Do I need to explain this better: Have we ever changed to better ensure our survival?

Question

Do I need to explain this better?
…one that made us better adapted to survive, a complete reversal of course - we knew there would be fewer wars, less environmental harm, less crime, etc. Does 'Better adapted' mean that a species is better equipped to survive After WWII there were less people dying in wars? Right? But was it a step forward, in terms of our survival? Would there be less war? Would there be less crime? Would there be less environmental harm into the future? Haven’t we brought ourselves closer to destruction? Does evolution imply that we are more evolved than other species? No other species has done more to destroy the world. To apply the theory better, what If we expand that to the long-term - Did evolution make us better equipped to survive than in all previous steps? Did ‘cavemen’ come anywhere close to destroying the world? And long-term – what will happen?

Answer 1

Technology is advancing faster than evoulution. We can build computers with twice the power, for the same cost, every two years. Human generation times are not nearly as fast.

Answer 2

[Sheesh, I should get about 50 points for this, since you're asking a dozen questions. ;-)]

--- "Do I need to explain this better?"

Yes, specifically, it helps if your question(singular) is direct and to the point.

--- "…one that made us better adapted to survive, a complete reversal of course - we knew there would be fewer wars, less environmental harm, less crime, etc. Does 'Better adapted' mean that a species is better equipped to survive After WWII there were less people dying in wars? Right?"

WWII did bring about changes, of a sort. For example, the formation of the United Nations, in spite of all the bad press they get, has helped to find diplomatic solutions to all sorts of conflicts.

--- But was it a step forward, in terms of our survival?

In the long run, probably not. It led to the development of nuclear weapons, which continue to be a pretty dire threat.

--- Would there be less war?
--- Would there be less crime?
--- Would there be less environmental harm into the future?

Short answer: No. As population increases, this brings people into closer contact with eachother, and increases competition for available resources (land, food, oil, etc.). This competition for resources is what drives most wars and crimes. Since human population has been constantly growing pretty much throughout history, there's no reason to expect that to stop. Which means that war, crime, and, yes, even environmental damage, will all probably continue to develop as problems in our society.

--- Haven’t we brought ourselves closer to destruction?

Yes. As technology increases, it puts more and more power in the hands of an individual. And individual are more likely to abuse that power than large groups. The fact that nuclear weapons can now be manufactured by small militant groups is pretty darn scary.

--- Does evolution imply that we are more evolved than other species?

Strictly speaking, no. Evolution is the process by which species are shaped by their environment - a process that works by basically killing off the more unfit members before they are able to reproduce (thus, transforming the genetic makeup of the species).

Humans have reached a point where, rather than us being evolved by in this way, we adapt our environment to our own needs. Witness igloos, space suits, and the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The process by which humans evolved started to slow down as soon as we learned to control fire, and cloth ourselves in animal skins.

The "most evolved" species are those that have become highly adapted to a particular environmental niche. For example, check out the Texas Blind Salamander (see source link, below). It's so highly evolved to it's environment that it's virtually impossible for it to live anywhere else in the world. And even the slightest change to that environment will wipe the species out completely.

--- No other species has done more to destroy the world. To apply the theory better, what If we expand that to the long-term - Did evolution make us better equipped to survive than in all previous steps?

Again, evolution made us better equipped to survive up to the point we started to change our environment to suit our needs. But once that technological curve began, starting with our use of fire and leading up to our current ability to create WMDs, we have been steadily increasing the risk to our longevity as a species.

--- Did ‘cavemen’ come anywhere close to destroying the world?

No. They simply didn't have the technological capability. About the most damage they were able to do was to start fires to drive bison and mammoths over the edge of cliffs. And that has about the same effect as the the 1,000s of lightening strikes that occur everyday throught the world for.

--- And long-term – what will happen?

That's the $1B question. Here's my guess
We'll continue to grow more and more dependent on technology. Meaning our infrastructure will become more and more fragile as we build up this house of cards that is required for the everyday operation of our society. At some point this will fail (e.g. we may run out of oil before developing a viable alterantive energy source) and the infrastructure will suffer a catastrophic collapse that results (indirectly) in the deaths of millions or billions of people.

Ironically, those deaths will likely occur in the most developed nations, where the populations are most dependent on technology.

Anyhow, that collapse won't be total. There will be plenty of survivors, but the level of technology in our society will fall dramatically, effectively bringing about a dark age of sorts.

What happens then is unknown. The only "escape hatch" for all of this is if we manage to find a way to propagate our species to other environments (read, "other planets"). But that doesn't look to be happening anytime soon. And all that does is insure our survival as a species. It doesn't prevent the collapse here on earth.

Oh... either that, or "The Apocalypse" comes about and we are all magically transported to Heaven or Hell. Take your pick. :-)

Answer 3

My personal opinion is that if the population continues to increase we will need a war to kill 3 billion people. Isn't that sad.