's population becomes increasingly connected, the opportunity for random change is dwindling.Jones said: “Worldwide, all populations are becoming connected and the opportunity for random change is dwindling. History is made in bed, but nowadays the beds are getting closer together. We are mixing into a global mass, and the future is brown.”
I think Jones brings up quite a few good points here, but to assume that you can examine the past few centuries of human existence, compare the differences between modern humans and our ancestors, and then extrapolate that we've stopped evolving is a bit impetuous. Jones' claims are problematic because they assume not only that humans wouldn't be equipped to adapt if necessary, but that there will be no crisis in which we would have to adapt to/for.
Evolution takes place over a vast time frame, with changes gradually developing across generations by building upon slight adaptations - usually sandwiched by extended periods of invariability. Maybe humans are in this stagnant period, and our evolutionary mechanisms will kick back into gear when the situation calls for it.
As the circumstances of an environment change, so too must the organisms that live within it. A changing world demands adaptation from the species who inhabit it - to suppose that humans will just "stay the same" is synonymous, in my opinion, with saying that we will perish.
Advertisement
NowPublic on Facebook
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Crowd Power
brentdanley
Wichita, Kansas, United States
Paul Conneally
Loughborough, Leicestershire, United KingdomExothermic
Tullahoma, Tennessee, United StatesJaredF
Canadafreesci
Polandgmaranhao
Braziljrust
Seattle, Washington, United Statessergimn
Spainkarin_al_cuadrado
Chile
Most Recommended Stories in Health
Recommendations (19)
Anonymous user
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (16)
at 12:58 on October 7th, 2008
The scientist seems to forget that 'Sexual Selection', the process in which certain favorable traits are selected for by members of a species seeking a mate, is still alive and very well. The same process that produced the peacock's tail (a useless evolutionary advantage, but highly preferred in mating) will continue to produce changes in the human appearance, possibly those of - Height, fair/smooth skin, blond hair, etc. In addition, sexual selection will indirectly favor high intelligence by selecting on the outward indicators of said intelligence (charisma, communication skills, money, adaptability, etc).
Remember this quote? Everything that can be invented has been invented. Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. patent office, 1899
It's the same ignorance, manifest in an evolutionary paradigm.
at 13:46 on October 7th, 2008
Jones does touch on the subject of sexual selection, which is mentioned briefly above, although he takes it another direction:
Source: dailymail.co.uk
It seems illogical to me (though I am no scientist or geneticist) that increased connectivity - ie. exposure to varying cultures and gene pools around the world - wouldn't promote random change. Jones appears to be saying that the more restricted a gene pool is, the higher the incidence of variation and mutations. It sounds nonsensical, am I interpreting this correctly?
at 13:06 on October 7th, 2008
Terri Potratz, I like this story. It's good stuff.
Sure, we've plateaued since we got opposable thumbs and vocal chords, but he's missed out the influence of viruses on our genetic makeup - something that hasn't slowed at any point in our evolution. Take into consideration the amount of viral DNA in the "junk" sections of our genome and that's surely all the 'pressure' and 'randomness' you need.
Perhaps he's just pissed that he hasn't had a documentary series since Dawkins got famous. Nothing drums-up book sales like a controversy.
at 14:04 on October 7th, 2008
Terri Potratz, I like this story. It's good stuff. Interesting contribution to the Nature-Nurture debate. The starting premise of course, is that Darwin is right, and the other is that adapation, mutation and evolution takes palce over many generations, not just in our life-time. However, the Uni of London is well-respected and their professors world-emminent in their field so he probably does know what he is talking about. Discuss. <g>.
at 15:41 on October 7th, 2008
.
at 15:39 on October 7th, 2008
While Professor Jones raises some interesting ideas, the notion that evolution will not continue to shape man in a major way is hard to fathom, at least to me. It must be remembered that effects of mutation and selection in man are realized over many thousands of years, not over one or 2 generations. With the rapid emergence in our own life time of novel pathogenic bacteria and viruses, and man made pollutants, a changing environment, over population, poverty, and increasing world competition for limited resources, I believe that human evolution through mutation and natural selection will continue to play the important role it always has in determining man's future success on the planet. One cannot assume that food, fuel and heat will always be plentiful for in fact, in much of the present world, it is not.
Thanks for the invitation to include some of my images from the Darwin Exhibition in your story.
at 20:08 on October 7th, 2008
karin_al_cuadrado has contributed a photo to this story.
at 20:17 on October 7th, 2008
Ciertamente comparto la idea de que la evolución humana se ha detenido. Me baso en que los avances tecnológicos nos han ayudado a sobrellevar nuestras vidas de mejor manera, permitiendo al mismo tiempo, que aquellos que posean ciertas enfermedades geneticas (que hagan que el desarrollo del ser humano siga siendo viable) pueda reproducirse... Un ejemplo claro es la intolerancia a la lactosa; quien posea esa deficiencia, en estos tiempos puede adquirir productos que no le hagan daño y por lo tanto, este ser podrá reproducirse... Finalmente, no tendremos selección natural y como consecuencia, la evolución se detiene, sin embargo, el ser humano puede seguir desarrollándose.
Saludos cordiales.
Karin^2, Estudiante Tecnología Médica, Universidad Diego Portales, Santiago de Chile.
at 20:24 on October 7th, 2008
Terri Potratz, I like this story. It's good stuff.
at 01:42 on October 8th, 2008
Terri Potratz, I like this story. It's good stuff.
Ohhh, weeee! This is the cutest story and title I have read in a long, long time. After this, I can go to bed. Tell those scientists that those lazy 'ole tadpoles stopped "evolving" into anything other than frogs, also. LOL!! LOL!!
Folks would rather believe anything than to acknowledge that they are going to meet their maker one day. And I guess it makes sense, 'cause He's going to be sho' nuf' mad at some folks!
Blessings,
Mary
at 11:34 on October 8th, 2008
George Bush is still evolving although his brain seems to have stopped
at 12:08 on October 11th, 2008
Wow, I am surprised that a scientist can make claims like these. Evolution was always believed to be a constant force that never stops, even if its immediate effects are not visible over long stretches of time. Humans invent new gadgets, new transportation methods, new drugs. Each of these innovations has various effects on human DNA and cell's metabolism. Hence, mutations are happening all the time, there is no way of "stopping" them or putting a cap on them. I strongly disagree with the statement that there are LESS environmental pressures to sustain evolution in today's world. What about the unprecedented stress levels, climate change and different kinds of radiation acting on us? These can be very potent evolutionary drivers. It does not matter if humans "perceive" the struggle to survive as important or not anymore, the evolutionary forces will still be doing their job. The mixing of genes when inter-ethnical marriages happen should lead to better adaptations in offspring. That is why Metis, half-Asian, half-European etc. children are usually so gorgeous looking and intelligent (and that was said by Dr. David Suzuki, a celebrated Canadian geneticist and environmentalist, during a presentation to science students at the University of British Columbia). So, it does sound nonsensical, Terri. I agree with you.
at 17:23 on October 19th, 2008
the fact that humans are inventing all these new drugs and technology is proof that we are no longer subject to the process of evolution. the whole point of evolution is that only the strong survive and survival of the fittest. today we let everyone survive; people with heart disease are given treatment and drugs to prolong their life and pass on their negative recessive genes, which, in a world without these drugs, would cease to exist because those with the disease are not the fittest. we are the only animals on earth to create our own climate with A/C and heating in our houses which means that we are not subject to a lot of meteorological forces and geological forces of the earth.
all these "new gadgets" and "new transportation" are invented for the sole purpose of making life for us as simple and anti-thought provoking in all aspects of our lives. how can we evolve when the challenges that life presents are bypassed with some "new gadget"? think about it, the last real human intellectual revolution was the industrial revolution. after that there was nothing left that humans needed to do. in that revolution we learned how to mass produce and create surplus which in turn allows us to support bigger families and have more stuff to waste. and since the revolution all we have done is refined our "stick"; first we could only call from home phones, then we could use cell phones with limited service, then we have better service and our cell phones become more compact, then we're able to text message from our phones, the our phones get the internet, play music, take pictures/videos, send email. this is the same for every "gadget" that humans come up with, be it cell phones, cars, planes, computers, boats, drugs, or anything else you could think of.
i can go on forever in support of the article above.
and now its someone's turn for a rebuttal...
at 10:10 on October 21st, 2008
It's important to remember that with ever gadget we come up with, every medical treatment, there's usually a negative effect associated with that - many of which we haven't yet discovered, or it is too soon to understand the long-term consequences. Cell phone radiation would be one example. Others, relating to health, would be antibiotic resistance and viral strains that become increasingly unresponsive to treatment.
I see your point - humans have made incredible strides in preventing illness and disease and developing technology, but at the end of the day none of us are immune to sickness. As we develop resistance to infection, so too do the microorganisms develop resistance to the drugs we attempt to treat ourselves with.
at 12:25 on October 11th, 2008
Terri Potratz, I like this story. It's good stuff.
Once humanity learns that the Universe is a mind created illusion, then we have achieved the pinnacle of human evolution. I mean, where the hell do you go from there?
at 21:11 on March 9th, 2009
This shows just how ignorant the teaching of evolution really is. Basically because we have not seen any proof of evolution that means it has stopped.... hmmm something wreaks of foolishness. How about the thought that since we have not evolved in 6,000 years perhaps we never did. Evolution is one of the biggest excuses to not serve the Creator. Creation is an everyday part of our lives, we understand that anything we have of any value has been engineered, so why would we think that we (the engineers came about by chance or natural selection, or random combustible coincedences). We are so intelligent we are stupid. When has a house evolved out of nothing, or a car, or a baby, or a sheet of paper at that, well, I guess the answer is never so perhaps evolution has stopped... let's just use logic here, evolution never happened we are the products of creation as is everything else.