Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

King E
Lv 6
King E asked in Social ScienceAnthropology · 8 years ago

Evolution of man, 1mil years in the future?

Way back when, my 7th grade science teacher turned me on to evolution. One of his favorite ways of showing examples was his theory that man would come to a point when he no longer uses his knees and therefore they would evolve into something less flexible and eventually straight bone. Well, that never was a good example to me and now I see people deliberately working out to use these things. But still evolution can change things. So here is the question: If a part of man/woman were to evolve out from our current state what do you think it might be?

Update:

Meaning over a period of a hundred thousand to a million years into the future.

4 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    7 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    Good question! Although I feel like my answer sort of ruins it but anyway here I go:

    The simple fact is - humans are not, and will not evolve unless circumstances change drastically.

    You see, we are no longer fighting for survival (at least in most of the world), we live our lives and their is no such thing as survival of the fittest in modern human society - and thus there is no more natural selection.

    This is why genetic disabilities and weaknesses prevail in human life, disabled people are cared for and procreate and again there is no natural selection so it is not only the fittest that procreate - everyone does. (In the wild albino rabbits would be hunted or killed almost instantly or neglected by the mother at birth, human albinos can obviously live a fulfilling life in human society).

    We are very lucky that we live the way that we do, without those harsh elements of nature. It does unfortunately mean though that evolution - for now at least - is at a standstill.

    The answers below were interesting to read, but they are wrong (sorry!)

    Wish I could have given a better answer, but this is the way it is!

    Source(s): Sir David Attenborough discusses the topic regularly
  • ?
    Lv 5
    7 years ago

    Good thinking by your science teacher, but he misses the main point of natural selection. For a trait to be selected by nature requires a bottle neck that offers an advantage to those having the trait. Humans are amazingly diverse with some being bigger, faster, stronger, more agile, a better immune system or able to subsist on different or less food. Another factor is reproductive ability... a more attractive person has the advantage of being more attractive to the opposite sex. A male that is irresistible to the opposite sex will have a reproductive advantage. Until a bottleneck selecting for some genetic mutation occurs, that mutation will simply be passed down to future generations without notice.

    Given that the Earth has 7 billion people &, with the exception of clones or identical twins, no two are alike we are evolving at a rapid rate. Keep in mind that every human actually has 100s of gene mutations but few actually do anything & those that do are not likely to be noticed.

    Therefore, until lacking knees gives humans a reproductive advantage we will have knees.

  • ?
    Lv 7
    7 years ago

    No, I don't think that the example of rigid knees was a good one but still it did stick with you after some years and still got you thinking today. Thumbs up to your teacher.

    It took millions of years to develop the legs that we have now. Yet they are not vital for life. You could be amputated or be born without legs and still functional. They have a simple function, to take as places, chasing food as far and fast as it might run and bring it back home. We still look at the legs of females as potential mates because good legs in a female means that her children could be good hunters and providers. The thing is that we don't need to chase antelopes all over the savanna any more nor run from saber-tooth tigers, so legs are kind of superfluous for the purposes they were built. Legs are also expensive. It takes huge amounts of calories and resources to keep them going and healthy. The legs may be using half of our nutritional intake or more just to sit there. It is not surprise that those that use the legs the less and drive cars everywhere not using the legs to burn calories are obese, and are those that eventually will need knee and hip replacements. Use it or loose it is true here although you can also damage your joints by over use.

    People loosing the use of their legs after child bearing age will not affect new generations, but if teenagers depend totally in automobiles for transportation, they will develop weak legs that could be passed on to their children, consequently as legs are not essential to survival, they could become vestigial eventually. Maybe, like in the case of the whales, future generation of humans could have mini-legs growing inside the body. Hey we only need a butt to seat on in front of a computer and drive automatic with cruise control, and seat on the sofa to watch TV. Who need legs anymore!

    That is why I ride 5,000 km by bike a year. I want to keep my legs.

  • ?
    Lv 7
    8 years ago

    Changes in morphology, shape and color of eyes and skin color. Adaptive strategies for tolerance to popular drugs, natural resistance to diseases like cancer, metabolic syndrome, etc., acute coping strategies for social ills including std's and mental illness.. greater longevity.

    psychometrics to extend our minds almost without end.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.