Re: Evolution In Humans
From: Strider (email-address_at_signature.okay)
Date: 07/27/04
- Next message: Strider: "Re: Evolution In Humans"
- Previous message: Huck Turner: "Re: Why Gould's "spandrels" are safer 'evolution-philosophically thought' of as side-effects of ceiling structures, than as scraps of selection"
- In reply to: dkomo: "Re: Evolution In Humans"
- Next in thread: dkomo: "Re: Evolution In Humans"
- Reply: dkomo: "Re: Evolution In Humans"
- Reply: Perplexed in Peoria: "Re: Evolution In Humans"
- Reply: Michael Ragland: "Re: Evolution In Humans"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 15:39:45 +0000 (UTC)
dkomo proclaimed...
> Biological evolution takes place on the time scale of hundreds of
> thousands or millions of years, so in our case I think it has little
> relevance.
A fair comment. But assuming that the human race doesn't destroy itself
(which doesn't look likely) then where would it take us?
> We will have either destroyed ourselves or transformed
> ourselves into Homo Superior (a distinctly different species) through
> our science and technology long before then.
You're saying you think we've made natural selection obsolete in
ourselves?
- Next message: Strider: "Re: Evolution In Humans"
- Previous message: Huck Turner: "Re: Why Gould's "spandrels" are safer 'evolution-philosophically thought' of as side-effects of ceiling structures, than as scraps of selection"
- In reply to: dkomo: "Re: Evolution In Humans"
- Next in thread: dkomo: "Re: Evolution In Humans"
- Reply: dkomo: "Re: Evolution In Humans"
- Reply: Perplexed in Peoria: "Re: Evolution In Humans"
- Reply: Michael Ragland: "Re: Evolution In Humans"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]