Thread: Evolution of humans

I am big fan of marvel movies! I had an idea when i watched X-Man! I think thats the final time to new evolution come, and that homo sapien become something new, to become like mutants in X-man! What do you think, is that possible?

Oh yeah. Psychic phenomena seem to have a certain credibility to them, so it could be that it will start to manifest more commonly at some point. I don't know if it would be exactly like the X-Men, of course.

On the other hand, it could just be a metaphor for high intelligence frightening the less intelligent (I'm kind of thinking of the "What's with the hate of intelligence?" thread I guess.) Science lost a lot of people's love when it developed the atom bomb. I don't think it's any coincidence that the villain in a lot of these comic stories tends so strongly to be a scientist who uses technology instead of super powers.

Superman's battles with Lex Luthor probably expresses the average American jock's fear toward the smart kids in their school.

Originally Posted by wolwerine94

I am big fan of marvel movies! I had an idea when i watched X-Man! I think thats the final time to new evolution come, and that homo sapien become something new, to become like mutants in X-man! What do you think, is that possible?

I think it is useful to separate fiction from reality.
There is no meaningful evidence that supports any form of extra-sensory perception or para-normal powers. There is currently no accepted theory of the world that suggests such powers could exist. Consequently there seems no good reason for believing such powers might evolve in humans.

Edited in a crucial word (no) from the penultimate sentence.

No one can predict the future, but nonetheless, the developement of "mutant powers" parallel to "X-Men" is, verily speaking, quite an absurd idea. First of all, evolution progresses take tens of thousands of years of time, and yet, the changes in a certain species happen taking small steps. Therefore, it's quite unlikely to develope any type of super powers by altering only a single gene, the "X-gene", if I recall it correct, which appeared in the "X-Men".

I am a mutant

I can put my left leg over my right shoulder and scratch my bottom with my big toe

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

Originally Posted by wolwerine94

I am big fan of marvel movies! I had an idea when i watched X-Man! I think thats the final time to new evolution come, and that homo sapien become something new, to become like mutants in X-man! What do you think, is that possible?

I think it is useful to separate fiction from reality.
There is no meaningful evidence that supports any form of extra-sensory perception or para-normal powers. There is currently accepted theory of the world that suggests such powers could exist. Consequently there seems no good reason for believing such powers might evolve in humans.

And yet, just about everyone I talk to for very long about it can remember having at least one prophetic dream in their life, where they saw something and then it happened as they had seen.

It can, of course, be explained as a flaw in one's own memory, thinking they remember something happening out of order with how it really happened, but it's a commonly shared experience many people go through and then never talk about, unless they really trust you.

The religious folk who think they see miracles may actually be seeing psychic phenomena. There don't appear to be any people who can credibly use the power at will, or anything, or if they exist they keep a low profile, but I wouldn't rule out seeing a sudden surge of it sometime soon.

Originally Posted by kojax

And yet, just about everyone I talk to for very long about it can remember having at least one prophetic dream in their life, where they saw something and then it happened as they had seen. .

Anecdotes are not quality evidence in science.

I used routinely to have prophetic dreams. I had close to a 100% hit rate on accuracy. This changed when I started documenting every single such dream. Then the hit rate fell to less than 5%.

Originally Posted by kojax

but I wouldn't rule out seeing a sudden surge of it sometime soon.

The only basis on which it appears you can make this assertion is that you think it would be a neat thing to happen. There is no credible evidence to support the existence of such phenomena.

I see the problem as arising from the limitations on the way science compiles evidence. It's all based on a threshold, one's and zero's, blacks and whites. Either something is held infinity credible, or it's zero credible.

I think there are many things people experience and won't talk about simply because they believe that nobody else has experienced it and they'll be seen as crazy or otherwise mentally deficient.

If you tried to ascertain whether incest was a serious problem in America in the mid-1800's you'd probably get similar results. People won't talk credibly about experiences they don't believe others share, and the few that do usually are the crackpot types who don't value their credibility enough to be afraid of how they'll be seen.

I think you´re underestimating the changes that would be required for "powers" such as X-men.
In fact, the difference in evolution between us and chimpanzees are probably even less then that of us and one of the X-men.

Here´s a nice video on evolution :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtIQvkQWTZY

As you´ll notice, almost all the "forces" that drive evolution, we humans are no longer affected by.

Originally Posted by kojax

I see the problem as arising from the limitations on the way science compiles evidence. It's all based on a threshold, one's and zero's, blacks and whites. Either something is held infinity credible, or it's zero credible.

It is not my perception that this is the case. Science typically deals with uncertainties. Statistical analysis is of increasing importance in a whole range of studies.
Or consider the example of the driving force for plate tectonics. Is it the push of new material erupted at the mid oceanic ridges, the drag of the convection current moving below the plate, or the pull of sinking cold slab at the subduction zone? Current hinking would say, yes, it is all three. The relative importance of each is what is (intensely) debated, but there is no absolute assertion that one or the other alternative is wholly responsible.

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

Originally Posted by kojax

I see the problem as arising from the limitations on the way science compiles evidence. It's all based on a threshold, one's and zero's, blacks and whites. Either something is held infinity credible, or it's zero credible.

It is not my perception that this is the case. Science typically deals with uncertainties. Statistical analysis is of increasing importance in a whole range of studies.
Or consider the example of the driving force for plate tectonics. Is it the push of new material erupted at the mid oceanic ridges, the drag of the convection current moving below the plate, or the pull of sinking cold slab at the subduction zone? Current hinking would say, yes, it is all three. The relative importance of each is what is (intensely) debated, but there is no absolute assertion that one or the other alternative is wholly responsible.

wtf? is this forum truly frequented by such moronic and pointless comment?

de da de da de da "or" shite... please will someone rescue this site from stupdity?

Originally Posted by Highball

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

Originally Posted by kojax

I see the problem as arising from the limitations on the way science compiles evidence. It's all based on a threshold, one's and zero's, blacks and whites. Either something is held infinity credible, or it's zero credible.

It is not my perception that this is the case. Science typically deals with uncertainties. Statistical analysis is of increasing importance in a whole range of studies.
Or consider the example of the driving force for plate tectonics. Is it the push of new material erupted at the mid oceanic ridges, the drag of the convection current moving below the plate, or the pull of sinking cold slab at the subduction zone? Current hinking would say, yes, it is all three. The relative importance of each is what is (intensely) debated, but there is no absolute assertion that one or the other alternative is wholly responsible.

wtf? is this forum truly frequented by such moronic and pointless comment?

de da de da de da "or" shite... please will someone rescue this site from stupdity?

So are you going to add anything worthwhile to the discussion or are you just going to make moronic and pointless comments Highball?

Originally Posted by Highball

wtf? is this forum truly frequented by such moronic and pointless comment?

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

Originally Posted by kojax

I see the problem as arising from the limitations on the way science compiles evidence. It's all based on a threshold, one's and zero's, blacks and whites. Either something is held infinity credible, or it's zero credible.

It is not my perception that this is the case. Science typically deals with uncertainties. Statistical analysis is of increasing importance in a whole range of studies.
Or consider the example of the driving force for plate tectonics. Is it the push of new material erupted at the mid oceanic ridges, the drag of the convection current moving below the plate, or the pull of sinking cold slab at the subduction zone? Current hinking would say, yes, it is all three. The relative importance of each is what is (intensely) debated, but there is no absolute assertion that one or the other alternative is wholly responsible.

Good point. Statistics are used and considered reliable despite their reliance on probability, and susceptibility to error from random flukes. However, the statistical conclusions are usually still drawn by the application of mathematical principles to concrete observations.

The problem with trying to find out who has and has not seen psychic phenomena, and whether they were fooling themselves, is that it doesn't even leave itself open to any kind of statistical analysis. It's almost like trying to test Freud's theories scientifically.

However, the fact there's no way for science to approach it doesn't tell us anything about whether it's true or false.

However, the fact there's no way for science to approach it doesn't tell us anything about whether it's true or false.

I disagree with this. It can certainly shift the probability scale around a bit. The fact is that there is no mechanism known whereby psychic phenomena might be possible that I know of. Also, no direct and reliable evidence has ever been collected. The whole idea is based on anecdotal accounts.

I'm with Kalster on this one. Until and unless we can postulate a mechanism by which psychic phenomena might occur then purely anecdotal, poorly controlled 'experiments' and 'observations' hold very little meaning.

There might be a large invisible gargoyle living on Mercury, singing melodies from Broadway musicals. We might even wish such a creature existed. Some people might even claim to have seen it with a powerful telescope. However, there would be little value in investing effort to search for it unless such claims could be independently validated by controlled observation.

Well, if it's time travel of a sort, then the phenomena would be explainable by the person having some kind of limited access to all the technology that ever will be invented in the future of the world.

You could go fully X-men with that.

I agree, however, that, if there's no way to investigate, then you might as well not bother. Individuals might discover it for themselves, but I doubt the community at large will ever be allowed to, so as not to violate causality. Or maybe that's the "singularity" people are speculating about.

So we were born like monkeys, stupid beans who don't know how to use fire or make lunch, we evolut to homo sapiens, and we can use our brane for smart things! Every days someone make a new, incredible thing. We discovered Computer, TV, ... Maybe when some day new species come on earth, they will have some powers, that we dont have! They will not control weather, control fire, be ice man or something like that. But maybe they will have something smaller, like healing theyr broken bones in just one minute for exemple. Not even that but maybe they will have...i don't know! But i think that they willl have some powers. Its interesting how Magneto control magnetic force, or i dont know how to say that in english because im from Serbia so i dont speak english very good! But its not posible to control magnetic field of force. What if next specie can do that? I dont say they will do that, but thats very interesting thing, isnt it?

What do you think is it posible to create claws like wolverine has?

Originally Posted by wolwerine94

But maybe they will have something smaller, like healing theyr broken bones in just one minute for exemple. ?

Advances in genetics and gene manipulation may make this kind of thing possible in the future, but this will arise from artifical changes, not evolution through natural selection.

Originally Posted by wolwerine94

What do you think is it posible to create claws like wolverine has?

Yeah sure

If you pay a cosmetic surgeon enough

But you'll never be able to stroke a woman again

But then maybe you wouldn't want to

Maybe you could just eat her instead