How far can we go?

[Celticguy]

How long of a time period do you find to be necessary; because I had set my parameters as being the last 2000 years?

We''ve only been here 400 years at the most. Much less as you head west.

[USFREEDOM911]

We''ve only been here 400 years at the most. Much less as you head west.

I had never intended to make this only about the US; but more as towards the species.

[midcan5]

If you made your point, then you shouldn't have a problem in pointing it out; without just repeating what you were on your soapbox about.

So, what was your point?

My point was we have changed little per my comments and links. Now since you ignored it, what was your point in opening this thread?

[USFREEDOM911]

My point was we have changed little per my comments and links. Now since you ignored it, what was your point in opening this thread?

Are you suggesting that someone from 2,000 years ago, is identical to someone from today?

But then; you did say "...changed very little..." which would imply that even you recognize that there have been changes.

[midcan5]

Are you suggesting that someone from 2,000 years ago, is identical to someone from today?

But then; you did say "...changed very little..." which would imply that even you recognize that there have been changes.

Yes, we are basically the same, and in some cases both socially and intellectually the same. Read ''Don't Sleep, There Are Snakes: Life and Language in the Amazonian Jungle' by Daniel L. Everett. The people live as they did in the past. In terms of time no one knows exactly how long.

The changes are as the British paper suggested, genetic changes that demonstrate natural selection at work. That would be due to migration, integration and adaptation. See also Robert Trivers if you are interested in topic.

I see though that you continue to censor information as you are unable to face challenges to your biased opinions.

[USFREEDOM911]

Yes, we are basically the same, and in some cases both socially and intellectually the same. Read ''Don't Sleep, There Are Snakes: Life and Language in the Amazonian Jungle' by Daniel L. Everett. The people live as they did in the past. In terms of time no one knows exactly how long.

The changes are as the British paper suggested, genetic changes that demonstrate natural selection at work. That would be due to migration, integration and adaptation. See also Robert Trivers if you are interested in topic.

I see though that you continue to censor information as you are unable to face challenges to your biased opinions.

But is not natural selection a form of evolution?

If an isolated area has a substantial amount of work that is hard labor, after several generations wouldn't it be expected to see the majority of the men being larger and stronger.

[midcan5]

But is not natural selection a form of evolution?

If an isolated area has a substantial amount of work that is hard labor, after several generations wouldn't it be expected to see the majority of the men being larger and stronger.

I started to reply but thought until censorship stops, free speech, you know the 1st, no more brilliant thoughts from mc5.

[Mott the Hoople]

I was watching some Sci-Fi movies and was just wondering?

Does anyone think the species of man has "evolved", since say over the past 2000 years?
I don't mean as a society or technical discoveries; but as a species.

This wasn't meant to be anything political or religious; but more about maybe how our species has evolved.

The second part of this, is what does anyone speculate as to where or what we might be able to get to.

Just asking, not meant to start any kind of arguments or insults.

That depends on how you're using the term "evolution". From a biological point of view yes we, as a species, are constantly evolving at the micro level. Evolution in the macro sense generally (but not always) takes large periods of time but, then again, if we've evolved in the macro sense we wouldn't be the same species. If you see my point?

You really need to know more than look at your own children to see evidence of the continuous progression of human evolution. That is, to see descent with modification, which is another way of saying natural selection.

[Mott the Hoople]

But is not natural selection a form of evolution?

If an isolated area has a substantial amount of work that is hard labor, after several generations wouldn't it be expected to see the majority of the men being larger and stronger.

No. Natural selection is the mechanism, or process, by which evolution occurs.

If that isolated area required substantial hard physical work in which being larger and stronger provide survival and/or reproductive advantages then one could predict that those traits would be naturally selected and would propagate throughout the population.

[Mott the Hoople]

How long of a time period do you find to be necessary; because I had set my parameters as being the last 2000 years?

You don't need long time periods at all to observe evolution/natural selection at work. Just look at your children.

[USFREEDOM911]

No. Natural selection is the mechanism, or process, by which evolution occurs.

If that isolated area required substantial hard physical work in which being larger and stronger provide survival and/or reproductive advantages then one could predict that those traits would be naturally selected and would propagate throughout the population.

Not by "natural selection", but more by individual choice.

[Mott the Hoople]

Not by "natural selection", but more by individual choice.

Well individual choice in selecting a mate is a big part of how natural selection works.

[USFREEDOM911]

Well individual choice in selecting a mate is a big part of how natural selection works.

I was trying to make the distinction for things changing due to individual choices, as opposed to something that nature has decided.