Homo Sapiens + evolution -> ???

[Retroboy]

k here's a mental exercise for you.

Assume you could track humans in general into the future, until at some point The Wonks Who Run Science decided that we were no longer "homo sapiens".

1) What do you think has to happen to get us to that next step on the evolutionary ladder to give us (or our many-times-removed descendents) a new classification? (in other words, what will be the first species demarcation point?)

2) Will said evolutionary step include all of us, or will it be a sapiens and 'sapiens plus' distinction?

3) Will homo sapiens as a species actually survive to GET there?

Discuss, debate, and disagree. My inferior-to-my-great-great-ad-naseum-grandchildren's thoughts will be posted shortly.

-- Retro

[oneredpanther]

Homo Sapien is merely the name for our collective group of planetary phenotypes. Just as there are many variants of that which we call a "dog" (yet no "dog plus") there are many distinct annexes to the Homo Sapien too.

Your question doesn't really make any sense.

[Langy]

I believe the difference between species is rather simple:

When two things can't reproduce with each other (and they are of the correct sexes, IE one male and one female) and there are no other problems, such as genetic diseases, then the two things are of different species.

The problem would come when you defeine what a genetic disease is, I guess. That could get a bit confuzzled.

[Vaarok]

Our species will either accumulate more neotenous traits, possibly ending up like the Niven novel where humans are pygmy sized, and the tops of their heads are bald. Basically we loose tougher/stronger traits because we birth earlier and earlier in development in order to allow the ever-growing skull to pass the birth canal.

However, I am personally hoping for directed biological improvement. Hurray for Nietzcheans and Sauron Supersoldiers!

[Retroboy]

Panf, IMO there's some hair-splitting going on here, but fair enough. Let me try again.

At some point, a decision was made regarding the evolutionary ladder to refer to two separate species - homo erectus (if I have our immediate ancestors correct), and homo sapiens.

In your opinion, what will be the demarkation point between homo sapiens and the next evolutionary step on the ladder, when a new scientific name is required to describe the resulting species?

Better?

-- Retro

[Bnonn]

Genetic modification will lead to castes of very distinct species created from the same homo sapien phenotype.

See posthumanism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posthumanism) and transhumanism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism).

[Tel'Quessir]

Fully understandable - I think technology can make us homo sapiens both ways. Of course making out-of-this-world predictions actually prevent those "Future" fears from materializing, so here goes :)

Presence of a almost totally automated and electronic-controlled everyday life can lead to the atrophy of physique - imagine if to be a civilian almost everything can be ordered from home online, no incentive to actually burn some calories because "work" pays off and takes up most of the time. Unless the person were in the military then there'd be no problems.

[Or use those toning devices or something, crazy tech.]

So on one end there'd be hunched over nerds with lots of techno-augmentation devices on them, or 300-pounders with massive "external fuel cells" and on the other hand we have normal human beings.

A bit exaggerated, yes, but living in a fully urban country I need a lot of discipline in order not to become some whelp that can be felled with single push. There's simply no where to go although I absolutely love very-long range trekking and other outdoor activities - all potential spots for those are indunated by numbskulls that can't even solve a simple daily-life problem without wasting a full half an hour. Gyms and tracks? Blah, same story.

Heck, I am looking forward to being "yelled at" in the Army. Only 1 month to wait.... I hate an easy life. Pfffft for "youth troubles", I've none as I deliberately go out of my way to keep an active role in whatever community...

[Tel'Quessir]

Now for a more natural point of view, based on that of the actual evolutionary tree.

We're generally depicted as some sort of very advanced ape [but yet not fully ape-like] way down the evo. chain, then evolving to have more brain mass, and a more upright stature to what we are today. Naturally this does refer to us humans first being "wild animals" then gradually being capable of forming communities in order to survive in the wild, and living by our wits instead of brawn [although it remains an important aspect, we tend to develop tools for a task instead of using hands&feet]. And less hair needed, LOL.

So in the future, who knows? It'll all depend on the kind of life we live - and if there are spacefaring human communities it can be expected of them spaceborne generations on large colony ships to have a different physique and style of thought than an Earthling, in time the differences might increase [even though with enough technology an Earth-like ecostructure could be placed on a vessel] and you have your example of different human "sub races".

[oneredpanther]

The changes you talk about would have to be integral, genetic traits from birth of the new "species" before it could be called such. This is unrelated to people being all spindly on spacecraft of the future - that's merely environmental reaction.

Evolution of Homo Sapiens to a point of new demarcation will not occur for tens of millions of years. Chances are, we'll all be dead by then anyway. Some argue that we stopped evolving when we no longer needed to battle tooth-and-nail for survival in the elements.

Just make sure you NEVER confuse EVOLUTION (happens over millions of years ONLY) with ENVIRONMENTAL REACTION (can happen over weeks) otherwise Squiddy will seperate you from your manlihood doublequick.

[NovaBurn]

the new species would probably be named Homo Superior. I agree it would take a long while for a significant changes to occur that would be able to classify the new line as a new species. The traits I believe would occur would be mostly enchanments in mental capabilities such as ability to learn at a highly accelerated rate (think jonas from stargate) and things of that nature. Physical changes I'm not sure on but probably resistance to increasing amounts of UV radiation and ability to live in lower-oxygen enviroments.

[Reignfire]

I doubt they will use Homo Superior since that's what mutants were called in the X-Men comics.

[Direwolf]

We're actualy homo sapiens sapiens.

[Vijil]

homo erectus... homo sapiens... x-men... then what?

Sometimes I think that medical science may be preventing us from improving in certain areas. The thing about evolution is that it takes so damned long. Its almost impossible for us to speculate with any kind of accuracy about what sorts of situations we'll be in and have to adapt to...apologies panth.

But then technology may get to the point where natural evolution simply becomes redundant.

[Bonnet]

/me waits for squidys post.....

Evolution is such a slow process that we may never be able to ascertain the results, also there is a rather good argument to be made for stagnation because of our devolpment level.

[Reignfire]

Two guesses I have are that our tail bone will completely disappear and hopefully our appendix too (since we've moved beyond needing these things, but haven't quite got rid of them yet). But, of course, these are just smalls changes, I'm sure must larger ones will happen.

[Direwolf]

Maybe our brain will decrease in size?!??! Or maybe it'll get a huge jump in size again!!

I should really dig up some facts in regards to the history. The best I can remeber from the past 3 steps in evolution in relation to brain size are; currently 1500cc, one step back, 1600cc, then another step back 1000cc.

So maybe we'll get huge brains :) 2000cc? who knows.

[RBA-Wintrow]

Extrapolating from our ancestors we'll have even less hair and even bigger brains. Perhaps wider hips to give birth.

[Handarazuur]

Or maybe our appearance won't change at all?

[Dimension]

less hair, more brains, loss of fingernails, toenails(both of which have already significantly decreased in the course of evolution), loss of the appendix, bigger head to accomodate for brain, less blondes (actually a trend that can be observed). we might also become taller, but i suspect this is not due to a shift in our genes but a result of a different lifestyle and different diet. taking the US into account, we might all grow fat as well.

i doubt that we'll develop a wider hip or that we'll naturally be born sooner and sooner during our development, as modern medicine won't let this become a trait that would cause natural selection.

that being said, who knows what we'll do ourselves in the genetics department?

[Handarazuur]

True. Once those pesky human cloning laws are out of the way...

[Vaarok]

Fewer blondes? That means more brunettes. Sweet.

[Handarazuur]

It's true. The gene for blonde hair is recessive, meaning you have a low chance of getting it, with the exception of having both parents blonde.

Ask Squiddy, he's the Biologist.

[Retroboy]

I'm a bit surprised nobody has mentioned transcendance of some sort as an option. Must not be many Alpha Centauri fans here. ;)

I'd say it's when humans gain some new ability, perhaps active telepathy. We've been homo sapiens sapiens for quite some time now, and there have already been some fundamental physical changes for the average human, height probably being the most obvious. But those, as mentioned above, are effects of the environment, and don't count toward scientific classification.

-- Retro

[Vaarok]

Bah. Telepathy and most other SF superhuman abilities are thinly disguised reversions toward shamanistic "magic", regardless of who chooses to misapply Clarkes' eloquent quote to the argument.. Humans have no apparent tendency toward telepathy, and no other species to our knowledge does either.

Consequently, I put mind powers in the same category of superstitious crap as Yuri Geller. Good as a plot device, rubbish as a real idea.

[Starfisher]

Gah. We have no evolutionary stresses on us as a population so by default we're not going to undergo any major changes. The only 'evolution' that will happen, barring any world changing disasters or events, will be for the various races to slowly breed together into one homogonized humanity.

If we colonize another planet or something happens to isolate one population of humans from another, then you might see some diversification. But that won't happen anytime soon.

So basically, the only way for me to answer this question is to predict some unpredictable event in the future that will cause stress on the human population. I choose space amoeba!!!1

[Mikk]

Humans will evolve into "couch potatoes"

[M37]

Ok.
From what I know our brains are folded- inother words our brins are compacted into our skulls. However I've also read that compared to other anamals the human head is nearly 4X the regular size.

-The next step might be losing our tailbone. -some people don't have one already.
- another step might be having our thumbs grow to be longer.
- other possibilites might be largr , wider ect legs and feet to hold our weight better.
Other changes could include slower aging.

[Reignfire]

Originally posted by Retroboy
I'm a bit surprised nobody has mentioned transcendance of some sort as an option. Must not be many Alpha Centauri fans here. ;)

In Babylon 5, humans will eventually transcend, but I didn't mention that possibility because I was looking at the next step. If humans were to transcend, I would have to agree that it's further down the road.


Originally posted by Starfisher
Gah. We have no evolutionary stresses on us as a population so by default we're not going to undergo any major changes.

You have a very good point. We've evolved to a point where instead of evolving to survive the world, we change the world to are needs.


For those who say we will get taller, I remember reading/hearing somewhere that we only see humans getting taller because of hormones given to cows (to make the larger and produce more milk) are passed down through the milk rather than caused by an evolutionary process.

[oneredpanther]

Give me one (or more) examples of another species known to have 'transcended' since native life began on this planet and you might have a case.

[Dimension]

reignfire, this can't really be as the trend to grow taller has emerged long before cows were treated with hormones. I'm not even sure if cows are even purposely treated with hormones. i seem to recall some story about cows and pigs being treated with certain antibiotics and other medicine that acts either similar to a hormone or has an impact on the individual's metabolism causing production of certain hormones.

I know for a fact that a horse that has EVER recieved narcotics during its life can't be processed to food (dog/cat food in most cases) by law. this imo is another clue that giving hormones to animals that are scheduled to be eaten at some point of time aren't actually legal.

however, I'm not really sure, so maybe vaarok, or someone else who's got some knowledge on that can enlighten us.

[Retroboy]

Growing taller, compared to medieval times, has chiefly been caused by good nutrition, not hormones.

You may be thinking as well of advanced puberty in young girls, which is rumored to be caused by hormones in the stuff they eat.

As for evolution not happening because we don't have to evolve in order to survive, that's not necessarily how it works, because we won't have to rely on good old mom nature to do the changes for us. We're good with genetics and fairly clever to boot - there's nothing saying that we can't in a reasonable timeframe learn how to create a new subspecies genetically that tweaks our children to be - for example - water/air breathers.

-- Retro

[Dimension]

there's estrogen in beer. and in pig's fat i think. maybe if the US would lower the minimum drinking age of non-distilled alcoholic beverages to 16, there wouldn't be as many boobjobs done as there are presently :D

also, i think breathing water would be kinda hard, as the mediums act pretty differently, and you have 21% oxygen in air, but much less in water if I'm not mistaken. however i see how this was only an example.

I'll say this though, I'm not sure if genetically tweaking ourselves or our children can still be called evolution. i don't find breeding new dog races or a different kind of corn to be evolution either. after all, its not the result of natural selection.

[Vaarok]

It's illegal to sell a cow for beef if it's pregnant or has any hormone residues in its' bloodstream. I'd sooner believe soy products are the problem, as soy has remarkable quantities of female hormones.

Meat is certainly not the source. They're quite paranoid about such things at slaughterhouses, and you DO NOT wish to try to get past them, much less try and fail.

Human size is a function of nutrition. Every species on earth can grow about a quarter bigger than the average size simply by expedient of good nutrition. I use an Accelerated Growth (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=accelerated+growth+milk+replacer) program of specially formulated milk-replacer for my calves. The "perfect" nutrient balance of the stuff makes them the size of a twenty-two month old heifer at eighteen months (!) simply by providing them sufficient energy during the first two months of their growth.

/Vaarok, Fleet Agronomist

[Pyromonger]

Natural evolution for humans is over. We affect our eviroment too much to allow it to procede...

So humans of the future will be whatever we want them to be.

I think we should grow pornstar babes with Einstein intellects, to start :P

[Freakshow]

its simple, when we dont have 46 chromosomes. *its 46 right?*

thats why other species cant mate with each other. a horse has 30 chromosomes *not really just for examples sake* and a dog has 36 or something. if they could reproduce theyd have a 33 chromosomed freak animal thing. and different species that can reproduce like tigers and lions, have odd numbered offspring that are sterile since an animal needs to have an even number of chromosomes or else meiosis doesn't work right.

so if "humans" ever get more or less then 46 chromosomes then we are a different species.

[ceejayoz]

Originally posted by Freakshow
its simple, when we dont have 46 chromosomes. *its 46 right?*

thats why other species cant mate with each other. a horse has 30 chromosomes *not really just for examples sake* and a dog has 36 or something. if they could reproduce theyd have a 33 chromosomed freak animal thing. and different species that can reproduce like tigers and lions, have odd numbered offspring that are sterile since an animal needs to have an even number of chromosomes or else meiosis doesn't work right.

so if "humans" ever get more or less then 46 chromosomes then we are a different species. Children with Down's Syndrome have an extra chromosome, but they're not another species.

That's not at all the way it works. Some species have the same number of chromosomes as other species but still cannot mate with each other.

Hell, if it was based on the number of chromosomes that'd mean some species would have to have tens of thousands of chromosomes, considering how many species there are.

[Dimension]

horses and donkeys don't have the same number of chromosomes i think, yet they can breed. however, if the father is a donkey and the mother a horse, the hybrid is infertile in first generation. if its the other way around the hybrid can be fertile for a few generations. or something like that.

[Vaarok]

I dislike both horses and people with Downs Syndrome.

[kaskara]

The whole reproduction thing is really complicated. Let's assume, that the sperm in question can penetrate the egg and get that gene payload delivered without screwing up. Things still have a long way to go to create a healthy embryo! Proteins need to be synthesised, cells differentiated, growth processes driected, homones produced... all manner of biological shennanegans go on, many of which are interdependent. Some genes activate & deactivate others, and if the timing is off for some of these, things can go very wrong. And when anything goes wrong, you usually end up with a ball of goo that isn't very happy. So as you can imagine, the more differenences there are between two sets of chromosomes, the less likely it is they'll be able to interact successfully and built a working organism.

So basically, as you increase genetic disparity, the goo factor (a.k.a. the likelyhood of producing unhappy goo) also increases.

As for the direction of human evolution, evolution only goes anywhere when selective pressure is applied. If you don't have that, you can have all the mutations and genetic recombinations (wee, crossover!) that you want, and all you'll get is a big fat load of genetic drift. I think the human genome drifting a fair bit right now. We have it so good right now, as a species, that reproductive success depends very little on an individual's genetic makeup. If that's a dearth of selective pressure as far as genes go, then I don't know what is!

[ASnogard]

I suspect the path humans will take to the next step will have more to do with mechanics than biology.

It will start slowly, a mechanical limb to replace one lost or defective from birth, mechanical eyes for the blind, ears for the deaf. Then the drive to be a better individual will lead to mechanical limbs, eyes, ears, etc as a enhancement to the norm. I believe the actual physical human will be nothing more than a brain attached to a cyborg body.

It all seems farfetched but by looking at current trends, in what manner can we evolve? There is no pressure to adapt….unless we are evolving into a inanimate root vegetable that resides on a common piece of furniture? :D

Cybernetics is defiantly a attractive path, especially if one looks at the initial benefits of medical care.

[Vaarok]

Speak for yourself. Growing the damn arm back appeals to me far more than changing batteries on the replacement every other day.