|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|07-03-10 12:43 AM|
Still, you do get mutants caused by unnatural factors that then breed that mutation into the population. Take a look at the Orygan, Catecan, and ratkin. Sure they're still human, but oddball factors have made them fairly divergent from normal stock.
Still. genetically we were roughly the same as we were back when we were butting heads with neanderthal over living space. I'd say if somehow you took a 40k person and plunked him into 'now' you'd still have a genetically similar human... barring radical chaos borne mutations.
|07-03-10 12:36 AM|
Originally Posted by Farseer_Iowan View Post
Originally Posted by DeathJester921 View Post
Again though, even PE's most optimistic fans will still tell you that it takes hundreds of thousands of years, rather than millions.
Long Story Short: If you colonise Valhalla with sub-saharan African humans and come back 38'000 years later, the people living on Valhalla will still be tall, dark-skinned and lithe.
If you land a bunch of Eskimo on Tallarn and come back 38'000 years later, same deal.
|07-02-10 08:35 PM|
Originally Posted by Azezel View Post
|07-02-10 08:02 PM|
i think as the rules of natural selection appliy, humans would vary greatly, take the two biggest imperial guard (im talking popularity) cadian & catachan.. the catachan are bound to have a more muscular build, mabey longer more ape like arms. Then theres the cadians, they live in the shadow of the eye of terror, so im guessing a larger populus of mentaly adept,also, the phisical apperence of cadians wold most likely be smaller, paler skin and eyes more ajusted to darkness.
ive said all i can.. goodbye
|07-01-10 08:39 PM|
|Farseer_Iowan||what about, those humans that were populating other worlds? could they not have evolved/mutated to survive better in there environment? over generations of course|
|06-29-10 03:41 AM|
|Azezel||That's exactly what I believe (and said on the first page).|
|06-29-10 02:59 AM|
|randian||We don't need evolution to posit significant change in 40k humans. I'm pretty sure they live longer than we do even without rejuvenat treatments, for example. All we need is Dark Age genetic technology. Given the other wonders invented during that period, I'd bet that in-utero genetic treatments to confer resistance to bacterial and viral diseases, long life, and eliminate genetic diseases like hemophilia would have been widespread and cheap. More importantly, the changes would be inheritable. You could create Space Marines with this stuff, if you had the vision.|
|06-29-10 01:44 AM|
You're refering to Punctuated Equalibrium, Sasha - and like many people you have it slightly wrong.
PE (if it even occurs, and there is significant doubt) is pretty rapid compared to 'vanilla' evolution. PE can occur over hundreds of thousands of years, instead of millions.
I'm not familiar with the minnow experiment you describe, but it's not terribly relevant to the discussion at hand due to the tiny population of the fish tank. Whilst the colouration was no-doubt a survival trait the fact is that in a small enough population qany aberation, beneficial or otherwise has both a much higher chance of appearing (small populations encourage double-recessive traits to manifest) and flourishing (due to lack of genetic competition). Case in point, there is a village in Africa with no collar bones (cleidocranial dysostosis) - hardly a survival trait, but that's small populations for you. A sailor with the condition visited them in the 19th century, knocked boots with a local woman (or ten) and the whole village has it now.
Long story short, 38'000 years ain't long enough by an order of magnitude.
|06-29-10 12:44 AM|
|Hurricane||I forget the name of the evolutionary process but in any case, species can adapt very very quickly. I forget the lab experiment (I'll look for it later) but I think it was minnows were placed in a controlled pond with predators and different types of soil underneath. Within ten generations the pigments in their skin had come to almost completely match the rocks underneath because it provided better camouflage and thus those that could hide were able to pass on their genes.|
|06-29-10 12:36 AM|
In terms of evolution, 38,000 years means almost nothing. Particularly in an environment where "weak" traits are not rejected with extreme prejudice. Genetically, we're more or less the same as we were 200,000 years ago when Homo sapiens sapiens rolled out.
Things may have changed if there was some sort of population bottleneck (say, the human population dropped to 10,000 breeding pairs), and it very well may have on particular isolated situations sudden climate changes, generational ships, a small sect deciding to colonize a planet on their own ect, but the Human population as the whole remained fairly large.
Of course the whole psyker thing emerged and the various mutants we see. And the ab-humans--Orgyns, rattlings, the Space Dwarves. So I suppose humans have come along much further than evolution could explain. That's fantasy for you, I suppose.
|This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|