Down With Darwinism?

Charles Darwin 

If Charles Darwin, back in 1859, could have seen 160 years into the future, he would be a very confused man. It was in 1859 that Darwin released his book, On The Origin of Species, which detailed his theory of evolution by natural selection. However, as the years have progressed, humans have consistently improved medication and technology to a point where many diseases or ailments that would have killed off our jungle dwelling ancestors can no longer affect us. Drugs like insulin, antibiotics, and similar compounds are able to prevent many diseases thus allowing those who are not necessarily fit for an environment to survive. Modern day humans have survived eating laundry detergent, blowing off limbs with fireworks, and various firearm mishaps, all of which would have eliminated our ancestors. Because of such advancements, many scientists have begun to question if the human species (Homo Sapiens for my fancy lads) is still evolving?

 As we have seen with developing technologies such as CRISPR, Humans have the ability to not only maintain life despite damaging diseases but actually have the ability to eliminate and alter certain traits prior to leaving the womb. This may lead one to say that it is competitive with the idea of Natural Selection as it inhibiting genotypic variation. Right?

The pesky lactose molecule which demonstrates modern evolution

This isn’t necessarily the case, in fact, some scientists propose that rather than evolution slowing down, the process is speeding up significantly. Nonetheless, of what scientists may speculate, the data shows that evolution is still occurring throughout our populations. These changes can be seen through dietary traits and phenotypic variations. In the case of dietary traits, lactose intolerance is put in the spotlight. Lactose intolerance is the inability of an organism (in this case humans) to break down the lactose molecule (a sugar). This trait in itself expresses the continuation of the evolutionary process as certain populations became more reliant on the ability to digest lactose and, therefore, in such populations (even today) individuals that reside in these areas tend to carry a genomic variation that allows for the digestion of lactose. As well, phenotypic variations like hair color, eye color, and height are all very prominent examples of how evolution is still occurring. The case of hair and skin color, these traits are selected for based on location. In environments in which there is a high exposure (eg. Africa, the Middle East), darker skin is selected for whereas environments further from the equator select for lighter skin as not as much melanin is needed to block UV rays. You can learn more about this here

     Although humans are still seen to undergo evolution by natural selection, who knows. Maybe by the year 2050, we will be birthing super babies capable of grand things.

FYI: If you have some time check out the Darwin Awards, you won't regret it :)

Below are some top natural selection memes to brighten your day:

Team City Bird vs. Team Country Bird

For those who have encountered the combatant pigeons of New York City, it likely comes as no surprise when I say that birds that live in the city have different behavioral patterns. The environmental conditions in the city are so drastically different than those of rural areas, that they place a selective pressure upon the birds, causing them to biologically adapt over time. In some ways, the pressures caused by city life can improve populations of birds, and in other ways, they are put at a disadvantage.

Birds in the city are forced to face several environmental differences that affect how they must behave to survive. There is a heightened amount of stimulus as well as population density in cities. At any given moment, there is noise, traffic, bright lights, and many people and different types of animals fighting for space and resources. In order to survive and reproduce, city birds tend to be forced to adopt a more aggressive demeanor and be willing to fight and assert themselves when necessary.

When observed, urban birds show off their aggressive sides in response to trouble. Much of this comes from biological evolution over time, but in addition to the foundation that evolutionary tendencies provides, the frequency of exposure to situations like these makes the birds better equipped for conflict going forward. Birds in the city also show raised aggression during mating as a result of the density of competition.

Additionally, it was found that city birds may even have a greater immune system and higher intelligence than country birds. I would hypothesize that their immune system would be better as birds are exposed to a much less clean environment, exposed to pollutants and food scraps, and therefore would naturally build antibodies to different pathogens more quickly. They could also have become genetically predisposed to have a better immune response over generations (read more about inherited immunity here).

One downside of life in the city for birds is the potential of more stress, which can shorten the length of their telomeres. Telomeres, which are like caps on chromosomes, shorten over time, and their shortening can decrease one's lifespan. With exposure to a great amount of stressors, city birds may face more wear and tear than country birds.

It is up to you whether you find that city birds or country birds are superior. Frankly, there is no true purpose in determining which type of the amazing creatures reigns supreme. City birds seem to mirror their human city-mates, having to endure great stress, but resultantly becoming more aggressive and well-equipped in the face of conflict. Country birds are not as likely to have these traits, but they also face much less external stress. The choice is up to you; Team City Bird or Team Country Bird?