It may sound racist, but one only needs to look at the demise ...
... of "black america" over the last 50 years to see "evolution" in action.
The notion that evolution "is a two way street" appears to be an attempt to make all evidence fit the theory instead of allowing the evidence build the theory...the "certainty" of evolutionary is decided, and so regardless of ensuing events, that theory must be preserved.
In short, evolutionists seem to practice what they accuse intelligent design adherents of doing.
I have noticed this "devotion at all costs" attitude also present in Global Warming (aka Climate Change) believers and among hard core liberals like Obama...no matter the result of their policies, they stay committed to their philosophy.
I think as a whole humankind is becoming "less wise" even as our data accumulation grows.
Is their no end to articles about Obama’s victory?
In general we are moving to a more complex and dynamic environment, that will reward intelligence. We are already seeing this in the job market where education, cognitive skills, and highly tuned social abilities lad to success. If we assume that over the long-term less intelligent people have less money and are unable to support as many children, then we should become as a species, more intelligent. I know the last point is totally opposite of today's reality, which is skewed by social programs that reward he least intelligent members of society, but once TSHITF this will revert to trend (We are talking evolution over 100’s of generations).
“Idiocracy”, where life mimics art (if you can call it art)!
This author, Paul Wallis, has jokingly stated something I’ve suspected for some time now: Western Civilization is on the cusp of another “Malthusian” cycle.
Conclusion of the Study:
Certainly the race is getting dumber...except of course, the really ^intelligent^ types like Crabtree and his peers who intend to rule over us and decide our very lives like good Dhimmicrat overlords.
This is another case of avoiding discussing the “Bell Curve”. In our information-loaded society, those who choose to be smarter are getting much more intelligent. But, in that same society, where a person can live off the dole from cradle to grave, those who choose to go through life fat, stupid, and lazy can do so and they are dumber than their parents. Chances are that their offspring will be dumber than they are.
Wouldn’t Evolution mean people should be getting smarter, more perfect?
Sound’s more like we’re De-evolving not evolving then doesn’t it?
(note for the record: I do not believe in evolution, I believe in a Creator who has a divine plan for mankind and in our everyday life whatever happens to us is due to choices or cause and effect)
But everything regresses to the mean. Trees don’t grow to the sky. We don’t have a population of geniuses
If you subscribe to the whole Survial of the Fittest thingy, you have to note that in the past century, technology has made it possible the less fit to survive and reproduce and dive once more into the genetic pool.
No. Not at all. Not evolving into idiots.
However, idiocy, dependence, indolence, unnatural habits, parasitism, stupidity and cheating are encouraged in our society, meaning that there will be more.
Hard working, thriftiness, independence, clean natural habits, honesty, studying, are all $hit upon in our current modern 2012 society under the democrats, meaning that there will be less.
CC
Did you read the article? It’s not really about evolution at all, just the writer’s take on how our culture is devolving into triviality and stupidity.
The notion that evolution "is a two way street" appears to be an attempt to make all evidence fit the theory instead of allowing the evidence build the theory...the "certainty" of evolutionary is decided, and so regardless of ensuing events, that theory must be preserved.
In short, evolutionists seem to practice what they accuse intelligent design adherents of doing.'
Disclaimer: I find it hard to ignore the vast bulk of scientific evidence supporting evolution. DNA analysis has only made the case stronger.
The thermodynamics law you're referring to is most simply stated as "Entropy tends towards a maximum." That refers to thermal entropy. Taking our solar system as a whole, the Sun provides for a whole lot of entropy transfer, driving processes on Earth. Outside of evolution there are many examples of less organized entities becoming more organized. For instance, grass grows in soil (not structured, and not even necessarily organic). Then, cows eat the grass (still not very interesting or structured) and produce baby cows (more structured, and tasty as well!). That increasing level of organization for simple materials over time comes at the basic cost of lots of energy from the Sun.
I had heard decades ago of the idea that evolution no longer applies to humans. This makes some sense to me, as the central point of evolution is that species' characteristics gradually evolve to adapt to environmental changes. Humans, on the other hand, adapt their environment to suit them. Clothing, shelter, medicine, agriculture, commerce, as well as heating and cooling systems are all examples.
That doesn't quite cover everything though. Evolution-like forces are still in play based on human selection criteria (appearance, personality, wealth etc.). There is also the factor of reproductive success, i.e. how many offspring a given person (half) produces.
So, we have at least three major factors that are counter-productive:
It may take new frontiers. Robert A. Heinlein was a visionary in that regard, he recognized that we now have no frontiers, and without them the human race will tend to stagnate. We are now at the point where, with a little more work, advanced technology could easily open up the inner solar system to human colonization. Perhaps that's what it will take to stop the slow decline and set free the human spirit once again - as well as presenting challenges that will truly reward the best and brightest.
Sorry for the long post, I hope it's interesting. I've given a fair amount of thought to this over the years. I'd personally guess it's about a 50-50 whether or not we'll have an overall beneficial "reset" of many of three factors I mentioned here in the US over the next few years, along the lines of Civil War II.