If evolution is real, is it possible that one race....?

Question

If evolution is real, is it possible that one race of human is evolving into the next version of human, and the rest are slowly becoming inferior? Like the monkey was left behind?

(I know the thought police will hate this question, but I'd rather have an intelligent answer.)

**starshipminivan** Evolution (if it exists) is all about the splitting of species all the way back from the first living organisms. So how does the fact that we are the same species suddenly stop evolution?

To quote wiki on evolution - "Through the course of time, this process results in the origin of new species from existing ones (speciation)."

I AM AMAZED BY ALL OF THE THOUGHTFUL ANSWERS! WOW!

Answer 1

Yes, and scientists just recent released that they have found what they believe is the "evolution gene."

So get used to it.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060817/ap_on_sc/brain_evolution_5


unfortunately, the also found that GW bush's evolution gene never evolved!

Answer 2

The main error in this question is the persistent
and pernicious tendency of humans to equate
"different" with "inferior". Evolution is real and we
may still be evolving, in fact, we can hardly avoid
it. Evolutionary change does not, however, confer
any absolute superiority on any species. Monkeys
are different from humans, they are not therefore
overall inferior to humans. They have less
intelligence than humans, certainly, but they are
much better adapted than humans to their way of
life. Can you do everything a monkey does as
well as the monkey can? If you can't does that
make you inferior to the monkey?

The current evolution of humans, whatever it may
be, is probably physiological, rather than anatomic.
Science fiction writers have portrayed future humans with enormous heads and shrunken bodies. There is no evidence, however that our
brain size is still increasing. Just the opposite, in
fact, the Neanderthal brain was slightly larger than
ours. What we may be evolving now is a greater
tolerance for environmental pollution, and possibly
better ability to survive under crowded conditions.

Answer 3

I'm surprised that people still think that evolution is a theory. I suppose the fossils aren't considered 'facts' in their minds. Sure there are holes in the chain of evolutionary events, but the debate has been over, we won, we have the fossils.

Anyway, back to your question, it seems logical that over the course of a hundred thousand years, if an isolated settlement, such as the Galapogis islands example, could occur, a race or species could branch off. The fossil records already show over 15 hominids that didn't make it, coming off the main branch of our distant ancestors. The most popular being the Neanderthals.

I doubt there could be isolated settlements in this day and age, the inter-marrying and mixing of races would prohibit an isolated off-shoot of the human race, or hybrid of the race (whatever you want to call it.).

Answer 4

Evolution is real in that the fact is we are evolving. I am not sure that man really evolved from monkeys but man has evolved from prehistoric times. I think you are mixing up evolution with evolving of species. The fact that humans are one species and monkeys or apes are another species is factual enough to prove that the missing link theory is not totally correct.

Once man may have walked on hind legs and knuckles but the human did eventually stand and walk on two legs. We evolved from that to what we are today. We are evolving as each of our generation grow.

But evolving from one inferior to a more superior human of intelligence is not how the evolution is evolving. The intelligent factor is learned and taught, you are not born intelligent, man has to be taught. Environment, and social skills are developed as man dictates these skill on to his generations of off springs.

What is evolving for one generation to the next is the human body and in a little way the brain. But the brain is a muscle and needs to be trained how to think. The body has million of years of DNA to tell it how to evolve.

I hope you can understand the difference about evolution. Or more study on your part is needed.

Answer 5

No, it isn't possible, because there is only one race, the human race. Although the differences between "races" may seem clear and distinct, in fact there are no clear cut boundries between them and never have been, even without modern mixed marriages. Humans are not like animals of different species. In fact now many scientists believe that in the ice age, human beings migrated around the globe by boat much more than we used to think possible. They only settled and started to look different later. The human race has always evolved as a whole, and it will continue to do so as a whole.

Answer 6

From what I recall from reading up on evolution, speciation happens when a population gets very small and isolated. Only then is the gene pool small enough for mutations to knock it off balance. (There's mathematics about this, but I'm not familiar with it.) Any subset of the present human race large enough to be identified as a "race" or "nation" is probably too large to evolve, even if one could prevent all its members from marrying out.

The larger moral, by the way, is that evolutionary success results only from evolutionary failure.

Answer 7

Evolution is a theory and will always be a theory. It has no basis in fact. Look at the world around you. Do you really think the perfect design was just a freak accident? Evolution is not only just a theory, it is a flawed theory. If God wanted a new race of humans he would just create them. It is not possible that people are evolving into the next version of anything because evolution is not possible. To prove the point Drs Miller and Fox tried to prove that life could arise spontaneously from a combination of methane, ammonia, and water vapor. They passed some electricity through it to simulate lightning striking a primeval ocean. No life was formed. They did manage to form some amino acids but they were not the suitable kind to start life.

Answer 8

I see the timeworn "we're stopping evolution because we..." and "natural selection isn't working because we don't reproduce on the basis of genetic superiority..."

Evolution is not a conscious process. We never consciously controlled it and we never will. Those who think we aren't selecting reproductive partners on the basis of genetic superiority are fooling themselves. This is in fact the process at work. The results of inferior gene pooling will, if not corrected by the infusion of a more robust gene pool, die out. The ones who survive will do so not because they consciously chose superior genetic partners, but because circumstances far outside the scope of their own generation made it possible for them to reproduce with genetically superior partners.

The time frame of our civilization's existence is so minute compared to the entire timeline of our evolution that we simply haven't been around long enough to make any kind of visible dent in the process. We couldn't, even if we tried.

Answer 9

I believe in one of Stephen Hawking's books he was discussing "Biological Evolution" vs "Cultural Evolution". Basically the point being made was how slow Biological Evolution is...and how we make millions of adaptations over the years due to our culture before even one biological change occurs.

For example, books, computers, and other forms of information teach us things that we never have to go out and experience on our own. We learn things at an extremely accelerated rate.

So, there's your answer. Yes we are still evolving, and at a much faster rate than anything ever before...in a cultural way, rather than a biologically significant way.

Answer 10

The biggest problem with your question that I see is "inferior"

Simple example time:
Assume that there is an accountant gene, accountants are sucessfull in free market economies, so any poeple with a strong accountant tendency (provided it is an attractive trait) are more likely to breed and re-enforce the accountant gene.
In socialist economies, its not considered attractive or sucessfull so the gene does not get re-enforced.

The point is that where accountants thrive, they will emerge, but where they dont thrive, then its not inferior to not have the gene.
Similarly monkeys do way better at living in trees than we do.

Answer 11

The racial differences between humans are increasing every day. In this day and age, intelligence is valued over strength, so "survival of the fittest" doesn't necessarily mean that the most 'superior' humans will reproduce, and the 'inferior' ones won't. Society has essentially severely slowed down evolution, at least of humans.