Evolution #9

[ QUOTE ]
Im pretty sure that within a few hundred million years, humans will begin evolving 'backward' into apes, reptiles, birds, etc. They will in turn regress into simpler, less complex organisms. Eventually, all that will be left on earth are the simple prokaryotes and eukaryotes. Finally, another pre-Cambrian type disaster will strike, leaving only one fortunate single celled organism on the earth. Then the process will repeat infinitely, even though the universe is not eternal.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd be willing to bet against this and lay 2:1.

[pc in NM]

[ QUOTE ]
"2) Are we evolving on the right path? "

For all practical purposes human evolution has ended. The unfit freely contribute their genes to the pool. The most fit seem to have no reproductive advantage, in fact in western society the most fit tend to reproduce at the lowest rates. Perhaps that's evolution after all, just not forward going.

[/ QUOTE ]

The genes that survive are, by definition, are "the most fit".

That's the "thing" about evolution - it's merely a descriptive explanation about the descent of species; its not a value-laden theory - there's no "better" or "worse"....

[benkahuna]

I feel your pain. I studied biology in high school and as a major in college and people here have serious misunderstandings about evolutionary theory.

The discussion on emotion here is a inaccurate in the context of its occurance in the brain and neurobiological evolution.

Emotion is strongly tied in with the hypothalamic output, not with complex decision-making, more recently evolved areas of the brain (neocortex). Emotions appear to serve a function as a coordinating mechanism for certain reflexive behaviors. The most recently evolved features of cognitive functioning seem to be a greater emphasis on reflex suppresion, not emotion. We have the greatest ability of all animals to consciously inhibit reflexive behavior or neurobiological action.

There are far too many misconceptions here to be worth my time dispelling. I recommend everyone here that is told they don't get evolution read a text on the topic. Be careful with the wording because small misunderstandings can easily lead you astray. When you understand the definition within the context of biology of the following terms, you'll be on your way:

natural selection
selective pressure
fitness
gene frequency
mutation
species
speciation
theory
common ancestor

Good luck. Learning the basics of genetics wouldn't hurt either. This should be 2-3 chapters worth of reading in a standard biology text. Shouldn't take more than maybe two hours. Basic genetics, maybe another hour.

Keep in mind that evolution is a theory. It cannot be proven (because we don't have the timescales necessary to do studies). However, it's almost universally accepted within the many subdisciplines of biology, even by the religious biologists (a few intelligent design types snuck in), largely because given the available evidence it's a very reasonable theory of which there is no working evidence-based alternative.

[pc in NM]

I'd recommend as the best introduction to evolution the various collections of essays by Stephen Jay Gould. These collections are readable, address many diverse topics in relation to evolutionary theory - hard to beat that combo....

[Hedge Henderson]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd recommend as the best introduction to evolution the various collections of essays by Stephen Jay Gould. These collections are readable, address many diverse topics in relation to evolutionary theory - hard to beat that combo....

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd recommend them as well, but I'd start with the earliest ones, such as The Panda's Thumb and Ever Since Darwin. They're in an intelligent, yet conversational style that just about anyone can read and enjoy. Gould's later collections are much more... verbose, often annoyingly so.


[ QUOTE ]
Cooker sez:
This theory of punctuated equilibrium is fairly well supported in the fossil record and pretty widely accepted among evolutionists.

[/ QUOTE ]

Punctuated equilibrium is a lot more intuitive if you've read Ernst Mayr. Given that most of the best theoretical work on population genetics was already done by the late 1940s, I'm surprised it took another two decades to come up with punctuated equilibrium. I'm even more surprised that the idea was so controversial when introduced. I guess gradualism wasn't exclusive to geology.

[ QUOTE ]
Read Stephen J. Gould's book "The Structure of Evolution Theory" to get a more modern view. There is a lot beyond natural selection in modern evolutionary theory.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sheesh! A fine book, true, but it's 1300+ pages! Have some compassion, man! Give 'em something to wade in before you throw 'em into the ocean.