OT: Mars rover has discovered.....What?

[lazlo]

For example, our technology constantly redefines who is the "fittest." Those who can not keep up with the technology find themselves in lower paying jobs with less chance of finding a desirable mate.

Not sure if that's true Tom. Engineers certainly make a very good salary, but we're not at the top of the food chain. By your definition, evolution will result in the ultimate investment banker

Edit: skipping over the inevitable pissing contest, Dan's examples of Snookie and Lady Gaga are a perfect example

Assuming there's extra-terrestrial life (based on the sheer statistics), that's why they don't visit us: we're a race of morons, watching Jersey Shore and entertained by a woman wearing raw meat

[flathead4]

skipping over the inevitable pissing contest, Dan's examples of Snookie and Lady Gaga are a perfect example

I prefer Dan's examples of how technology has allowed people with Diabetes and other diseases to live normal lives. How many great thinkers, like Stephen Hawking, were able to live and contibute to human knowledge because of technology. How many board members here are diabetic or were born by C-section? Would it have been better for the human race if you would have just died instead of contribute your bit of innovation? Of course there is no way to predict what the human race will need to survive in the coming years and whether our technology will be our savior or our downfall.


Tom

[Mcgyver]

we're a race of morons, watching Jersey Shore and entertained by a woman wearing raw meat

increasingly so. Evolution has been arrested - doesn't matter who makes what income, provided they survive to breeding age which means everyone in the developed world. There's even a semi-case for arguing there is de-evolution; that we will dumb down to the level required for survival. If there's a correlation between intellect and prosperity, and we know there is just about a universal correlation between prosperity and birth rates, and Levitt and Dubner make a compelling arument that the single biggest factor in someones intellect is who their parents are.....then there's a highly politically incorrect case to be made for ongoing dilution of intellect in the gene pool. I proffer the popularity of Michael Jackson, Jersey Shore and Windows 8 as strong compelling evidence of de-evolution.

[Evan]

Assuming there's extra-terrestrial life (based on the sheer statistics), that's why they don't visit us: we're a race of morons, ...

To quote The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, "Mostly Harmless".

[lazlo]

I prefer Dan's examples of how technology has allowed people with Diabetes and other diseases to live normal lives. How many great thinkers, like Stephen Hawking, were able to live and contibute to human knowledge because of technology. How many board members here are diabetic or were born by C-section?

But evolution works by statistics. Stephen Hawking only had 1 child. As Dan and AK pointed out, there's no longer any natural selection: smart people tend to have few children, and Snookie and Lady Gaga fans tend to have a lot of them

To quote The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, "Mostly Harmless".

No doubt. The truly embarrassing part is that we're broadcasting that sh!t into space, so 4 years from now when that broadcast hits Alpha Centauri, they'll just be shaking their heads

[Evan]

It's absolutely true. Intelligence short circuits evolutionary processes and not just at the level of humans. Human intelligence is no different in kind from that of a dog, it's only a matter of degree. As soon as a species develops any degree of intelligence that plays a part in further evolution. Even a planaria flatworm is able to learn in order to find light. That is the earliest step up the ladder. Sensors become evolved and eventually you end up with a brain that can plan and anticipate the results of actions. Dogs are at that level. When that happens evolution plays a much smaller part. Dogs made a choice to associate with humans which tied their evolutionary fate to us. Dogs have been extremely successful.

Incidentally, the type of meddling we do with dogs in creating various breeds is not a form of directed evolution. If you put a pack of random breeds together the offspring immediately revert to the original phenotype within about 3 generations.

[flathead4]

Intelligence short circuits evolutionary processes and not just at the level of humans.

I disagree.

As soon as a species develops any degree of intelligence that plays a part in further evolution.

I agree. There are many inputs to evolution, intelligence included. And I disagree that evolution has stopped, as much as some people would like (desperately want) it to be so. Also, you can hardly say we are "devolving" based a few years of crappy TV and overbreeding. Evolution is a slow process.

Tom

[Evan]

Intelligence makes it possible for the unfit to survive. Whether that is a good or bad thing is a different discussion.

[dp]

Intelligence makes it possible for the unfit to survive.

So does love. All babies are born unfit, for example, but most grow into becoming self-sufficient. Some can never care for themselves at any time in their lives, but survive because they are loved.

Intelligence is a consequence of evolution and augments evolution but cannot replace it. If it is in our genes to hit an evolutionary wall as has happened with all other apes, all the intelligence in the world can't help us. We haven't hit our wall yet but I'm certain we will. We haven't the intelligence to prevent our own self-destruction. One indicator is New Orleans has not been given back to the sea. We're deluded into believing we can hang on to that hole in the ocean with technology and by pouring money into it. We respond badly to obvious flawed ideas. War being another example.

I think we are more clever than intelligent.

[danlb]

In first world countries, I appears that neither strength, intelligence, wealth nor health are required for survival. The propagation of your genes has been reduced to the simple feat of getting someone to sleep with you without birth control. You don't even need to be good at it when the prospect pool is large enough.

Beer factors in there somewhere. So does lack of scruples. Note that one does not even need to know how to brew the beer.

The only game changers I see are things like resistance to disease or psychic powers.

Dan