<div dir="ltr">Up to maybe hundred years ago, a rich man could sire and raise ten children or more and many poor men none or at the most a few. The key point is that genetic differences influenced the number of descendants a person had with the result that the conditions were there for natural selection and undoubtedly human beings evolved. <br>Today however, genetic differences between people have very small influence on the number of their descendants so the conditions are very weak for natural selection. I conjure that if natural selection is happening today it is very small, maybe negligible? <br>But if you look beyond natural selection and include gene editing, humans can of course evolve. I would be very surprised if there are not already some filthy rich people doing it in secret. <br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, 24 Apr 2021 at 20:32, Steve Smith <<a href="mailto:sasmyth@swcp.com">sasmyth@swcp.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p>DaveW -</p>
<p>I think the eugenics movement(s) of the last century as well as
the many clan structures in indigenous peoples and royal
bloodlines throughout history have been structured with the
aspiration of either inducing genetic drift in a desired
direction, or (in the case of clan structures and incest taboos)
perhaps mute it's worst outcomes.</p>
<p>The divergence of Neandertalis/Devonisis/Sapiens presumed to have
happened hundreds of thousands of years ago and the
reconvergence/subsumption roughly 40,000 years ago seem to
represent the most *significant* evolution we know of among
"modern" humans... The time-scales I consider in your questoin
are on the order of hundreds of years, not tens or hundreds of
thousands. That alone suggests to me that we will not see
anything we can measure as "evolution". The divergence of traits
we identify as "race" seem to have happened over tens of thousands
of years as well. From our experience with domestic animal
breeding, we probably have (refer to Eugenics literature) some
sense of how many generations it would take us to "breed in" or
"breed out" various traits. <br>
</p>
<p><img src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/42/Homo_lineage_2017update.svg/320px-Homo_lineage_2017update.svg.png"></p>
<p>As Marcus and other technophile/posthumanist proponents have
indicated, it seems that germline modification (e.g. CRISPR) is
likely to become acutely more significant (for the first world?)
than any natural "drift", much less evolution by natural
selection.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>And then all the ways we might entirely stunt/block evolution:</p>
<p>
<a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/texas-rancher-cloned-deer-lawmakers-want-legalize_n_607ef3e0e4b03c18bc29fdd2" target="_blank">https://www.huffpost.com/entry/texas-rancher-cloned-deer-lawmakers-want-legalize_n_607ef3e0e4b03c18bc29fdd2</a></p>
<p>Who knew we had come this far from <a href="https://dolly.roslin.ed.ac.uk/facts/the-life-of-dolly/index.html" target="_blank">Dolly</a>?</p>
<p>Can species NOT involved in deliberate breeding programs (e.g.
wild things) evolve quickly enough to stay ahead of the
anthropogenic changes afoot? I think the simple answer is "hell
yes!" but the more interesting relevant answer is sadly more like
"barely" or "probably not hardly" if we are talking about our
favorite or photogenic species (large mammals, colorful birds,
... in particular).</p>
<p>For better or worse, the large mammal strategies including high
mass/surface ratios also yield longer dependency and reproductive
lags, so while the bacteria might achieve population doubling in
tens of minutes, Whales, Elephants, Polar Bears and Humans have
reproductive periods on the order of decades. <br>
</p>
<p>I think the Big Green Lie thread is asking if human *cultural* or
*social* evolution can be quick enough to avert the disasters we
think (some of us) we see looming on the near horizon. A very
specific (engineered?) pandemic might yield a very acute selection
pressure. <br>
</p>
<p>In the wild, maybe in the niche areas where conditions are going
out of human survival range (e.g. dewpoint too high for human
sweat-cooling to maintain a temperature below the threshold for
breakdown of enzymes (and other metabolic macromolecules) will
uncover/select-out those with metabolisms more able to skirt that
hairy edge... but how many generations of that kind of selection
(without significant mixing with other populations) would be
required to see a coherent gene pool reflecting that survival
trait? And with modern knowledge/travel/technology, the chances
of humans staying put and enduring those conditions and NOT
creating/importing some form of mechanical/chemical refrigeration
(or just moving into pit-houses coupled to the much lower
temperature earth?)</p>
<p>I'm definitely not going to depend on it!</p>
<p>- Steve<br>
</p>
On 4/24/21 10:50 AM, <a href="mailto:thompnickson2@gmail.com" target="_blank">thompnickson2@gmail.com</a> wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Well, it’s obviously both/and with
trade-offs between. <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Please see attached. It’s short. <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Nick <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Nick Thompson<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="mailto:ThompNickSon2@gmail.com" target="_blank"><span style="color:rgb(5,99,193)">ThompNickSon2@gmail.com</span></a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/" target="_blank"><span style="color:rgb(5,99,193)">https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/</span></a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(225,225,225);padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> Friam
<a href="mailto:friam-bounces@redfish.com" target="_blank"><friam-bounces@redfish.com></a> <b>On Behalf Of </b>Merle
Lefkoff<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, April 23, 2021 9:21 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee
Group <a href="mailto:friam@redfish.com" target="_blank"><friam@redfish.com></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [FRIAM] semi-idle question<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif">Dave,
I found this in Wikipedia: "</span><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(32,33,34)">The
social brain hypothesis was proposed by British
anthropologist </span><span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Dunbar" title="Robin Dunbar" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(6,69,173);text-decoration:none">Robin
Dunbar</span></a></span><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(32,33,34)">,
who argues that human intelligence did not evolve
primarily as a means to solve ecological problems, but
rather as a means of surviving and reproducing in
large and complex social groups."</span><span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(32,33,34)">That
might explain why we are now leading our species off
the cliff. </span><span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 7:12 AM Prof
David West <<a href="mailto:profwest@fastmail.fm" target="_blank">profwest@fastmail.fm</a>>
wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border-top:none;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:1pt solid rgb(204,204,204);padding:0in 0in 0in 6pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
<p class="MsoNormal">Can human beings evolve?<br>
<br>
Was reading about Pepper Moths in England during the
Industrial Revolution. (population genetics)<br>
<br>
Population was white with dark spots and the occasional
dark colored moth was easy prey.<br>
Pollution killed lichen and caused the trees (moth's
habitat) to be covered in soot, turning them dark.<br>
Population of black moths went from 2% in 1848 to 95% by
1895.<br>
<br>
Is is possible for humans to evolve in response to climate
change in a similar way? more general prevalence of
melanin, craving for spicy hot food?<br>
<br>
Of course moths used many generations to achieve their
change and their lifespan is a fraction of a humans, so
extinction is more likely than adaptation. But, is it at
least possible in principle?<br>
<br>
davew<br>
<br>
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .<br>
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 <a href="http://bit.ly/virtualfriam" target="_blank">bit.ly/virtualfriam</a><br>
un/subscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" target="_blank">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br>
FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a><br>
archives: <a href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/" target="_blank">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</a><u></u><u></u></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br clear="all">
<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-- <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.<br>
Center for Emergent Diplomacy<br>
<a href="http://emergentdiplomacy.org" target="_blank">emergentdiplomacy.org</a><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
mobile: (303) 859-5609<br>
skype: merle.lelfkoff2<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">twitter: @merle110<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<pre>- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 <a href="http://bit.ly/virtualfriamun/subscribe" target="_blank">bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe</a> <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" target="_blank">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a>
FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a>
archives: <a href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/" target="_blank">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .<br>
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 <a href="http://bit.ly/virtualfriam" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">bit.ly/virtualfriam</a><br>
un/subscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br>
FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a><br>
archives: <a href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</a><br>
</blockquote></div>