It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Will Global Climate Change Stimulate an Evolutionary Leap in Mankind?

page: 1
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2017 @ 08:44 PM
link   
This topic is something of interest. A refutation to the global warming alarmists, who wish to keep the climate in some sort of stasis field, never changing, never growing, never evolving.

It seems periods of dramatic climatic shifts are the defining moments of how humans became human. Humans are not an end-product in the story of evolution, just another step in our particular evolutionary branch.

Could a supposed global climate change be the threshold necessary for another evolutionary leap? Maybe a collective consciousness, or super-human traits only dreamed of in the realms of science fiction?



The data is also helping scientists sift through the possible theories for just how climate might have triggered evolutionary advances. For instance, one idea is that big leaps forward were not driven by adaptation to a specific habitat change, but by a series of frequent changes. In other words, humans evolved to live with uncertainty.

Smithsonian

Of course, there is no certainty in what our evolutionary path will take us. Different species of people, machine/human hybrids, or even Webbed feet, cat's eyes and gills

Will humans become smarter due to global climate change? We seem to have created an environment favorable to atavism in the human world, maybe global 'warming/cooling/weirding' isn't such a bad thing after all.

What are your thoughts ATS?




posted on May, 20 2017 @ 08:48 PM
link   
Perhaps if the climate really does change in 100,000 or 200,000 years



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 08:51 PM
link   
a reply to: GodEmperor

Evolution doesn't get "triggered" like that. If an evolution is required to survive the global environment, it will start with a handful of people who are already able to survive it and their genes will be passed on. Mutations happen when they happen and if they are more likely to promise more offspring, that encourages evolution.

It's why we have white polar bears. A few down the line had mutations that made them white and the rest starved because they couldn't hunt as well when they were forced to live in more arctic conditions. The white ones passed on their genes and... tadaa! The white mutant polar bear that carried the gene was probably not the first but it definitely mattered in that context.

Right now, there are probably people who are immune to some sort of bacteria. It might be irrelevant or it might be a bacteria that doesn't exist. But the mutation that makes them immune would suddenly be pretty damned awesome of an asteroid full of that bacteria landed on Earth. Then, in a thousand years, all humans alive would be the offspring of those few, thus they evolved.

So for climate change? It won't trigger an evolution. We just need to hope we happen to have among humanity a few people who can survive it so they can pass on those badassed genes.



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 08:52 PM
link   
a reply to: GodEmperor


Will Global Climate Change Stimulate an Evolutionary Leap in Mankind?


No. Rule out smarter due to global climate change, too.



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 08:55 PM
link   
China is moving to renewable energy sources like solar and wind power. Given the vast amount of desert land they have, that's a win-win, free energy and less pollution.



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 08:56 PM
link   
A Technological Leap is far more likely than anything 'evolutionary'.



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 08:58 PM
link   
a reply to: stormcell

desert is very suboptimal for electric solar panels because the wind and dirt abrasses the surface, makes it dirty and the heat can give optimal conditions to hotspots and backpanel failure. You want a steep declination depending on the location and some cooling wind to make them work at best efficiency.



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 09:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Snarl

Or an artificially induced biological change because of our technological advancement. Why wait around for random mutations to hopefully make new changes to us that make us better when we can do a little tinkering with our own dna where we intend some changes to happen.

I mean if we can make spider goats and sh*t why not engineer a few new types of humans while we're at it??



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 09:11 PM
link   
The issue with this concept is that before the modern era, with civilizations, Humans were actually subjected to the environment.

Now a days we aren't. Today it was +21c, 3 months ago it hit -35c, yet in my home it was always 21 regardless of the weather outside.

Thats why any climate changes will not affect us anymore.

Even if it could, we have far more intrusive events occurring, such as biological-technological convergence that will effectively take us even further from being effected by biological evolution.



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 09:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Abysha




Other experts believe our biological evolution has not only proceeded but has sped up since we developed agriculture about 10,000 years ago, a sea change that led to civilization as we know it.

...

Using one of several techniques now available to search for signs of recent selection in the human genome, Harpending and Cochran and their colleagues determined that fully 7 percent of our genes appear to be under recent evolutionary pressure. Moreover, they contend, we humans are evolving away from each other. "The genes that seem to be the newest and evolving fastest are regional, not pan-human,"

www.pbs.org...

I'm wondering if there aren't more mechanisms in place than what you believe.




Around the time of Ardipithecus it seems that some apes decided to walk around on two legs. This probably happened as a result of - wait for it - climate change. Africa went through a particularly bad drought around 6m years ago, which resulted in the drying up of the Mediterranean and seems to have set in motion some rather significant changes in the hominid - and ultimately human - lineage

Guardian



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 09:15 PM
link   
a reply to: GodEmperor

Humans have always adjusted to climate change and the climate has always changed. Nothing is new except the need of Globalists to 'cash in' on the natural fluctuation of our environment.



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 09:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Ghost147



Thats why any climate changes will not affect us anymore.


Speak for yourself, weather and climate very much affect large portions of the population, because whatever it may be, there are people who still have to work and/or live outdoors without modern amenities.



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 09:18 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

Heh...

So would you prefer Spider-man or Goat-man?




posted on May, 20 2017 @ 09:21 PM
link   
Nah. So far it has only triggered a new era of stupidity to such a degree that even the mere assertion that it might happen has people headed into crazy town. Imagine if it truly did all go down...






posted on May, 20 2017 @ 09:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: GodEmperor
a reply to: Ghost147



Thats why any climate changes will not affect us anymore.


Speak for yourself, weather and climate very much affect large portions of the population, because whatever it may be, there are people who still have to work and/or live outdoors without modern amenities.


sure, and when that happens, and 'leaps and bounds' in evolution occurs, some populations may branch out of what we know now to be a Homo sapien

It would not effect humanity as a whole



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 09:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: GodEmperor
a reply to: Abysha




Other experts believe our biological evolution has not only proceeded but has sped up since we developed agriculture about 10,000 years ago, a sea change that led to civilization as we know it.

...

Using one of several techniques now available to search for signs of recent selection in the human genome, Harpending and Cochran and their colleagues determined that fully 7 percent of our genes appear to be under recent evolutionary pressure. Moreover, they contend, we humans are evolving away from each other. "The genes that seem to be the newest and evolving fastest are regional, not pan-human,"

www.pbs.org...

I'm wondering if there aren't more mechanisms in place than what you believe.




Around the time of Ardipithecus it seems that some apes decided to walk around on two legs. This probably happened as a result of - wait for it - climate change. Africa went through a particularly bad drought around 6m years ago, which resulted in the drying up of the Mediterranean and seems to have set in motion some rather significant changes in the hominid - and ultimately human - lineage

Guardian


I don't think you understand what I was saying. Yes, climate change could result in evolution but it can't trigger it. Mutations happen when they happen, no matter what.

Those evolutions you are pointing out in past climate changes? The "evolution" is the result of the survivors surviving. The mutations didn't happen because of it but if those mutations allowed a few of them to survive, the future of that species will include that evolution. That's what evolution is. It's rewarding random mutations with a survival rate greater than their peers. Why do you think humans are getting hotter? Ever see old paintings? They weren't bad painters; they were just ugly back then. Bigger boobs, penises, and prettier faces mean more procreation and those people pass on their genes. After thousands of years, the whole species looks a bit better.



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 09:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: GodEmperor
This topic is something of interest. A refutation to the global warming alarmists, who wish to keep the climate in some sort of stasis field, never changing, never growing, never evolving.
What are your thoughts ATS?


Some scientists say the CO2 coming from all the fossil fuel being burned may kill all life on earth. I believe them before I believe you or anyone else in the right wing blogosphere. The nice thing about scientist is they are capable of admitting they are wrong when the data shows otherwise. Scientist follow a process that eliminates some ego from commentary. This is the direct opposite of the right wingers who think their opinions are facts.



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 09:32 PM
link   
Technologically it already has.

But a prototype nuclear battery isn't going to be commercially viable over night. Multi-qbit quantum processors are only just now being sold. They aren't cheap either. DWAVE just made its first commercial delivery of their latest quantum computer.

It's barely begun. We haven't even scratched the surface of what will make it to market in the next decade, and what could be just over the horizon.

There are fundamental changes in technology coming that will make it possible to augment every aspect of our lives. Genetic editing, cybernetics, quantum computers, there is a massive tsunami of seriously advanced tech coming our way, and as we continue to integrate with machines and edit our genetic makeup to resist disease, considerably slow aging, and enhance our cognitive abilities, we will no longer be the same species. We will be something else, something I look forward to taking part in.

All of this requires energy. TONS of it. It needs to be efficient, clean, and renewable. Can't get there with the system we have in place now. The demand for energy alone will force this to happen.
edit on 20 5 17 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 09:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: GodEmperor
This topic is something of interest. A refutation to the global warming alarmists, who wish to keep the climate in some sort of stasis field, never changing, never growing, never evolving.
What are your thoughts ATS?


Some scientists say the CO2 coming from all the fossil fuel being burned may kill all life on earth. I believe them before I believe you or anyone else in the right wing blogosphere. The nice thing about scientist is they are capable of admitting they are wrong when the data shows otherwise. Scientist follow a process that eliminates some ego from commentary. This is the direct opposite of the right wingers who think their opinions are facts.


Is that right?

Which scientists are saying this?



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 09:36 PM
link   
a reply to: GodEmperor

Waterworld



new topics




 
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join