Topic: Are humans not changing naturally? (Read 716 times)

Humans are changing evolutionally. They are producing new and new technologies on the basis of their lifespan. Their technologies are beneficial for various industries.

More likely it is a result of various kinds of growth hormones going into factory-farmed animals and from there into humans.

Those who does not believe that humans are changing, here is a nice example. Try to find a bunch of school kids of 5-7 grade and compare their height with yours. And try to remember your height at the same age. I am sure kids at your time were much lower. I remember when my cousin graduated from school (12 grades, kids graduate at the age of 17-18 y.o) and how I felt myself as a midget among his classmates. I am 176cm. I think the kids at the age 17-19 are now 180-190cm minimum. I think the reason of these changes are genetically modified foods. During my childhood and school years, there were almost no such food or they only start to appear.

Although I'm optimistic on most issues, I think humanity will cease on the planet faster than our estimation to even recognise any evolutionary changes in the upcoming generations. The technological advances we made just in the last five decades alone is more than enough than probably the whole human history combined, and such will be the catastrophe when the side effects of these stuffs will interfere with our day to day activities, it's like we are selfish since as long as our own life span (60-80) years is filled without much interference in comfort of technologies which are disastrous to the environment, we simply don't care about the future generations or human species as a whole. The movie interstellar shows it beautifully when the man on one of the unfortunate planet wanted to live even at the cost of whole humanity

Man-o-man is the education system lame these days!  The last scientist who said that was Lamarck who died in the early 1800's.  Darwin's theory pretty well put an end to this theory.

While acceleration of evolution via selective breeding is nothing new, 'science' is opened back up again much more recently where people can indeed design genetic mutations rather than waiting for them to come along by chance.  That's how such things as SARS-cov-2 come about.  Unfortunately it gives the more creepy weirdo scientists something of a God complex and the feeling that they have a right (and sometimes a duty) to shape reality using what are actually fairly primitive understandings of things.

Just a matter of time as well before any change that OP perceives that the vaccines, inorganic fertilizers used for food and other factors that which he says are causing change will be seen/evident. Although i do not completely agree with OP on the inorganic propagation of this supposed change alone, just as scientist say the giraffe grew longer necks frim stretching to eat fruits from trees, i'd say some other physical and environmental factors that we need to adapt to will drive or is driving this change naturally as well.

This explains the concept of succession. Gradually adaptations until a stable community is established. There have been a lot of constraints in the growth of things in recent times and all traces right to the activities of man. As population continues to rise, nature poses a different kind of resistance to keep everything in check which trigger various responses, either consciously or unconsciously to ensure adaptation.

There may not be enough proof to account for certain occurances in evolution but that doesn't deny evolution of its existence. Its just a matter of time before certain discoveries are made and brought to light. Even up to date, archaeological findings still continues to surface and breath forth certain truths of past life and existence.

Just because it is interesting and you seem not to know, individuals are classically considered the same species if they can mate and produce viable offspring.  If they cannot, they are not.

By way of an illustration, a donkey and a horse can mate and produce a mule, but the mule is itself not capable of breading with any other mule or horse or donkey.  The creatures are healthy enough, and they have a nice mix of characteristics from both parents, but they are sterile.  It has to do with chromosomal differences which are just to much for fertility, and this tends to occur when populations are isolated from one another over a sufficient period of time.

---

Contrary to what the Hasidic and kabbalahistic rabbis say, jews and goyim are in fact the same species.  At least by the above definition.  Their definition is more esoteric having do to with to which soul got given the 'sacred spark'.  Most people will be unsurprised to learn that He gave it only to his 'chosen' people, and everything else on earth (most specifically including the goyim) were put in the universe for the use and benefit of His chosen.  Eventually said 'chosen people' are expected to 'heal the earth' by sweeping up the spark-less souls of the non-Jews and throwing them into the dust-bin of history (though some goy may be kept on as slaves.)

Some people believe that that time ('tikkun olam') is finally here.  How the various Jewish people running the various vaccine companies, running 'simulations', setting 'vaccine' policies, etc feel is not presently known...but probably should be...

This just demonstrates that you misunderstand the concept. Evolution is a two-step process.

1) Cell mutations occur due to copying errors. Whether or not this is truly random when considering a single instance of mutation is arguable. But it's not really relevant... the point is that when we are talking about the evolution of a species, the total number of mutations across all individuals within the species will include sufficient variety as to cover a wide range of effects. This introduces a variety of characteristics to the population.

2) Natural selection. This is most certainly not random. Whilst the selection pressures may be entirely separate to the development of the species so far, and may appear to be random (sudden temperature drop, sudden loss of habitat, etc), this is incidental.

What matters is that evolution occurs as a result of the combination of these two points, 'random' mutations, and selection pressures.

1) Some gazelle infants exhibit mutations that mean they can run faster. Some exhibit mutations that mean they are stronger, but run more slowly.
2) Selection pressure: this generation of lions is on average slightly faster than the previous generation.

Points 1 and 2 combine to mean that the gazelles with the 'go faster' mutation are more likely to survive and pass on their genetic profile to the next generation. The 'stronger but slower' gazelles are more likely to get eaten. Result: the next generation of gazelles are slightly faster than the previous generation. The species has undergone an evolution, through natural selection of 'random' genetic variations.

Mutations may be random. Evolution is not.



I'm going to out out on a limb and suggest that you have no understanding of quantum mechanics. Fortunately I do have some background in this area, and will happily explain some key concepts if you wish.

Change is constant,but not all humans have the ability to change.Naturally,change is suppose to come when it's due for every human,but some person's just remain adamant,and won't want to change at all no matter what.

Change comes by choice,and when it comes,it just like a reflex action,before you know yourself,you are a new person from your old self.

I too believed that humans are changing naturally. I watch the documentary of tortoise and turtle which makes me think more about that, about how they have primitive ones while the the ones existing now have more shells than the old ones but the shell add more weight to them while scientists believed that the old ones move faster than the present new ones.

Humans are genetically changing naturally if scientists can trace primitive humans which they said to have small skulls to the modern era ones, there are some differences already.

I think it was evolution that led to creation of humans. Billions of years ago, animals evolve before humans when the earth was structured and well-organised in the form of a crust. Climate also changing due to human activity. Therefore, humans are changing naturally.

Talmudic Judaism pre-dates 'Nazi' ideology in this respect by a few thousand years, and is vastly more widely distributed and powerful than a few seemingly mostly imaginary fringe groups in Idaho.

It's probably safe to say that 'Nazi ideology' is on life support complements of Jewish dominated media primarily as diversion so that people could get away with ignoring the proverbial elephant in the room.

Humans have a social nature.  So every human being is dependent on other humans.  This requires humans to be able to change, including drastically, is our outer packaging, attitudes, and ways of thinking.  Likewise, among others, physical appearance, attitude, maturity, insight, and ideology.  This includes feelings of resentment, jealousy, or heartache that previously you could only keep to yourself in your heart, which can also bring change to individuals and groups.  So I agree more if humans can change caused by humans.  Even the innocent nature can change yes because of human activities.

The Netflix documentary Unnatural Selection was pretty crazy talking about and even showing people trying to “hack” their own bodies to do things it wouldn’t do on it’s own. The scariest part is the documentary is a couple of years old. I was shocked at how easily it was shown to be to obtain things that in essence altered your DNA.

The advancement of biological sciences can make people live longer, and I believe more is to bring about social progress.I am studying alien civilization recently. And Bitcoin should also be a form of civilization.

Well, we (in the meaning of mankind) used to rate and evaluate everything we
meet on our journey through life. But we must have in mind, that some of these
ratings are just our subjective point of view and maybe it simply cannot be
applied to such a thing as evolution is.

We know that evolution of life is full of dead and blind branches, species
that extincted completelly. Species that were superseded by others. How can we
tell, that way mankind's evolving is unnatural? Maybe it will be the final
victory over other species on the planet in this longtime-period battle. Maybe
it is the only way to start next journey in the evolution of whole universe.

We are blind wanderers and it is not up to us to deciding what is natural and
what isn't. Everything what mankind did was a part of evolution process that
started long before us. These process brought us to this moment in time. There
are just two possible future realities: We will survive or we will extinct.
That is only relevant rating of mankind's deeds, when comes to rating
evolution.

What will the future look like? Who knows such a things? Maybe we will
extinct. But it is sure that this eventuality is totally natural thing in the
diversity of evolution and hence there is nothing to worry about. The universe
will still works as it used to do.

?

There's no feedback option for this kind of things. The vaxx delivers the message, and its gone, there will be no receiver for the feedback/reply.

How do I know it, it is in the basics of molecular biology, and the fact that you accept the concept of DNA and RNA, means that you accept the basics of this which is the mRNA, tRNA, and rRNA


The main word for this is "CAN" and overthinking about this thing is the anxiety most people have that refrains them from making decisions. This method of thinking is psychological, and most often, it makes us missed opportunities


When you said "LOADS", how many is it actually comparing to the overall numbers of "real doctors and scientists who are not conspiracy people"? cause believe it or not, it will not even reach 15-20% of the entire population.

There are several things missing from your explanation... your explanation, which is right in its simplicity.

1. As you say, the mRNA doesn't do anything other than deliver a message. Here is a good simple explanation https://www.civilbeat.org/2021/04/what-is-mrna-heres-a-crash-course-on-what-it-does/. But what you don't say is that there are thousands of messages it can be designed to deliver, instructing your cells to do the things that the mRNA can't. So, what are the messages telling the cells to do in the vaxx, and how do you know it?

2. Many people seem to get no adverse effect, or only a minor irritation of some sort, from the mRNA vaxx. Other  folks die almost immediately. And there are all kinds of reactions that come about over a period of time, from days to months after the jab, which wouldn't have come about without the jab. See https://openvaers.com/, a simple, statistical breakdown of the CDCs own info... which is lacking both in quantity and quality. Since adverse effects come about at varying times after the jab, how does anybody know what the longest time for reaction to take place is? It might take 10 years for some people... or longer.

3. There are loads of real doctors and scientists who are not conspiracy people - who often are vaccine proponents - who are expressing dangers in mRNA vaxxes. Do you really think that all these professionals and experts are mistaken? Do you really think that they are simply jealous that a few companies got there before they did?

Inside these 3 points, alone, are loads of sub-points that you blow right by without even addressing them. All your talk about the safety of the mRNA vaccines is pure baloney from example (VAERS) and from the warnings of health professionals all over the place.

Since you suggest by your talk that the vaccines are safe and effective, yet you blow right by the facts, you are either way too ignorant to be talking like you do, or you are a Big Pharma shill, out to help them make money at the expense of the people.

Oh for heaven's sake, how many times? The mRNA vaccines can’t change your DNA!! Like, it’s not an assumption, it physically can’t!

For mRNA to become DNA you need an enzyme called reverse transcriptase and we, humans, don’t have those (except for in special regions that encode retrotransposons, but that’s a different story and they only work in a specific manner for several sequences)!

To reach the nucleus special signal recognition patterns are also required, as well as special transporter proteins. At last, in order to be inserted into human DNA, you need to get rid of histones that hold DNA together in chromosomes, unravel it (which also requires a set of enzymes and molecular factors), and make cuts in the strand (this also needs to be specifically triggered).

It’s a complex process and even after that, the chances of insertion aren’t that high. Get over it, people! And stop fearing scientists so much, rather fear mass media which spreads so many fakes. That’s where the real horror is…

But you are used to that, 'trying to accelerate your car on neutral'. Exactly where you are going with QT.

I couldn't make sense of anything you wrote until I looked at your signature. I think I am not going to waste time debating with you. Its like trying to accelerate your car on neutral.

Here is the big flaw with QT. QT essentially starts out with an idea the probability of which makes it something that would never happen. Maybe the odds are so against it happening that they may be like 10^0000000000 to 1 against. But they are imagined to have happened, and all kinds of things that would have happened if they happened are examined.

Then the whole ball of wax, including the improbable happening, and all the stuff that would have to go with it, are applied to things that DO exist, and we get a picture of something new that we never would have begun to imagine if we hadn't done it that way. From there engineers make new stuff out of these ideas.

But some of this Quantum stuff is so unable to happen that it would really be like everybody in the world winning the same lottery at the same time. All QT has to do with probability and improbability.

I can only speak from a physics background, not biology. What you say makes sense at smaller and smaller scales, until you reach the scale of quantum physics where what you can or cannot observe hits a barrier. For all intents and purposes, until we develop a better theory of our physical world, cause and effect is very much random to us.

^^^ Virtually all evolution ideas have the word 'random' in them somewhere. Random simply means that we don't know what the cause and effect process really is for evolution. Since there isn't any spontaneity proven anywhere, cause and effect is all there is. Cause and effect suggests planned operation rather than happenstance... which is totally against the idea of evolution even existing.

From my perspective, it's all natural. If you throw away the idea that humans are special/priviledged and somehow are in control of their own evolution, then yes, its natural.
Evolution is a very chaotic, random and extremely inefficient process which is becoming more and more complex with time. So whats to say that these new fertilizers and vaccine technologies is not the next natural step in our evolution? Lets just hope its not a huge misstep into extinction for humanity.

Children are simply maturing faster... like chimpanzees become adults much faster than humans. Many people of antiquity had I.Q.s much higher than people of today. We are devolving as a species.

Children are becoming more intelligent in their era. When we are still young and do not have many technologies like today, we are smart in our environment, but after people invented the new technologies, our children learn what change is and become smarter than us.

Years go by, and they have kids. Their kids learned back like what their parents did at a young age, making them smarter than their parents. If you see children in this era, they can press their mother and father phones without a problem while we are in our era can press the number in the old telephone.

Humans are changing naturally following the era and it will be like that forever. As long as everything is changing, humans will change.

Are humans not changing naturally?


Of course they are changing naturally. Baby to adult to dead, all in less than a hundred years.

I think there are evolutions that we are overseeing.

Aside from the physical apperances that are so obvious to see, there are some evolutions that we can't see. There are humans that have immunity to certain virus. I also see this as an evolution as people are developing these defensive mechanisms without them even realizing.

Robotics and biotechnology will be the things that help humans the most and at the same time the scariest things...

in the future, we will see a lot of humans have robotic arms or legs and that is a tool for those who are born with disabilities or accidents. I don't know what will happen to humans and robots in the future but it will be really cool and scary.

I mean are humans changing naturally? I am not talking about Al or any technology. Normally humans will still evolve has time goes on, that is what is happening now and scientific manipulations can result to humans not to evolve the proper way it should. But some people says it is not possible that the scientific manipulations like genetically modified crops can not do any thing to human genetic makeup that can result to mutation.

Not impossible,  there is an even crazier idea, a scientist named Pearson predicts that by 2050, humans can outlive physical limits.  Genetic engineering with AI will be the attraction of many people.  Advances in artificial intelligence can create bodies with computer-based systems to stay alive after bones, flesh and blood cease to function.  And according to him, cyberspace can be created so that people can upload their consciousness after their body dies.  Truly evolution.

Humans are evolving and now they reached the extreme stage of selfishness which they were not used to be like that few centuries ago, and also another reason why these inorganic fertilizer is to bring high yield since the population of this world is getting higher and higher so we can't give food to everyone if we follow the same old farming technique which gives good health while eating the products.

I do not believe kids are more intelligent than before, small children are smarter than what you can see, if a grown man or women just want to learn a language from one country, he can not speak it fluently like kids born in that country easy learn it naturally from other people speaking the language, are you not surpsired that kids learn language easily even without teaching them? Kids are intelligent also towards what they find interesting, like pressing there mother's and father's phone, that does not mean the old days kids are not intelligent like that too, but only intelligent to what they find interesting which are games and things of the olden days.

Humanity has limitless innovatiin and evolution consirdering the never ending growth and increase in knowledge of a certain individual If we'll take a look back at the beginning of humanity, we kniw hiw much important it is to to be strong and be the one who dominates over his tettitory. It was survival of the fittest before and it is survival of the fittest up until now. It is just not like that anymore where the strong survives, and bring you problems as you become the weaker one. Even the weakest now can become the strongest all through his wits. Knowledge has become powerful nowadays.

While we humans tend to change over time, it is hard to say if the individuals are changing too. In my opinion most changes happen over generations and take a long time to be permanent. While as kids we want to be rebels and be different from our parents, once we get older we get more and more similar to our parents and grand parents. The changes in human nature happened over hundred and thousands of years. In general people where much smaller in the past so also their skull must have been smaller. We can still see this today in old houses from 600 or 800 years ago.

With your analysis on it regarding evolution, you can also observe that there has been increase in the intelligent level of the kids and youths which has led to different vices and unrest in the political circle affecting the economy. The kids have adapted to the environment that has shaped them either due to the food they eat, the intelligence has really increased that you are amazed by what a kid can do these days.

The evolution has affected even the political system and you see many system has left communal living like communism that governance is in the hand of few to a more elaborate system that introduces "freedom" and individual achievement more as capitalism. This kind of freedom that is introduced by evolution no doubt is giving light to decentralised financial system also, the reason we now have bitcoin.

All these also affect to change our political system as they become a new way of adaptation.

Humans make themselves change and separate from nature

There is no end to humanity and life is always changing everything is changing at the appointed time accept the sudden change in your life due to an event no matter how unexpected accept the faster you accept the faster you will be able to adapt to the changed life. No matter how difficult an event may be, over time we all return to the normal course of life it is important to remember that some changes in life seem seemingly unacceptable or stressful.

Are humans not changing naturally?


Smarter, but older.

It's inevitable for people to start using CRISPR/CAS9 extensively and when that happens we will be watching how rich people under the radar are genetically engineering babies, and that will be the end of humanity as we know it.

That might be what the word "theory" means in layman's terms, but it is not what it means in scientific terms. A scientific theory is established knowledge which is supported by all the facts, observations, and evidence available.

The germ theory of disease describes how microorganisms cause diseases, but no one, not even crazy anti-vaxxers, argue that the existence of germs is "just a theory" or a best guess.

I serve God, but that does not mean I should literarily believe all what humans are saying. I perfectly believe in evolution and scientific researches. I have read a lot about scientists, they call it theory, which means it might not be what actually happen but likely what happened that led to the existence of something, is that not perfect enough after also giving some factual understanding about how the world evolved. If you say you do not believe in scientists, you need to start reading the reasons they make certain conclusions which are valid reasons. I am not a man that someone will tell something and I will just believe, I make reading researches too. And also, where in religion was evolution emphasised about? Why the argument then?

Your reply shows you do not believe that man was created by God from the Bible perspective? That contradicts my position because I do not take any other theory of the creation of man other than that from the Bible. It makes me want to ask you this question if you actually believe in the existence of God?

When a certain proportion of consensus is formed, organisms can collectively mutate. Living things can reverse transcription and rewrite their genes. At a certain moment.

The earth is roughly 4.6 billion years old. The evolution of life is certainly a fascinating subject, and we know a surprisingly large amount. Below are simplified (and extremely simplified) examples of the tree of life.


https://i0.wp.com/flowingdata.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/tree-of-life_2000.png?w=2000&ssl=1


https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_of_life_(biology)#/media/File:Simplified_tree.png

And the study of how humans evolved is particularly interesting. Below is an image of the evolutionary history of hominins (scale is millions of years, so starting 10 million years ago). Obviously we don't have the full detail, but you will note that in the genus homo, the pattern is somewhat more convoluted than is commonly represented, notably the fact that divergence is not simple branching, but a lot messier and with elements of convergence. Most notable perhaps for those of us with European ancestry is the interbreeding between 'modern' humans and Neanderthals in the last few tens of thousands of years, which bequeathed us modern Europeans a couple of percentage points of Neanderthal DNA.


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3e/Hominini_lineage.svg/1280px-Hominini_lineage.svg.png

the answer should be not "agree" or "disagree", should be "it depends".

as for your organic pesticides that can harm humans..are they limited to those two?, there are a lot of alternatives out there...so the answer will also become "it depends"

you can point out negative parts but the question is did the organic industry learned or progressed?

another thing, sometimes the best produce like tea for example doesn't even bother getting the organic "certification", the ones that are labeled as organic is the one they wanted to sell and use the "organic" label to prop up the product (cases with large scale farming). the best ones are always sold out with no organic certification needed (an unnecessary expense).

so just like i said up thread, some are just getting scammed.

It was evolution that led to the creation of humans, it is not possible men will be existing the moment he Earth was created, it will take millions of years or billions of years, even the earth will be structured, plants evolved, animals also evolved before humans will evolve. The oldest human fossil record and from researches of the scientists, humans are said to evolve after the jurassic world after the exinction of the dinosaur age which was less than 50 millions years ago, while the earth was estimated to be 400 million or billions of years of existence.

So you agree that organic doesn't taste better despite your statement in literally your very last post in this thread. Ok, time to move the goalposts I guess...

You do realize that organic farming uses pesticides too, right? In fact, often more pesticides than conventional farming because they are not as effective. Just because a pesticide is derived from a natural source and is therefore "organic" doesn't mean it is safe. Rotenone was used for decades as an organic pesticide despite being a potent neurotoxin in humans. Copper sulfate causes liver failure. Pyrethin causes cancer. And despite all this, these pesticides/herbicides/fungicides are still not as good as conventional ones, which is why organic food has been linked to deadly outbreaks of things such as E. coli.

Was that before the creation of the earth? Because that is the only time I read no humans and animals were on the surface of the earth before God made them all.


May be that was what those who support the conspiracy that coronavirus is not an illness but a laboratory exercise in China gone bad are pointing at. May be coronavirus is actually one example of bad mutation. The virus has gone out of control now and no one can put an end to this anymore.

organic food can be grown with lack of plant nutrition and can still be called organic..hence the quality of taste can be affected.

it is not as black and white as you portray, organic foods are mainly chosen because you want to avoid pesticides, herbicides and chemical fertilizers.

it is very clear that you do not have proper experience growing plants for food, same with meat. no amount of books can teach you that.

Neither can anybody else. If you think you can, then you have simply fallen to their marketing gimmicks.




Bold added. So either no difference, or the non-organic food was rated more highly. Lol.

LOL not surprised this pro vaxx dude can't taste the difference between organic foods and non organic...best case scenario, you are just scammed 

That's a common misconception; it was never that bad. These low life expectancy figures are merely skewed by the incredibly high infant mortality rates of the time, which were often over 50%. Those who survived childhood typically lived to be over 60. Many even lived long enough to watch their grandchildren die horribly of now-preventable diseases (okay, I lied when I said it wasn't that bad). It baffles me that some people apparently want to go back to such conditions.

Opinions are irrelevant. All scientific evidence is that both genetically modified and non-organic foods are just as safe, healthy, and nutritious, as non-GM or organic foods.

No, it can't. Your body doesn't know if a string of DNA in a piece of fruit you eat has been shaped by natural selection, artificial selection, or genetic modification. It breaks them all down just the same and the DNA from the food you eat is in not incorporated in to your own DNA, regardless of the source of that DNA.

I am only just thinking about this, I did not see it from any website, that is why I take it to here to hear people's opinions about it, we learn everyday, bringing it here is just to know what others will post about it because this forum is helpful in everyway. I am very concerned that the vegitable I am eating today has never again be like the old ones, the water content has increased, it changed differently not like the old ones when little heat is applied, this is not the only reason, I have noticed this much in crops, this makes me to think if all genetically and inorganically mordified food can lead people to artificially evolution over long period of time. I am not saying I am right and neither did I say I am wrong, that is why I ask it as a question.

Nooo, the GMO you mentioned can't really be a factor of the natural evolution you mention as it not interferes with the genetic identity of the patient.

Citation needed. There is no evidence organic food is better/healthier/more nutritious than its non-organic equivalent.

As Cnut237 has correctly pointed out, everything in our world is already genetically modified, from crops to pets to working animals. Go and Google "wild banana". The banana we have now is thanks to hundreds of years of genetic selection by humans.

If you want natural, then I would invite you to go live in the jungle, forage for your own food, and die in your 30s from being eaten by predators or by catching some vaccine preventable disease like tetanus. The fact that artificial manipulation of our environment means that we no longer live like that is a triumph of science.

mRNA vacines do not enter the nucleus (part our DNA sit in)
mRNA doesnt have the coding to alter the dna

mRNA goes to the ribosome. to make proteins. not new dna sequences
mRNA breaks down in days.
mRNA doesnt have the tRNA or rRNA or any other microRNA types to replicate

the fastest way to evolve a species would have been hitlers model of only wanting blodhair blue eyes to produce offspring and then kill off the ginger, none pal, dark haired population.
but even with tanks on the streets and guns in hand.. even he couldnt speed up a change of human kind to a single direction

the only thing left is the neo-nazi fear of the lineage of 'pureblood' being diluted into mix-race offspring..

as for science intervening into natural evolution
well chemical usage.. if you call sugars chemicals. have been added by the cupfuls into foods that didnt have them 100 years ago.
this has caused people who usually get diabetes at 60 average. to now be 40average. where by their kids become diabetic by teen years.

but with that science has actually helped those that usually died at around 50yo 100 years ago. to now have it where the average age is 85
basically giving 65% extra live expectancy

chimps live for about 40 years..
so millions of years only added 10 years naturally
since added 35 years on top of that in just 100 years

this is not any genetic manipulation. or dna altering. or evolution change.
this is just finding cures/medicine for a disease or ailment that people would have got in their 40's/50's that would have killed them without the cure/medicine.
even things like organ transplant and operations. save lives and keep people alive longer

How did you know? If we like it or not, evolution will surely occur, as the primitive humans are not 100% the same as the modern time humans according to fossil records, existence of mutation and other scientific researches. The scientists manipulation can make the natural evolution path to be different from what should have happened naturally with what I am talking about. The artificial manipulation can result to the natural evolution path to be different.

I don't understand this argument at all. Human life expectancy has increased dramatically over the last century. This is true around the globe. Technological advances in medicines in particular have had a profoundly beneficial impact. Look at the data. I don't know where you get the idea that human lifespan is decreasing; this is not supported by any data.

I am seeing what you have in mind but I don't want to be presumptuous so I will just lend my thoughts regarding this topic.

I will disregard the 1st paragraph as it is vague for the main topic

so regarding the 1st sentence in the 2nd paragraph, the mRNA will not contain any of the "MANIPULATION" as; (1) the background of the vaccine is clear and can be studied anywhere in the world by anyone, (2) the contents of the vaccine can be reversed engineered up to an extent where you can see if there is a foul play happening in the vaccine, and lastly (3) there is no worth for such things.

For the other sentences, Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) or what you said as Genetically modified crops, are made for the very purpose of product preservation. Other things you see are just experiments for something, but regardless, the only thing you can caught with this are that it may alter the benefits and nutrients of the crops that had been modified. Ergo, you can't really be modified (EVOLVED by what you mentioned) just by eating this GMO.

The only evolution which human are doing every day is that they are introducing more and more technologies every day at the expense of their age (life). No matter how much humans have developed , they have been losing their age. The average age human is decreasing ever since. What's the use of all this technology enhancement, when they can't increase their life span 

Evolution occurs naturally. Mutations are random, and caused by errors in cell replication. Some mutations are beneficial to survival, some are detrimental, some are neither. People who have a mutation that is beneficial is more likely to survive and have children than someone who has a mutation that is detrimental. In this way, from generation to generation, beneficial mutations tend to spread through the gene pool of the species. Evolution is the term for how these two elements work together, a) mutations and b) natural selection (or 'survival of the fittest', meaning best fit to the conditions of the environment).

Viruses reproduce much much more rapidly than humans. The same processes of mutation and natural selection are true for viruses, but because they reproduce so much more quickly, dangerous mutations (such as the delta variant of Covid-19) also arise comparatively quickly.

As for scientists manipulating the human genome and this becoming the primary method of human evolution, I'd say yes, this is very likely to happen.... mostly because science advances so much more rapidly than natural human evolution. It's not even 20 years ago that the human genome was first fully sequenced.


All crops are genetically modified. "Natural" wheat for example has been selectively bred by humans for thousands of years. Modern dog breeds have been created through directed selection by humans, and through self-domestication by interaction with humans; "natural" dogs are wolves. When we talk nowadays about GM foods, what we mean is that we now understand genetics a lot better, and our attempts at modification are a lot more precise than they have been over previous human history. But we have always tampered with the genetics of other organisms, going back to the neolithic and the agricultural revolution, possibly further.

According to the oldest skull of humans, it is said that primitive humans have small skulls, there were time when there was no single human on Earth, but evolution still continues after the humans evolved, it can be hard to notice but will become obvious after thousands or millions of years passed. We do not know where the world is going, I believe the scientists will be the one that will not let people to know some structures or functions in their body may be evolving artificially.

When covid 19 was known to the world, there has been several mRNA vaccines, I hope this is not one of the scientist manipulation that is evolving humans away from what should be natural towards what is artificial. Only organic fertilizers were used by the old farmers, but now they are using inorganic which we see difference in foods that inorganic fertilizers is not good like organic. I have been reading about genetic modified crops also. I hope the natural make-up of human being will not become artificial one day with scientists manipulation

What do you think about this?