Evolution confirmed?

[redstar2000]

A "far-out" story from the BBC...


Originally posted by BBC
Time changes modern human's face

They looked at 30 skulls dating from the mid-14th Century. They had come from the unlucky victims of the plague. The skulls had been excavated from plague pits in the 1980s in London.

Another 54 skulls examined by the team were recovered from the wreck of the Mary Rose which sank off the south coast of England in 1545.

All the skulls were compared with 31 recent orthodontic records from the School of Dentistry in Birmingham.

The two principal differences discovered were that our ancestors had more prominent features, but their cranial vault - the distance measured from the eyes to the top of the skull - was smaller.

Dr Peter Rock, lead author of the study and director of orthodontistry at Birmingham University, told the BBC News website: "The astonishing finding is the increased cranial vault heights.

"The increase is very considerable. For example, the vault height of the plague skulls were 80mm, and the modern ones were 95mm - that's in the order of 20% bigger, which is really rather a lot."

He suggests that the increase in size may be due to an increase in mental capacity over the ages.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/sci/tech/4643312.stm

Are we really "getting smarter" in what is, from an evolutionary standpoint, an almost instantaneous interval?

That seems really "far out" to me...but what if it's true?

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Sentinel]

The evolution is faster than we think, I'd say. Look at the development of our teeth
for example. The wisdom teeth no longer fit in our mouth and cause trouble.

This is due to the growth of the brain in the last tens of thousands years. It is not such a long period when we consider the age of our planet..


Originally posted by Dr Ira D. Cheifetz
Over tens of thousands of years, the cranial proportions changed. The growing human brain needed more space, so the brain cavity expanded while the jaws diminished accordingly. But in all this time, the number of teeth in the normal human jaw has remained the same: 32.
Of course, there are individual exceptions - some people have fewer teeth, some have more, and extra molars are not an unusual feature. With further evolution, wisdom teeth may disappear altogether, but for now this vestige of prehistoric life is very much with us.

The article:
http://www.pacpubserver.com/new/health/d-e/hm1025.html

I've also heard that the human canine teeth are getting smaller by each generation,
but of this I've seen no proof yet. Anyway it seems likely for me that small differences in our anatomy can be seen with relatively close intervals.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Originally posted by RS
Are we really "getting smarter" in what is, from an evolutionary standpoint, an almost instantaneous interval?

That seems really "far out" to me...but what if it's true?


There is ample evidence that suggests evolutionay changes in DNA do not follow a linear path. They have been found to occur "in spurts"; usually "triggered" by a major environmental event, catastrophe, etc..

I do think that much more studies will need to be done before this discovery can be recognised as an actual evolutionary change in human DNA.

[Amusing Scrotum]

Originally posted by Comrade RAF+Jan 26 2006, 06:15 PM--> (Comrade RAF @ Jan 26 2006, 06:15 PM)
RS
Are we really "getting smarter" in what is, from an evolutionary standpoint, an almost instantaneous interval?

That seems really "far out" to me...but what if it's true?


There is ample evidence that suggests evolutionay changes in DNA do not follow a linear path. They have been found to occur "in spurts"; usually "triggered" by a major environmental event, catastrophe, etc.. [/b]

So say the development of industry could have triggered an evolutionary change as well as a change in the nature of class society?

[Vinny Rafarino]

Originally posted by Armchair [email protected] 26 2006, 11:40 AM
So say the development of industry could have triggered an evolutionary change as well as a change in the nature of class society?
That is an absolute possibilty; only time can tell.

[Solace]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26 2006, 11:46 AM
Are we really "getting smarter" in what is, from an evolutionary standpoint, an almost instantaneous interval?


There is a specific detail here that wasn’t mentioned in the article.

I am not sure if it this is a real increase in size per se or just a reduction in the thickness of the cranial-vault bone.

If it is the latter, then this is not news. As a matter of fact, cranial-vault thickness is one aspect that distinguishes H. erectus from H.sapiens. People say it has been decreasing ever since. But this idea is beginning to be questioned.

I recall reading about a study carried out on Aboriginal Australians. Remains of these people spanning a period of a few thousand years showed that there is only a handful of skull characteristics and measurements that distinguishes them from H. Erectus. Their thinning is not similar to other people’s on other geographical spots on the planet. They are not any less “smart” and their overall biological processes are not any different or less "evolved". Evolution is not like one continuous line.

Measurements of “European” skulls are not considered as the normal standard data now and comparative studies are reaching new conclusions.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Originally posted by solace
am not sure if it this is a real increase in size per se or just a reduction in the thickness of the cranial-vault bone.

If it is the latter, then this is not news. As a matter of fact, cranial-vault thickness is one aspect that distinguishes H. erectus from H.sapiens. People say it has been decreasing ever since. But this idea is beginning to be questioned.

This particular study is not about the "thickness"of the cranial vault but about the measured distance from the top of the orbital bone and ending with the crown of the skull.

[encephalon]

Obviously there was a change, but I'm not so sure it has to do with cranial capacity.

In fact, it could be as simple as the plague feeding on a gene (or a lack thereof) tied into the distance; one gene can affect a lot, and the gene(s) that affect the distance could also play a role in the immune system, or even a specific immunity to the bubonic plague itself.

If that were the case, then most europeans of today would have a longer distance because they were the ones that had a specific advantage against the plague compared to those with smaller cranial vaults.

With the skulls of those in the 1545 shipwreck--that is, those that didn't (as far as we know) die from the plague but shared the same characteristics: they were still in the midst of the plague's height. The variable only suggests that they didn't die of the plague, not that they wouldn't have.

So yeah, it is natural selection, I'd imagine, which is the basis of evolution. I don't think, however, that it's proof that we've grown much more intelligent, if at all. There are too many variables to even imply that, I think.

[Severian]

Modern people are bigger. We have bigger heads. We have bigger skull measurements.

This article from another publication on the same findings says (http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=16619710&method=full&siteid=66633&headline=we-re-getting-big-headed--name_page.html) instead that people have got "more bigheaded" and that the skulls are longer.

Hm...longer and taller. Sounds more like a change in size than shape.

Now if brain-body ratio has increased - which neither example specifically says - that would need another explanation. Probably not Darwinian evolution over such a short time, though.

I'd say this article is mostly an example of how crappy most reporting on science is. Unfortunately, there's no article on this from the New York Times or any other publication that does a decent job on science reporting.

[norwegian commie]

good news folks...
while people get smarter they realise that the right way to go is the left way :D !
a world of smart people will understand what we now do! we are ahed of our time, the red flag will return!

[Schleppy]

I wouldn't rely on that.... The larger an animal's brain is, the more idiocy you can cram in.

[BuyOurEverything]

Couldn't this be due simply to non-genetic, environmental changes, such as better nutrition?

[Seong]

Yes but we have better nutrition because we're more technologically advanced, which means that we're smarter, because we have better infrastructure, protection against disease and better nutrition. :P

I really don't know that much about Darwinism or biology, but our registered users are growing. Maybe it means we're getting smarter?

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2006, 08:07 AM
Yes but we have better nutrition because we're more technologically advanced, which means that we're smarter, because we have better infrastructure, protection against disease and better nutrition. :P
You didn't seriously mean that, did you?

We know more than people in the past, but that doesn't mean we're smarter. The reason we know more is because we stand on their shoulders. Knowledge has accumulated thanks to the accomplishments of past generations.

[Seong]

*Poking tongue out*

The only time you'll see me doing this when I'm serious is when I'm concentrating and am unaware that I am doing it!

[Commie Rat]

Biologists call this "Accelleration"

Evolution speeds up as it progresses

We took 100's of millions of years to split from one cell to two, and now our bone structure is changing in a matter of 200-300 years

[1984]

Only the smartest have survived...?

:huh:

If this was true for the latest 300-400 years, I belive we'd be in a much better environment right now. And with the acknowledge of "slime" TV, what if we're going in the opposite direction?

:o

It's really a shock that evident evolution such as that could have happened in such a short amount of time.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 10:39 AM
*Poking tongue out*

The only time you'll see me doing this when I'm serious is when I'm concentrating and am unaware that I am doing it!
Damn smilies.

[TC]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2006, 09:52 PM


Body size and IQ though has a great deal to do with diet and health care. The average dutch height increased by six inchs over the span of only 140 years. Obviously this was due to environmental factors not genetic ones. http://www.macleans.ca/topstories/science/...4_103140_103140 (http://www.macleans.ca/topstories/science/article.jsp?content=20050404_103140_103140)

For that matter the average human life expectancy has continued to increase dramatically...which again has much moe to do with health care then genetics.


I think at this point technological and economic evolution drives changes in human physical diversity, not biological evolution, as human generations are relatively long, and most people make it to maturity so there is no natural genetic selection.

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

Intelligence increases over time in accordance with the Flynn Effect, but it does nto increase by a noticable amount at one time, then again later. Intelligence increases over time, but it can be documented as a genuine increase through generations.

[dusk]

evolution is adaptation to the curcomstances we live in.

Like the world is getting warmer, so we need less hair.

[Entrails Konfetti]

Even if our brain was getting bigger I don't see how it could impact us that much, seeing how we only use 20%(?) of our brain capacity.

This could just mean bigger tissue, and not more brain cells.

[Don't Change Your Name]

Originally posted by EL [email protected] 15 2006, 01:04 AM
seeing how we only use 20%(?) of our brain capacity.
Myth

[Xanthus]

Regardless of whether you call it dialectical materialism, or punctuated equalibrium, the idea that evolution can happen quickly is certainly nothing new.