In 1859, Charles Darwin published his first fundamental work on the laws of evolution, which caused not only fierce controversy, but also numerous speculations on the development of life on Earth. The most progressive futurists of that time immediately hypothesized that man continues to evolve as a biological species and our descendants will differ from us, as we are from apes. How correct is the hypothesis?
Natural selection
In its most simplified form, evolutionary theory says that the emergence of new biological species is carried out due to mutations, which are either discarded or fixed in the course of natural selection, giving the species new qualities.
From a human point of view, natural selection is very cruel - it is expressed through high mortality (very rare animals live to old age), through continuous hunting (in the food "pyramid" there is practically no chance of survival for weak or sick creatures), through changes in the environment (with climatic changes or depletion of resources, many species are totally dying out). But it was in such conditions that modern man appeared and developed.
Nature never uses any one line in selection - she goes through numerous options, giving each of them a chance to be realized in new conditions. When mind appeared on the planet, at least three closely related species became its carriers: Cro-Magnons, Neanderthals and Denisovan man, whose remains were discovered relatively recently. Regardless of skin color, height and build, we are the descendants of a small Cro-Magnon tribe.
Minor admixtures of Neanderthal genes are found in all modern peoples, except for Africans; some genes of the Denisovan man are found in the Melanesians and the inhabitants of Tibet. Both related species have become extinct, which is why, at the genetic level, the human population is very poor. We are significantly inferior in diversity even to chimpanzees. Therefore, our biological evolution is slowed down. Moreover, it is quite possible to say that it stopped at some point.
Promotional video:
Other people
At the end of the 19th century, scientists had a very vague idea of how inherited traits are transmitted from generation to generation. The material carrier of genetic information, DNA, has not yet been identified. Finding the bones of the Neanderthals, anthropologists concluded that man has developed significantly in comparison with these "savages" and development will continue.
The idea seemed so exciting that science fiction writers immediately took advantage of it. Suffice it to recall the famous novel by H. G. Wells "The Time Machine" (1895), which describes the people of the future - frivolous, evil and gloomy Morlocks, distant descendants of the aristocracy and proletarians. Moreover, many futurologists believed that due to the rapid development of road transport and the emergence of various means of communication, which practically did not leave the house, people were physically degraded by the middle of the 20th century.
French futurist Albert Robida ominously warned: "If proper measures are not taken in a timely manner, then a person will turn into a huge brain under a domed skull, propped up by the thinnest legs!"
As we can see, the 20th century is long over, cars have filled the streets, the Internet and cellular communications are everywhere, and people are still the same.
The only important difference is that we began to live longer (the average age increased by 20 years) and grew taller (the average height increased by 11 centimeters). But this is precisely due not to evolutionary factors, but to the fact that we began to eat much better and received superior (compared to the 19th century) medicine.
The fact is that biological evolution is caused by changes in the genome, and not by the conditions in which our body was born and developed. Our external diversity is apparent and depends solely on individual development; the genome is basically unchanged.
For new species characteristics to appear, deadly natural selection is needed, but it was humanity that successfully and “turned it off” by building a civilization that protects people from the unpredictable influence of the external environment. By and large, we are all "greenhouse flowers" grown in artificial conditions.
Child's world
Modern anthropologists believe that the last time a person truly evolved was after the fall of the Roman Empire, when sanitation standards were lost for a long time and intestinal infections severely thinned the population of Europe. Only those with the mutant gene for cystic fibrosis survived.
And yet the question arises: if our evolution is no longer influenced by the natural environment, then maybe the social environment will affect? Of course, this will not be in such a primitive form as HG Wells and Albert Robida predicted, but nevertheless, some social trends inevitably influence selection within humanity itself.
For example, with an increase in life expectancy, there is an increase in the period of growing up. The current young man can afford to remain a child until 20 years or more, which was completely unacceptable half a century ago. "Infantilization" penetrates into all spheres, primarily into mass culture.
Masculinity and femininity are no longer in vogue. The standard of beauty has become graceful beardless boys and skinny girls disguised as schoolgirls. Differences in clothing and lifestyle are minimized. If it is precisely such "asexual" eternal adolescents who will give offspring, then will the trend not be fixed in the future, giving rise to a new subspecies of man? Will our grandchildren or great-grandchildren look like Japanese anime characters?
Still, the influence of fashion shouldn't be overestimated. It works for a short time and not for everyone, changing noticeably every five to six years. It is infantile girls who have more problems with childbirth and healthy offspring than women of normal proportions. Nature stubbornly resists fashion, and it takes something out of the ordinary to change our genetic makeup.
In the scientific world, they sometimes like to fantasize, imagining humanoid creatures that could arise if civilization collapsed as a result of some devastating catastrophe.
For example, the Scottish paleontologist Dougal Dixon even published a book "Man after Man", in which he described the most bizarre creatures: from aquabionts living in the oceans to vacuumorphs that populated outer space - but all these imaginary monsters remain on the scientist's conscience.
Illustrations for the book of Dixon
Almost the same
However, there is one trend that is alarming. Comparing the genomes of contemporaries and distant ancestors, scientists noticed that over several million years, the human Y-chromosome, which is responsible for the appearance of men, has significantly shrunk in size. If the trend continues, then it may disappear in 5 million years, which means that the male half of humanity will also disappear. However, optimistic scientists say that the Y-chromosome is close in size to the "optimum" and will no longer shrink.
It turns out that revolutionary changes in human nature should not be expected. If civilization itself does not interfere with the structure of the genome, wishing to improve it, then biologically our descendants will be the same as we are.
A person can change outwardly only if he ever starts colonizing other planets. Then environmental factors can again play a role in shaping the appearance of our descendants. Let's say an inhabitant of a cold little Mars will probably be fair-skinned, thin and very tall. The inhabitants of hot Venus, on the contrary, will be dark-skinned and stocky.
People will permanently lose hair on the head and body; they will only have long eyelashes to protect their eyes from dust. As food in the future will become mostly liquid and pasty, the teeth and the entire lower jaw will shrink. Over time, the intestines will begin to contract, because the need for prolonged digestion of rough food will disappear. Then, in the course of anatomical compensation, the trunk itself will contract.
Probably, such people will look a little strange in our modern opinion, but we can say for sure: no one will call them ugly.
Anton PERVUSHIN