Cuz that ain't true. I just want to help educate some of my fellow evolutionist cult members; people are taller today than 200 years ago because of nutrition, not evolution. Evolution doesn't happen that fast.
2007-10-09 09:47:54 · 26 answers · asked by dissolute_chemical 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Actually you are wrong and somewhat correct at the same time.
Let me explain. You are correct about the causation of the tallness related to nutrition part. However you are wrong about it not being a form of evolution.
Ladies -please confirm this part:
On the average both sexes have gotten taller. It is a statistical fact that taller men have more sex with more partners. Therefore they are more likely to pass on the genes for tallness.
This is a perfect example of natural selection. The environment has changed so that taller people develop - a slight if not major mutation. They become more successful at breeding. Thus their children are more likely to be tall and most likely will be taller than their parents.
Also research has shown that taller people get better salaries so are more likely to have greater resources and better quality of foods.
Essentially there are a lot of contributing factors here , but it all boils down to the fact that taller men will have more children, thereby ensuring there genetics continue on.
That is natural selection at work.
2007-10-09 10:03:22 · answer #1 · answered by Atrum Animus AM 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
You are trying to hate on macro-evolution, which of course happens over very long time-spans. The fact that people are taller now is not only historically inaccurate, but can be anecdotally explained by any number of factors, including the nutrition example which you so aptly provided the readers.
On the flip side of the argument that you think exists and in reality simply does not, people are taller now because as far as evolutionists are concerned, the animals from which Homo Sapiens descended were NOT people. Thats the whole freakin point, if you go back to the point in time when there were no distinctions between the different animal kingdoms (all one kingdom of animal) then there probably weren't any animals that even stood up in the first place.
I suggest that you actually read about evolution, and more specifically the distinction between macro and micro-evolution, before you continue to make an **** of yourself in public by arguing a point nobody is arguing in the first place...and just for the record, you aren't helping anyone's education on any subject
2007-10-09 10:00:44 · answer #2 · answered by gottjoshie 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Humans evolve and change and that can be and usually is due to external pressures (like the strongest or smartest survive). However, the human body also adapts to having better nutrition, by having the ability to grow taller, larger, faster, older, etc. 200 years ago people did not live as long, nor grew as tall. The major contributing factor could easily be pointed as better nutrition and/or hormones in the food, etc. Humans have somewhat slowed down our evolution as we allow the weak to survive and the stupid.
2007-10-09 10:00:07 · answer #3 · answered by disturbed001500 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Really? You mean, the average height of a human today compared with a 4 foot tall human of 50K years ago is still the same??
Somehow, I doubt that. We are getting taller - both due to evolution AND due to nutrition - this is why bra manufacturers in China and Japan are reporting that the sizes have increased since the 1940's. Thats nutrition. The fact that we are, on average, 1.5 feet taller than past humanoids is evolution.
2007-10-09 09:53:21 · answer #4 · answered by ? 5 · 5⤊ 0⤋
But evolution is also modified by medicine. The species is probably actually getting weaker in a way because people that would normally have died get to reproduce. Evolution may actually be accelerating due to this, but I agree that the height thing is probably almost completely nutrition-based. There is probably a small selection component to it.
2007-10-09 09:54:52 · answer #5 · answered by Meat Bot 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Changes in immunity directly affect DNA, so evolution is happening to you, right now. And there is some evidence to suggest that MALES can even pass newly acquired immunity on. Based on the overwhelming majority of data collected since the early 1970s, Lamarck was far more correct than Darwin.
2007-10-09 10:03:17 · answer #6 · answered by neil s 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Our DNA has evolved in addition to the better nutrition itself allowing us to grow taller. Height is a function of our genes in cooperation with our environment.
Nature IS selecting for taller and taller people.
2007-10-09 09:54:33 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
evolution also relies on natural selection, and people with characteristics that are considered desirable today temd to select others with the same characteristics. Height tends to be one of these characteristics. Since selection is not necessarily 'natural' these days, some characteristics can change faster than previously. Having said this, you are largely correct but it doesn't explain enclaves of short people.
2007-10-09 09:57:12 · answer #8 · answered by Nemesis 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nutrition and reduction in childhood disease due to sanitation and vaccination. You can show that there wasn't a shift in allele frequency leading to greater height, but environmental factors predominate over the scant number of generations.
2007-10-09 10:02:20 · answer #9 · answered by novangelis 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
People in North America are much larger then their Great-Grandparents. We believe this is largely due to a better and more enriched diet and better health care.
2007-10-09 10:18:12 · answer #10 · answered by Eartha Q 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋