| Article in UK. Human Species to split in two?
Posted: 10/27/2007 12:47:32 PM | Just saw this article from a British paper online. Pretty interesting. Will the world really come to this?
Human race will 'split into two different species'
By NIALL FIRTH -
The human race will one day split into two separate species, an attractive, intelligent ruling elite and an underclass of dim-witted, ugly goblin-like creatures, according to a top scientist.
100,000 years into the future, sexual selection could mean that two distinct breeds of human will have developed.
The alarming prediction comes from evolutionary theorist Oliver Curry from the London School of Economics, who says that the human race will have reached its physical peak by the year 3000.
The report claims that after they reach their peak around the year 3000 humans will begin to regress
These humans will be between 6ft and 7ft tall and they will live up to 120 years.
"Physical features will be driven by indicators of health, youth and fertility that men and women have evolved to look for in potential mates," says the report, which suggests that advances in cosmetic surgery and other body modifying techniques will effectively homogenise our appearance.
Men will have symmetrical facial features, deeper voices and bigger penises, according to Curry in a report commissioned for men's satellite TV channel Bravo.
Women will all have glossy hair, smooth hairless skin, large eyes and pert breasts, according to Curry.
Racial differences will be a thing of the past as interbreeding produces a single coffee-coloured skin tone.
The future for our descendants isn't all long life, perfect bodies and chiselled features, however. While humans will reach their peak in 1000 years' time, 10,000 years later our reliance on technology will have begun to dramatically change our appearance.
Medicine will weaken our immune system and we will begin to appear more child-like.
Dr Curry said: "The report suggests that the future of man will be a story of the good, the bad and the ugly.
H G Wells' Science Fiction novel The Time Machine (which was later adapted into two films - this picture is from the 2002 version) the human race has evolved into two species, the highly intelligent and wealthy Eloi...
...and the frightening, animalistic Morlock (as seen in the 1960 film version of the classic book)
"While science and technology have the potential to create an ideal habitat for humanity over the next millennium, there is the possibility of a monumental genetic hangover over the subsequent millennia due to an over-reliance on technology reducing our natural capacity to resist disease, or our evolved ability to get along with each other. "After that, things could get ugly, with the possible emergence of genetic 'haves' and 'have-nots'."
Dr Curry's theory may strike a chord with readers who have read H G Wells' classic novel The Time Machine, in particular his descriptions of the Eloi and the Morlock races. In the 1895 book, the human race has evolved into two distinct species, the highly intelligent and wealthy Eloi and the frightening, animalistic Morlock who are destined to work underground to keep the Eloi happy. | |
|
| |
| |
| Article in UK. Human Species to split in two?
Posted: 10/27/2007 5:30:26 PM | | Sorry to bring joke here, it is not humor section, but this reminds me of this beautiful ballerina proposed to this ugly scientist telling him “Let get married and we will have kids beautiful like me and smart like you” the scientist answers “How do you know that they will not be ugly like me and stupid like you” | |
|
| |
| Article in UK. Human Species to split in two?
Posted: 10/27/2007 8:14:19 PM | Actually the Eloi, while the more attractive, are not intelligent at all...they have come to rely on their beauty & pleasure so much, they have become child-like & lost their intelligence & even the ability to read..they are incapable of making decisions or thinking for themselves...& while terrified of the Morlock...they rely completely on them to provide for them...
& yes, while the Morlock are keeping the Eloi pacified & provide for them...they are also using them as their food..basically taking care of their cattle...did you actually read the book or see the movies?
& it doesn't make sense to me to say
advances in cosmetic surgery and other body modifying techniques will effectively homogenise our appearance.
how can something cosmetically done, mess with genetics?...That's like saying if a woman gets a boob job, then her descendants will have larger breast...I think not...
& that there will eventually be the beautiful, smart people & the ugly, stupid ones...is to assume that only beautiful, smart ppl sleep with other beautiful, smart ppl for many generations...& only ugly, stupid ppl sleep with the same...& we all know that 1st...there are many combinations of these...aka...ugly does not equal stupid nor does beauty suggest intelligence...
also, in order for this to happen, it would have to be required that only certain ppl be allowed to sleep with their exact same type...& ppl who are combinations...say ugly, but smart...would have to be sterilized...am I making any sense here?
the only relevance I see in this that could be a true theory, would be a closer blending of skin tone...& I believe that's part of the whole point we are supposed to be trying to get anyhow...ppl are the same, no matter the color of the skin...it's the genetics, education, & upbringing that create the differences...
 | |
|
| Article in UK. Human Species to split in two?
Posted: 10/27/2007 10:29:05 PM | The article is obviously written by an idiot who does not grasp what evolution really is, hence the 'physical peak' nonsense.
Biological evolution is not a system where there's a goal or specific outcome desired in any species, man included.
Biological evolution is a system where mutation traits that are most beneficial to survival are passed on to offspring, as dictated by enviromental pressures.
For example, in an enviroment where it's very cold, any genes that create an organism with a protective fur coat to help keep the organism alive will be the dominant genes since those specific organisms will have a much better chance of survival and passing on those genes. | |
|
| Article in UK. Human Species to split in two?
Posted: 10/28/2007 12:56:29 AM | Funny. Ever met a couch potato who looked good? Ever met a smart person who never read a book? Only way this would work would be if the ruling elite read tons of books, and worked out every day, and the lower classes read nothing, and sat of the sofa all day. Seeing as most people who have everything handed to them don't seem to like the idea of making an effort, a lot of the descendants of the ruling elite probably wouldn't read much, and wouldn't exercise much, so some of the ruling elite would become part of the lower classes. Also, seeing as the main aim of those in the lower classes is to get a better life for themselves, a lot of the descendants of the lower classes would educate themselves and make themselves look great and become part of the ruling elite.
You only have to look at our society. Lots of models were from poor backgrounds. Same with lots of successful businessmen. Lots of their grandchildren are ugly and stupid and become poor.
The aristocracy suggested this hundreds of years ago. So the noble families decided to only marry each other. They inbred, and developed all the typical problems caused by inbreeding, such as lots of idiots, and serious inherited illnesses, such as haemophilia. Where the term "blue blood" comes from. They were so sickly that their veins stood out, and their faces were blue, not a healthy pink colour. | |
|
mak68
|
Joined: 10/9/2007
Msg: 9 | |
| Article in UK. Human Species to split in two?
Posted: 10/28/2007 1:13:36 AM | Ever met a couch potato who looked good?
Yes.
Ever met a smart person who never read a book?
If you refer to someone who is intelligent but not booksmart, most certainly. Even rats and chimps show signs of intelligence.
Only way this would work would be if the ruling elite read tons of books, and worked out every day, and the lower classes read nothing, and sat of the sofa all day.
Seems you don't understand the article, did you read it ??? Mentions NOTHING of the ruling elite, nor the lower classes.
Seeing as most people who have everything handed to them don't seem to like the idea of making an effort, a lot of the descendants of the ruling elite probably wouldn't read much, and wouldn't exercise much,
Where does it say in the article that the ruling elite would evolve like this ? You are turning something that is genetics based into something that is class based. One HUGE strawman. Read and understand the article.
Here is a link to the article:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/technology/technology.html?in_article_id=489653&in_page_id=1965 | |
|
| Article in UK. Human Species to split in two?
Posted: 10/28/2007 2:37:36 AM | I bit my tongue for a while, largely because there is some possible validity to the hypothesis, despite the ludicrous claims that often accompany it. I tend to agree with Blaise, largely based on entirely anecdotal evidence.
No evolution is not directional - it does not "choose" an outcome. WE, however, DO. Have you ever heard the joke "God must have liked idiots, since he made so many"? Or noticed the trend among the affluent and healthy western nations to declining birth rates? The wealthy, healthy, and affluent tend to avoid reproducing, but their children live long, and they choose attractive, healthy mates. [Okay...wealthy and affluent is redundant. Oops]. The poor OR unhealthy are less selective. They take the mate they can get, and reproduce more often, generally with lower survival. Combined into a single society, this creates bimodal reproduction, with directional reproductional selection: Individuals choose similar mates, and in the long run, the result is reinforcement of genetic pools. This has already been demonstrated numerous times in short periods - genetic illnesses or abnormalities in royal lineages with line-breeding; dog, cat, horse, pig, cattle, and chicken breeds which are simply line-select genetic pools within their species; human races with different physical and genetic features [HIV resistance in some Caucasians, SSA in many negroids]. It is exactly these trends which causes speciation.
I haven't had a chance to read the article, though it lead to a previous thread [yes, this one is redundant]. The idea has support. The specifics may be questionable. The unscientific extrapolations, however, are often silly or just plain racist or prejudicial wishful thinking. | |
|
| Article in UK. Human Species to split in two?
Posted: 10/28/2007 1:05:46 PM | To Blaise McPyrrho in msg #9:
1) The article:
The human race will one day split into two separate species, an attractive, intelligent ruling elite and an underclass of dim-witted, ugly goblin-like creatures, according to a top scientist. Seems like someone didn't read the article himself.
2) Genetics:
As FrogO_Oeyes put, these sort of breeding groups tend to incur genetic diseases, such as haemophilia. I have a friend from Londonderry in Northern Ireland. This sort of thing was believed over there, and people from the ruling elite only married each other. Same for the underclass. The result was that both parties' genetic abnormalities were repeatedly encouraged. It ended when it became apparent that 50% of the population were bumbling idiots, and the other 50% were impractical geniuses, in both groups.
Darwin said that Evolution encourages adaptability to the environment. So if attractive, intelligent people were the best adapted to the new environment, everyone would become that. If dim-witted, ugly, goblin-like creatures were the best adapted to the new environment, everyone would become that. As it is, it appears that in our current environment, both groups have their advantages. Intelligent people are generally more successful, but worry too much. Attractive people generally find it much easier to get dates, but much harder to establish relationships.
One only has to look at the Lord of the Rings trilogy. It is the Ents, the trees, the ghosts, and the destruction of Sauron who get rid of the goblin-like orcs. Until these invincible forces of Nature come about, the Men of Rohan and Gondor are clearly about to be defeated. It is Nature that saves man from orc, not man.
3) Types of intelligence:
If you refer to someone who is intelligent but not booksmart, most certainly. Even rats and chimps show signs of intelligence. Books are collections of information. Paper books are only one kind. E-books are another. IMHO, people who are intelligent are people who learn things and apply them to their daily lives. People who are intelligent but not "booksmart", are people who have read a "book", even if it is a mechanic who learns a car so well he knows it "like a book", or who listens to a "living book", a person of knowledge. People who have that sort of information, invariably do take up reading paper books in their field at some point in their lives, if only for light entertainment and to increase their knowledge, and often have a good library of paper books in their fields of interest.
However, there are lots of people who lack any desire to learn or to apply their knowledge except to benefit themselves. We call these people a blight on society. They seek to insult intelligent people at every turn, knowing full well that it is only a matter of time until society's current positive discrimination to the mentally disabled will be put under the spotlight, and reveal these cowards and weaklings for who they are.
It is a common misnomer that if someone is "booksmart", they are incapable of dealing with real life. I know plenty of people who are "booksmart", and they apply their knowledge constantly. However, this is very infuriating to the unintelligent, and seek to insult them at every turn. I know plenty of intelligent people who can barely read. They never put me down for my "booksmarts" and I appreciate them for their abilities equally well. However, there are plenty of other people who do, and they often reveal by their words and their actions that they are miserable in their lives down to their own actions, and that they seem extremely unwilling to recognise their part in their misery.
Rats & chimps are "booksmart" too. They learn from their siblings and their parents. One only has to look at how chimps behave, grooming each other, and being supportive of each other, to see that they have recognised the benefits of co-operation and avoiding competition, something many unintelligent people seem NOT to have grasped in our society.
I suggest that you read the article again, and pay particular attention to the words used. The mind boggles how you managed to miss 2 words (ruling elite) from the first sentence in the article, yet managed to notice the same 2 words in my post. | |
|
| Article in UK. Human Species to split in two?
Posted: 10/28/2007 4:00:23 PM | | I think that purposeful genetic manipulation and human integration with technologies will be where the next split happens rather than through the kind of natural selection that created our species. This could also happen much sooner than divergence strictly through sexual selection. We may not live long enough to see it, but it's possible that humanity could splinter in many directions in the near future ("near future" being a relative term). | |
|
mak68
|
Joined: 10/9/2007
Msg: 13 | |
| Article in UK. Human Species to split in two?
Posted: 10/28/2007 10:16:11 PM | The human race will one day split into two separate species, an attractive, intelligent ruling elite and an underclass of dim-witted, ugly goblin-like creatures, according to a top scientist. Seems like someone didn't read the article himself.
Seems as if you have not understood it. In your first post, you discuss the habits of ruling elite and underclass, not adaptation to environment as you do now.
Now you state:
Darwin said that Evolution encourages adaptability to the environment. So if attractive, intelligent people were the best adapted to the new environment, everyone would become that. If dim-witted, ugly, goblin-like creatures were the best adapted to the new environment, everyone would become that
Yet you mentioned NOTHING of it previously, only that habits would affect who would be upper or lower class. The article refers to genetics being the cause of split, NOT the habits of one or the other, or how one part of the class may fall into the underclass due to lack of certain habits. Now you present something else.
The article is referring to what may happen as a cause of genetics, not as it is now, nor it being a cause of habits of class as you have posted in your previous statement:
Only way this would work would be if the ruling elite read tons of books, and worked out every day, and the lower classes read nothing, and sat of the sofa all day. Seeing as most people who have everything handed to them don't seem to like the idea of making an effort,a lot of the descendants of the ruling elite probably wouldn't read much, and wouldn't exercise much, so some of the ruling elite would become part of the lower classes.
You were also generalizing (as I have bolded), to try and make a point.
A ruling elite and a lower class will be split via genetics, not habits. Habits of the elite or the underclass do not necessarily equate adaptibility to environment either.
IMHO, people who are intelligent are people who learn things and apply them to their daily lives.
That can be a sign of intelligence, yet not necessarily though. They may just be mimicking what they see, without having to think. One can learn and apply what is learned without the benefit of reading. It is practical intelligence as opposed to analytical intelligence.
People who are intelligent but not "booksmart", are people who have read a "book", even if it is a mechanic who learns a car so well he knows it "like a book", or who listens to a "living book", a person of knowledge.
Ahh, but that wasn't the issue in your first statement was it? :
Ever met a smart person who never read a book?
Now you go on to say that "books" can be many things, as a living "book". You are now shifting terms in discussion, ie making up your definitions as you go along to suit your point. This is very disingenuous.
It is a common misnomer that if someone is "booksmart", they are incapable of dealing with real life.
Strawman, I never said this. There is analytical intelligence (booksmarts), practical intelligence (common sense and how you apply analytical intelligence), and creative intelligence (formation of novel or new ideas). Dealing with life is usually regarded as practical intelligence, not analytical. See here:
http://student.vwc.edu/~kkbutts/Successful%20intelligence.htm
I suggest that you read the article again, and pay particular attention to the words used. The mind boggles how you managed to miss 2 words (ruling elite) from the first sentence in the article, yet managed to notice the same 2 words in my post.
I was referring to "ruling elite" as you had defined it in your post, a matter of habits and their upkeep. I should have clarified. | |
|
| Article in UK. Human Species to split in two?
Posted: 10/29/2007 6:00:00 PM | Re the OPost:
Are we supposed to comment on the theort presented from a scientific or a philosophical perspective? I choose the latter.
"100,000 years into the future, sexual selection could mean that two distinct breeds of human will have developed."
Now in predictions there is ST, MT and LT. This is XXXXXXXXLT (super extra LT).
"The alarming prediction comes from evolutionary theorist Oliver Curry from the London School of Economics, who says that the human race will have reached its physical peak by the year 3000. "
Ie in 993 years from now. Ie as far ahead as 2007 was in 1014. Still XXXLT, especially by "just in time" standars of the era. Who among us will be around to say whether this prediction proved right or not?
"The report claims that after they reach their peak around the year 3000 humans will begin to regress".
So we are still climbing to our peak and we have about 993 years to start going "over the hill", physically. So what's the hurry? 993 years?
And what if there will indeed bee two "species" 100,000 years from now? The chances that a megametior will have hit Earth by then (a la the one who eliminated the Dinos) are higher. Or climate change! Or 2012!
Indeed there no comparison to the creatures in the Time Machine (book and movie).
On a lighter note, is the dichotpmy described not sort of a case that existed WITHIN certain countries, in schematic terms of course, only a few centuries ago? And was quickly, thankfully, reversed? Or a sneakier thus note, is this theory paving the way for an educational reform to avoi this LT effect schism? | |
|
| Article in UK. Human Species to split in two?
Posted: 10/29/2007 7:45:55 PM | This isn't a direct response. Just a marginally-related general book recommendation.
Fiction: Darwin's Radio.
An interesting (to me) thought experiment on the non-direction, non-linear nature of evolution... | |
|
| Article in UK. Human Species to split in two?
Posted: 10/29/2007 11:07:57 PM | I'm surprised no one's mentioned the film Idiocracy. It's set only 500 years into the future, but it's clearly labeled as sci-fi. Speculation about where evolution might be twenty times farther out should probably be labeled similarly.
While I can see why it can be valuable to look way far out in time using what we now think we know, I can also see how the conjectured dystopian result could be used improperly for political purposes in the present. But perky breasts? Ok, I'm onboard.  | |
|
| Article in UK. Human Species to split in two?
Posted: 6/29/2008 6:53:24 AM | | I don't think this will happen because there are too many assumptions. I believe that within the next 100 to 500 years, the way genes are contributed to future generations might change. Further, unless we begin colonizing other planets, the long-term isolation necessary for two distinct species to evolve will never happen. Remember a new species exists when one form can no longer produce healthy, FERTILE offspring with the other form. I believe that there will always be Haves mating with Have nots . On Earth, there will be no geographic isolation and therefore, no new species creation. | |
|
| |
| Article in UK. Human Species to split in two?
Posted: 7/3/2008 9:32:06 AM |
I don't think this will happen because there are too many assumptions. I believe that within the next 100 to 500 years, the way genes are contributed to future generations might change. Further, unless we begin colonizing other planets, the long-term isolation necessary for two distinct species to evolve will never happen. Remember a new species exists when one form can no longer produce healthy, FERTILE offspring with the other form. I believe that there will always be Haves mating with Have nots . On Earth, there will be no geographic isolation and therefore, no new species creation.
This isn't quite true. I think unless humankind gets in a situation where a trait provides a group a real advantage for survival(as in life and death not the accumulation of more wealth) I doubt that there will be much if any natural evolution in the large population. Having said that, I can not discount evolution due to progresses in genetic engineering. | |
|
| Article in UK. Human Species to split in two?
Posted: 7/3/2008 11:02:00 AM |
how can something cosmetically done, mess with genetics?...That's like saying if a woman gets a boob job, then her descendants will have larger breast...I think not... Actually, how this is more likely to appear is in the rich and wealthy having scientists change the genetics of either the egg or sperm, or something of that nature, to produce a beautiful, intelligent child....basically a flawless child. The poor will have to rely on the old-fashioned method. This is more likely to produce two separate classes of people with a huge divide between them. | |
|
| Article in UK. Human Species to split in two?
Posted: 7/3/2008 12:30:52 PM | I really doesn't matter about who's the more beautiful or has the biggest tallywhacker. Life 3000 years from now will be as it is today. Ruled by those with the most terrifying aresenal of weaponry.
O | |
|
|
Home
login 
