evolution of humans and animals

[qwerty]

I was wondering, according to the theories we grew up as apes and stuff that couldn't really talk and resembled gorillas of this present day.

 

It took us hundreds of thousands of years, or so, to become the way we are today.

 

Now, do you think if in thousands, or hundreds of thousands of years the animals of today would eventually evolve into what may be human like creatures, as in they can communicate and build stuff and do basically the same stuff that we can do?

 

anyone any thoughts on this?

[Hellbender]

I was wondering, according to the theories we grew up as apes and stuff that couldn't really talk and resembled gorillas of this present day.

 

No, we are apes, and we share an immediate common ancestor with modern apes such as gorillas.

 

It took us hundreds of thousands of years, or so, to become the way we are today.

 

more like millions.

 

Now, do you think if in thousands, or hundreds of thousands of years the animals of today would eventually evolve into what may be human like creatures, as in they can communicate and build stuff and do basically the same stuff that we can do?

 

they *could* if favorable conditions arose, but since they would be competitors with us in our respective niches, and we got a few million years of evolution on them.

[AzurePhoenix]

If we were gone for some hypothetical reason, they could go on to convergently evolve into human-like creatures, or they could take a completely different route.

[Hellbender]

to kind of answer the question again, qwerty (man that is easy to type!), animals evolve along similar lines all the time. Consider that there is a marsupial version of many placental mammals. Or that legless lizards are lizards that lost their legs, just like the ancestors of snakes. Or phytosaurs and crocodilians (phytosaurs are extinct, but they were quite similar to crocodilians, sharing the same niche and looking quite similar, but the two are not closely related). These are just a handful of examples, I'm sure everyone will come up with lots more.

[AzurePhoenix]

Icthyosaurs (extinct) and dolphins and sharks all resemble eachother, but are unrelated. The Juaguarundi, a cat, is often regarded as weasel or otter-like. Andrewsarchus was a giant predator that resembled a wolf or hyena, but was technically an ungulate, related to hoofed animals. Ostriches closely resemble gallimimus, the classic "ostriche-dinosaur." This concept is convergent evolution, acquiring similar traits on an idependentbasis, because that particular trait happens to be well suited for the task being adapted for.

[-Demosthenes-]

It would have to have the metabolism of a mammal and warm blooded (I believe), and what I think is the key is manipulating appendages. I discussed this with sayo once. I think that manipulating appendages (like primate hands) would give them the potential to use tools. And from there it is smooth sailing, which ever members of the species is the "smartest" and can use the tools better will live. I think that that is the key, but maybe not. If that's right it would only take time under these conditions.

[Bioslap]

No i dont think that 'animmals' would ever evolve to become something like we are today. Firstly humans just simply wouldnt allow it, thus applying selective pressure on the particular species in question to cease further development down that pathway. The human species is an hugely selfish and competitive species and would act sharpish to keep that particular organism 'in its place' so to speak. Such an organism would prove to be ultimately competition and that just wouldnt do would it!

[AzurePhoenix]

I could imagine us creating human-like organisms in labs to serve some slaving role (i have no doubts we will go through such a period again on this rollercoaster of civilization) which might then survive and replace us in the event we leave or die out, assuming of course, they don't. I'm not saying it's even close to likely, I'm just throwing out some imaginative speculation.

[Deified]

Who says it will be a primate that will evolve intelligence next? It could be a dolphin or a bird... It really depends on the circumstances. Example: Humans destroy almost all of crow habitat, the crows have to adapt and evolve to develop techniques for surviving in a city. Just some random speculation.

[Christ slave]

Who says it will be a primate that will evolve intelligence next? It could be a dolphin or a bird... It really depends on the circumstances. Example: Humans destroy almost all of crow habitat, the crows have to adapt and evolve to develop techniques for surviving in a city. Just some random speculation.

Yes, I've heard some birds' songs are actually evolving (taking on the characteristics/likeness) to the sounds of traffic. In fact, there are really smart parrots out there. Perhaps parrots can evolve so much that they become radio hosts or song artists.

[-Demosthenes-]

But what selective pressures are there on those species? It is far more important for a bird or dolphan to be fast and strong rather than smart. Although smarter ones will survive, it would be far less than other evolutionary pressures. The trick is to get conditions in which intelligence is strongly selected agaisnt other characteristics.

[Christ slave]

But what selective pressures are there on those species? It is far more important for a bird or dolphan to be fast and strong rather than smart. Although smarter ones will survive, it would be far less than other evolutionary pressures. The trick is to get conditions in which intelligence is strongly[/b'] selected agaisnt other characteristics.

Whereas a honking goose is ridiculously ignorant. If they had more predators, they wouldn't be honking all over the neighborhood...heck, people can't even scream without causing a problem, yet them gooses somehow do as they please.

 

So, does the goose's freedom give it creative freedom and intelligent ability, or would it need to have more predators? That's something to consider.

[Hellbender]

Icthyosaurs (extinct) and dolphins and sharks all resemble eachother, but are unrelated. The Juaguarundi, a cat, is often regarded as weasel or otter-like. Andrewsarchus was a giant predator that resembled a wolf or hyena, but was technically an ungulate, related to hoofed animals. Ostriches closely resemble gallimimus, the classic "ostriche-dinosaur." This concept is convergent evolution, acquiring similar traits on an idependentbasis, because that particular trait happens to be well suited for the task being adapted for.

 

ah, good examples. I think I remember another being a long-necked plesiosaur (kronosaurus or maybe rhomaelosarus) evolving again from a long necked plesiosaur after other short-necked varieties already have. I'll have to check. Other examples I can think of are new and old-world vultures, which share very different common ancestors, but are quite similar (like the turkey-vultures I see all the time), axolotls and mudpuppies are both aquatic salamanders that retain neotenal branching gills, but are not closely related, my memory runs out now, but I will try and think of more.

[Flareon]

How important are opposable thumbs to becoming an advanced and intellectual species? Because obviously dolphins and birds would take quite a long time in evolving such a grasping mechanism. So the question is, are such mechanisms essential for intellectual evolution?

 

I would think yes, because tool manipulation is the first step toward technology.

 

Thus, I would imagine that the next animal to evolve to human standards would have to have opposable thumbs or something similar.

[Hellbender]

All apes already have opposablr thumbs. They are important for the application of our concept of intelligence, not the other way around.

[Flareon]

All apes already have opposablr thumbs. They are important for the application[/i'] of our concept of intelligence, not the other way around.

 

I wasn't implying that opposable thumbs were all that was necessary for intellectual evolution, but that it is an essential part to possess to even have the chance for it.

[Hellbender]

I wasn't implying that opposable thumbs were all that was necessary for intellectual evolution, but that it is an essential part to possess to even have the chance for it.

 

It seemed to be essential for us anyways, because intelligence is all we got compared to other animals. If not for our inventive mind and the dextrous hands to apply it, we would have been the doormat of the african savannah.

[qwerty]

Another pretty straightforward thing i was tryin to ask is, just for example, some birds can chirp and squark and whatever they do, one day will they evolve enough to be able to actually speak and not just copy what we say but actually think of their own stuff to say in reply to what we say. Having intelligent conversations with animals. Yet again probably in hundreds of thousands of years/millions of years.

 

you guys think?

[Hellbender]

Another pretty straightforward thing i was tryin to ask is, just for example, some birds can chirp and squark and whatever they do, one day will they evolve enough to be able to actually speak and not just copy what we say but actually think of their own stuff to say in reply to what we say. Having intelligent conversations with animals. Yet again probably in hundreds of thousands of years/millions of years.

 

We can communicate with trained parrots (like Alex, the African Grey that speaks english and knows what she is saying), and more so with apes trained in sing language. But this is all becuase these are highly intelligent animals that have been trained.

[-Demosthenes-]

These animals only understand concrete concepts, and it's a stretch at that.

Another pretty straightforward thing I was trying to ask is, just for example, some birds can chirp and squawk and whatever they do, one day will they evolve enough to be able to actually speak and not just copy what we say but actually think of their own stuff to say in reply to what we say. Having intelligent conversations with animals. Yet again probably in hundreds of thousands of years/millions of years.

How would this benefit the bird? I don't see communication like that being strongly selected, there are far more important things that are selected for.

[AzurePhoenix]

I imagine that octopus would be good candidates for creatures capable of evolving into the "next sapient race." Good eyesight, strong communicative and problem-solving skills, and good dexterity.

 

How would this benefit the bird? I don't see communication like that being strongly selected, there are far more important things that are selected for.

I think given time wild parrot species might, might naturally develop the higher cognitive abilties necessary for true communication, being highly social creatures. My vote goes out for Keas.

[-Demosthenes-]

I can see the reasoning for an octopus, but can a cold blooded crustacean sustain a brain our size?

 

And the bird, do you believe that the parrot would develop higher cognitive skills because they can mimic human speech? If not please tell me. Other species can mimic noise, although a parrot can remember certain phrases and words, and when to say them, which is very remarkably, but how do these things benefit the parrot? He can't talk to other parrots, and it does the parrot no good in the wild, so they are just as likely to die as the ones who can't mimic as well. There just isn't any pressure exerted on the parrots mimicry that would carry it the higher cognitive abilities.

[Hellbender]

...although a parrot can remember certain phrases and words, and when to say them, which is very remarkably, but how do these things benefit the parrot? He can't talk to other parrots, and it does the parrot no good in the wild, so they are just as likely to die as the ones who can't mimic as well. There just isn't any pressure exerted on the parrots mimicry that would carry it the higher cognitive abilities.

 

african grey parrots are highly social birds, so perhaps the ability to mimic and know what they are saying has a lot to do with communication. Mokele?

[-Demosthenes-]

Assuming the sounds they make are used for communication (any comfirmation?) Is it more important than being able to fligh fast or how well it can attract a mate? I don't see it being stongly selected for.

[AzurePhoenix]

I can see the reasoning for an octopus, but can a cold blooded crustacean sustain a brain our size?

Who says that as time goes on gastropods won't eventually become endothermic? It's already happened twice, why not again? They're certainly more derived than other invertebrates. Given a few hundred million years, or a couple billion, I don't it'd be too far a leap. Not even much of a skip.

 

do you believe that the parrot would develop higher cognitive skills because they can mimic human speech? If not please tell me.

A parrot's ability isn't necessarily why they are intelligent, it just allows us to recognize and gauge their smarts through full blown verbal communication. Their ability to mimic is a result of a very versatile syrinx. Ravens are remarkably intelligent too, but their ability to mimc is limited, whereas a lyrebird's mimicry-skills are fantastic, but they themselves aren't real brainy.

I don't think being able to mimic people will lead to the higher cognitive ability. I consider that trait to be secondary to their natural communicative skills. If anything, evolving more complex "societies" among wild flocks is what will allow them to develop higher brain functions, and thereby use their ability to vocalize as a means to communicate with us.