Will evolution make us slower?

No. Genetic manipulation will prevent this.

The trend started with the advent of agricultural revolution and, today, we "devolve" faster than ever.Probably some of our ancestors could run 10 min for 5k.

I think that all these people from the Rift Valley are faster than the rest of the world because they are closer to the original specimen - our early human ancestor who evolved to run long distances to find food.

Yes. Today the most intelligent are the slowest. And vice versa.

The exact opposite will happen. People are getting faster and we train and run at speeds that people never bothered to before because there was no productive end result.

There actually is no real need for people to have amazing getaway or catch up speed in the real world.

Generations of people would have also lived in the past where they never once ran from or after anything.

The number of amazing natural athletes is actually rising rather than falling.

I'm no evolutionary biologist, but when would the ability to run a snappy 5000 have come in handy for our ancestors? It would seem like you would have needed to outrun a predator in a much shorter distance, or would have to chase potential prey much farther and at an overall slower pace.

Critical Thinking wrote:

I'm no evolutionary biologist, but when would the ability to run a snappy 5000 have come in handy for our ancestors? It would seem like you would have needed to outrun a predator in a much shorter distance, or would have to chase potential prey much farther and at an overall slower pace.

If you had the basic speed to chase down predators over a short distance and had the endurance to chase them over a long distance then it is likely you could run a decent time in between

We are already seeing it with the increased number of injuries, illness due to weight issues and lack of effort in all things non-code.

Recently, two Kenyan farmers caught a cheetah in just over 4 miles. The cat was eating their livestock. The 5k allusion was just a thought to possibly suggest that our human ancestors may have been able to ran faster at an elevated pace. Maybe they were the hunters, not the hunted. Today, most animals' first reaction is to run away from humans.

The are some enduring questions. Why is the human body so seemingly crafted for endurance running? Why do we stand upright, why do we have springy Achilles tendons, why do we store energy, and why do we have about 15 sweat glands per square inch of skin? Why is it that cheetahs (and most quadrupeds on Earth) cannot keep up even with an average Marathoner, but yet they can blow by Usain Bolt like he is standing still?

Okay, but the few things that I've seen about your questions and how humans supposedly evolved to run refer to running more like ultramarathon type running.

As far as your Kenyan farmers chasing down a cheetah, I don't see how that is relevant to evolution. It seems unlikely that people would typically chase a predator; I mean, they were chasing it because it was eating their livestock, yet humans didn't have livestock until fairly recently.

Prptoe wrote:

Traits like strength and endurance are no longer prominent factors in our day to day lives and do not usually determine how successfully we can provide for our families any more. Our lifestyles become increasingly sedentary.

If this trend continues will we be worse athletes 1,000 years from now?

there are still loads of people who do hard labor for their job.

we are not really becoming that much more sedentary. fitness trends are booming, most kids are still growing up playing soccer/baseball/basketball. it's not "cool" to be out of shape.

we also have a bit of selective breeding. athletes breed with athletes often.

also, OP is assuming that the differences between maybe 1900 and 2000 continue in the same trend, but that's unlikely to be true. in 1000 years a lot can change with culture, but almost nothing will change within the human body. 1000 years is roughly 40 generations. that isn't much.

In modern society the selection has changed to that of high IQ. We become slower but smarter. The Flynn effect is evolutionary and societal as many people incorrectly think.

Big bang is irrelevant.

Prptoe wrote:

If you had the basic speed to chase down predators over a short distance and had the endurance to chase them over a long distance then it is likely you could run a decent time in between

You don't know what "or" means?

Yes I do

yyy wrote:

In modern society the selection has changed to that of high IQ. We become slower but smarter. The Flynn effect is evolutionary and societal as many people incorrectly think.

Big bang is irrelevant.

Okay, but surely intelligence must have been important for a long time, otherwise presumably it would not have evolved at all?

Prptoe wrote:

Yes I do

Then why did you respond incorrectly to that guy's post?

reed wrote:

in 1000 years a lot can change with culture, but almost nothing will change within the human body. 1000 years is roughly 40 generations. that isn't much.

You're wrong. Very wrong.

Rats that were selectively bred for running improved the distance they could run by a factor of three compared to average rats after 39 generations.

Liberals in particular don't like to hear about such results as they clearly show that humans may not be as equal as they want them to be.

not-pc wrote:

You're wrong. Very wrong.

Rats that were selectively bred for running improved the distance they could run by a factor of three compared to average rats after 39 generations.

Liberals in particular don't like to hear about such results as they clearly show that humans may not be as equal as they want them to be.

Nothing you wrote shows that he is wrong. Next time, try actually providing a source to go along with your claims. And make sure it's humans since we are talking about humans.

yes, but intelligence is much more important today than we lived on the savannah. Therefore, compared to other skills (speed, strength) this relatively more important today and so

the selection pressure is different now.

Literally all that matters is if gifted atheletes have more children than people who sit on the couch.

My bet? We will, on average, become slower and less athletic.