Re: Why no new species of man?
- From: dk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (DK)
- Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 12:34:31 -0400 (EDT)
In article <g55p6n$cn1$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, oprah.chopra@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
A few hundred thousand years ago, the world population was very smal
yet we had several species of man. In the past 1000 years the world
population has grown orders of magnitude larger, yet how come no new
species have evolved?
My understanding was evolution depends on population and time. The
greater the product of those two, the faster the evolution.
Absolutely. Human evolution *has* been accelerating.
http://www.pnas.org/content/104/52/20753.full
or
http://www.reuters.
com/article/healthNews/idUSN1043228620071210?
feedType=RSS&feedName=healthNews&rpc=22&sp=true
if you don't have access to PNAS.
So why are
we not seeing radically new species man emerge when more people are
born in one day ( ~4 million ) then lived in the world for milleniums
100,000 years ago.
Because for new species to emerge, there has to be reproductive
isolation. That's not what we have. Modern global mobility seems
to work against it. On the other hand, if some tendencies of
positive assortative mating (say, paucity of black-asian marriages
or working class - ruling elite couples) remain or become stronger,
it may be just a matter of time.
DK
.
- References:
- Why no new species of man?
- From: oprah . chopra
- Why no new species of man?
- Prev by Date: Re: Why no new species of man?
- Next by Date: Re: Why no new species of man?
- Previous by thread: Re: Why no new species of man?
- Next by thread: Re: Why no new species of man?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
