Posted on 01/12/2016 11:42:04 PM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
The perils of climate change are well known, but rising sea levels could also alter human evolution, scientists have claimed.
Rising sea levels could force communities to live in underwater or semi-aquatic towns which could change out physiology.
Dr Matthew Skinner a paleoanthropologist from the University of Kent, claims that humans could evolve to have webbed hands and feet and less body hair so they could move quickly through the water.
Our eyes would even become more like cats, so we could see in the murky gloom of seas and rivers and our lungs would shrink as we became used to using artificial tanks to breathe underwater.
"Regular underwater foraging would lead to the evolution of longer fingers and toes which would then likely develop 'webbed' interconnecting skin to enable easier swimming," said Dr Skinner.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
If it walks like a duck....
: )
...You can't wear flip-flops with webbed feet. Duh! :)
That is a fact. You need to apply for a grant!
That also works.
And out of left field, did you know that chickens can float, just like ducks?
/apropos of nothing
:)
; )
Humans could also evolve headlamps if they all have their heads up their butts like this "scientist".
HA!!!
So funny, Lol!
If evolution theory somehow was correct, the humans that didn’t step back from the rising water levels would die and therefor not proliferate.
Here's another one: grape production along the Mosel River could double! Currently, grapes are only grown on the side of the river that gets the most sunlight.
It's a tough area to grow grapes, near the 50th parallel, the equivalent of Calgary. As I am partial to Mosel Riesling, I'm in favor of more global warming.
We could also lea
rn to breath underwater.
Once you go gill-man...
LOL!
SHEESH, what daft people think up to perpetuate the Global Warming BS!
IF this theory holds water : )
Then why is it that mammals who live in the ocean (Like.... whales for instance) DO NOT HAVE GILLS ?
The AGW people already have this figured out, supposedly.
Apparently it's a double edged sword, with some areas gained (blue), some lost (red) and others still growing (green).
No way to verify how accurate these projections are:
Thanks for posting! I’m going to have to look at that map in closer detail. Thankfully, Texas doesn’t appear to be impacted either way. Unfortunately, I doubt I’ll be around in 2050...lol.
I will now give two or three instances of diversified and of changed habits in the individuals of the same species. When either case occurs, it would be easy for natural selection to fit the animal, by some modification of its structure, for its changed habits, or exclusively for one of its several different habits. But it is difficult to tell, and immaterial for us, whether habits generally change first and structure afterwards; or whether slight modifications of structure lead to changed habits; both probably often change almost simultaneously. Of cases of changed habits it will suffice merely to allude to that of the many British insects which now feed on exotic plants, or exclusively on artificial substances. Of diversified habits innumerable instances could be given: I have often watched a tyrant flycatcher (Saurophagus sulphuratus) in South America, hovering over one spot and then proceeding to another, like a kestrel, and at other times standing stationary on the margin of water, and then dashing like a kingfisher at a fish. In our own country the larger titmouse (Parus major) may be seen climbing branches, almost like a creeper; it often, like a shrike, kills small birds by blows on the head; and I have many times seen and heard it hammering the seeds of the yew on a branch, and thus breaking them like a nuthatch. In North America the black bear was seen by Hearne swimming for hours with widely open mouth, thus catching, like a whale, insects in the water. Even in so extreme a case as this, if the supply of insects were constant, and if better adapted competitors did not already exist in the country, I can see no difficulty in a race of bears being rendered, by natural selection, more and more aquatic in their structure and habits, with larger and larger mouths, till a creature was produced as monstrous as a whale.
Bad movie, stupid premise.
“Waterworld” with Mel Gibson.
... get the reference but I believe it was Kevin Costner.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterworld
Yeah, my bad. You’re right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
