Among humans, bioogical adaption to enviromental change has been generally replaced by what?
111109
The only one that makes sense is B.
1042707
"In biology, evolution is the measurable change in the heritable traits (allele frequency) of a population over successive generations. Evolution is ultimately the source of the vast diversity of the biological world. Over time, it may result in the origin of new species (speciation). Contemporary species are related to each other through common descent, products of evolution and speciation over billions of years." translation organisms change over time due to adapting to their environment and selective breeding, though natural selection plays the largest role in evolution, in natural selection the animal that is best fit to live in  and survive in its environment will be able to live on and reproduce. Also known as "survival of the fittest"
226
Evolution is ever-present as always. You could argue it's rate is a function of environment change. So to answer what's driving human evolution you need to look at the human environment as part of the equation. Extreme evolution happens when an organism's environment changes and it cannot escape it. As a previous post mentioned, humans now have the ability to easily move around the world and escape a 'bad' environment. So evolution may indeed have slowed, but it is not dead. Some cataclysmic change affecting the whole planet, if it doesn't kill the species completely, will certainly speed up the evolutionary process when you compare the human race a few generations either side of said event.\n\nGiven that evolution is the result of genetic mutation/favoritism during sexual reproduction are we seeing those more desirable for sex setting the evolutionary path while environment change is minimized by our ability to control it or escape it?\n\nIs average height an example of this? It would certainly seem that humans are growing taller on average, and what western (cultural bias) woman does not want a tall mate for example. It should be noted however that who we think is desirable for sex is very culturally dependent and may not lead to the best long-term (breeding) prospects for an individual conceived to those parents.
861325
Changing, definitely. \nEvolution is a result of natural selection -- the environmental pressures on the organisms' ability to survive and pass on their genes to the next generation. They adapt to a particular environment so they are improved for those circumstances. When circumstances change, however, that change might not be an improvement, but could turn out to be a handicap. Example: evolving toward less fur in a warm environment. If the environment turns cold, those with fur might have a better chance of living to pass on their genes.
334217
that's due to climate,food....and various reasons....everybody has adapted themselves with the part of world they live in......u must have heared about survival of the fittest(EVOLUTION).
869176
earth has become the planet of the apes... we've lost humanities traits of caring for others and helping those less fortunate.  Today it is like the Serengeti where it's eat or be eaten.
139168
Climate is variable. Always has been. The question is, is there currently an anthropogenic component to the variation?
722420
Think of it this way (VERY simplified example here):\n\nIn Africa, the jungle borders on the plains. There's a population of ape-like primates that live in the jungle. The population gets too big, so another population branches off after a few thousand years, and lives on the plains. Thep lains are a whole diffeent story compared to the jungle. Different predators, different fod supply, different enviroment. It's very tough out there. Only the apes who have adaptations to living on the plains survive. These keep getting better and better at it, and eventually become humans.\n\nMeanwhile, th apes that stayed in the jungle also face changing conditions, though obviously not as big a change as jungle-grasslands. But, they keep getting better t what they do in more subtle ways (subtle since they don't have as ig a change to deal with). These eventually become modern apes. They look more like the original apes than humans do because they stayed in the ame environment, but eventually even those original apes all died out or became chimps, gorillas, etc.\n\nIt's possible that someday, some chimps might move out onto the plains. Maybe they'll evole some of the same adaptations that humans did, but they wn't BE humans any more than dolphins are sharks (just becasue they evolved in a similar environment and ended up looking sorta like sharks).
626210
Appears some of us have evolved into completely different species.
21700
Stress is simply a fact of nature -- forces from the outside worldaffecting the individual. Hence, all living creatures are in a constant interchange with their surroundings (the ecosystem), both physically and behaviorally. This interplay of forces, or energy, is of course present in the relationships between all matter in the universe, whether they are living(animate) or not living (inanimate). However, there are critical differences inhow different living creatures relate to their environment. These differences have far reaching consequences for survival. Because of the over abundance ofstress in our modern lives, we usually think of stress as a negative experience.But from a biological point of view, stress can be neutral, negative, orpositive. \n\nStress has driven evolutionary change (the development and natural selectionof species over time). Thus, the species that adapted best to the causes ofstress (stressors) have survived and evolved into the plant and animal kingdoms we now observe. Man, because of the evolution of the human brain, especially thepart called the neo-cortex, is the most adaptive creature on the planet. This adaptability is largely due to the changes and stressors that we have faced and mastered. Therefore, we, unlike other animals, can live in any climate orecosystem, at various altitudes, and avoid the danger of predators. Moreover, most recently, we have learned to live in the air, under the sea, and even inspace, where no living creatures that we know of have ever survived. So then,what is so wrong with stress?\n\nA brief history of stress\nA key to the understanding of the negative aspects of stress is the conceptof milieu interiur (the internal environment of the body), which was first advanced by the great French physiologist, Claude Bernard. In this concept, he described the principles of dynamic equilibrium. In dynamic equilibrium, constancy, a steady state (situation) in the internal bodily environment, is essential to survival. Therefore, external changes in the environment or external forces that change the internal balance must be reacted to and compensated for if the organism was to survive. Examples of such external forces include temperature, oxygen concentration in the air, the expenditure of energy, and the presence of predators. In addition, diseases were also stressors that threatened the constancy of the milieu interiur.
906362
I really don't think its likely we will evolve to handle pollutants to way you describe. It would take many deaths specifically from pollution, and a specific mutation in a few peoples lungs that make them better equipped to handle the bad air.
1127130
I would say "C" is the closest answer to the question. I believe that people adapt their way of living to the topography, climate, tradition, social pressures and any number of other factors. Do a little research on the Anasazi of the southwestern U.S. and see what factors may have lead to their demise.
252845
evolution is the constant change in physiology a life form undergoes to remain adapted to its environment. Its hard not to believe in evolution. What is hard to belive is that God created all species in their current state and doesnt change them. I believe thats just the bibles answer because it was written before evolution was known.
145559
My answer is ot supposed to completly argue on the subject, but it may yet give something to think about!!\n\nBecause when humans come up in an area without changing it, they settle in an armless way (if they notice a flooding risk, they adapt themselves to the area: egyptian with the Nile 3000 years ago for exemple).\nOn the other hand, when they show up and develop altering the area situation, such things as flooding that did not happen before may occur. Which would explain why most of the disaster happen in these cases.\n\nMy opinion is that humans should always try to adapt themselves to the situations instead of trying to adapt the situations to themselves (which tend to be more and more frequent unfortunatly).
9
A tough question as it overlaps science and theology. Since you asked "how the human species evolved?" I'll assume you're interested in the scientific approach to the answer.\nThe current theory holds that Homo sapiens evolved from Hominid ancestors over the course of millions of years through a process called natural selection. Natural selection is the weeding and advancement of species variants over time based on the fit in that species' then current environments. The pressures for "fit" are competitive (with each other, with other tribes, and with other animals) and environmental (weather, terrain, availability of food, etc.). These factors all contributed to the development of our higher brain, which we now use to evolve as a global collective through communication & technology.
532715
Change is inevitable, and since you are brought up outside of the traditional environment, it is just natural that you do not fit perfectly into the old Indian culture. After all, culture and environment go hand-in-hand. When one changes, the other would.
1149128
Because we now have the ability to override natural selection.  It doesn't necessarily exist in the true form for humans anymore.