Human Evolution Has Reached Its Peak – Part 2

Posted: April 29th, 2008 | Author: | Filed under: My Thoughts | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , | 12 Comments »

Well, where do I start? First, let me say that the last post was mostly satirical. The purpose of it was to see what some people might say about a possible end to evolution in humans (if we are even evolving). I thought I might get a few different types of replies, but apparently only a few people of the many who read this post left a comment.

Evolution_chart

Evolution Map

I am not a scientist and have no degrees even remotely connected to the sciences, origin of the species, or the human genome; but I do have the power of observation and a love of finding the truth. Maybe what I say next will just prove my ignorance even further.

It is odd to me to think that if one accepts evolution as the process by which man is the result of millions, possibly billions of years of changing from a single celled organism into what we are today, that they think we cannot move on to some other type or variety other than what we are today. I mean, at some point in the process, all species branched out from their parent in some fashion. From fish to crawler, from gills to lungs, from walking to flying, at some point a major change would have had to take place and survived. My point in brining up the story of young Lakshmi Tatma was to ask the question, would social prejudice and scientific or moral process interfere with further evolution in humans if it meant us taking on a new form?

I believe, as is evident, that Lakshmi’s extra limbs are a mutation, and doctors are correct to remove them if she chooses. However, those who believe in evolution have to stop and ask the question, “Are we stopping further evolution because her limbs are not socially acceptable?” And if the answer to this question is yes, would that elimination of the next evolutionary step be considered survival of the fittest, or survival of the moral and scientific majority?

The fact that this question (no matter how legitimate) can be asked is evidence that there is a difference between man and animal. Since there is this difference, that we can contemplate things outside of our own needs, or discuss the relevance of a moral code or origin of life, I ask what made the difference? Is it a change in our genetic coding, or was it programmed to be that way from the beginning? If we were made with a distinct, intentional, intelligent design, was it for a purpose?

I believe in the six day creation of the world and life, as laid out in Genesis, so I answer those questions with God (Jehovah), programmed to be that way from the beginning, and yes.

- chris mooney


  • jayrodgers

    I would think that to a pure naturalist, that is one who believes completely in the survival of the fittest would have to reckon that nothing can stop the process of evolution. Intellectualism and social morality would be the outcomes of a Darwinian naturalism. Not only does the strongest physical being survive but the the strongest intellectual being would survive as well. How could evolution be stopped if naturalism is in essence, the way the universe operates. So ultimately if eight legs are the next step in human evolution we cannot stop it by merely cutting these legs off. If those legs cannot survive than they are not in fact a higher step of the evolutionary process. Of course this is based on the thought that pure evolution is the end all of scientific thought and inquiry.

  • ramblingperfectionist

    Actually, we CAN stop it merely by cutting its legs off, the same way that we can cause the planet to warm up if we keep pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere: just because a process is “natural” does not mean it is omnipotent or unstoppable. Chances are it will find a way to make itself felt, but that is not a certainty. For (admittedly unscientific) references, look up the movie “Idiocracy” and the book “The End of Eternity” by Asimov.

    >>Since there is this difference, that we can contemplate things >>outside of our own needs, or discuss the relevance of a moral >>code or origin of life, I ask what made the difference? Is it a >>change in our genetic coding, or was it programmed to be that >>way from the beginning? If we were made with a distinct, >>intentional, intelligent design, was it for a purpose?

    You’ve already given the answers, you simply choose to reject them. Why NOT just a change in our genetic coding? Why reject it immediately and wonder about deliberate design or its purpose?

    Also, nobody said the process of selection in evolution had to be natural: is eugenics already such a distant memory?

  • ramblingperfectionist

    I forgot to mention this, but it was too long anyway,so:
    if the sole purpose of these essays were to discuss the case of Lakshmi Tatma and its impact on human evolution-I know it wasn’t, but humour me- then they were entirely useless, since the very article you cited says that “She was actually a pair of ischiopagus conjoined twins where one twin was headless due to its head atrophying and chest under-developing in the womb. The result looked like one child with four arms and four legs.” Evolution works by tiny,cumulative “copying errors” or mutations in the genetic code, and this obviously isn’t the case here. The case has nothing to do with evolution at all. Just mentioning.

  • jayrodgers

    To ramblingperfectionist, You make a good point and I see the validity of your argument. I stand corrected. Just because it is natural does not mean that it is omnipotent. Thanks for the insight obviously I have more studying to do on the subject. I also agree that this is not a proper case for evolution. But I would like to pose a question. Can you give a proven example of genetic mutation or the addition of genetic material that has resulted in a better more efficient being? (Genuine question as a subject of study)

  • http://nimravid.wordpress.com Nimravid

    “Can you give a proven example of genetic mutation or the addition of genetic material that has resulted in a better more efficient being? (Genuine question as a subject of study)”

    See my blog (http://nimravid.wordpress.com). Pierid butterflies are only the most recent example I’ve written about. Well, I guess there’s the bacteria with rearranged gene networks too. Less recently snakes with a new venom gene and several examples of genes made by more unusual processes.

    I’m rather disappointed that you seem to be working from an agenda rather than a spirit of inquiry.

    As pointed out above, this was not a mutation, and even if it were the surgical removal of the extra limbs would not stop evolution unless we’re being Lamarckian (inheritance of acquired characteristics). If she had a mutation causing extra limbs and this was present in the germ line (inherited from mom’s or dad’s gamete and not picked up during embryonic development), her kids could inherit the mutation even if her extra limbs were removed.

    Such mutations as extra limbs are possible from what are called homeotic mutations, but these are not usually involved in evolution. If we examine creatures like whales that have lost their legs we see that they weren’t lost in one fell swoop, but by a gradual reduction over long periods of time. However, whales did use homeotic mutations in the modification of their spines, in a much less drastic process.

  • jayrodgers

    To Nimravid, I apologize if you felt me pushing an agenda. I will make no attempt to hide that I believe in intelligent design. But I am truly curious to see these discoveries and see if they are valid or not. I really was asking that question to see if there were any. I make no claim to be an authority on this subject. Now tell me why somebody would get offended by a question. Aren’t questions the nature of scientific discovery?

  • http://nimravid.wordpress.com Nimravid

    “Now tell me why somebody would get offended by a question. Aren’t questions the nature of scientific discovery?”

    You know what offends people? Transparent misrepresentation of their words. Where above did I say I was “offended”, and by what particular question?

    Again, regarding beneficial mutations, I direct you to the many examples at my blog.

  • jayrodgers

    Well Perhaps I read into into your post. I’m not trying work from an agenda although I do already have a belief or hypothesis if you will but I’m guessing you do to. I will check out your blog thanks for the info.

  • http://www.seekingabove.com Tony

    Back to Mooney -

    I got and enjoyed your original post (Lakshmi Tatma). This follow-up seems to of taken a life of its own. Good job…

  • http://pridelandsmommy.blogspot.com/ Michelle

    My head feels like it will explode when I talk about evolution…

    So I figured that I would pass along a lead to grabbing some great DVDs with people who explain it so much better than me! LOL I bet you would enjoy them.

    http://www.answersingenesis.com

    We have one, Frog to a Prince, that is fantastic!

  • flannelcat

    Hi, could I know where the evolution map is off? we’re working on a mag for kids and would like to track this down.

  • Jacelyn Manolakis

    Many thanks! You often write very interesting articles.