Evolution question?

Question

Does this mean that with each new generation we are getting better? Does this include our brains and the way we think as well or just primarily physiologically? Sidenote: If I were to look at a photograph about 100 years old, would I be able to see slight differences physically in people?

Secret agent man, there are many people who feel more comfortable in this section as I do. People here seem to have a wealth of knowledge and speak in terms that I, a major layperson when it comes to evolution understand. Have you ever gone to the science section and seen qa's? I cant understand half of it. So, because this topic is heavily covered in here already, I felt fairly comfortable brining up my specific query here. You didnt have to answer, but congrats on your points.

Answer 1

Judging by the false logic of evolutionists...de-evolution seems to be far more evident.

Answer 2

The individual differences between people as it is would definitely overshadow the differences in the last 4 generations. Besides maybe being a bit taller due to better nutrition. But that's not evolution.

If you went back, say, 40,000 generations (the minimum we would see in a million years), then yes, you might be able to see some differences due to evolution. We left our last common ancestor with bonobos behind about 7 million years ago. However, most people can't trace their family back 5 generations - no one knows who their 40,000th grandfather was.

EDIT: I'm pretty sure that the getting-taller thing is just due to the genes we had already and good nutrition, not evolution. Just like the living-longer thing - sure, the average life-span for is increasing, but even in the Roman times we know people lived for 90 years sometimes. We had the capacity, just not the medical knowledge, to live that long.

Answer 3

"Better" is subjective, which means it's not real. Species get better at living in the niches in nature through a case-by-case sequence, which, over a LOOOOONG time, causes significant change and is called "Evolution". Evolution isn't even a real thing, it's just a term for this broad trend of many little real things. Humans may evolve IF they have a specific niche to fall into, but right now, humans live in such diverse areas and their lives and reproduction depend on such a huge range of circumstances, there is not really a unified direction to fall towards. Evolution happens more easily when a small segment of a population gets stuck in a new environment (this causes branching) or when a huge environmental change happens and only a small segment of the population survives.

Answer 4

Evolution is a tendency of the offspring of children with favorable traits to do better. Technology has removed a fair amount of selective pressure from humans.

Despite some of the examples given, you are discussing a process that works over thousands of years. Height changes are based on improved nutrition. Increased cancer rates are a function of early detection and people living long enough to get cancer, rather than dying of diseases that have been eradicated. The changing environment does not put many survival pressures on humans, especially in the Western world.

Answer 5

Yes. Barely, but it's detectable.

Physically, the only major difference is height. Each new generation is slightly taller, on average, than the one before it.

Intellectually, the difference is much more significant. While "average" IQ is always 100, the tests are recalibrated upward every 5-10 years. The average IQ now is roughly twenty points higher, in absolute terms, than the average one-hundred years ago.

Answer 6

The process of natural selection does not occur in the same way because "weak" members of society get to pass on their genetic traits too. In a state of nature, you need to survive long enough to breed so it helps if you have the particular qualities to survive in your particular environment. These qualities are then passed onto the next generation whereas animals without these qualities are less likely to survive. In our society, most people reach breeding age so having better running ability (for instance) counts for nothing.

It is not correct to say that humans are taller than a hundred years ago because of evolution - it's because of better nutrition (no shortages of food). The average height of a human (in a Western country) is the same now as it was tens of thousands of years ago (when we were hunter-gatherers).

Answer 7

It is subjective to what you consider better. Evolution drives to traits that better allow the species to survive and reproduce.

Yes, this generation is taller then previous generations. This would be a difference you could see from people 100 years ago.

Answer 8

normally, it takes a great deal more time for changes to spread out in a population as a whole. The more radical the change, the more likely this would require a single common ancestor of everyone who takes on the change.

one can see differences between us and people 100 years ago (height, weight, clothing and hairstyles), but these are more changes in culture and society (eating patterns, styles).

Answer 9

people a 100 years ago were shorter, 5'10 was considered tall. If you look at thet faces in old pics, you really don't see faces like that anymore Either. Not sure if that's evolution or not though, nutrition has more to do with us getting taller. As far as people not looking much like we did a hundred years ago. i'm not sure about that.

Answer 10

Not necessarily better, just more suited for our environment. This includes our brains and our physiology.

You would notice that people generally look a lot smaller, both in height and weight. That's not evolution so much as it is more available nutrition (both good foods and vitamins and fast food, snacks, etc.)

Answer 11

With each new generation we are getting more adapted to surviving in our current environment. In today's society, that means resistance to disease. People from 100 years ago won't look all that different, but they'll have a slightly weaker immune system.