Human species 'may split in two'

[iGav]

...expects a genetic upper class and a dim-witted underclass to emerge.

Some might say they already have, and that they can be distinguished by Burberry & bling.

So in short, men will have bigger willies and women more pert boobs. I'm liking the future. :D Freeze me now, and thaw me in a thousand. ;)

Oh, and we'll all be coffee-coloured too.

Rinky dink link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6057734.stm).

[Blue Velvet]

men will... have squarer jaws, deeper voices and bigger penises.

Women... will develop pert breasts, glossy hair...



He carried out the report for men's satellite TV channel Bravo.

;)

[bartelby]

;)

Yes. Exactly.
Catering to those dim-witted underclass...

[Queso]

Definitely already happened. The trouble is the dim-witted ones are breeding far faster :eek:

LOL. I'm assuming I'm part of the superior branch :D :D

[iGav]

LOL. I'm assuming I'm part of the superior branch :D :D

Well, I'm tall so I think I am too.

[Blue Velvet]

*Looks at flat chest, piggy little eyes and horrible hair... and ready-meal in fridge* :(

[Much Ado]

100,000 years?

That's going out on a limb a bit, isn't it?

[motulist]

As a person with a college level understanding of biology, but admittedly not a professional biologist, this sounds like a huge pile of bull.

[Jaffa Cake]

I'm liking the future. :D Freeze me now, and thaw me in a thousand. ;)That might not be a good idea – it would be bad enough waking up in an unrecognisable world where everything you know and love is long gone, but also everyone would be laughing at your small penis. :o

[Much Ado]

That might not be a good idea – it would be bad enough waking up in an unrecognisable world where everything you know and love is long gone, but also everyone would be laughing at your small penis. :o

Speak for yourself :eek:

(Sorry, sorry, sorry, sorry...)

[Jaffa Cake]

Speak for yourself :eek:To be fair, I'm used to it now so it wouldn't matter in the far future either – plus, we'd have rocket cars. :)


By the way, I'm loving the picture of what the Bravo subscribers of 3000AD will look like... :D

88409

[bartelby]

To be fair, I'm used to it now so it wouldn't matter in the far future either – plus, we'd have rocket cars. :)

And your Hull shirt might be fashionable again!

[Much Ado]

To be fair, I'm used to it now so it wouldn't matter in the far future either – plus, we'd have rocket cars. :)

And OS X.66,667

[Abstract]

100,000 years?

That's going out on a limb a bit, isn't it?

He's brilliant. He can make a bold, outrageous claim, and nobody will be around, or remember what he said, and point out how wrong he is.

[Don't panic]

and the upper class will have magical powers and they shall be called "Elves"
and the underclass will live in caves and they shall be called "dwarves"
and there still be enclaves of unevolved people who shall surprisingly call themselves "humans"
and of course there will be other races, products of genetic engineering experiments gone awry, and they shall be called "orcs", "trolls" and "goblins"

[Rodimus Prime]

wow well that is a load of crap. I going to assume or at least hope the claim was more made to be funny. other wise the guy is going to be part of the lower dumb class in the future.


As for the upper intelligent and lower dim witted well that I could see happing in distance future. Reason being is as a whole the people we tend to marry are of similar intelligence as our selves. That means smart people tend to marry smart people and dumb people tend to marry dumb people. Their kids tend to be like their parents. Smart parents make smart kids and dumb parents make dumb kids.

As for human reliance of technology. I kind of wonder if we have not already becoming to reliant on technology.

[jsw]

Rinky dink link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6057734.stm).
Spoiled by gadgets designed to meet their every need, they could come to resemble domesticated animals.
I'm not quite clear on how being spoiled will make us grow tails, but I'm all for the bigger penis thing. As long as it's prehensile. I mean, with one of those, and a tail, I think life would be wonderful. I could hang from a branch with my tail and pick strawberries off the ground below with my penis.

Sounds like utopia to me.

[Queso]

I'm not quite clear on how being spoiled will make us grow tails, but I'm all for the bigger penis thing. As long as it's prehensile. I mean, with one of those, and a tail, I think life would be wonderful. I could hang from a branch with my tail and pick strawberries off the ground below with my penis.

Sounds like utopia to me.
Having a tail would be kick-ass. Why our ancestors got rid of theirs I'll never know :)

[2nyRiggz]

Tails and bigger pee pees....indeed a good future for my greatest grandest kids.




Bless

[Eric5h5]

What, so this guy read The Time Machine by H.G. Wells then? Hardly an original theory...although the stuff about body parts is, I guess, an "interesting" twist....

--Eric

[yg17]

The trouble is the dim-witted ones are breeding far faster :eek:

Well that'll change once we get bigger dicks and nicer boobs :D

[gauchogolfer]

Definitely already happened. The trouble is the dim-witted ones are breeding far faster :eek:


Yep, there's even a documentary about it: IMDB.com (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/)

[Abstract]

Well that'll change once we get bigger dicks and nicer boobs :D

If I had a bigger dick and nice boobs, I may not need a woman. I'm creative when I want to be. I can figure something out.

[Butthead]

;)

Actually we already have those "qualities" available to us via Dr 90210, lol....silicon works wonders, just ask Pam Anderson...and the bigger they are, the harder they fall, lol just ask Misha Barton's former rocker b/f.

http://superficialgirls.blogspot.com/2007_01_01_archive.html

*Looks at flat chest, piggy little eyes and horrible hair... and ready-meal in fridge* :(

Ummm, my kind of woman- wanna have some pizza and sex :p ?

If I had a bigger dick and nice boobs, I may not need a woman. I'm creative when I want to be. I can figure something out.

eeeeeeW, dude yer freakin me out. The day I find out Jeon Ji-Hyun has a bigger dick than I do, I'm committing suicide...that would be so wrong.

[Abstract]

Dang, I had to check Google for who you were talking about. For a second, I thought you were talking about the North Korean leader. :p

[Ariez]

Doubt it. Unless there are some tribes out there thats so out of touch with civilization that they fall behind evolution progress.

[the vj]

I recall that movie where the snob girl said when she saw his friend warking in the back yard: don't we have mexicans for those things?

[ChrisA]

He's wrong. If we look at current trends those that are more reproductively successful tend to be poor and uneducated. The well to do affluent ten not to have families with 8 kids. Compare much of Africa to Japan.

[joepunk]

It's my dream come true. Or, I've probably been dreaming about One Million Years B.C. :o

It's either that or the crackpipe guy has some sort of fixation on that movie as well.

[mac-er]

88409

For that superior human in that picture to have a bigger wad, I would expect a much bigger bulge. Unless its tucked between his legs in the depiction. :D

[aLoC]

People will learn to genetically engineer themselves well before 100,000 years, and then all bets are off.

All the fashionable women will have feathers on their back and all the fashionable men will have tails for holding things.

[MartyMoe]

Having a tail would be kick-ass. Why our ancestors got rid of theirs I'll never know :)

Especially when I need a prehensile tail to scratch that one little spot in the upper back that I just can't- quite- reach....

Well, I supposed that is why we developed civilization in the first place. To build doorframes you can lean up against to scratch your back.

[Jaffa Cake]

For that superior human in that picture to have a bigger wad, I would expect a much bigger bulge. Unless its tucked between his legs in the depiction. :DClearly in the future our genitalia will be detachable. It would make it much easier to keep clean, I suppose – just stick it in the dishwasher or something.

[twoodcc]

As a person with a college level understanding of biology, but admittedly not a professional biologist, this sounds like a huge pile of bull.

i'd have to agree here. after reading that article, it seems he basically just dreamed that up

[Jschultz]

But my question is to whether some things he says have any truth. For instance, will human genes actually adapt to all the plastic surgery and bodily enhancement we do? I mean, I know that there are different things in our food today versus 100 years ago that accounts for some genetic change, but I didn't know if plastic surgery is something that can be 'learnt' from genetics.

Also, with the creation of genetic counseling, isn't something feasible as well?
If the poor have no access, wouldn't that create some disparity?

These are my honest questions.

[GSMiller]

Definitely already happened. The trouble is the dim-witted ones are breeding far faster :eek:

LOL. I'm assuming I'm part of the superior branch :D :D

Indeed. And the majority of Mac users get an automatic advance into the supierior branch :p (The exception being those who are like the guy in this post (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=377243)).

[kwood]

I think the less superior race should be selectively removed. You know, to prevent genetically moving backwards.

Oh wait... Didn't someone already think this idea up?

http://www.firstworldwar.com/features/graphics/hitler_fuhrer.jpg


Ah...right miene fuhrer. Do we really want to go through that (http://images.google.com/images?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=holocaust&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&um=1&sa=N&tab=wi) again?

[Drumjim85]

I think someone has been watching too much of the movie "The Time Machine" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Time_Machine_(2002_film)) .... did he say anything about people living underground??

[yg17]

I think the less superior race should be selectively removed. You know, to prevent genetically moving backwards.

Oh wait... Didn't someone already think this idea up?


Ah...right miene fuhrer. Do we really want to go through that (http://images.google.com/images?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=holocaust&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&um=1&sa=N&tab=wi) again?


Well, there's a difference between what someone thinks is an inferior race and what is scientifically proven as an inferior race, so yes, we can kill off all the idiots :D

I nominate my housemate's girlfriend's cat to lead the killings. He (or maybe she, who cares) is white, and has a bit of a Hitler moustache. Plus, it would make an awesome lolcat pic.



And before anyone actually thinks I'm serious, I'm not ;)

[Don't panic]

But my question is to whether some things he says have any truth. For instance, will human genes actually adapt to all the plastic surgery and bodily enhancement we do? I mean, I know that there are different things in our food today versus 100 years ago that accounts for some genetic change, but I didn't know if plastic surgery is something that can be 'learnt' from genetics.

No.
You can't surgically acquire transmittable traits.
If anything it could be the opposite: surgery will increasingly mask the genetic "look" so that exteriorly beautiful, but genetically ugly people will generate uglier and uglier kids, which will have to undergo ever increasing "somatic beautification".

An increased reliance in 'artificial' means to get better/stronger/healthier bodies will in fact undermine the possibility of naturally developing those same traits, unless the 'improvements' are achieved by genetic manipulations of the gametes (sperm and eggs). even genetic manipulation at the fetal level would not result in transmittable traits, unless it affects the gametes of the developing embrio, meaning any intervention would have to be done very early and based on the genetic makeup, rather than any directly observable trait. AND the result would start to appear in the following generation.

so an alternative prediction would be that the dominating class/race/species would sport unhealthy, weak, ugly bodies that will necessitate to be artificially modified since birth (or even pre-birth) to look/be healthy, strong and beautiful by artificial means.
The underclass won't have access to those means so in their brutal underworld only the fittest will survive (by being stronger, smarter, good looking or generally 'better').

edit: to some extent, this is already happening with genetic diseases.

[ravenvii]

No.
You can't surgically acquire transmittable traits.
If anything it could be the opposite: surgery will increasingly mask the genetic "look" so that exteriorly beautiful, but genetically ugly people will generate uglier and uglier kids, which will have to undergo ever increasing "somatic beautification".

An increased reliance in 'artificial' means to get better/stronger/healthier bodies will in fact undermine the possibility of naturally developing those same traits, unless the 'improvements' are achieved by genetic manipulations of the gametes (sperm and eggs). even genetic manipulation at the fetal level would not result in transmittable traits, unless it affects the gametes of the developing embrio, meaning any intervention would have to be done very early and based on the genetic makeup, rather than any directly observable trait. AND the result would start to appear in the following generation.

so an alternative prediction would be that the dominating class/race/species would sport unhealthy, weak, ugly bodies that will necessitate to be artificially modified since birth (or even pre-birth) to look/be healthy, strong and beautiful by artificial means.
The underclass won't have access to those means so in their brutal underworld only the fittest will survive (by being stronger, smarter, good looking or generally 'better').

edit: to some extent, this is already happening with genetic diseases.

Sounds like a book, "Man After Man". Great book, you guys should read it, much more realistic than this guy.

Link: http://www.amazon.com/Man-After-Anthropology-Future/dp/0312035608/ref=pd_bbs_2/103-7738373-0363010?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1193781940&sr=8-2

[killr_b]

It's called Ugenics and has been around for hundreds of years now. You know it as Genetics. That's what we renamed it to after WWII and Hitler giving it a bad name. Same science, same point (final solution), new American name.

The rich elite are doing their best to become a super human class compared to us peasants. It's not new, they've been working on this for centuries.

Google: Alex Jones' Endgame. It will tell you about the Ugenics agenda starting at about the half way point.

Video Link for Endgame (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1070329053600562261&q=endgame+duration%3Along&total=85&start=0&num=50&so=0&type=search&plindex=8)

[.Andy]

It's called Ugenics and has been around for hundreds of years now. You know it as Genetics. That's what we renamed it to after WWII and Hitler giving it a bad name. Same science, same point (final solution), new American name.
No eugenics and genetics are two completely different things. Eugenics is controlled breeding (or selective killing) to enhance or remove individual genetic traits in a specific population. Genetics is the field of biology that studies heredity and phenotypic variation. Eugenics may have a basis in genetic theory, but they are most certainly not synonymous.

[ezekielrage_99]

He's brilliant. He can make a bold, outrageous claim, and nobody will be around, or remember what he said, and point out how wrong he is.

And those are the best kind of claims..... You don't have to hear it when you're wrong.

[killr_b]

No eugenics and genetics are two completely different things. Eugenics is controlled breeding (or selective killing) to enhance or remove individual genetic traits in a specific population. Genetics is the field of biology that studies heredity and phenotypic variation. Eugenics may have a basis in genetic theory, but they are most certainly not synonymous.

No what?
We imported all the Nazi doctors to America and started Genetics.
Though Eugenics should be classified as a subset of what we call genetics, it came first.
The imported Nazi eugenics became genetics in America. Plain and simple.

[.Andy]

No what?
We imported all the Nazi doctors to America and started Genetics.
Though Eugenics should be classified as a subset of what we call genetics, it came first.
The imported Nazi eugenics became genetics in America. Plain and simple.
Mendel (the father of genetics 1822-1884), Darwin, and Galton all worked well over half a century before the Nazi's were even around. Galton derived eugenics (he coined the term) about 30 years after being inspired by the Origin of the Species publication. Galton's ideas were to enhance positive traits in the population by encouraging breeding between people that shared those traits, and is a far cry from what the Nazi's hijacked and used to legitimise their pseudoscience racist killings.

Again to spell it out. Eugenics is merely an application of genetics. Galton used the current knowledge of genetics to come up with eugenics. The field of genetics was around for decades before eugenics was proposed, and for about half a century before the Nazi's 'eugenics'.

Can I ask where your information is coming from?

[Don't panic]

No what?
We imported all the Nazi doctors to America and started Genetics.
Though Eugenics should be classified as a subset of what we call genetics, it came first.
The imported Nazi eugenics became genetics in America. Plain and simple.

you have no clue whatsoever of what you are talking about. Plain and simple.

[killr_b]

Mendel (the father of genetics 1822-1884), Darwin, and Galton all worked well over half a century before the Nazi's were even around. Galton derived eugenics (he coined the term) about 30 years after being inspired by the Origin of the Species publication. Galton's ideas were to enhance positive traits in the population by encouraging breeding between people that shared those traits, and is a far cry from what the Nazi's hijacked and used to legitimise their pseudoscience racist killings.

Again to spell it out. Eugenics is merely an application of genetics. Galton used the current knowledge of genetics to come up with eugenics. The field of genetics was around for decades before eugenics was proposed, and for about half a century before the Nazi's 'eugenics'.

Can I ask where your information is coming from?


Galton "coined" "eugenics" in 1893.
This was as you confirm, due to the works of Mendel and Darwin's publication of Origin of Species in 1859. (Proving that the first "genetics" were based on evolving of species.)
The term "genetics" and it as a fathering class of sub-sciences wasn't until 1906. At which point the research was still going on primarily in Europe. During the Nazi rise to power eugenics was all the craze in europe and especially in Germany and America. During WWII all the discoveries of "genetics" were due to the eugenics studies and organizations.
After WWII and the bad Nazi people we had to rename all our eugenics stuff. So now we have genetic engineering (1941) instead of selective breeding or social darwinism or any of many terms we once used.
But still, the rich are the ones behind all of this. They have always wanted a second "race" that would be a working underclass. They financed and sought the finding of "genetics" so they could breed into super humans.
Now, it will be through technology that regular people can't afford that they will finally be able to "outpace" our evolution so they can dominate us as usual.

Where do I get this?
Reading books written before 1950.
Basically everything I wrote came from Aldous Huxley's mouth.

Edit: Hitler came to power in 1933 and based his eugenics laws on the wildly successful eugenics laws in America. The Nazi's embarrassed the elite but they continue with their plans.
The American Birth Control League became Planned Parenthood.

[rt_brained]

Women here in southern California experienced this metamorphosis years ago; although I assure you, it had nothing whatsoever to do with evolution.

[rt_brained]

"...men will have bigger willies"

Trekkies, however, still won't be able to get laid.

[dogtanian]

Clearly in the future our genitalia will be detachable. It would make it much easier to keep clean, I suppose – just stick it in the dishwasher or something.

LOL, funny.

At least one part of the article is almost certainly correct. That in a few thousand years we'll all be a nice shade of coffee :D Not that I mind, I'm British so I need a tan.

[skunk]

Not that I mind, I'm British so I need a tan.Hundreds of thousands of Britons of African, Asian or West Indian origin might find that statement rather odd.

[saltyzoo]

As a person with a college level understanding of biology, but admittedly not a professional biologist, this sounds like a huge pile of bull.

What's sad is that we pay people to do idiotic studies like this every day.

[dogtanian]

Hundreds of thousands of Britons of African, Asian or West Indian origin might find that statement rather odd.

Caucasian British then I might add to avoid offence to my ethnic-British brethren...

[skunk]

Caucasian British then I might add to avoid offence to my ethnic-British brethren...Much better. :)

[dogtanian]

:D I think it would probably closer to millions as well, there are well over 60 million people here on the island... but of course you could have been speculating on the amount of ethnicities that would have "found the [my] statement odd" then obviously we would never know I suppose ;)

I'm just being awkward now. :p

[Ugg]

Caucasian British then I might add to avoid offence to my ethnic-British brethren...

And I thought Americans had a problem with geography!

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but the people in the Caucasus tend to be rather dark skinned. Don't you perhaps mean Anglo Saxon?

[dogtanian]

And I thought Americans had a problem with geography!

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but the people in the Caucasus tend to be rather dark skinned. Don't you perhaps mean Anglo Saxon?

Well OK, as you asked, I could certainly be classed as anglo-saxon but the term 'caucasian' refers to a broad division of humankind covering peoples from Europe, Western Asia, and parts of India and North Africa" or "white-skinned; of European origin" or "relating to the region of the Caucasus in SE Europe".

kinda the opposite of dark skinned... ;)

Its a racial category, suppose that subject is covered under Geography. I think you were talking about the region caucasus near Turkey.

[skunk]

Well OK, as you asked, I could certainly be classed as anglo-saxon but the term 'caucasian' refers to a broad division of humankind covering peoples from Europe, Western Asia, and parts of India and North Africa" or "white-skinned; of European origin" or "relating to the region of the Caucasus in SE Europe".Translating "Caucasian" as "of European origin" is a little far-fetched. It's about as useful as "Indo-European" and "Aryan" as a racial classification.

[dogtanian]

Translating "Caucasian" as "of European origin" is a little far-fetched. It's about as useful as "Indo-European" and "Aryan" as a racial classification.

But thats the definition so we'll have to cope some how or another with that fact... ;)

God I am so sarky...

[FrankBlack]

...."underclass" humans who would have evolved into dim-witted, ugly, squat goblin-like creatures.

Actually, I think they might be working at a Jiffy Lube near my apartment.

[Ugg]

But thats the definition so we'll have to cope some how or another with that fact... ;)

God I am so sarky...

Perhaps we could compromise by using the only truly relevant term, homo sapiens!

You also failed to quote the remainder of dictionary.app's definition:

USAGE In the racial classification as developed by anthropologists in the 19th century, Caucasian (or Caucasoid) included peoples whose skin color ranged from light (in northern Europe) to dark (in parts of North Africa and India). Although the classification is outdated and the categories are now not generally accepted as scientific ( see usage at Australoid and Mongoloid ), the term Caucasian has acquired a more restricted meaning. It is now used, esp. in the U.S., as a synonym for ‘white or of European origin,’ as in the following citation:: the police are looking for a Caucasian male in his forties.

Seems like the definition is far from useful...