noise

no, i think it's your understanding of evolution that is completely off

don't expect dramatic change so fast. 40K years is nothing at all on an evolutionary timescale.

but also remember that we humans have a tendency to resist change by adapting our environment to suit us, rather than vice versa. individuals born with sub-optimal traits are nursed and cared for rather than being left to die. disease rarely takes its toll on the week. etc etc. we've kind of put a wrench in the gears of the system.

but no matter, wait till a global disaster comes around and then see who's strong enough to survive in the post-apocalyptic world. it will take a lot more than ruthless inefficiency and a fat wallet

__________________
my flac collection

Guybrush

Some will always do "better" than others, even if it's purely by chance (genetic drift). Such harmony is not really attainable, but it is perhaps approachable to some degree. The Hardy-Weinberg principle says that there's an equilibrium (or harmony if you will) where allele frequencies remain constant (you could interpret this as evolution does not take place) in a population that satisfy some criterias :

"Random" mating - which means mates are chosen at random. You don't choose a mate based on favourable characteristics that make them attractive (assortative mating) and you don't do inbreeding.
Infinite population size (no genetic drift) - Basically, it has to be infinitely huge because then stochastic effects like rock slides killing off some germans here f.ex won't have much impact on the common human genome.
No natural selection - Nothing in the social, biotic, abiotic, whatever environment that makes one trait more favourable than another.
No gene flow - No input of alleles from different populations that may disturb the equilibrium.
No mutations - Mutations will create new alleles and if these increase in the population, that violates the HW equilibrium criteria.

In a population that satisfy all these criteria, the new generation should have the same genes (alleles) in the same proportions as their parent generation. This means that although the population may create different individuals, the genome as a whole doesn't change much - it contains the same varieties of genes at the same frequencies. As I wrote, this is not attainable. For example mutations do happen whether we like it or not and we do have sexual preferences. There are also a range of selection pressures, but they vary very much with where you are. Some places in the world, malaria can f.ex be a real selection pressure which favours some mutations. Where I am, it is not.

Whether or not there is gene flow is a question of definition because you then have to define the human population or populations that gene flow can occur between, so that's relative. Also, depending on how you see it, you could argue that the human population size is huge

So sometimes, large populations of organisms may "approach" what looks like a HW equilibrium. Depending on how you define a human population - f.ex if you only look at Norway or some other western country, you could probably find that we do as well. However, it's never quite attainable and at any rate, it's only temporary. Some stronger selection pressures are bound to come along soon enough.

edit :

Remember that in my example, a mutation which caused irritable bowels suddenly helped people survive cholera. I mentioned malaria and the exact same thing goes for the mutation which causes sickle cell disease. It protects against malaria so while this mutation causes a disease which is not beneficial to us, it can be if you're someplace with malaria.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sickle-cell_disease

In other words, which mutations are beneficial or not may simply depend on the environment you're in and environments change over time.

__________________
Something Completely Different

CAPTAIN CAVEMAN

were you completely ripped when you posted this?

Guybrush

^That (duga's post) is indeed a statement and I think you should always be a bit careful when making statements. At least ask yourself "how do I know this is true?"!

__________________
Something Completely Different

noise

haha thanks a lot tore, you just rendered my entire discipline (anthropology) useless with one little post

__________________
my flac collection

TheBig3

Mine does. I was using this cream and it was gone for awhile. Other day my evolution started acting up and my foot went polydactyl.

__________________
I've moved to a new address

Freebase Dali

The Monkey

Sexual selection has come to play a greater part, at the expense of natural selection. That's really the only difference.

Guybrush

How do you know it plays a greater part now than it did say .. 20 000 years ago?

__________________
Something Completely Different

Burning Down

If you mean that people can possibly select the sex of their child due to things like the "test tube" baby or artificial insemination, then sure. But in regards to natural conception, there's no such thing as selecting the gender of the child. You get what you get.