[Alan McDougall (OP)]

Greetings,

The earliest Homo sapiens are said to have lived some 200 000 years ago. My question is what do the forum think that homo sapient would look like in another 200 thousand years?, and what would it evolve into and what Homo Superior look like??

Larger heads for large brained, smaller mouth, teeth disappearing, tiny jaw

My comments above

Alan

Etc??

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2005-02/uou-toh021105.php

The oldest Homo sapiens
Fossils push human emergence back to 195,000 years ago
 
 
 
Geologist Frank Brown, dean of mines and Earth sciences at the University of Utah, crouches on Ethiopia's Kibish rock formation, where Brown and colleagues determined that fossilized bones of Homo sapiens were 195,000 years old -- the oldest fossils of the our species ever found. Credit: Ian McDougall, Australian National University
 


When the bones of two early humans were found in 1967 near Kibish, Ethiopia, they were thought to be 130,000 years old. A few years ago, researchers found 154,000- to 160,000-year-old human bones at Herto, Ethiopia. Now, a new study of the 1967 fossil site indicates the earliest known members of our species, Homo sapiens, roamed Africa about 195,000 years ago.

"It pushes back the beginning of anatomically modern humans," says geologist Frank Brown, a co-author of the study and dean of the University of Utah's College of Mines and Earth Sciences.

[Madidus_Scientia]

Well, you would have to consider what evolutionary pressure there would be due to the environment, which is very hard to predict over 200 thousand years, and differs in different parts of the world. One of the only factors I can think of is that in general "western society" as it is now, the majority of us have plenty of fatty foods available to us, and many of us over indulge and become fat or obese. This generally makes one less physically attractive in today's culture. In the old days and in some other cultures being fat was/is actually attractive as it showed one had plenty of food to share, and in women the larger the hips the easier childbirth is. But an obese person in today's society might be less likely to reproduce, as a result of being less physically attractive, so persons who manage to remain reasonably slim might reproduce more and have their genes start to dominate the gene pool. This is actually a shame since the reason us humans can put on weight so well in the first place is because we evolved over hundreds of thousands of years to be able to survive famines, so an obese person today might have had the best genes for the job back in harsher times. But much of us are still struggling through famines in less fortunate countries, so you would think this particular evolutionary pressure would be the opposite in such places.

Maybe another thing is that with todays medicine many things that might have affected evolution may not matter, for example people with diabetes or something might well have died untreated before passing on their genes, but today it is reasonably manageable and would not generally kill the unfortunate person and prevent them from multiplying.

And will we get smarter? Only if by having a genetic predisposition towards being intelligent helps you to multiply, which might be rational if you think along the lines that they might obtain a higher paying job and become more desirable that way, but I think that is determined more by your upbringing and education than genes. And maybe smarter people are more likely not to have too many kids? I personally know a few people who I would not exactly consider smart who have managed to get someone pregnant unintentionally whilst still in or barely out of their teens. However someone really smart might end up like the 40 year old virgin type? Or be smart enough to use contraception?

But there are different types of intelligence, maybe those with better social skills might dominate, as they could potentially seduce more mates? Or those with a tendancy to be more "clucky"

Perhaps we will ultimately guide our own evolution through genetic manipulation to eliminate diseases, such as in the movie Gattaca.

[thelastman]

Greetings,

My question is what do the forum think that homo sapient would look like in another 200 thousand years?

In 200,000 years, we'll have ice ages which will scrape every trace of humanity out of existence in the higher latitudes.  We'll also have greater chances of other catastrophic events such as super-volcanoes, earthquakes, global warming, and large meteor strikes.  As I recall, the last 50,000 years or so have been stable unlike any other period in our existence and this stability has contributed to our success.

Personally I believe man will not make it 200,000 years from now.  We're selfish, destructive, wasteful, and careless:  the solution to global warming is the catastrophe caused by global warming.  Man will continue to over-consume, to deplete the natural resources of the earth, continue to destroy the only place he will ever have a chance to live, and continue to sow the seeds of his own destruction. 

I hate writing that.  I really do.  What's the use of being on a forum if I can't be honest about what I think someone is asking about?

[that mad man]

I don't think we will evolve much more than we already have even in that 200,000 year timespan. I don't think our brains will be bigger or we will be much smarter and I don't think we will look much different.

Because of racial mixing we could possibly have only one colour.

[Don_1]

I think humans have a problem with further evolution. Men & women are no longer selective in their choice of partner in a way which would further our species.

[Alan McDougall (OP)]

Well with the unbelievable unexpected explosion in information and ease of accessing it via internet etc maybe this will push humanity into advances and inventions and solutions of the mysteries of existence, mankind might be very much unlike our wildest imaginations in just a few hundred years not thousands

Thinking back to just the other day, in 1984, there were no PC no cell phone no internet?

Alan

[Alan McDougall (OP)]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6057734.stm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Trans-post-human2.jpg



Human species 'may split in two'
 
Humanity may split into an elite and an underclass, says Dr Curry
Humanity may split into two sub-species in 100,000 years' time as predicted by HG Wells, an expert has said.

Evolutionary theorist Oliver Curry of the London School of Economics expects a genetic upper class and a dim-witted underclass to emerge.

The human race would peak in the year 3000, he said - before a decline due to dependence on technology.

People would become choosier about their sexual partners, causing humanity to divide into sub-species, he added. (have they? my comment)

The descendants of the genetic upper class would be tall, slim, healthy, attractive, intelligent, and creative and a far cry from the "underclass" humans who would have evolved into dim-witted, ugly, squat goblin-like creatures.

Race 'ironed out'
But in the nearer future, humans will evolve in 1,000 years into giants between 6ft and 7ft tall, he predicts, while life-spans will have extended to 120 years, Dr Curry claims. (when I go to the local mall I can see some truth in that statement, all these young guys seem to tower over me "my comment")

Physical appearance, driven by indicators of health, youth and fertility, will improve, he says, while men will exhibit symmetrical facial features, look athletic, and have squarer jaws, deeper voices and bigger penises.

Women, on the other hand, will develop lighter, smooth, hairless skin, large clear eyes, pert breasts, glossy hair, and even features, he adds. Racial differences will be ironed out by interbreeding, producing a uniform race of coffee-coloured people.
However,

Dr Curry warns, in 10,000 years time humans may have paid a genetic price for relying on technology.

 

Receding chins
Social skills, such as communicating and interacting with others, could be lost, along with emotions such as love, sympathy, trust and respect. People would become less able to care for others, or perform in teams.

Physically, they would start to appear more juvenile. Chins would recede, as a result of having to chew less on processed food.

There could also be health problems caused by reliance on medicine, resulting in weak immune systems.

Preventing deaths would also help to preserve the genetic defects that cause cancer.

Further into the future, sexual selection - being choosy about one's partner - was likely to create more and more genetic inequality, said Dr Curry.

The logical outcome would be two sub-species, "gracile" and "robust" humans similar to the Eloi and Morlocks foretold by HG Wells in his 1895 novel The Time Machine.

"While science and technology have the potential to create an ideal habitat for humanity over the next millennium, there is a possibility of a monumental genetic hangover over the subsequent millennia due to an over-reliance on technology reducing our natural capacity to resist disease, or our evolved ability to get along with each other, said Dr Curry

Any comments on this article

Alan