Thank you so much for your interest José Luis García Vigil

But these changes if continued often produce negative results because a change in the extraordinary evolved makeup of our genomes makes the probability that a random change will not be helpful. Many of the non-lethal changes that have been studied are interesting but not species-altering, such as height, eye color, and other physical traits.

yes , you may find this article interesting

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/05/humans-are-still-evolving-and-we-can-watch-it-happen

The genetics go through occasional changes in small ways over a long time. The replication is good and much better than thermodynamic probability square root of n as Schrödinger expounded in his book "What Is Life."

Viruses and funguses do random genetic engineering on us and on everything else, ,most of which is rejected by immune systems.

Whether the species is improving or not is debatable. Survival of the fittest seems to operate to some extent as long as fitness is defined from observing survivors, a rather silly proposition.

Extinction is not likely due to large diversity in the population. It is customary to classify all humans as one species, in a research context that would assign about 1400 separate species to that same diversity of non humans.

There is concern for human survival and prosperity over a long time period. Part of the research community assigns no probability at all for humans to exist in the distant future.

I associate with groups that are determined to overcome obstacles and populate the universe with humans, even predicting the possibility of surviving the end of our universe and the new beginning of another. Discussions on RG have contributed to the effort with results suggesting the objective is attainable and the technologies can be developed.

The question suggests something of a passive observer in the wrong group.

If we continue to evolve genetically, especially at the level of greater maturity and anatomical and functional improvement of the brain; via the increased use of telecommunications, internet and devices equipped with artificial intelligence software, which enhances our human intelligence.

On the other hand, it has been demonstrated by the great geneticists and evolutionists of the world, mainly by Lynn Margulis and Stephen Jay Gould, that the evolutionary changes are not continuous or at least do not manifest themselves in permanent and constant changes, but rather manifest in of large discontinuous or saltatory changes.

yes there is

The mechanism of evolution is sporadic genetic mutations, caused by any number of phenomena, environmental, radiation, pure, dumb luck (or lack thereof). Some of these mutations are beneficial, such as, greater resistance to disease, or greater compatibility with local environmental conditions. Just as likely, other such mutations are detrimental. The detrimental mutations will tend to eliminate themselves over time, the beneficial ones will instead be better represented in the population. For example, it seems clear that mutations which benefit our immune system will tend to keep those individuals living longer, having more offspring, than the more unfortunate ones whose immune systems are compromised by mutations. Some mutations are neither good nor bad, they just create diversity.

So, do we have any reason to believe that this mechanism has stopped operating? No, I wouldn't think so.

http://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/dna-is-constantly-changing-through-the-process-6524898

It seems that error checking and error correction in DNA is not nearly as strong as it is in computers. If the error checking and error correction were extremely robust, mutations would be excessively rare, and evolution would not exist. Pretty amazing stuff.

Human evolution can seem like a phenomenon of the distant past which applies only to our ancestors living millions of years ago. But human evolution is ongoing. To evolve simply means that mutations – the accidental changes to genes that happen normally in the process of copying DNA – are becoming more or less common in the population over time.

These changes can happen by chance, because the individuals who reproduced happened to carry a particular mutation somewhat more often than individuals who didn’t have children. They can also happen because of natural selection, when carriers of a specific mutation are better able to survive, reproduce or tend to their family members – and therefore leave more descendants. Every biological adaptation, from the ability of humans to walk upright on two feet to flight in birds, ultimately traces back to natural selection acting on these minute changes, generation after generation.

Thanks dear Dr. Mohammed H. Musleh for sharing your question. The question and the expected discussion thread are a nice opportunity for me to learn about this interesting topic.

I do not believe , stupid and wise were/are in every society

I think so.

I think that evolution is declined. Only the techniques are evolved. Human still made war

Are we?

Evolution is doing its work. We are under its control.

But we are running towards extinction for our uncontrolled greed and destroying of ecological and our physiological balance!

No scientific measurement of degree or percentage between 'Evolution' & 'Extinction' in literature

Human race expected age since 'Evolution' is 3 to 4 billion years & resemblance of 98 percent 'Genes' with 'Chimpanzee' proved same family at 'Birth' of human race.

My belief 'Genetic Mutation' of human is influenced by 'Environment' & strong 'DNA' by 'Environment'. Therefore, unwanted pollution in 'Environment' weaken 'DNA' & Human 'Greed' consolidated attack implicitly on human race.

'Evolution' & 'Extinction' absolutely supervised by 'Nature' any thing reaching towards 'Extreme' restricted by 'Nature'

Nothing above 'Law of Nature' & many inherent protection via 'Consciousness' responsible for an efficient balance between living organisms

Protect 'Nature' via 'Flora & Fauna' and secured future of human race

follow answer dr.mohammed

best regard

Human groups have evolved around the world in response to the unique challenges they face in the environment in which they live. As a result, we differ not only in our external form but also in the internal mechanism of our bodies. The different effects of evolution among humans in different parts of the world today can be seen in the strong influence of our history on our health.

Thank you so much for your interest Tahir Iqbal

Life will always be reshaped by the changing environment and itself. Might slow down someday, but on a long enough timeline something’s bound to kick it back into high gear.

Regards

Thank you so much for your interest José Luis García Vigil

But these changes if continued often produce negative results because a change in the extraordinary evolved makeup of our genomes makes the probability that a random change will not be helpful. Many of the non-lethal changes that have been studied are interesting but not species-altering, such as height, eye color, and other physical traits.

Follwoing

YES we are

Sometime for good and sometime for bad

Evolution in genetics is constant process and the epi-genetics encompasses the impact of environmental triggers on our body is probably the reason we have changes in our genes

Regards

Thank you very much to everyone, I appreciate your great feedback and thank you so much your response.

Yes. Even if all traits were neutral with no real selection on any of them, random changes in frequencies would occur in the population over time. However, is selection operating on "survival" fitness or more importantly reproductive fitness the same way, for example, as it was 500, 5000, 50,000 or 500,000 years ago the same way? Probably not. With technological and social advances, we solve certain problems in both aspects without having to rely on generational changes in certain genotypes and phenotypes in the same way we think about normative biological evolution among animal populations. There are some aspects of cultural transmission and biological transmission that need to be considered. Take for example Dawkins' "meme" concept, although I don't think he goes far enough to explain how it might really work (i.e., is effectively modeled) - not really his focus anyway - or on considerations of the evolution of non-biological populations (certainly not to be confused with social Darwinism) including individual and group selection models. That's probably not all that relevant vis-a-vis your question, but needs some consideration nevertheless; because of potential influences it may have on the genetic side of things.

It asks enough research to confirm this hypothesis!

In actual society, no matter how prepared we are, we are not evolving, much less genetically

Thank you very much for the wonderful scientific answers and opinions I appreciate those opinions ..

I really benefited a lot

It is probably one of the risks an organisation like the UN should assess: humanity has become so much of a city animal that should catastrophic collapse of the earth environment arrive (say a deep impact meteorite to keep a politically neutral scenario), many humans might not fit well in a subsequent world. And they say that there is so much heavy metal and other toxins in most adult city

humans that we would not be fit to eat.

Interesting discussion!

Follow