Where's Evolution taking us?

[Gian]

Three questions

1) If the first life forms c 4y.billion ago lived about 24 hours (?) and we now live about 80years, in another 4y.billion will life expectancy continue to increase in a straight line and our descendants will have lifespans of 2.5y.millon?? If so it will certainly make intergalactic travel more practical!

2) Is our species H.Sapiens continuing to evolve? Will our descendants become a new species or species?

3) Will the natural course of evolution without human agency cause the dinosaurs or something like them to evolve again in the far future?

Cheerz GIAN 🙂

[dimreepr]

Evolution doesn't have an agenda, it's a discription of a process; you may as well ask "If I got £20 using my bank card from an ATM today, will I get £100 tomorrow?".

[delboy]

1. Evolution doesn't work in straight line graphs

2. Yes. If we don't go extinct we will become a new species. If the second species is plural - that seems unlikely as genetic isolation of 2 populations seems improbable.

3. Something extinct cannot evolve again - extinction is final. Something similar - seems unlikely but who knows. 

[Curious layman]

1 hour ago, Gian said:

2) Is our species H.Sapiens continuing to evolve? 

Yes

https://www.inverse.com/mind-body/humans-still-evolving-3-recent-adaptations

1 hour ago, Gian said:

Will our descendants become a new species or species?

Maybe.

BBC news- Human species may split in two

1 hour ago, Gian said:

Will the natural course of evolution without human agency cause the dinosaurs or something like them to evolve again in the far future?

They already did, dinosaurs are just animals.

[Gian]

21 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Evolution doesn't have an agenda, it's a discription of a process; you may as well ask "If I got £20 using my bank card from an ATM today, will I get £100 tomorrow?".

The natural human lifespan has extended from the lifespan of the first life forms. Is the extension of lifespan a natural consequence of evolution and will it continue?

21 hours ago, delboy said:

3. Something extinct cannot evolve again - extinction is final. Something similar - seems unlikely but who knows. 

What I mean is, is it at least possible with natural selection that vast organisms something like dinosaurs could evolve again? 

[Bufofrog]

25 minutes ago, Gian said:

The natural human lifespan has extended from the lifespan of the first life forms. Is the extension of lifespan a natural consequence of evolution and will it continue?

No.

27 minutes ago, Gian said:

What I mean is, is it at least possible with natural selection that vast organisms something like dinosaurs could evolve again? 

Something like a dinosaur could certainly evolve.  The key word here is like.

[Sensei]

23 hours ago, delboy said:

3. Something extinct cannot evolve again - extinction is final. Something similar - seems unlikely but who knows. 

There are many examples of animals which evolved independently, from different branches of evolutionary tree, which are very similar, at least from POV how they look and behave. Example: birds, pterosaurs, bats.

Re-making true dinosaur (or extraterrestrial animals, including intelligent one) is plausible.. because you can go through the all possible combinations of DNA in a loop, run simulation of animal inside the computer (or rather network of supercomputers), and sooner or later (rather later) you will find the right combination of DNA which will match (but you will have problem of knowing it really does match perfectly.. that is another problem). So, better find damaged DNA of dinosaur, in amber or so, then run simulation in a loop, to find missing parts which will fit and work and simulated animal will be able to live inside of your simulation (to verify it is promising DNA sequence for later tests and uses)..

 

Edited July 16, 2020 by Sensei

[dimreepr]

3 hours ago, Gian said:

The natural human lifespan has extended from the lifespan of the first life forms. Is the extension of lifespan a natural consequence of evolution and will it continue?

You can't extrapolate evolution into the future, other than the process will find a way around almost any roadblock.

[Area54]

On 7/15/2020 at 1:15 PM, Gian said:

1) If the first life forms c 4y.billion ago lived about 24 hours (?) and we now live about 80years, in another 4y.billion will life expectancy continue to increase in a straight line and our descendants will have lifespans of 2.5y.millon?? If so it will certainly make intergalactic travel more practical.

There is a reasonable correlation between the mass of an organism and its lifespan. (cf. mouse, dog, man, elephant). So, unless you anticipate us evolving into 300ton monsters don't expect a 2.5 my lifespan.

Part of the explanation for extended lifespans lies in the inreasing complexity of the most complex organism: An e.coli bacterium doesn't need any time to develop a whole suite of interacting organs.

On 7/15/2020 at 1:15 PM, Gian said:

2) Is our species H.Sapiens continuing to evolve? Will our descendants become a new species or species?

Yes, we are continuing to evolve. We shall either evolve into and entirely new species, or multiple species, or our line will become extinct. Species don't last for much more than a million years.

 

On 7/15/2020 at 1:15 PM, Gian said:

Will the natural course of evolution without human agency cause the dinosaurs or something like them to evolve again in the far future?

Convergent evolution is common. Thus flying was independently developed by pterosaurs, birds and bats. Swimming with a "fish shape" was developed by mutiple kinds of fishes, ichtyosaurs and cetaceans.

[CharonY]

It is also important to note that all extant species have experienced exactly the same time of evolution. Obviously with large variations in life span. I.e. the length of evolutionary time is not related to expected lifespan.

[Danijel Gorupec]

I think, if our civilization continues without a reset, we will very soon start to intentionally change ourselves at a rate much faster than natural evolution could do. We will engineer our genetic codes (we will also install non-living implants into our bodies to obtain above-natural capabilities and we will even create self-reproducing machines not based on DNA that will continue to evolve themselves at an 'explosive' rate).... So, ironically, the 'intelligent design' might soon be thought as a mainstream

[studiot]

Coincidentally there was an article on the artificial slowing of aging on today's news.

 

https://www.ed.ac.uk/news/2020/blood-iron-levels-could-be-key-to-slowing-ageing

[Gian]

On 7/16/2020 at 8:11 PM, Danijel Gorupec said:

I think, if our civilization continues without a reset, we will very soon start to intentionally change ourselves at a rate much faster than natural evolution could do. We will engineer our genetic codes (we will also install non-living implants into our bodies to obtain above-natural capabilities and we will even create self-reproducing machines not based on DNA that will continue to evolve themselves at an 'explosive' rate).... So, ironically, the 'intelligent design' might soon be thought as a mainstream

On the other hand, could biology one day become machines? Eg, scientists could design biological organisms to do what machines do for us now? A biological motorcar which can drive passengers around on wheels at upto 100mph but also eats grass for fuel?

[drumbo]

On 7/16/2020 at 3:11 PM, Danijel Gorupec said:

I think, if our civilization continues without a reset, we will very soon start to intentionally change ourselves at a rate much faster than natural evolution could do. We will engineer our genetic codes (we will also install non-living implants into our bodies to obtain above-natural capabilities and we will even create self-reproducing machines not based on DNA that will continue to evolve themselves at an 'explosive' rate).... So, ironically, the 'intelligent design' might soon be thought as a mainstream

This is more or less where I see things headed. Keep in mind that if artificial gestation pods are developed, and if they become cheap, reliable and widely available, then very few women would be willing to go through the stress of natural childbirth and would instead opt to use the "pods". And if children are no longer developed inside of women's bodies that opens up the possibility of completely abandoning the two parent model for raising children, and children would probably instead be raised by the community or the state.

[Curious layman]

32 minutes ago, drumbo said:

Keep in mind that if artificial gestation pods are developed, and if they become cheap, reliable and widely available, then very few women would be willing to go through the stress of natural childbirth and would instead opt to use the "pods".

Disagree. If this was true, most women would only have one child, which isn't the case. 

Question: does/would using a gestation pod lesson the bond between mother and child?

33 minutes ago, drumbo said:

and children would probably instead be raised by the community or the state.

Let's hope not. They already do, with mixed results. Just go to your local prison if you want to speak to some of them. 

 

[drumbo]

33 minutes ago, Curious layman said:

Disagree. If this was true, most women would only have one child, which isn't the case. 

Question: does/would using a gestation pod lesson the bond between mother and child?

Let's hope not. They already do, with mixed results. Just go to your local prison if you want to speak to some of them. 

 

It could happen like this: Imagine a future where academics, the government, and hospitals tell you that if you attempt to undergo a natural pregnancy you will be putting your health and the child's at great risk since statistics show that artificially gestated childbirths have much lower risks of complications for both the child and mother. The hospital then charges a large amount of money to deliver a natural pregnancy since they need all sorts of extra staff and procedures to minimize the risk of complications. Your insurance premiums also skyrocket once they learn you intend to carry out a natural childbirth. At some point in the future natural childbirth might be become associated with poverty stricken people who do not have access to modern technology.

The parentless convicts you speak today of are subject to poverty and other poor socioeconomic conditions. I see no reason why people raised in wealthy futuristic communities without a 2 parent model couldn't become well adjusted healthy people. Keep in mind that the 2 parent model only developed because it was evolutionary convenient and it worked; it made sense for 2 parents to work together prioritizing their own kids to pass on copies of their genes. But if we are going to move towards a future where we do not selfishly prioritize our own genes and instead use genetic engineering to promote the traits that we think are good, regardless of whether we have those traits, then there is no reason for a 2 parent model.

[michel123456]

On 7/15/2020 at 3:15 PM, Gian said:

2) Is our species H.Sapiens continuing to evolve? Will our descendants become a new species or species?

Yes.

My bet is that first we will become dumb (I am afraid it is happening right now).

Then we will become a new specie of marine mammals.

[Strange]

27 minutes ago, michel123456 said:

My bet is that first we will become dumb (I am afraid it is happening right now).

People have been saying this ever since the invention of writing (and presumably before then, as well). It doesn't seem to have happened yet

[Phi for All]

40 minutes ago, michel123456 said:

Then we will become a new specie of marine mammals.

Perhaps those that stay on Earth. I don't see why we'd become less intelligent though. There's an awful lot to explore in Earth's oceans, and I think exploration advances our intelligence.

Those who go off-planet will face a whole new system of evolutionary pressures and environments that will require selective adaptation. 

[michel123456]

59 minutes ago, Strange said:

People have been saying this ever since the invention of writing (and presumably before then, as well). It doesn't seem to have happened yet

I was not that serious.

However, I think that our intelligence is a spark. It can become a fire or it can vanish just like that.

[HallsofIvy]

On 7/16/2020 at 5:21 AM, Gian said:

What I mean is, is it at least possible with natural selection that vast organisms something like dinosaurs could evolve again? 

"Vast organisms"?  Blue whales, today, are much larger than dinosaurs were!