Re:Forearm artery reveals human evolution continues?
by Izkata on Saturday October 10, 2020 @09:26PM
(#24743173)
> Ewwww. Why is university press the worst? If we are still evolving and this isn't just about genetic recombination then by definition mutations are involved.
The use of "superpowers" alongside it indicates they're referring to pop culture mutations (in the sense of the X-Men).
Re:Forearm artery reveals human evolution continues?
by Ericson2314 on Sunday October 11, 2020 @11:24AM
(#24746407)
Yes, but does using that overloaded word cover anything "superpowers" didn't? I'd think it just adds ambiguity.
Re:Forearm artery reveals human evolution continues?
by ffhhj on Saturday October 10, 2020 @06:33PM
(#24742375)
"Evolutionary intertia"? Evolution is change, and inertia is the resistance to change... it makes no sense anyway.
Re:Forearm artery reveals human evolution continues?
by Ericson2314 on Saturday October 10, 2020 @09:02PM
(#24743083)
So I'm totally making this up but if interia is about the rate of change being the same, I can imagine a population bottleneck forcing more change as the remaining population finds a niche.
Ewwww. Why is university press the worst? If we are still evolving and this isn't just about genetic recombination then by definition mutations are involved.
Also the publicist writes
> This evolutionary trend will continue in those born 80 years from today, with the median artery becoming common in the human forearm.
Wat. "Evolutionary intertia" probably has been defined by someone, but it's not that.
It looks like this is a doubl-wammy misinterpration of the following quote, also from the press release:
> “This increase could have resulted from mutations of genes involved in median artery development or health problems in mothers during pregnancy, or both actually. If this trend continues, a majority of people will have median artery of the forearm by 2100.”
It could involve mutations and the trend could continue.