What is Digg?338 Comments
- geoboy, on 10/12/2007, -7/+53"The thing about evolution is that it typically takes long periods of time to manifest itself, especially in humans, where the time between successive generations tends to be rather large."
That, and also how we humans have nearly made the process of natural selection irrelevant. Today, even the dumbest and most incapable humans are allowed to reproduce and pass on their genes. Perhaps we are de-evolving ;) - cius, on 10/12/2007, -9/+38Well, first of all, this isn't "proof" and to say it is belies a thorough misunderstanding about how science works. Science does not prove anything, the best you can hope for is strong evidential support for your hypothesis. So, it would be more accurate to say that this is scientific support for the hypothesis that humans are still evolving. Which, in my opinion, isn't that shocking. The thing about evolution is that it typically takes long periods of time to manifest itself, especially in humans, where the time between successive generations tends to be rather large. Considering the meager info given bythe article, its really not surprising that they found differences. I mean, do you expect to find no genetic difference when looking at people of different races? I'd think the phenotypical characteristics alone would give you a clue that there is going to be atleast some difference at the genetic level. It's good to know people are on the lookout for this sort of evidence though. digg for science topics.
- otomo, on 10/12/2007, -13/+41Well this will be buried thanks to the new comment system, oh well.
Wanna bet evolution is a theory? No really, do you? I bet you don't even know what evolution (the WHOLE theory) encompasses. Or the proofs that have been shown, the tests that have been done.
Sticking your fingers in your ears and singing john jacob jingleheimerschmidt when you don't like evolution as a concept is naive. From http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-qa.html (PS: if you want to debate evolutions wrongness these are the guys to ask, but please read the faq and the whole website before posting):
I thought evolution was just a theory. Why do you call it a fact?
Biological evolution is a change in the genetic characteristics of a population over time. That this happens is a fact. Biological evolution also refers to the common descent of living organisms from shared ancestors. The evidence for historical evolution -- genetic, fossil, anatomical, etc. -- is so overwhelming that it is also considered a fact. The theory of evolution describes the mechanisms that cause evolution. So evolution is both a fact and a theory.
People who say evolution is "not proven", "can never be proven", "has no proofs", etc.. blah blah blah really make me laugh. At least the "debate" is worth a few chuckles, too bad people don't understand religion has no place in science because it isn't science. (circular sort-of, but it isn't verifiable/repeatable/etc... so therefore not science) - Herolint, on 10/12/2007, -14/+38@ itsgus "Creationists"
I resent that. I am a creationist who believes in evolution (I don't know what you'd call that, but I'm sure it has the word crevis in there somewhere). I don't believe that the existence of God nullifies the theory of evolution and I don't believe that the theory of evolution nullifies the existence of God. What I do believe is that we don't know everything we'd like to pretend we do yet so I think we should buckle down and keep looking; like the University of Chicago apparently is. (as a side note, I don't believe God created everything out of nothing either as some christians do).
I'm not a scientist by any strech of the word, but I love science as long as it is approached from the viewpoint of "here's what we know so far and here's where we plan to continue our search for truth". When we take a snapshot of understanding and pronounce ourselves "all-knowing" that's when we are really dumb; I think. - stormmind, on 10/12/2007, -5/+27"Theories are not facts. Evolution is also falling down the drain. Look anywhere but the US and you will see a tendancy to move away from evolution because its silly."
Where did you get information like that? Afaik, it's only in the US that people have started to move away from evolution. Here in Europe few people even doubt it. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -9/+26"Look anywhere but the US and you will see a tendancy to move away from evolution because its silly."
Um, not really. In fact it seems that its MAINLY the US with its over abundance of crackpot religious right-wing nutcases that seems to be moving away from the idea of evolution.
Inteligent Design anyone? - cgwas, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17Survival of the fittest isn't the only thing that factors into carrying on your gene. Eventually characteristics that make someone undateable will be extinct. Then who would run the Internet?
- Osjpr, on 10/12/2007, -7/+19Who said it stopped?
- Kokichi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12FYI, a scientific theory is COMPLETELY different than when someone says that they have a "theory". A scientific theory is something that has constantly withstood tests to disprove it, has a lot of evidence to support it, and continues to gain the respect and agreement of scientists everywhere. A "theory" in the casual sense is equivalent to a hypothesis. I'm SICK of hearing idiots say "it's just a theory". As soon as you hear those words, for the love of no God, stop your conversation with them right then and there. It's obviously not worth your time.
- Arevos, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15@Inphormatika
Perhaps you could supply arguments that have not been already refuted by websites such as talkorigins.org?
Evolution is science because it is falsifiable. If one were to find that all visible stars in the sky were less than 6000 lightyears away, for instance, this would suggest that there wasn't enough time for species to evolve. Likewise, tens of thousands of separate experiments in the fields of biology, astrophysics, geology, physics and archeology could have produced results that would invalidate evolutionary theory. And how many of these experiments actually produced repeatable results that invalidate evolutionary theory beyond reasonable doubt? Zero.
Evolutionary theory has stood up for 150 years of criticism, probably more than any other contemporary theory. This is why scientists believe that life evolved over a long period of time; because there are mountains of evidence to support it, and no-one has yet succeeded in proving it wrong. This is not faith, which requires an absolute belief in something without supporting evidence, but science, which is the discipline of aggressively trying to prove things wrong, and adopting the few ideas which survive the process.
Creationism, on the other hand, is faith, because it cannot be disproven by evidence. With an omnipotent God, you can claim that any evidence that contradicts creationism was the result of God planting it there to mislead those who haven't the faith to believe in His word. It's a good thing that this idiocy isn't applied to modern science, or we'd still be in the dark ages. - ByteGuerilla, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11I disagree. Applying facts is how we arrived at the theory of evolution. Give us all a nice example of how when you apply facts to the theory of evolution they all "pretty much dissolve". You can use fossil records to chart the evolution of animals in an eco-system and physically see adaptations occurring in order to allow species to survive.
Better yet, give us an example of a fact that, when applied to creationism, actually strengthens the argument for creationism. - nstern2, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13and yet every Sunday massive amounts of people go and worship a book about stuff that happened long ago. Makes you realize that there is no point in any of it.
- drbroccoli, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Creatures optimized for sitting on couches.
- Guano, on 10/12/2007, -6/+15"It's kind of silly to say that people in the U.S. are beginning to favor "intelligent design" over evolution. That's patently false. The United States is the most productive nation in the world. We're not as stupid as Euro-wannabe shameful American leftist kids would have you believe."
Are you joking? A recent report has shown that the U.S. is second to last of about 40 nations in accepting evolution. You know who we beat out? Turkey. (no offense meant toward the fine people of Turkey) - timbudtwo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Natural Selection is NOT evolution P.S. This proves nothing. Natural Selection is natural selection. A part of evolutions theology, but it is not evolution.
- Codebender, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10> "Look anywhere but the US and you will see a tendancy to move away from evolution because its silly."
Now that is patently ridiculous, and clearly coming from someone who never looks anywhere but the U.S..
The evidence for evolution is literally mind-boggling, there's no way a single person could possibly read it all. The very few examples of evidence against evolution become evidence for evolution as the theory incorporates minor changes due to the new information. That's how science works. Don't forget that the alternative is a "theory" (not even that, really) that has exactly zero evidence backing it up. I'm surprised these people haven't seriously started supporting the Onion's "Intelligent Falling" idea.
Being something of a cynic, I consider the idea that an omnipotent being created humans "in his image" to be just about the most arrogant thing I have ever heard. - chrisc2, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Beliefs are hard to change. I like to stick with ideas.
- gotamd, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12I read about that earlier today. It's pretty interesting stuff. It makes sense that evolution wouldn't just have stopped at some point because there are always going to be some genes that get favored in a society. Plus, it's from the University of Chicago which automatically makes it cool ;)
- Guano, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Evolution does not mean "improve", necessarily.
- ItsGus, on 10/12/2007, -7/+15@ herolint ... if you believe in both, then i would not classify you as a creationist. there is no reason to take offense. I simply answered the man's question. creationists tend to say evolution never existed in the first place. once again, no need to take offense
- RockTheWall, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Absolutely incorrect. Mutations will continue to appear in the genome, but until those without the mutation cannot survive, evolution will be stagnant. As stated earlier, humans have largely succeeded in rendering natural selection irrelevant by manipulating their environment to their needs (think air conditioning, bear hunts). Furthermore, it is biologically radical that procreation would be a trait of the weak, which humans have achieved, considering the astonishing number of teen pregnancies.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12No way! I thought human evolutoin had come to a stopped once religion took over!
Seriously. This should've been completely obvious. Evolution will never stop as long as there is more than one species of life form on the planet. - Arevos, on 10/12/2007, -7/+14@Inphormatika
The theory that evolution resulted in the diversity of life today is a theory debated only by the lunatic fringe and by people ignorant of the scientific process. Whilst debates about such subjects are usually fun, most of the arguments that so-called creationists put forward have been debunked years ago, and this takes some of the challenge out of it. Add this to the fact that no amount of evidence will disuade such people from their belief, and you quickly get a situation that's not worth arguing about. - riverrunner, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"Are you joking? A recent report has shown that the U.S. is second to last of about 40 nations in accepting evolution. You know who we beat out? Turkey. (no offense meant toward the fine people of Turkey)"
I wonder - does one need to 'evolve' to believe in evolution? in that case us mericans and them turkians have some catching up to do. - ItsGus, on 10/12/2007, -12/+18creationists
- noamsml, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Eventually, I hope that all of humanity will evolve beyond the "Racist jerk" phase.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7why would people assume that we are the ultimate achivement of evolution? that would be sooooo damn arrogant... Plus, the link requires a login......
- Osjpr, on 10/12/2007, -6/+12What is so funny about your comment, Inphormatika, is that the exact opposite is true. Fact is a word that is innately alien to religion. Nothing to date has been proven by a religious scholar. Not. One. Single. Fact. Yet scientists have knocked down precept after precept of claims made by religious scholars. The papal church and the pope has buckled and collapsed under the weight of scientific evidence presented to refute its claims.
- MugatuOT, on 10/12/2007, -6/+12They go hand in hand - God is not a simpleton - if you believe in God then science should enhance that belief.
- MihaiM, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Did someone think that the human evolution has stopped?
- mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6ok this article is a definite oxymoron. of course we are still evolving. evolution doesnt just pause randomly, its a constant variable, we are always mutating because in nature, nothing is ever replicated 100%, there is always an error or something that changes from event to event. this is how nature works.
if we still exist 100,000 years from now, i have no doubt that humans would have an altered physical body than what we have now. science medicine and technology have also definitely slowed down evolution, but yes, it is still happening. - mntbikeracer1, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7This doesn't prove evolution, sorry it is still a theory. But one I believe non-the-less. All this ID disproving BS needs to stop though, a person can easily believe in both and not deny their religion or scientific fact. Wouldn't you think that God would want to create animals that can evolve and become better adapt to a changing earth, doesn't that make life more exciting, I don't think God created us to be stagnant.
- chrishavel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6"A part of evolutions [sic] theology." Theology = "the study of the nature of God and religious belief." Evolution does not "have" a theological component, in spite of what the fundies like to claim in an effort make science and religion equivalent.
- tavisjohn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5We really are still evolving? I thought that we had stopped evolving when we gained the ability to use tools. ::)
Please, this is nothing new. Every creature on earth is still evolving! It is how nature works. - mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7evolution wouldnt stop if there were only one species. why would you think that.
- jedi0utkast, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I Agree, this is evidence that not all digg users are monkeys.
- chillypepper, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Ray Kurzweil also said that one day we could upload our souls into a robot so we'd never die. He made some sweet keyboards, but that guys wack.
- jumanous, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Problem... We don't have the Genome of a 5000-15000 year old person, so all of it is mute. It reminds me of people saying "the brain is a useless organ... the heart is where all or thoughts come from", and the one that still hasn't been let go by wannabe scientific activists, "the appendix is useless" or the "tonsils are useless". What is useless is the brains of the people who make these stupid assumptions in the first place.
In 50 years time, this theory (along with most creationist theories) will be laughed at with fervor by people claiming how intelligent they are now to have the "real truth". When in reality, no one has, or will ever know the full truth. We are worse than a dog trying to understand physics, and the arrogance I see here is an embarrassment to the human species. - LongLostStar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6"Science does not prove anything, the best you can hope for is strong evidential support for your hypothesis."
Actually, I think that your wrong. Only universal hypotheses ("all ravens are black") cannot be verified, given absolute proof of. Existential hypotheses (which may include "there is still such a thing as human evolution"), however, can be verified, obviously simply by making such an observation. Now, one might argue of the validity of the observational claim, but still, it isn't correct to deny science all proving or verifying power. - luvkit, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Interesting... the new comment system is being used to suppress opinions. That's not cool. I'm okay with shutting down the jerks, but differing opinions are not jerks. One argument that has been undugg was actually a good point. Without wide sampling of the 10,000 year old human DNA, scientist can make no valid points about what the human genome was. Therefore, demonstrating a change over time without a proper earlier sampling cannot be conclusive by any means. Thus, human evolution is far from pr oven. This is simple statistics.
As a note, for the blind-faith believers on both sides (evolution and creation), I believe that living organisms are undergoing adaptation... and even from natural factors. For those of you that don't know, the environment dictating the adaptation of an organism is evolution. - forgottenred, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"adapting" inside a species is one thing, a human changing into another species altogether is another
- datagod, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The tagline says "Proof", yet the story "hints" at evidence...there is a big difference.
- JeremyCade, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Two quick citations from the article:
"The genes that show this evolutionary change include some responsible for the senses of taste and smell, digestion, bone structure, skin color and brain function."
" Three populations were studied: Africans, East Asians and Europeans. The selected genes affect skin color, hair texture and bone structure."
Now here's the question:
Do you class Genetic Mutation as evolution?
He's an example for you to ponder?
I (I'm Anglo) had kids with my girl friend (She's Asian), that they their gene's controlling skin color, hair texture and bone structure would be slightly different to mine, and my girl friends.
Now say another 500 generations (about 250 years @ 2 Generations per 100 years, give or take) of my future family pass with similar ethnic (for lack of a better word) breading choices.. Their genetic makeup, while having some genetic throw-backs to mine and my girl friends originals, would be somewhat if not vastly different..
So back to the question?? Would you class this as evolution??
My personal (un-educated NO PHD HAVING) opinion is Yes.. this is evolution.. - brandizzle, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Religion is great. It's what's called blind belief. You can believe in it all you want, you'll just have to ignore everything else. Yes, you can believe that God created people to evolve. That's probably the more intelligent thing to do. (Before you say I'm being a bitch, I was raised Christian)
EVERYTHING in science is a theory. Well..okay, almost everything. The point being evolution cannot and will not be made into a "law" for a few hundred thousand more years. But you know what? Neither can creationism. Actually...I strongly believe no ID theory can be "proved" except if evolution is disproved (we don't evolve so we must have been created this way). - davidemm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Well, I just want to say that I recently went through an emergency surgery to have my appendix removed. Was not fun.
With that said, modern medicine is slowing the rate at which we evolve. If it was not for advanced medical techniques, I would not be here and I would be unable to pass on my "appendix" gene. Thanks to the good doctors, I can pass on my genes and my kids can may have the same problem. Therefore the appendix as a evolutionary problem will continue to persist.
This can be spread to fit many different kinds of genetic "features" that can be fixed with modern medicine so that the problem will always remain. Bad genes will continue to survive.
So survival of the fitness via "natural selection" does not work so well anymore.
Doctors, how is that for job security? - RedLibertyX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4So we should just give up all historical pursuits because we may or may not be able to piece together what happened from primary and secondary sources? Although I admire the philosophical debate which this may spawn, I find it hard to throw out the entire fossil record simply because scientists may hypothesize wrong more than they theorize correctly.
- yukevster, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Here! here! ... where do people get the notion humans are 'improving'?
It's a myth that humans are inherently 'better' than any other species - you can thank religion for that.
Can you run 60 m/hr? Can you breath underwater? Do you have the bite force of 355 pounds per inch? Can you...... you get the idea. - timewarrior, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Genes show humans are still evolving
New York Times News Service
Published March 7, 2006
Providing the strongest evidence yet that human beings are still evolving, researchers have detected some 700 regions of the human genome where genes appear to have been reshaped by natural selection, a principal force of evolution, within the last 5,000 to 15,000 years.
The genes that show this evolutionary change include some responsible for the senses of taste and smell, digestion, bone structure, skin color and brain function.
Under natural selection, beneficial genes become more common in a population as their owners have more progeny.
Three populations were studied: Africans, East Asians and Europeans. The selected genes affect skin color, hair texture and bone structure.
The study of selected genes may help physical anthropologists explain why people over the world have a such a variety of distinctive appearances, said Spencer Wells, director of the Genographic project of the National Geographic Society.
"There is ample evidence that selection has been a major driving point in our evolution during the last 10,000 years, and there is no reason to suppose that it has stopped," said Jonathan Pritchard, a population geneticist at the University of Chicago who headed the study.
The findings are in Tuesday's issue of PLoS-Biology, published by the Public Library of Science, a non-profit organization. - crapiolio, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Username: garbagegoeshere@gmail.com
Pass: 123456 -
Show 51 - 100 of 333 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is