Slartibartfas

So you mean the industrial revolution was the significant change?
I want to be sure of that before I answer.

Of course does evolution happen in jumps, even though those jumps are small, every time a gene changes in a constructive way, you have a jump.

Moreover the genetic heritage of humans is quite diverse, it will be extremely hard to tell if something is a real change or just a gene we dont know yet in this variation.

__________________
"Every country gets the cuisine it deserves"

Common insult examples and how to avoid them

Oregon Elephant

There wasn't a single change that took us from evolving to no longer evolving. The more control we took over the enviroment, the less evolution effects humans. When the egytains we're farming and cultivating, they were in partial control of the enviroment, they had adjusted the enviroment to accomadate their way of living, so they didn't need to evolve as much to live there. But the industrial revolution is probably the last key event to where we are now that we aren't evolving.

The issue with human's still evolving, is that if it can be proven, that disproves the current theory of evolution. According to the current theory, humans cannot be evolving.

You're right, it happens in little jumps, but those jumps are every generation, everytime parents have a child, evolution should take place. The change of the differences over time is the flow of evolution, but we've had several generations of man sinse we've been at a point where evolution shouldn't be happening, and no evolution has happened.

Slartibartfas

I lack to see in how far the industrial revolution changed so extremely much on a basic level. I would think if something had severe consquences it was the progress of medicine, which in fact does not have too much to do with the industrial evolution at all.

But thats not my real point.
What you prove by this is just one thing: That its not a natural habitat we evolve to fit better, but the environment we create ourselves. Thats a circular relationship, but that makes evolution only more complex, and not inexistent.

How do you explain btw the deficiency of Glucose 6 Phosphate Dehydrogenase that is very common in some heavy malaria regions, and only there?

And why can't humanity change anymore according to the theory of evolution?

No. I was talking about different, larger jumps. I was talking about "+ mutations". They dont happen that often, actually they are rather rare.

But perhaps we are talking about two different things here?

__________________
"Every country gets the cuisine it deserves"

Common insult examples and how to avoid them

Oregon Elephant

The deficiency of G6PD is heriditary, and so is passed from the parents. Population build up deficiencies when there is little gene mixing. These people are suseptible to Malaria (thus why they have so much of it). Evolution would be changing the genes of these people through the generations to make them stronger against Malaria, those weak to malaria would be killed by it and not have any children, while those strong against it, would survive and have more children, passing down the strengths against Malaria to their kids and grand kids and so on.

There has to be competition amoung humans for the right of reproducing, from both natural selection and mate selection.

I think we are. There are, every now and again, major jumps that evolution takes, but it still always goes on each generation.

Slartibartfas

They are stronger against Malaria, they pass it on to their kids and people who dont have it get killed (to a substantially higher degree).


It might really be heriditary, but nothing would make it impossible that something similar could evolve newly. For example a new degeneration of a gene that in fact adds a benefit for the organism.

There is selection taking place. People choose their partner not randomly. Humanity will not remain static till the end of times. If its to our advantage is another story.

Evolution would only be halted if all humans would completely independently from their abilities and tendencies (and therefore also genes) reproduce statistically homogenic. They dont.


Well, for sure, that as well.

__________________
"Every country gets the cuisine it deserves"

Common insult examples and how to avoid them

Seer

Ever heard of this?

http://www.darwinawards.com/

__________________

Oregon Elephant

There is very little linkage between G6PD and malaria, the tests go on with mice and what they might expect to happen in people. A G6PD definency causes many problems, Jaundise, Anemia, ***** (if they get a *****, it is much worse than for others), pneumonia, and so on.

It doesn't have to be perfectly homogenous for evolution to stop. Evolution requires that the reproduction take place by the females being attracted to the more successful males. In our population, whether you are successful by anyone's standard, you can find a mate and have kids. Just because you are more successful at life, doesn't mean that you are going to have more kids. And in todays society, your genetics have much less to do with success, just because your parents were unsuccessful doesn't mean anything towards you (on a genetic level, financial level is different).

I'm beginning to notice the standard evolutionary talking points. The "homogenic" claim is one of the big ones.

Oregon Elephant

I love those awards, they are the funniest things.

Ygorl

Only when they want to force an entire society to veiw their "relations" the same as HET. relations.

Which they're NOT and never WILL be.

The difference between a male and a female

or a male and a male

or a female and a female

is as clear and obvious as the difference between a cube and a sphere

or a sphere and a sphere

or a cube and a cube.

The "pairing" is NOT the same and calling it the same thing won't MAKE it the same.

Oregon Elephant

First, it doesn't matter, but nither does the big bang, but I would love to know more about anything, knowledge and the pursuit of it is the most fun thing in life.

Here's a quote from your link (I don't like Wiki on political issues because of it's ability to be edited, but I'll respond anyway), "...shows that homosexual behavior, not necessarily sex, has been observed..."

What are homosexual behavoirs in animals? In many cases they show it as two males that are "too" close as friends. In animals, if it isn't gay sex, it isn't gay. I've noticed male cats (I swear I wasn't watching, they just did it) sniff and lick an in-heat cat's who who. That doesn't mean that cats love oral sex and foreplay, it's human characteristics that are being placed on animals.