Family & Relationships1 min ago
What Will Humans Look Like In 200,000 Years?
..Exactly the same but with massive eyes and fake tans apprently.
http://
http://
Answers
As if the planet will put up with our nonsense for another 200,000 years. We'll be long gone by then.
12:31 Thu 16th Jan 2014
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
// that this would be a result of human colonization of the solar system, with people living farther away from the sun where there is less light.''//
I'm not a biologist, but I wouldn't have thought this would mean we develop massive eyeballs. Surely the light receptive cells at the back of the existing eyeball would become more sensitive..or something more mundane like that.
I predict that in 200,000 years time we'll still be rubbish at predicting the future.
I'm not a biologist, but I wouldn't have thought this would mean we develop massive eyeballs. Surely the light receptive cells at the back of the existing eyeball would become more sensitive..or something more mundane like that.
I predict that in 200,000 years time we'll still be rubbish at predicting the future.
There is no possibility of evolution without pressure to do so.
We can become more genetically (and phenotypically) varied but unless there is some factor killing some of us before we can reproduce, there is no 'selection' step.
I recall reading once that artificial insemination experiments proved that Darwin's finches were genetically capable of crossbreeding with the species from other Galapagos islands, it was just that they chose not to do so.
A debate raged, for a time, about whether the definition of 'species' strictly meant biological inability to reproduce with anything outwith one's own species, or whether behavioural disinclination to do so were enough.
Our nearest domestic equivalent would be Willow Warbler versus Chiffchaff. They look so alike that only their song or inspection in the hand can rightly tell them apart.
As the UK melting pot proves, there's no danger of anything like this occurring with humanity.
(boom-chick-a-wah-wow)
We can become more genetically (and phenotypically) varied but unless there is some factor killing some of us before we can reproduce, there is no 'selection' step.
I recall reading once that artificial insemination experiments proved that Darwin's finches were genetically capable of crossbreeding with the species from other Galapagos islands, it was just that they chose not to do so.
A debate raged, for a time, about whether the definition of 'species' strictly meant biological inability to reproduce with anything outwith one's own species, or whether behavioural disinclination to do so were enough.
Our nearest domestic equivalent would be Willow Warbler versus Chiffchaff. They look so alike that only their song or inspection in the hand can rightly tell them apart.
As the UK melting pot proves, there's no danger of anything like this occurring with humanity.
(boom-chick-a-wah-wow)
@seadogg
//Can you imagine any self respecting willow warbler with that superb and complex call going for something that calls "chiff-chaff" all day inn the breeding season. //
No (grin)
Some people like music with long and complex guitar solos while others prefer chug-along-a-Status-Quo
But it's not about that. The fact that they look alike (to the casual glance) means they are forced to sing their separate ways, to avoid confusion and wasting energy pursuing the, ahem, wrong lady.
Furthermore, as plain as it is, if the Chiffchaff's song is delivered anything less than perfectly (a 'variant' song being akin to a pub-band cover version of a classic), it's chances of breeding success are reduced.
A research paper I found online seemed to suggest that tagged birds were seen to breed successfully in their 2nd or 3rd year after failing the first time round because it took them time to 'train' their song, by listening to, and mimicking, the adults.
//Can you imagine any self respecting willow warbler with that superb and complex call going for something that calls "chiff-chaff" all day inn the breeding season. //
No (grin)
Some people like music with long and complex guitar solos while others prefer chug-along-a-Status-Quo
But it's not about that. The fact that they look alike (to the casual glance) means they are forced to sing their separate ways, to avoid confusion and wasting energy pursuing the, ahem, wrong lady.
Furthermore, as plain as it is, if the Chiffchaff's song is delivered anything less than perfectly (a 'variant' song being akin to a pub-band cover version of a classic), it's chances of breeding success are reduced.
A research paper I found online seemed to suggest that tagged birds were seen to breed successfully in their 2nd or 3rd year after failing the first time round because it took them time to 'train' their song, by listening to, and mimicking, the adults.
I have seen that before and it is the biggest load of BS ever. The presumption that human evolution would be driven by the inevitably small numbers who *might* live on space colonies is ludicrous.
It would have been more interesting with ideas based on how were cope with the inevitable things like climate change, pollution and "technologicalisation".
It would have been more interesting with ideas based on how were cope with the inevitable things like climate change, pollution and "technologicalisation".
Latest Posts
ChatterBank9 mins ago
ChatterBank14 mins ago
How it Works16 mins ago
ChatterBank16 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.