Are we still evolving or we have utterly stopped?

[JustNobody]

jackdonekings "are we be able to travel at the speed of light in the near future?" Sadly no, to even be able to travel near the speed of light would take enormous amounts of energy. "are we able to make artificial intelligent robots that will match our intelligence?" I doubt robots will ever possess real intelligence, however within the next 20-30 years they will become very useful once the multicore phenomenon reaches critical level.

"and lastly are we still evolving or we have utterly stopped?" Some of humanity is deevolving; some is evolving. It really depends on the group. Also a lack of selective breeding dilutes the rapid advances in evolution that a small percent of the population makes. The average IQ is slowly going up though, which is why the tests have to be renormalized ever so often. Though one might argue that some of the comforts of life have made us lazy, they have afforded us to use our mental abilities more which is likely speeding up our intelligence.

slashsdfz " "The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you." " Err maybe you could cite your source, nevermind I found it. Erwin Schrödinger . Schrödinger wave equation. Quantum physics all that jazz. Basically at the subatomic level there is a non deterministic nature to physical reality, which turns classical physics on its head. My glass is empty, where is God? I want a refund! Maybe at the bottom of a glass of supernatural science God is waiting for you. Oh wait, we don't have a supernatural science. And I wanted to get drunk. Guess I'll have to settle for bourbon.

From my own personal research in genetics, looking at the different types of organisms from viruses to humans, all species have methods of manipulating their genetic codes. Transposons and plasmids for the win. Some genes are strongly preserved, while others change more quickly. The idea that beneficial mutations are random or chance is a product of a time when genetics wasn't properly understood.

[c'est la vie]

Fascinating to see some of the examples cited as 'evolution' in this thread.

Even more interesting to see some claim 'devolution' of humans. Since evolution is purposeless and directionless, there should be no such thing as 'devolution' since there is no goal to hit.

[JustNobody]

c'est la vie
"Fascinating to see some of the examples cited as 'evolution' in this thread.

Even more interesting to see some claim 'devolution' of humans. Since evolution is purposeless and directionless, there should be no such thing as 'devolution' since there is no goal to hit."

By fascinating, you mean both you were both entertained and repulsed by some ideas. Even if you don't agree with what I write at least I make an attempt to think for myself. Some people do get stupider. I am claiming selective devolution, nothing else. I'm not claiming someone(human) is becoming non human. Dna is a code that defines what one cannot and cannot do. It codes the proteins and tells them in the circumstances they can be used. It is a finite length. So any particular advantage gotten in one area will eventually result in some disadvantage in another area since the genetic length of humans(~3 billion base pairs, 46 chromosomes) is currently locked in place. In comparison to another animal like creature, an ape for instance, humans are rather weak, physically. Arguably humans traded mental ability for physical ability. Evolution is not purposeless and directionless. You just see no purpose in life outside of God. You're argument for devolution is the same as saying evolution doesn't exist. Increased understanding and manipulation of the universe seems a reasonable goal and observation seems to support that theory. Evolution by the very definition of the word requires some improvement to be called such. You should considering reading a book on genetics, you might learn something.

[sanspeur]

Actually human evolution is speeding up, especially since the introduction of agriculture.
Researchers' analysis found that 7 percent of human genes have been undergoing rapid, recent evolution.

If humans had always evolved at this rate, the difference between modern humans and chimps should be 160 times greater than it really is.
Human Evolution Speeding Up, Study Says

[PaxUniversum]

Originally Posted by jackdonekings

are we be able to travel at the speed of light in the near future?
are we able to make artificial intelligent robots that will match our intelligence?
and lastly are we still evolving or we have utterly stopped?

Well it depends. I think we are still evolving and regressing in little ways.
I do think, however, that our extinction is very near. Humans are the most violent species on planet Earth. I believe in God, and I believe in science, so don't tell me I'm an atheist. I do believe that we will kill ourselves off by depriving our atmosphere of the proper gases we need to survive, or by nuclear war which is probably about 70% likely at this moment in time.

I think if we don't wise up, and learn to live alongside animals and the Earth itself, then we're already extinct.

[sarahkate_m]

Originally Posted by jackdonekings

are we still evolving or ...

we are a species in the throes of death/extinction... not unlike a drowning person...

[Gplex]

Originally Posted by jackdonekings

1are we be able to travel at the speed of light in the near future?
2are we able to make artificial intelligent robots that will match our intelligence?
3and lastly are we still evolving or we have utterly stopped?

1. Yes, but that would pose a lot of other problems, like time dilation, and the resulting explosion if you where to run into a grain of sand.

2. Probably.

3. In biology, evolution is change in the genetic material of a population of organisms from one generation to the next.
So for evolution to stop in humans, we either have to be clones, or go extinct.

[rifleman]

We know some evolutionary facts to be true now, as a result of our spectacular new ability to "map" the genome of many species, one day most or all of them.

1. over time, changes do occur in any organism's genome.

2. the rate of such changes can vary within the species and across species in general, or with new "eras" in that organsims' history.

3. these chages are not directed; "evolution" does not have a master plan.

4. these changes may create functional differences in our "phenotype" (the outer expression of our specific genetic makeup: our "genotype").

5. these outward expressions, being of a random origination, are then "tested", without direction or intent, against the environment of the organism. There's no predetermined outcome. No "design" intent.

6. positive and directly useful changes may be adapted and thus duly recorded in that organism's genome, via reproductive replication. Potentially useful changes may lay dormant until the niche changes, or some other genetic variant occurs that facilitates the earlier change.

7. we'd expect almost all random changes to be negative and fatal. They are. Sort of like you trying to improve your HD-TV by sticking a screwdriver into it's circuit board and stirring around.

8. species are content in their niches, but other new or more specialized niches may be available. Or not. Evolution is thus variable in it's speed. I coined the term "Evolutionary Vector" in a paper on evolution I did once, covering the concept that the rate of evolution, coupled with it's direction, is highly variable.

We humans don't generally allow the environment to manipulate or direct our evolution. WE adjust the niches to our liking, though with predictably disasterous results in the longer term (global warming, habitat loss for most no-human species, global pandemics, etc.)

Eventually, the consequences of our own evolutionary vectors will be obvious to all. We being a DNA based organism, will always evolve.