BLOG VIEW | HEADLINE VIEW

CULTURE

POLITICS

MUSIC

CELEB

The Cold, Hard Science of the Eloi and the Morlock

SATURDAY OCTOBER 27 2007 4:00 PM

Submitted by Rahodeb. Edited By Rahodeb.

TAGS: Human Evolution, H.G. Wells, The Time Machine

Is it science...or is it science fiction!? London-based evolutionary theorist Oliver Curry has declared that humanity is actually evolving into two sub-species, which will have fully emerged within 100,000 years. Half of the family will be an attractive, intelligent ruling elite, while the others will form an underclass of dim-witted, ugly goblin-like creatures, strikingly similar to the the Eloi and the Morlock in H.G. Wells' The Time Machine.

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.

According to Dr. Curry, the men of the ruling elite will have deeper voices and bigger penises, and the women will have smooth hairless skin, large eyes and pert breasts. Interbreeding will have produced a single coffee-coloured skin tone. That's great, but there's a downside, too:

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.

Okay, so--aside from which subspecies you think your descendants will fall into--the real question here is, why are Oliver Curry's claims being published? This story, which made headlines in the past week, seems to have originally appeared last year in the BBC, the Telegraph, the Sun, the Scotsman, and various other news outlets. Why again, now? First of all, he's a political theorist, not a scientist or geneticist. Second of all, the idea the humanity is still evolving seems legitimate, but everyone turning coffee-colored? Really? Human beings have been geographically and socially mobile for a long, long time now, and we don't show any overarching signs of blending, yet.

Last year when it appeared, Bad Science ripped it apart.

Oliver has perhaps not been to Brazil, where black African, white European, and Amerindian have lived side by side and bred together for many centuries. The Brazilians have not gone coffee coloured, they in fact still show a wide range of skin pigmentation, from black to tan. This is because skin pigmentation seems to be coded for by a fairly small number of genes and probably doesn’t blend and even out as Oliver - a political theorist, not a scientist - suggests.

What about his other ideas? Like the one that ultimately, through extreme socioeconomic divisions in society, humans will divide into two species: one tall, thin symmetrical, clean, healthy, intelligent and creative, the other short, stocky, asymmetrical, grubby, unhealthy and not as bright?

Dividing into species requires some fairly strong pressures, like geographical divisions: even then, the Tasmanian aboriginals, who were isolated for 10,000 years, can still have children perfectly easily with white Europeans. “Sympatric speciation”, a division into species where the two groups live in the same place, as Curry is proposing, is even tougher. For a while, many scientists didn’t think it happened at all. It would require that socioeconomic divides were absolute, although history shows that attractive impoverished females and wealthy ugly men can be remarkably resourceful in love.

Sounds like Curry would have been better off doing an MFA instead of a PhD, although then he would have wound up facing plagiarism charges. Are we still evolving? Yeah, I would guess so. Are we evolving in the direction of H.G. Wells' The Time Machine? Probably not so much. Soylent Green? Maybe. Bladerunner? Perhaps. But The Time Machine? Gimme a break.

40 Comments

PAGE:

1 | 2 | 3

Formus

Milwaukee, WI

May 2007

OCT 27, 2007 04:14 PM

Pft, everyone knows humans will have evolved into cream-colored snub-nosed brunettes with tremendous brains, psychic capabilities, and photosynthesizing bacteria on the skin that eliminate the need for eating.

ElizaTheTroll

Australia

January 2006

OCT 27, 2007 04:25 PM

Wait, I'm confused. While I believe that Mr. Curry is full of crap, I fail to see how Bad Science's criticism even applies if indeed he claims that humans will divide into subspecies rather than separate species.

Formus

Milwaukee, WI

May 2007

OCT 27, 2007 04:31 PM

OlafTheTroll said:
Wait, I'm confused. While I believe that Mr. Curry is full of crap, I fail to see how Bad Science's criticism even applies if indeed he claims that humans will divide into subspecies rather than separate species.

Well, he's not a scientist, you see. And that makes Bad Science's panties all twisty.

StopSnitchin

Hudson, NH

February 2004

OCT 27, 2007 04:43 PM

I'm evolving into http://www.myspace.com/zorloq

xazapdmytinu

Fort Collins, CO

July 2007

OCT 27, 2007 05:03 PM

There should be a movie about this where Jeremy Irons explains to Curry, Played by Guy Pearce, how incredibly wrong he was...maybe with Orlando Jones as a lovable but slightly annoying computer sidekick?

SockPuppet

I'm lost

July 2006

OCT 27, 2007 05:17 PM

Thanks for pointing out he's not a geneticist; I missed that.

But the whole genetics thing is a bit silly, in human terms. Human evolution is mediated by intelligence and language.

Sick

Minneapolis, MN

June 2003

OCT 27, 2007 05:34 PM

SockPuppet said:
Thanks for pointing out he's not a geneticist; I missed that.

But the whole genetics thing is a bit silly, in human terms. Human evolution is mediated by intelligence and language.

Not in a scientific sense it isn't. Have a look at the definition of evolution provided by talk.origins

"In the broadest sense, evolution is merely change, and so is all-pervasive; galaxies, languages, and political systems all evolve. Biological evolution ... is change in the properties of populations of organisms that transcend the lifetime of a single individual. The ontogeny of an individual is not considered evolution; individual organisms do not evolve. The changes in populations that are considered evolutionary are those that are inheritable via the genetic material from one generation to the next. Biological evolution may be slight or substantial; it embraces everything from slight changes in the proportion of different alleles within a population (such as those determining blood types) to the successive alterations that led from the earliest protoorganism to snails, bees, giraffes, and dandelions."
- Douglas J. Futuyma in Evolutionary Biology, Sinauer Associates 1986

No amount of difference in language and intelligence alone could possibly result in speciation.

Now, if you wanted to argue that the evolutionary pressures humans now face are related to language and intelligence...

But the genetics thing is very much not silly. Let's not confuse the advancement of the human race with its evolution.

Edit: Emphasis added.

SockPuppet

I'm lost

July 2006

OCT 27, 2007 05:52 PM

Sick said:

SockPuppet said:
Thanks for pointing out he's not a geneticist; I missed that.

But the whole genetics thing is a bit silly, in human terms. Human evolution is mediated by intelligence and language.

Not in a scientific sense it isn't. Have a look at the definition of evolution provided by talk.origins

Beg to differ. Evolution is about adaption to the environment. The whole reason that intelligence and language work is that they bypass genetics; that behaviour in intelligent species modifies them faster than genetics can keep up with. How do you think we got where we are?

(And BTW, language is probably the more important of the pair. It allows adaptation in people without any genetic link. !! )

paulnikon

Melbourne, FL

February 2003

OCT 27, 2007 06:01 PM

Unless a Vulcan starship shows up, we will destroy this planet in way less than 10,000 years.

Formus

Milwaukee, WI

May 2007

OCT 27, 2007 06:08 PM

PaulNikon said:
Unless a Vulcan starship shows up, we will destroy this planet in way less than 10,000 years.

Vulcan?

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

JayBugg

Reisterstown, MD

February 2006

OCT 27, 2007 06:11 PM

Thank humanity we won't live to see this...

Okay actually I wouldn't mind humanity ending up looking like

Sick

Minneapolis, MN

June 2003

OCT 27, 2007 06:17 PM

SockPuppet said:

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

I see. So we're throwing out the scientifcally accepted definition of biological evolution for one that suits you better?

You're going to have to do some pretty fast talking to convince me that language changes us on a biological level in addition to a cultural one.

And change in culture does not evolution make.

SockPuppet

I'm lost

July 2006

OCT 27, 2007 06:36 PM

Sick said:

SockPuppet said:

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

As you wish. I'm not going to get into a fight about it. But it appears to me that the whole point about evolution is adaptation to changing environment, and intelligence and language allow humans to do that faster than other species, which is The Secret Of Our Success . (Though of course my definition of "our" needs to be looked at carefully, if I'm right.)

I'm not attempting to convince you that "language changes us on a biological level in addition to a cultural one". What I'm saying is that intelligence and language alter us - make us different - in ways that subvert and supersede the biological level.
For instance, the capacity to feel sympathy for individuals without any genetic tie to ourselves.

Sick

Minneapolis, MN

June 2003

OCT 27, 2007 06:52 PM

SockPuppet said:

Sick said:

SockPuppet said:

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

As you wish. I'm not going to get into a fight about it. But it appears to me that the whole point about evolution is adaptation to changing environment, and intelligence and language allow humans to do that faster than other species, which is The Secret Of Our Success . (Though of course my definition of "our" needs to be looked at carefully, if I'm right.)

I'm not attempting to convince you that "language changes us on a biological level in addition to a cultural one". What I'm saying is that intelligence and language alter us - make us different - in ways that subvert the biological level. For instance, the capacity to feel sympathy for individuals without any genetic tie to ourselves.

Yes; the difference in our opinions seems to be that I'm arguing about biological evolution, while you're arguing about cultural evolution. Genetics versus memetics.

And while I agree that language, and cultural evolution in general, does the things you say, the article was about humans dividing into sub-species--a biological change. A change like that just isn't something culture alone can do. The culture of western Europe is vastly different from that of Australian aborigines, yet they're both human. Capable of interbreeding. The same species.

And if we're going to say that culture is capable of creating subspecies, there's no need to claim that it will happen in the future, because it's already happened.

squee_

Grand Marais, MN

September 2004

OCT 27, 2007 07:10 PM

PaulNikon said:
Unless a Vulcan starship shows up, we will destroy this planet in way less than 10,000 years.

This is perhaps man's biggest arrogance. We very well might destroy ourselves, but it is extremely unlikely we will destroy the planet. Reshape it. Sure. Destroy it. I don't think so.

PAGE:

1 | 2 | 3