Phyreburnz wrote:something
In the example I gave I imagined that the parents and the children would be genetically identical (perhaps people isn't the best example, maybe single celled organisms?). It's my opinion that in such a scenario, perhaps a hundred, or a thousand or however many generations down the line, there would be some divergance - I don't think I'm explaining whatever it is I'm talking about too well.
Perhaps during the evolution process, changes to one's environment, one's physical condition or similar, may affect future generations. Say for instance if I were to go and live in the jungle (think Tarzan), become really adept at swinging from trees, have a family and teach them to do the same, and have this trend continue for a few hundred thousand years, my descendants in the future might have adapted to life in the jungle moreso than people living elsewhere?
This is why I mentioned
Lamarckism earlier. There are a few known examples: I remember hearing of a Mongolian tribe (or race or something, can't really remember), anyway, they had to endure particularly harsh winters during the last ice age with no shelter, and developed an extra layer of skin over their eyelids, to protect their eyes from the bitter frost. People of the same ethnicity, from slightly further afield do not have this trait, because their ancestors were able to travel south for inter, or find caves to live in, or something. (Quoting all that from memory).
Ever hear of people saying that in the future people won't have their little toe, because they don't use it? Or that people now are generally much taller than people a few centuries ago? It's these ever so slight changes that I'm talking about.
Why does the U.S. seem to get everything cheaper?
