It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


We haven't stopped evolving.

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 10 2009 @ 01:33 AM
This is just my opinion, and I haven't personally heard or read about it before so tell me if it's already been suggested,

I see that one of the main questions asked about evolution is, "Then why have we stopped evolving?".
I don't think we have stopped evolving.

People presume we should still be evolving physically, like how we no longer have a tail, or how we don't have an opposable toe anymore, etc. But my theory is this:
Once we reached what is most convenient physically (were we are now), we started evolving mentally. Upgrading our tools, creating the wheel, getting airplanes in the sky, creating television, etc. Why did we not create an airplane when we were living in a cave? Because it wasn't fundamental to our survival.

Physically our aspects are fundamental, so we don't evolve in that area anymore.
Mentally we still evolve faster than we ever have before. Especially in terms of physic abilities and remote viewing, etc.

posted on Feb, 10 2009 @ 01:56 AM
Richard Dawkins likes to stress that physically we aren't done evolving, hints support for this by the large number of people with back pain saying our bodies aren't use to walking erect.

I like to think that eventually (probably not telekinesis or that stuff) we will all evolve mentally more, the possibilities of what it could be is amazing.

posted on Feb, 10 2009 @ 01:56 AM
It pretty obvious we have stopped though, Evolution occurs as a way for a species to overcome a challenge, and lets face it, as the dominaant species, carving the entire planet out as we see fit, we have no more need for it, pathetic as it sounds.

posted on Feb, 10 2009 @ 02:32 AM
reply to post by ShadowKing

Wrong. Evolution never stops. Even when a species appears to have reached complete equilibrium in regards to computability with it's environment, it still evolves. Humans have not stopped evolving because we have not stopped mutating. Collectively, human beings have on average about 130 mutations per zygote - and we continue to mutate all throughout our lives.

Evolution does appear to work faster in smaller populations where mutations can spread throughout a population much faster, or in a larger population cut off from each other through some natural barrier so as to effectively create two smaller populations which will each diverge along their own separate evolutionary paths provided they aren't reintroduced before the number of mutations overcomes the capability for reproduction - thus creating speciation.

Common Myths and Misconceptions about Evolution

Everything is an adaptation

Evolution leads to greater complexity

Evolution creates species perfectly adapted to their environments

Evolution always promotes the survival of a species

[edit on 10-2-2009 by Lasheic]

posted on Feb, 10 2009 @ 02:39 AM
Yes we have no more need for physical evolving, that's what I mean. It'd be great to have a third arm though.

Therefore we begin mentally evolving, then creating things to try put our mind to rest, and ending up where we are now..

posted on Feb, 10 2009 @ 03:05 AM
reply to post by Nventual

Perhaps this will explain more clearly. Pay special attention to the segments on Gene Flow and Genetic Drift, as they have enormous impact on the perceived notion of the slowdown in Evolution within humans... especially when you consider the history of human migration, civilization, and trade.

[edit on 10-2-2009 by Lasheic]

posted on Feb, 10 2009 @ 03:18 AM
reply to post by Nventual

Why did we not create an airplane when we were living in a cave? Because it wasn't fundamental to our survival.

Er... an aircraft would have been quite useful to our ancestors. The reason why they didn't invent it, is because they didn't have the technology or understanding. Even if they had a portion of it, if not all of the enabling technologies are in place - it won't matter. For example, the ancient Egyptians used electricity for electroplating. Why didn't they have Playstations? Because the other enabling technologies were not in place.

What you argue is a great comparison between humans and computer, though. The human brain and the semi-conductor are both enormously potential processing machines... yet our skills lie in very different areas. Why do our computers struggle with pattern recognition, while our brains struggle with numbers? Simply because advanced arithmetic was of very little use to our pre-human ancestors. What was of use, was being able to recognize a predator from a potential mate.

posted on Feb, 10 2009 @ 03:41 AM
reply to post by Nventual

Why did we not create an airplane when we were living in a cave? Because it wasn't fundamental to our survival.

Er. First we had to invent fire. Metalurgy, mathmatics, aerodynamics.
Bernoulli had to create his law, Newton had to get hit on the head by an apple (ok, that's a myth, but the principle is there.) Two brothers had to com up with an idea, based on bits and pieces of all of this.


posted on Feb, 10 2009 @ 04:19 AM
I am not sure we evlove, however I am sure we change. It is up to us if we want to turn this change into evolution or extinction.

posted on Feb, 10 2009 @ 04:33 AM
You evolutionists are as bad as Christians. Can't even agree on aspects of your own religion

Evolution stops or continues depending on environmental factors.

Proof # 1: the coelecanth hasn't changed for millions of years and I believe neither has the shark and probably 100s of other species as well.

I think that's all the proof I need, eh? How can you let a creationist teach your religion to you?

Yes, I know evolution is not a religion. I'm just messing with your heads

posted on Feb, 10 2009 @ 04:43 AM
I think humans are DE-evolving.

Just think, take an average Joe off the street now and drop them into the wilderness, and then drop Joe Caveman from 500 years ago in the wilderness. Who do you think will survive longer?

posted on Feb, 10 2009 @ 04:44 AM
reply to post by Lannock

Sharks have changed, take a general look through their history. While the basic idea hasn't changed changed much (fins, teeth gills), sharks have gone through a huge range of diversity in the past.
As for the coelocanth, the current surviving species are remnants of the order, and are not the same as the ones that appeared in the fossil record.
Just as with other niche animals that have survived for millions of years, they are virtually unchanged. This means that while they have changed or evolved over the years, their ancestors would still be recognizable, unlike other creatures (like whales for example.)


posted on Feb, 10 2009 @ 06:00 AM
reply to post by WatchNLearn

lol. I propose also this : Drop Joe Caveman in the centre of Detroit, then drop average Joe in the centre Detroit . Who would live longer ?

Evolution does not necessary mean allways "better", it could simply mean "better adapted for a speciffic environment" ..

[edit on 10-2-2009 by sty]

posted on Feb, 10 2009 @ 06:55 AM

Originally posted by Lannock
You evolutionists are as bad as Christians. Can't even agree on aspects of your own religion

Evolution stops or continues depending on environmental factors.

Proof # 1: the coelacanth hasn't changed for millions of years and I believe neither has the shark and probably 100s of other species as well.
Sorry Lannock your so far off base I am going to call you Hovind for the rest of this post

Right Mr. Hovind the two species of coelacanth we see today swimming in our oceans are Latimeria chalumnae and L. menadoensis, while the come under the umbrella term of coelacanth they are only two extant(still living) members all the species that once lived under the umbrella term coelacanth, both L. chalumnae and L. menadoensis are relatively new species within the Order COELACANTHIFORMES and are not the same ones that we have found fossilized dating back hundreds of millions of years, there are lobefinned members of the Order coelacanthiformes that are similar in appearance to our two extant species but are not the same species

heres a list of all the ones that are now extinct and are the ones we do find fossilized in the millions of year old rock


Family Coelacanthidae (extinct)
Axelia (extinct)
Coelacanthus (extinct)
Ticinepomis (extinct)
Wimania (extinct)

Family Diplocercidae (extinct)
Diplocercides (extinct)

Family Hadronectoridae (extinct)
Allenypterus (extinct)
Hadronector (extinct)
Polyosteorhynchus (extinct)

Family Mawsoniidae (extinct)
Alcoveria (extinct)
Axelrodichthys (extinct)
Chinlea (extinct)
Diplurus (extinct)
Mawsonia (extinct)

Family Miguashaiidae (extinct)
Miguashaia (extinct)

Family Latimeriidae
Holophagus (extinct)
Libys (extinct)
Macropoma (extinct)
Macropomoides (extinct)
Megacoelacanthus (extinct)
Latimeria (James Leonard Brierley Smith, 1939)
L. chalumnae (Comorese coelacanth) (James Leonard Brierley Smith, 1939)
L. menadoensis (Indonesian coelacanth) (Pouyaud, Wirjoatmodjo, Rachmatika, Tjakrawidjaja, et al., 1999)

Undina (extinct)

Family Laugiidae (extinct)
Coccoderma (extinct)
Laugia (extinct)

Family Rhabdodermatidae (extinct)
Caridosuctor (extinct)
Rhabdoderma (extinct)

Family Whiteiidae (extinct)
Whiteia (extinct)

the two in bold Mr. Hovind are the one's that are alive today and are not found in hundreds of million year old rocks as fossils

should you compare a modern one with the ones above many are wildly different some are similar but none are the same

when you're confusing an entire Order of species as a single species your really going to look dumb when it smacks you in the face like now.

Thats likes saying wow Carnivora are still alive today they have not changed for million of years and being dumb enough not to realize it covers nearly every carnivorous mammal that has lived for the past 42 million years and is as diverse as elephant seals, dogs, cats and panda's and 256 other(extant) species in between

sharks horseshoecrabs and anything else you care to pull out of the bag ay is a living fossil and has not evolevd at al in the last x number of years i m quite happy to predict a)your wrong about it b) ill be able to prove you are

I think that's all the proof I need, eh?
Well its all the proof i need to know you know nothing about taxonomy paleontology or evolutionary biology, is that good enough?

How can you let a creationist teach your religion to you?
have yet to learn anything from a creationist that is worth knowing except for repeating down the local bar as a joke

maybe you should try teaching us and we will correct you as you go?

Back to the OP yes were still evolving physically i can pull out some examples if you like?

In fact the major change that increased our brain size by altering our skull shape i still active and still flexing which is the number one cause in teeth misalignment in people and when 80+%of the worlds populations are suffering the same thing it lets you know it still on the moveit still on the move

[edit on 10/2/09 by noobfun]

posted on Feb, 10 2009 @ 07:18 AM
news article

A TWO-year-old girl who spent 20 minutes under water after falling into a swimming pool has stunned British doctors by making a full recovery in hospital.

Not so much sure that this is evolution in a small count...

or just wicked good luck...

posted on Feb, 10 2009 @ 11:18 PM
Of course we haven't stopped evolving. Nothing ever does.

We may have developed control over our environment to the point where we live comfortable lives and are no longer threatened by predators, but that doesn't mean we have eliminated the pressures that drive natural selection and therefore evolution.

To see why this is so, imagine an environment that is perfectly suited to human life. Plenty of good, nourishing food, clean air and water, complete security from natural threats (disease, predators, natural disasters) and every home comfort you could think of. Now put a random sample of, say, a million people into this environment and wait for results.

What do you think will happen? Will everyone thrive equally in this environment? No, of course they won't, because people are all different. Some will have special abilities or talents that enable them to do better in the chosen environment than others; likewise, some will have handicaps that cause them to do worse.

Over time, these differences will affect their reproductive success. The ones who thrive best in the environment will have more offspring than those that don't. Their genes will come to dominate the gene pool, and their physical and behavioural traits will be widely distributed in the population.

You see, when people speak of the environment affecting human evolution, they forget that the biggest single factor in that environment is other people. Darwin didn't forget it; he was very clear, from the outset, that the fiercest evolutionary competition is among members of the same species. No-one controls his environment until he controls all the people in it.

So even in the 'perfect environment' evolution will still continue.

And our real environment is far from perfect. It's rife with war, disease, famine, disaster, violence and crime. It is heterogenous, varying enormously from one part of the world to another. And it changes continually, this environment of ours, far more rapidly and unpredictably than the African savannah ecosystem in which we first evolved. The contemporary human environment imposes far greater selective pressures and stresses on us than any purely 'natural' environment.

So if anything, we are probably evolving faster than ever before.

After all, the rest of the planet is. Why should we be any different?

posted on Feb, 11 2009 @ 03:51 PM
No animal, including humans (primates), will ever stop evolving.

Mankind is evolving today. We are changing and adapting not only to our environment, but we're also bringing on change artificially through advances in medical science. A good example is that an increasing number of people are born without wisdom teeth. This may, or may not, be related to having them pulled generation after generation, but it is a change that seems to be happening whatever the cause. More interesting than that is that fact that even no person, in this generation, were to be born with any wisdom teeth at all generations in the future could actually be born with their wisdom teeth, and it's all because the genotype could simply be going dormant. Genetics is a very fascinating subject.

I wish I could provide a link to the study that discovered dormant genes becoming active again, it was a very fascinating read.

Anyway, having said all this, I feel that evolution as we understand it is not as Darwin saw it. Yes it does happen, but it's not a single organism to multi-celled organism, over millions of years, kind of thing.

posted on Feb, 11 2009 @ 10:04 PM
reply to post by one_enlightened_mind

A good example is that an increasing number of people are born without wisdom teeth. This may, or may not, be related to having them pulled generation after generation...

Whatever the reason for people being born without wisdom teeth, that certainly isn't it.

That isn't evolution by natural selection. It isn't even Lamarckism.

Still, you do say in your post that you believe evolution takes place, but not necessarily in a Darwinian way. Would you like to elaborate a bit on that? I'm interested.

posted on Feb, 11 2009 @ 10:16 PM
This has always interested me and its very true because we are constantly evolving...Unfortunately due to our extreme circumstances in these times, I believe we are accelerating at a faster rate and not fully aware of it. I would also go as far as to say that some of us are evolving benevolently and some of us negatively.

Proof? Well...Emotions are far more intense. Crimes/Conflicts are far more intense. Thoughts are more predominant. Idea's more frequent. Premonition/Prediction/Theory is at an all-time high.

Think back to say...1909...People didn't express themselves the same way they do in 2009. 100 years ago, we weren't having the same feelings pass through us we do now.

It feels to me as if everything is intensifying and that I believe is part of evolution. Mankind is not evolving physically (if we are its uncomprehendingly slow) but mentally/psychically (don't mean moving objects with mind and teleporting) Anyone relate to that?

posted on Feb, 11 2009 @ 10:27 PM

Human evolution kicks into high gear
Researchers debate whether our species is growing apart or together

.......The new genetic adaptations, some 2,000 in total, are not limited to the well-recognized differences among ethnic groups in superficial traits such as skin and eye color. The mutations relate to the brain, the digestive system, life span, immunity to pathogens, sperm production and bones - in short, virtually every aspect of our functioning.

The rest of the story.......

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in