NationStates Jolt Archive

A couple of interesting articles from the BBC.

*the past: Humans and chimps may have interbred for millions of years
*the future: Will the human species "split in two"?

The Past


Humans and chimpanzees may have split away from a common ancestor far more recently than was previously thought.

A detailed analysis of human and chimp DNA suggests the lines finally diverged less than 5.4 million years ago.

The finding, published in the journal Nature, is about 1-2 million years later than the fossils have indicated.

A US team says its results hint at the possibility that interbreeding occurred between the two lines for thousands, even millions, of years.

[...] "The hypothesis is that there was gene flow between the ancestors of humans and chimpanzees after their original divergence.

"So, there might have been an original divergence and a separation for long enough that the species became differentiated - for example, we might have adapted features such as upright walking - and then there was a re-mixture event quite a while after; a hybridisation event."

[...] Commenting on the research, Daniel Lieberman, a professor of biological anthropology at Harvard, told the Associated Press: "It's a totally cool and extremely clever analysis.

"My problem is imagining what it would be like to have a bipedal hominid and a chimpanzee viewing each other as appropriate mates, not to put it too crudely."


(link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4991470.stm))

The Future


Humanity may split into two sub-species in 100,000 years' time as predicted by HG Wells, an expert has said.
Evolutionary theorist Oliver Curry of the London School of Economics expects a genetic upper class and a dim-witted underclass to emerge.

The human race would peak in the year 3000, he said - before a decline due to dependence on technology.

People would become choosier about their sexual partners, causing humanity to divide into sub-species, he added.

The descendants of the genetic upper class would be tall, slim, healthy, attractive, intelligent, and creative and a far cry from the "underclass" humans who would have evolved into dim-witted, ugly, squat goblin-like creatures.

But in the nearer future, humans will evolve in 1,000 years into giants between 6ft and 7ft tall, he predicts, while life-spans will have extended to 120 years, Dr Curry claims.

Physical appearance, driven by indicators of health, youth and fertility, will improve, he says, while men will exhibit symmetrical facial features, look athletic, and have squarer jaws, deeper voices and bigger penises.

Women, on the other hand, will develop lighter, smooth, hairless skin, large clear eyes, pert breasts, glossy hair, and even features, he adds. Racial differences will be ironed out by interbreeding, producing a uniform race of coffee-coloured people.

However, Dr Curry warns, in 10,000 years time humans may have paid a genetic price for relying on technology.

Spoiled by gadgets designed to meet their every need, they could come to resemble domesticated animals.

Social skills, such as communicating and interacting with others, could be lost, along with emotions such as love, sympathy, trust and respect. People would become less able to care for others, or perform in teams.

Physically, they would start to appear more juvenile. Chins would recede, as a result of having to chew less on processed food.

There could also be health problems caused by reliance on medicine, resulting in weak immune systems. Preventing deaths would also help to preserve the genetic defects that cause cancer.

Further into the future, sexual selection - being choosy about one's partner - was likely to create more and more genetic inequality, said Dr Curry.

The logical outcome would be two sub-species, "gracile" and "robust" humans similar to the Eloi and Morlocks foretold by HG Wells in his 1895 novel The Time Machine.

"While science and technology have the potential to create an ideal habitat for humanity over the next millennium, there is a possibility of a monumental genetic hangover over the subsequent millennia due to an over-reliance on technology reducing our natural capacity to resist disease, or our evolved ability to get along with each other, said Dr Curry.


(link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6057734.stm))

So my ancestors had sex with with chimps, and some of my descendants will be gnomes... Cool. :D

I believe that children are the future. Teach them well and let them lead the wa...aaaaH! *ducks a thrown brick and scampers out of the thread*

Unfortunately Oliver Curry is one of those sad breed of self-styled scientists who are willing to take money to provide a soundbite that suits whomever pays them. In this case it was a men's magazine who essentially wanted a scientist to say soemthing along the line of 'in the future women will have bigger tits'.

'in the future women will have bigger tits'.

Cool!:D

Unfortunately Oliver Curry is one of those sad breed of self-styled scientists who are willing to take money to provide a soundbite that suits whomever pays them. In this case it was a men's magazine who essentially wanted a scientist to say soemthing along the line of 'in the future women will have bigger tits'.

Well breast enhancement surgery is only going to get more sophisticated.

that future thingy neglects to acknowledge changing standards of beauty and attractiveness.

Cool!:D

I bet you read Nutz...

Well breast enhancement surgery is only going to get more sophisticated.Yup..
Thanks to cosmetic surgeory, in the future, we will have an upper class that is born as gnomes, then gets surgically transformed to beautiful 6-7 feet giants.
Whereas the lower class, not having the money to afford biology-duping technology, will have to rely on genetics to keep up to a reproductive standard of beauty. So they'll be born as 6-7 foot beautiful giants, and due to poor working conditions wither to gnomes over the course of 120 years..

meh.

humans will evolve in 1,000 years into giants between 6ft and 7ft tall

I'm a giant?

I'm a giant?Yup, and you're 1000 years ahead of your time too. You freak, you.

Is it just me, or is Oliver Curry plucking his predictions out of thin air?

Yup, and you're 1000 years ahead of your time too. You freak, you.

Go back to your own time! *shakes fist* Dirty foreigners from the future...

Wait, I'm almost 6'2''. Seems I belong in the future too.

Is it just me, or is Oliver Curry plucking his predictions out of thin air?

More like out of his ass.

A couple of interesting articles from the BBC.

*the past: Humans and chimps may have interbred for millions of years
*the future: Will the human species "split in two"?

The Past



(link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4991470.stm))

The Future



(link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6057734.stm))

So my ancestors had sex with with chimps, and some of my descendants will be gnomes... Cool. :D

No - some of your ancestors had sex with the ancestors of chimps. That's not the same thing.

And the other guy.. the evolution expert from the LSE... the LSE? WTF?

Dude reads too much pulp sci-fi.

Go back to your own time! *shakes fist* Dirty foreigners from the future...

Wait, I'm almost 6'2''. Seems I belong in the future too.

Midget. We, the master-race, tower over you by several inches. Back to the underclass, gnome.

More like out of his ass.

He could've shook some of the dung off first. :p

No - some of your ancestors had sex with the ancestors of chimps. That's not the same thing.


The theory in the article is that humans and chimpanzees continued to interbreed for a very long time *after* their species became differentiated.

Midget. We, the master-race, tower over you by several inches. Back to the underclass, gnome.

:(

*plods off sadly to the underclass*

He could've shook some of the dung off first. :p

What would be left if you shook the dung of a pile of dung?

:(

*plods off sadly to the underclass*

The bigger they are, the more fun it is to uppercut them in the testicles. :)

We'll genetically engineer our children long before evolution gets much further with us. Not many would do this today but sooner or later more and more people will fall for the temptation of designing their dream child. We won't be able to resist using that technology.

However if evolution was allowed to continue naturally long enough... Genes that handle hard times like starvation will diminish since they aren't needed anymore and since those are also the genes that increase the risk of obesity humans will become thinner. Genes for physical fitness will also diminish for the same reason making us even thinner. Genes for fur will continue to diminish due to clothes replacing that role until we're hairless. The size of our brains will continue to increase to cope with the complexity of modern society until babies have too big heads to be born normally so everyone will be born by c-section. Eye size will increase due to the amount of visual impressions we have to take in. Jaw size and strength will diminish due to cooked food. We'll end up looking like thin hairless aliens with big heads, big eyes and small mouths.

What would be left if you shook the dung of a pile of dung?

That's one of those Mysterieeees of Science! *nod*

err... whats the source on this. The past thing seems plausible enough, though I'd actually have to read the original study to buy it, but the future thing seems like it's either some quack spewing off whatever he thinks of, sci fi or a joke, like something you'd find in the weekly world news or something.

I bet you read Nutz...

Naaaa, I just like tits!;)

That's one of those Mysterieeees of Science! *nod*

Ooooooooh.
*ponders endlessly*

The theory in the article is that humans and chimpanzees continued to interbreed for a very long time *after* their species became differentiated.


Yes... but they still weren't what you might consider 'humans' or 'chimps' as such. They were just no longer a common ancestor...


:(

*plods off sadly to the underclass*

We hadn't expected to have to start suppressing this rebellion for quite some time yet...

More like out of his ass.

but it's an ass of teh future

but it's an ass of teh future

He's a time travelling bullshit merchant? :eek: :p

I would marry a robot chimp.

We'll genetically engineer our children long before evolution gets much further with us. Not many would do this today but sooner or later more and more people will fall for the temptation of designing their dream child. We won't be able to resist using that technology.

However if evolution was allowed to continue naturally long enough... Genes that handle hard times like starvation will diminish since they aren't needed anymore and since those are also the genes that increase the risk of obesity humans will become thinner. Genes for physical fitness will also diminish for the same reason making us even thinner. Genes for fur will continue to diminish due to clothes replacing that role until we're hairless. The size of our brains will continue to increase to cope with the complexity of modern society until babies have too big heads to be born normally so everyone will be born by c-section. Eye size will increase due to the amount of visual impressions we have to take in. Jaw size and strength will diminish due to cooked food. We'll end up looking like thin hairless aliens with big heads, big eyes and small mouths.

you just went and nicked that from that film about the face on mars. or greys. we're all gunna turn into greys! waaahhhh!

I would marry a robot chimp.

Ahhh but what rights would you accord it? ;)

The theory in the article is that humans and chimpanzees continued to interbreed for a very long time *after* their species became differentiated.

cross-species mating (and therefore genetic introgression) happens all the time (relatively speaking) - it takes much longer to firmly establish reproductive barriers between species than it does for there to be significant changes in morphology and the like. on the order of millions of years for most mammals.

i wonder if these hybrid protochimp/protohuman offspring would have been fertile. i'd guess not because then the two lines may well have converged for good. any ideas? are hybrids always infertile or is that just true for mules?

i wonder if these hybrid protochimp/protohuman offspring would have been fertile. i'd guess not because then the two lines may well have converged for good. any ideas? are hybrids always infertile or is that just true for mules?

Just true for mules, I think. Ligers and tigons are fertile, though I don't think any have actually produced offspring.

The future article is such a load of horseshit it's difficult to know where to start shooting it down.

1) There's unlikely to be much human evolution at all, right now nearly all people pass their genetic material down to the next generation regardless of their own defects. Evolution requires stress, requires change, we're not stressed and there's little reason to change.
2) Technology won't have the horrid down sides he's blathering about, fucking luddites. There's no evidence that our immune systems have been compromised by increasing medical technology.
3) I don't think the dumbass even read The Time Machine. The Eloi despite being graceful little things were stupid, certainly not upper class. The Morlocks were clever, pretty much the opposite of his stated prediction.

I remember that 'future' story when it popped up last year, largely because it led to The Sun publishing "All men will have big willies" as a headline article (http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article67423.ece), which is kind of hard to ignore when it forms a sizeable proportion of what's on view when you're on the train of a morning.

It, together with Oliver Curry himself, was also the subject of a counter-article by Ben Goldacre, who has more info about it on his (fairly good) website at http://www.badscience.net/?p=316 if anyone is interested.;)

i wonder if these hybrid protochimp/protohuman offspring would have been fertile. i'd guess not because then the two lines may well have converged for good. any ideas? are hybrids always infertile or is that just true for mules?

probably fertile. even better, i would assume that it's relatively likely we currently have genes in our population now that came from post-split chimp gene introgression. just like we know we do with neandertals (or maybe some other archaic human species that was running around at the time - same difference.).

I don’t think that humans will change enormous.

There are 2 reasons for:

• The difference between now and the past is that we breed with anyone.

The groups of people that live really separately from the rest are too small to influence the genes-pool in its whole.

Maybe that a few races will disappear, or maybe one will be dominant, but that’s not such a big change for humanity.

• We are all more or less living in the same conditions.

Unless a branch of people enter some Battlestar Galactica and fly to a new planet with other conditions as on Earth (but still with liveable parameters) then it could be that humanity will evolve due the separation and the other conditions.

I remember that 'future' story when it popped up last year, largely because it led to The Sun publishing "All men will have big willies" as a headline article (http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article67423.ece), which is kind of hard to ignore when it forms a sizeable proportion of what's on view when you're on the train of a morning.


Heh. Trust the Sun to be predictable.

If somebody in 200 years' time stumbles across Curry's article somehow, it's a fair bet they'll have a good laugh at least. Just as we do at the people who said "there is nothing left for mankind to discover" at the end of the 19th century. He may not be entirely wrong, but there are so many unexpected factors of change that will muck up his predictions.

The bit about cross-species interbreeding by our ancestors is interesting, though.

It, together with Oliver Curry himself, was also the subject of a counter-article by Ben Goldacre, who has more info about it on his (fairly good) website at http://www.badscience.net/?p=316 if anyone is interested.;)
Thanks.

Unsurprisingly, it turns out that Oliver Curry is a political theorist and not a scientist. More amusingly, his report was commissioned by crappy bikini and fast car “men’s TV channel” Bravo to celebrate their 21st anniversary.

What a load of twaddle.

Thanks.

Unsurprisingly, it turns out that Oliver Curry is a political theorist and not a scientist. More amusingly, his report was commissioned by crappy bikini and fast car “men’s TV channel” Bravo to celebrate their 21st anniversary.

What a load of twaddle.
Indeed. It's actually quite frightening just how many of the 'science proves x...' stories that make it into the papers and onto the TV turn out to be speculative at best, and even more frightening how easy it seems to be for corporations to commission scientific reports by putting forward a finding that they want confirmed and then paying out some cash to have it 'confirmed' by anyone with a PhD.

Thanks.
You are most welcome.

Unsurprisingly, it turns out that Oliver Curry is a political theorist and not a scientist. More amusingly, his report was commissioned by crappy bikini and fast car “men’s TV channel” Bravo to celebrate their 21st anniversary.

What a load of twaddle.

I'm rather startled at the Beeb for publishing it.

I thought the Beeb could be trusted a little bit more at least that your random average media source.

I hate it when people write an article about pure fantasy and claim it's going to happen in the future. People do that all the time about quantum computers. They always say there will be quantum computers in "about 40 years." The truth is there may never be a quantum computer, ever.

The truth is there may never be a quantum computer, ever.And even if there is, you won't know precisely where ;)

And even if there is, you won't know precisely where ;)

Or you will know the general where abouts, but it would be too tiny to see!;)

I believe that children are the future. Teach them well and let them lead the wa...aaaaH! *ducks a thrown brick and scampers out of the thread*

Goofballs: the true future of the human race?

Goofballs: the true future of the human race?

Diety or Dawkins ;) help us!

I hate it when people write an article about pure fantasy and claim it's going to happen in the future. People do that all the time about quantum computers. They always say there will be quantum computers in "about 40 years." The truth is there may never be a quantum computer, ever.

I found some old magazines from the sixties. At that time they did predictions how we would live NOW. :)

We all would have flying cars, all diseases would be cured, you would book trips to the moon.

And so much more:

«Everything that can be invented has been invented.»
Charles H. Duell, an official at the US patent office, 1899.

«It will be gone by June.»
Variety, passing judgement on rock 'n roll in 1955.

«Four or five frigates will do the business without any military force.» -– British prime minister Lord North, on dealing with the rebellious American colonies, 1774.

«This antitrust thing will blow over.»
Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft.

«It will be years - not in my time - before a woman will become Prime Minister.»
Margaret Thatcher, future Prime Minister, October 26th, 1969.

«Read my lips: NO NEW TAXES.»
George Bush, 1988.

«That virus is a pussycat.» -– Dr. Peter Duesberg, molecular-biology professor at U.C. Berkeley, on HIV, 1988.

«Sensible and responsible women do not want to vote.»
Grover Cleveland, U.S. President, 1905.

«Where a calculator on the ENIAC is equipped with 18,000 vacuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers in the future may have only 1,000 vacuum tubes and weigh only 1.5 tons.»
Popular Mechanics, March 1949.


«There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home.»
Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC), maker of big business mainframe computers, arguing against the PC in 1977.


«I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is a fad that won't last out the year.»
The editor in charge of business books for Prentice Hall, 1957.


«But what... is it good for?»
IBM executive Robert Lloyd, speaking in 1968 microprocessor, the heart of today's computers.

«There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will.»
Albert Einstein, 1932.

«Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?»
H. M. Warner, co-founder of Warner Brothers, 1927.

Goofballs: the true future of the human race?

All is going according to plan. :)

And so much more:


Not bad. :D

I remember when I was a kid, we were asked to draw what life might be like in the year 2000. I have vague memories of everyone drawing flying cars. For some reason, I drew people playing football with anti-gravity boots.

I found some old magazines from the sixties. At that time they did predictions how we would live NOW. :)

We all would have flying cars, all diseases would be cured, you would book trips to the moon.

And so much more:

«Everything that can be invented has been invented.»
Charles H. Duell, an official at the US patent office, 1899.

«It will be gone by June.»
Variety, passing judgement on rock 'n roll in 1955.

«Four or five frigates will do the business without any military force.» -– British prime minister Lord North, on dealing with the rebellious American colonies, 1774.

«This antitrust thing will blow over.»
Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft.

«It will be years - not in my time - before a woman will become Prime Minister.»
Margaret Thatcher, future Prime Minister, October 26th, 1969.

«Read my lips: NO NEW TAXES.»
George Bush, 1988.

«That virus is a pussycat.» -– Dr. Peter Duesberg, molecular-biology professor at U.C. Berkeley, on HIV, 1988.

«Sensible and responsible women do not want to vote.»
Grover Cleveland, U.S. President, 1905.

«Where a calculator on the ENIAC is equipped with 18,000 vacuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers in the future may have only 1,000 vacuum tubes and weigh only 1.5 tons.»
Popular Mechanics, March 1949.


«There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home.»
Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC), maker of big business mainframe computers, arguing against the PC in 1977.


«I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is a fad that won't last out the year.»
The editor in charge of business books for Prentice Hall, 1957.


«But what... is it good for?»
IBM executive Robert Lloyd, speaking in 1968 microprocessor, the heart of today's computers.

«There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will.»
Albert Einstein, 1932.

«Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?»
H. M. Warner, co-founder of Warner Brothers, 1927.

"Everything that has transpired has done so according to my design." -Emperor Palpatine.

Not bad. :D

I remember when I was a kid, we were asked to draw what life might be like in the year 2000. I have vague memories of everyone drawing flying cars. For some reason, I drew people playing football with anti-gravity boots.

We invented Mega F*cking Mindy for that:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5i251ai88Ig

Man, I hate her :)

I found some old magazines from the sixties. At that time they did predictions how we would live NOW. :)

We all would have flying cars, all diseases would be cured, you would book trips to the moon.

And so much more:

«Everything that can be invented has been invented.»
Charles H. Duell, an official at the US patent office, 1899.

«It will be gone by June.»
Variety, passing judgement on rock 'n roll in 1955.

«Four or five frigates will do the business without any military force.» -– British prime minister Lord North, on dealing with the rebellious American colonies, 1774.

«This antitrust thing will blow over.»
Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft.

«It will be years - not in my time - before a woman will become Prime Minister.»
Margaret Thatcher, future Prime Minister, October 26th, 1969.

«Read my lips: NO NEW TAXES.»
George Bush, 1988.

«That virus is a pussycat.» -– Dr. Peter Duesberg, molecular-biology professor at U.C. Berkeley, on HIV, 1988.

«Sensible and responsible women do not want to vote.»
Grover Cleveland, U.S. President, 1905.

«Where a calculator on the ENIAC is equipped with 18,000 vacuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers in the future may have only 1,000 vacuum tubes and weigh only 1.5 tons.»
Popular Mechanics, March 1949.


«There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home.»
Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC), maker of big business mainframe computers, arguing against the PC in 1977.


«I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is a fad that won't last out the year.»
The editor in charge of business books for Prentice Hall, 1957.


«But what... is it good for?»
IBM executive Robert Lloyd, speaking in 1968 microprocessor, the heart of today's computers.

«There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will.»
Albert Einstein, 1932.

«Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?»
H. M. Warner, co-founder of Warner Brothers, 1927.

"Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is."

George W Bush, Governor of Texas, 1999

"I think it’s also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."

George W Bush, Governor of Texas, 1999

"Bombing a sovereign nation for ill-defined reasons with vague objectives undermines the American stature in the world. The international respect and trust for America has diminished every time we casually let the bombs fly. We must stop giving the appearance that our foreign policy is formulated by the Unabomber."

Tom DeLay, Texas Rep, 1999

"I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our overextended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today"

Tom DeLay, Texas Rep, 1999

"It’s very simple. The president is not supported by the House, and the military is supported by the House."

Tom Delay, Texas Rep, 1999



I don't know - I just like those ones better...

I thought the Beeb could be trusted a little bit more at least that your random average media source.
Oh dear me, no.

Especially not with technology and science stories. Just take a look at how they dealt with the OiNK fiasco.

Sounds to much like science fiction then reality in the predictions. I for one do agree though that there will be two types of humans. I believe there will be the human as we know it today on Earth. The second will be the off world Humans that never set foot on Earth which have genetically mutated to better handle space. Then again we could get into more then two types if we colonize Mars.

I doubt that we'd split into different subspecies... while we remained on Earth. I do predict that we would split into different subspecies as we migrate to different planets. A few examples:

Martians: These are humans born on Mars. They are taller than Terrans, but have lighter frames and do not do well in normal gravity environments. Martians also have powerful lungs and are somewhat resistant to cold and radiation.

Astrans: Humans who live on space stations. Astrans are adapted for a variety of gravities. In some ways, Astrans resemble monkeys - their arms have elongated, while their feet are capable of grabbing on to handholds. They also have a superb sense of balance. All these facilitate moving around space stations if there is no gravity.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought it sounded like a bunch of bullshit.

Frankly, unless something destroys civilization as we know it, there is not going to be any natural evolution of the human race beyond--my guess--2025. After that we'll be completely guiding everything through genetic manipulation, nanotechnology, and so on and so forth.

Frankly, unless something destroys civilization as we know it, there is not going to be any natural evolution of the human race beyond--my guess--2025. After that we'll be completely guiding everything through genetic manipulation, nanotechnology, and so on and so forth.

of course, that in itself could lead to speciation. quite rapidly, one would suspect.

of course, that in itself could lead to speciation. quite rapidly, one would suspect.

Indeed. This speculation is made with the caveat that it might not go THAT fast. The rate of technology is certainly increasing faster and faster though.

All valour and due note, but doesn't the guidance of an evolutionary path through genetic manipulation in fact support the claim that evolution will carry on? In fact it seems to indicate that the rate of such change would be quite accelerated, which may eventually lead to a bifurcation in species... that said, I doubt that humanity will survive for long enough to find this an issue.
I wonder, have any of you read that H.G Wells book "time machine?" It Supposes a similar scenario to this one.

apology, delay!

All valour and due note, but doesn't the guidance of an evolutionary path through genetic manipulation in fact support the claim that evolution will carry on? In fact it seems to indicate that the rate of such change would be quite accelerated, which may eventually lead to a bifurcation in species... that said, I doubt that humanity will survive for long enough to find this an issue.
I wonder, have any of you read that H.G Wells book "time machine?" It Supposes a similar scenario to this one.
Yes, I have read The Time Machine, which was never meant as a true depiction of the future of humanity.

Further, you miss the fact that genetic manipulation would be entirely guided. You also miss the fact that it has nothing to do with evolution, which is a series of random mutations and alterations that become prized and kept due to the specific members of the species that is evolving that have these new traits living whereas the old members die off. This process requires many, many generations, which usually results in a long period of time from a human perspective since most creatures tend to live several years at least. Only when you go down to insects can you observe enough generations inside of a few months.

Anyway, the point is that it's not going to "accelerate evolution" and evolution is not going to happen because it won't be necessary. Necessity is what causes the mutations and alterations in the first place. Unlike what silly faux science like "X-Men" would have you believe, there is no "leaping forward guided process" nor does evolution have anything to do with becoming superior so much as it has to do with simply being the best adapted to the current environment.

Genetic engineering. Problem solved. You can thank me 100,000 years from now.