• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

On the Origin Of Species by Means of Natural Selection.

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Drew UK

Drew UK

.
Tomorrow - Nuclear Holocaust.

Most of the world is left uninhabital, plant matter is almost obliterated - the surface and the atmosphere is filled with dust and piercing radiation - no light penetrates, and temperatures depress severely.

If humanity survives, albeit deep underground - how will it and how would you expect it to develop?

Given the theory of evolution, and if a potential nutrient/water crop could become available to allow continuation of species what would happen to

  • Stature
  • Hair
  • Intelligence
  • Teeth
  • Mouth/Nasal orifices
  • Eyes
  • Skin Colour
  • Skin appearance
  • Facial Structure - Jawbone/cheekbones
  • Fingers and digits
  • Communication
>?
 
Drew UK said:
Tomorrow - Nuclear Holocaust.

Most of the world is left uninhabital, plant matter is almost obliterated - the surface and the atmosphere is filled with dust and piercing radiation - no light penetrates, and temperatures depress severely.

If humanity survives, albeit deep underground - how will it and how would you expect it to develop?

Given the theory of evolution, and if a potential nutrient/water crop could become available to allow continuation of species what would happen to

  • Stature
  • Hair
  • Intelligence
  • Teeth
  • Mouth/Nasal orifices
  • Eyes
  • Skin Colour
  • Skin appearance
  • Facial Structure - Jawbone/cheekbones
  • Fingers and digits
  • Communication
>?
Click to expand...
The trouble with all attempts to project forward is that there is any number of possible outcomes. Evolution doesn't select in favour of the best result, it selects in favour of those random mutations which actually occur whose bearers happen to survive and reproduce. There's also the additional variable introduced by existing human intelligence: we can modify our behaviour and in various respects our environment more quickly than natural selection can modify us (for this reason I still have colouring adapted to the cloudy skies of north-western Europe despite being born in a country with some of the highest UV levels on Earth).
Your scenario is also arguably questionable, particularly the radiation levels: I don't think any projected nuclear war would involve global saturation with radiation - more likely a few large hotspots, some larger areas like the contaminated zone in Ukraine, and larger areas largely unaffected by radiation but devastated by nuclear winter.
What that environment might favour is existing human populations adapted (physically or culturally or both) to cold weather and dim light. So maybe the Inuit and Saami inherit the Earth.
 
No change. Provided the dwellings aren't exceptionally cramped and nutritional needs are met, no major evolutionary changes would occur. Humans have already effectively divorced themselves from the evolutionary process by inventing things like clothing, fire, air-conditioning, artificial light, factory farming, etc, etc.
 
We could splice the genes that make cockroaches immune to radiation with our own and go back to the surface.
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">
 
skunkape said:
We could splice the genes that make cockroaches immune to radiation with our own and go back to the surface.
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">
Click to expand...

There are better choices, Mythbusters did a whole episode on it. But that's directed interference, not natural evolution.
 
Think of how much more beautiful the landscape would be if everyone lived in underground homes. I hope to someday build a home that would consist of a concrete dome buried in the earth I remove to make a fish pond. It'll be a hill with windows. The idea occurred while looking down at the ground from an airplane. I couldn't help thinking that human activity was making the face of the planet look like a piece of wood eaten up by ship worms.
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">
 
The scenario isn't realistic. If plant matter were practically wiped out, that would be the end of photosynthesis and oxygen production. Humans wouldn't survive underground. Btw if the bulk of the surface biomass were destroyed, temperatures would soon rise not fall, as the CO2 in dead matter reentered the atmosphere. Earth would end up nearly as hot as Venus.
 
Developing,

The concern arises that I find it extremely difficult to obtain any useful speculation on the matter since the cold war period which to bring us up to date has seen -

  • The new potency and power of weapons developed since then, which eclipses to a partial extent the reduction in warheads between the US and the former USSR.
  • The additional inclusion with Pakistan (currently not under taleban control), India and Israel (housing a wounded animal) into the game.
  • The potential acquisition to North Korea, Iran and maybe Italy.
Consequently, by looking at the events (economic, environmental, political and social) unfolding in conjunction with some of the topics being considered around the forums - It seems to be edging towards probable.

Extinction is the rule, not the exception for life on Earth.


The old description of this matter, would be thermonuclear war - population reduction to 3 Billion(*See Next Post), radiation fallout (severe - then decreasing), nuclear winter (3 Years - 25% Sunlight) some but limited crop and animal feedstocks to allow agricultural and farming continuation and sustenance to survivors, another 2 years to drop out harmful radiation and then back to growth and happiness.

This sounds very optimistic, at best - my argument, in which this thread and question was postulated was very different, that the transformation will be tumultuous and long lasting (similar to K-T extinction) - how would the human species if it could survive, and reproduce biologically adapt in the long term to cope with such ideas as -

Long term surroundings?
How does the planet change?
What will the effects on the biosphere be, climatic effects, temperatures?

How does this play a role in the synergisms of biological systems -In particular what species would survive, what species would die?

Albeit, large (mammalian) organisms - unable to develop shelter such as birds and cattle are particular vulnerable to temperature changes, low light levels and high radiation levels - whereas cold blooded reptilian species and insects will probably fare higher.

In the abundance of insects and smaller disease vector carrying organisms - would nasal and oral orifices be more suited to narrowing?
- would skin thickness/hardness be more suited to increase, as a further protection barrier?

In terms of nutrition could insects become the primary menu ingredient, and if so how would our cheeks/jawbones modify to enjoy the delicacies of exoskeleton tissue rather than tear through the fibrous textured T-bone steak?

What epidermal, body hair, and eye development changes would you incorporate into an organism to resist enhaced UV-B flux and climatic effects?

Would the new challenging environment and lack of easy fatty foods, perturb growth and reduce average heights?

Also, in a world where resources become more scarce - could it spur the next leap in intelligence - similar to homo sapiens arrival on the cold, wintery northern european tundra in the past - to engage the brain, develop tools and innovations for survival?


I know why I don't want to know in making the connection between this subject and that topic now. (Rumsfeld??)
 
Drew UK said:
...Extinction is the rule, not the exception for life on Earth.


The old description of this matter, would be thermonuclear war - population reduction to 3 Trillion, ... (Rumsfeld??)
Click to expand...

Back up a bit Drew, we are somewhere between 6 and 7 billion, I think, but definitely nowhere near a trillion yet :)
 
For a glimpse of the hell of your scenario I suggest you read Cormac Mc Carthy's outstanding novel, The Road. (I believe a film of the book is due to be released this October, but I'd "recommend" the novel for the sake of Mr McCarthy's wonderful prose)
 
I don't think it'll really happen. Nuclear weapons=effective deterrence=no war. Had it not been for n-bomb development, India and Pakistan might've fought one of their periodic wars in 2000. IMO a future war, escalating ultimately to the use of nuclear bombs, may be most likely in the Mideast. But it may be a regional armageddon.
 
Back
Top