Skip to main content

By-products of Evolution - why not everything has a purpose

Last time we looked at how certain major adaptations such as hair loss have enabled humans to survive over the millennia in different conditions, and when faced with competition from other species. Not everything about the human body has a specific purpose, though, in the sense that we expect it to. One example of such thing is the philtrum - that little channel leading from the base of your nose to the upper lip. Recent research suggests that this development dates back millions of years, and has been inherited from fish. Apparently, when human embryos develop their face in the womb, all parts of the forehead, mouth, etc come together and fuse where the philtrum is located.


Some adaptations, on the other hand, are no longer relevant not because of their nature, but because the environmental selection pressure for which they evolved has disappeared. For example, an East Asian's typical eyelid shape evolved as a result of higher light intensities in that area of the world, yet the people born with this adaptation in other areas of the world simply don't need it. Another example is skin colour. Most physical adaptations due to local environments where separate human populations used to live for a very long time are now being mixed together because people can travel more easily around the world and settle.



There are of course, those properties which happen to be a certain way by chemical or otherwise coincidence, not evolution. For example, the colour of blood happens to be red due to the haemoglobin in red blood cells, which carry oxygen around the body. Similarly, there is no reason why we must have 10 fingers and 10 toes. We have merely used what our ancestors had, to adapt to new conditions. We have four limbs, but we walk upright. We still have 10 toes, but they've changed their shape (big toes).

Essentially, evolution is limited by whatever resources there are available. No organism can just grow wheels or another brain overnight, and that is why all organisms on Earth are so interlinked and similar. For example, the structure of the heart and brain can clearly be explained from birds to cats to humans, without any huge jumps in between, just small changes over a long period of time.

Check back next time for a different topic; we'll look at how positive and negative sexual selection work when it comes to relationships.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

4 Reasons Google's Calico Won't "Solve Death"

The on-line world has been taken ablaze by Calico's bid to end ageing, and thus death itself, but is this what they will actually focus on, and will they achieve it? The fact is ageing will be reversed, and death by "natural causes" will go with it. The questions are "When?" and "By whom?". Until recently, not a lot was known about the approach Calico would take in this venture dubbed "moonshot thinking" - a term touted by Google as the source of all considerable human progress throughout history. This we don't doubt, but is this what Calico is all about? CNN's Dan Primack has revealed details about Calico's plan , which hint at a less-than-moonshot thinking approach, and cast a serious question mark on its ability to deliver the punchy TIME headline. Here is why: 1. The man with the idea, Bill Maris, arrived at the conclusion that the root of all death-causing disease is simply ageing itself. Not only is this widely ...

No, but seriously: What is “Life”?

i) Attempts to define life in terms of humans thinking about defining life in terms of egotistical individuals, genes, species or whatnot have failed for what should be obvious reasons. Life is a natural phenomenon no different to any other. It can be regarded as an abstract concept referring to an energy exchange process rather than any given chemical, object, individual or concrete material arrangement. The temptation to define life as such has been merely a bias of the definer, of our individual consciousness taking place in an individual body. While bodies may exhibit life, as they are alive, they are not as such life itself, as life itself does not operate in any significant way on a given object: not individuals, nor species, nor size scales, chemicals nor arrangements of matter. The failure of life at any of these levels (think individual death, species extinction or even mass extinctions) does not overall hinder the process of life through time, for as long as any sin...