>long range global migration is easier than ever>Socio-Economic Status-based assortative mating is taking place>race/culture/faith/identity-based assortative mating is decreasing>SES is a strong proxy for IQ>early access to genetic manipulation technology will be unevenly distributed by SES>assortative mating tends to genetic diversification>the first space colonists will be picked individuals>smarter than average, healthier than average, saner than average>their descendants will be subject to a founder effect>https://archive.is/XRIcyIs this possible, or is there some factor Land has not considered that is likely to halt the process? How long would speciation take on current trends?I'm asking here, because it tends to be /lit/ or /pol/ who talk about this stuff, but they don't know the first thing about genetics. Would like to get the opinion of someone who understands biology.
>>16487995>How long would speciation take on current trends?Speciation? 2 million years(source: one of the last species to actually speciate under the definition of species happened around that time, where? I read it 10 years ago even if remeber where it would probably be affected by linkrot)>is there some factor Land has not considered that is likely to halt the process? Yes, with increased population exchanges the tendency would be to mix genes, not isolate them, therefore no speciation would be possible under natural conditions, unless you go for artificial, and artificial modification of human beings is so nebulous that is a tall order to say that it would be conducent to a different species altogether>their descendants will be subject to a founder effectA founder effect can lead to speciation, and something like space travel has the chance to actually isolate people, the only problem is the how has some devilish details. For example: Under current conditions, if all humanity focussed itself on space colonization, with current tech no human colony is completely self-sustaining outside of Earth for the discussed timeframes, therefore no speciation is possible as there would be migration from time to time, and avoiding speciation requires very little exchange to avoid a complete genetic driftIf you wanted a grounded response, it would go along that line, in terms of hyperspeculation as Land likes to do, if it were to happen it would be one hell of a black swan event, but to my knowledge the conditions that would allow a social class to transform itself into a different biological category are simply not there, and if they are, with our current understanding of biology it would require so much time that it reduces the question to abstract drivel which could only have any value if some future retrospective warriors 2e6 years later use Land to say "Actktsually someone saw this coming"
>>16487995 >the first space colonists There will never be any "space colonists". We will never leave our own solar system and it is possible that we won't even reach Mars with a manned mission. The nearest star system to ours is the triple star system of Alpha Centauri, it's about 4.2 light years away or 25 trillion miles. It has two confirmed planets: Proxima b, an Earth-sized planet in the habitable zone discovered in 2016, and Proxima d, a candidate sub-Earth which orbits very closely to the star. The main issue with traversing such unimaginable giant distances, is that nothing can travel faster than light, which is capped at around 300,000 kilometres per second (671 million mph). The closer you get to light speed, the more energy you require to increase your speed further, with the energy requirement trending toward infinity as you approach light speed. Thus, nothing with mass can even reach the speed of light. It would take light, the fastest thing in the universe, roughly 4.2 years to reach Proxima Centauri. In comparison, the fastest craft we've ever made, the Parker Solar Probe, is flying through space at around 192,227 m/s (429,999 mph), or less than 1% the speed of light. It would take the Parker Solar Probe more than 6,600 years to travel the same distance. At a maximum speed of about 17,600 mph it would have taken a Space Shuttle about 165,000 years to reach the same destination. Another discovered planet is Epsilon Eridani b, at a distance 10.4 light years away. The speed of light is likely just as impassable in your century as it will be in the next. No one will ever break the universal speed limit. Time travel will never be possible either for similar reasons. It's a violation of causality. There is also no magic "warp-space" for a spaceship to enter either. Wormholes, Alcubierre drive, etc. all require exotic matter that doesn't exist.
>>16488075>last species to actually speciate>2 million yearsSupposing the process is accelerated by elective use of CRISPR, polygenic selection, etc. Is there a way to calculate the relationship between the number of genes artificially altered and the speciation timeline?>increased population exchanges>mix genes, not isolate themEven with extreme stratification? As far as I can tell the thought experiment is based on a scenario similar to the birth of the Varna system in India. Ethnic groups would mix together, but then split into castes that no longer mix with each other.>avoiding speciation requires very little exchange to avoid a complete genetic driftHow much exchange would be sufficient? Has anyone calculated a percentage for it?>some future retrospective warriors 2e6 years later use Land to say "Actktsually someone saw this coming"Lol, I hope archive.is is still around then.
>>16488090>There will never be any "space colonists". We will never leave our own solar system and it is possible that we won't even reach Mars with a manned mission.this is stupid as fuck. the entire solar system will eventually have someone land on it if it's landable.if you think anyone alive is going to another star system you're dumb as shit, it'll be generation ships when it happens (it'll be when because some schizo cult will do it eventually) but travel times will be somewhat faster then I imagine.
>>16487995>nerdy retard falls in love with asian gfSorry bro your master race has to include these Eliot Rodgers
>>16488173>Supposing the process is accelerated by elective use...Under the definition of species, you only need to modify genes in such a way that an individual can only reproduce by another compatible individual in any form. i.e: Let's suppose that you manage to modify the vaginal canal to be able to sustain a more acidic microbiome and you modify the semen of the male to be more naturally basic, obviating some clear issues, you by the Myers definition of species would have created a different species... yet, everything else would be the same. That took, like what? a few hundred changes? But then suppose that genetic drift happens for 5 million years, and after hundreds of thousands of changes only in the last 100k years the series of changes required to impede reproduction between one type of human and other type happens.The point being, biological systems are complex, is not a simple number game, is not a discrete problem and modelling these things is hard for such timeframes where so many things can happen, that most stimates will have to accept unacceptable uncertainties.> but then split into castes that no longer mix with each otherThe human culture you are speaking of had a mere 3500 years, that is not a even blink in the eyes of evolution, and that is supposing that it sat absolutely perfectly still and no social or cultural change happened in any form. Have in mind, species can drift in a lot characteristics but still be biologically compatible, so unless we are talking about a perfect sociocultural system that can stay precisely the same for millions of years, there is no natural way for speciation to happen.
>>16488173> Has anyone calculated a percentage for it?To be honest here, we are talking about hardy weinberg equilibriums and such which has been quite a while since I have touched them and I would not even dare to give a hard threshold on such a complex thing. Also, have in mind another thing when looking into this, some species have it easier to speciate than others, the only valid numbers are for humans and anthropology is filled with a lot of literal witch doctors and people that speak authoratively about things they have no actual tangible proof, just evidence of, so every time you see an evolutionary line that says "australophitecus x,y,z of which y turns into homo x,y,z,w at around these millions/hundred thousands years ago" you can take these things with a healthy dose of skepticism, so, in the former example: If it turned out that australophitecus x,y and z could actually reproduce and they were just regional variations of which y happened to be morphologically closer to homo x,y,z,w then no one would be able to tell the difference... but then some people would take those numbers and classifications and try to make stimates, stimates like the one you are asking.How hard is for humans to speciate?Well, to be honest, I have no idea, and any answer I see to this question I will take with a Moon sized grain of salt.
>>16488208With this I want to illustrate the point that although the general idea of species is akin to something completely different altogether, if we actually take the original definition of species as coined by Myers in 1942(dang it I wrote it wrong):>A species (pl.: species) is a population of organisms in which any two individuals of the appropriate sexes or mating types can produce fertile offspring, typically by sexual reproductionWe can find that this concept has some exceptions and to this day it does not manage to cleanly explain and separate individuals(i.e: Ring species). In fact, taking this definition, as long as there is something stopping individuals from producing self replicating individuals, it is correct, which creates situations in which two individuals that are extremely similar are actually different species altogether(if I recall correctly, some species of insects mated with members of other species out confusion since they are so similar) and very different individuals are actually the same species, for example: If you were to see a male anglerfish and a female anglerfish, at first glance you would think they are actually different species.Land goes into a much different... let's say outlook on species, but if we go with the actual definition of biological species in our current paradigm, I don't think he thought much about whether it was about some humans being capable of reproducing with other humans, but such a change in the nature of man that it would extend to the biological. Therefore, I don't think you are looking for a mere biological distinction, but a more holistic one which I most certainly won't dare to state since the way Land writes lends itself to such interpretations that the concept of species is a mere vehicle for what he wants to speak about.
>>16487995That's David Bowie isn't it
>>16488176>some schizo cult will do it eventuallyOh shit, so the founder effect will select for schizo cultists. The further you go from Earth the more schizo it will be.>>16488214>weinberg equilibriumsJust looked that up on libretexts and it says that genotype frequencies will remain constant in the absence of evolutionary mechanisms. If that's the case how does random genetic drift occur? How does Weinberg Equilibrium not contradict the Wright effect?>>16488237>Land goes into a much different... let's say outlook on speciesWould it be fair to say what he is calling species would be better defined as a new ethic group? Unless of course such a group deliberately chose to alter their own genome to induce incompatibility with other groups.>>16488518Yeah, well spotted.
>>16488176 >it'll be generation ships when it happens This is also impossible. The humans who would need to keep a generation ship running are most likely not the same ones who will see their new home. Keeping such an "ark" running is filled with so many insurmountable variables involving radiation exposure, mechanical failure, accleration and deceleration, social systems, and the fragility of the human mind and spirit under pressure. Imagine a big prison flying through space for 150+ years where you cannot go outside and where even the guards aren't able to go home after their shift. It's pretty much unfeasible. We don't even know if humans can withstand the psychological toll of the 6 months journey to Mars. On your hypothetical ship many generations will be born, live and die during the journey. Will they even want to carry on the mission after they are many generations removed from the original crew who agreed to it? It's still unknown how to keep cosmic rays at bay without Earth's protective magnetosphere. NASA published research where mice were blasted with cosmic radiation. Result: massive GI damage and tumors. At this point, we're not even sure we can make it to Mars without giving astronauts cancer. Then either the planet at the other end is dead, in which case we'll have to spend centuries terraforming it (if that's even physically possible in any way), or it's alive, and its microbiome could kill us, or trigger chronic disease or allergies.
>>16487995>Is this possible, or is there some factor Land has not considered that is likely to halt the process?short ASI timelines would cut it off before it got far enough to count as speciation (something like speciation probably still happens in post-singularity world if beings like humans are still around, but it comes from different causes)
>>16488732>how does random genetic drift occur?As it turns out when you calculate the randomness per se of genetic mutations in species the effect is actually very very small. The internal randomness of the mechanisms of DNA replication cannot explain evolution by itself, i.e: I still remember when I did the calculations back then and taking the models and everything it would take an absurd ammount of time for simple mutations to change a species, that is why, you often hear that genetics is not everything, you have to account for the many things that are affecting the genetic make up of a species, which is why biology is so not deterministic, because when you actually try to make a prediction to the same level as say: the rotation of the Moon around the Earth, it is the whole universe which you have to control for.>Weinberg Equilibrium not contradict the Wright effect?Don't take weinberg equilibriums as law, it is just a model, between so many to understand biological systems at population level, you can use it to understand genetic drift against the ideal conditions of the weinberg equilibrium and make predictions or explain things based on it. That is why it does not contradict it, because it does not explain it just models it.>a new ethic group?I would go out on a limb(Land is hard to understand sometimes) and say that this is a new group of people in a completely different sense. The definition of an ethnic group is about culture, which is wide enough to encompass wealth and biological phenotypes. But the idea Land has is that such a group would have transceded human society so much that they would be different in all senses, these people are not even human so they don't even understand the world as other humans would do even if you were to strip some of their characteristics and make them live among other people in the same conditions, which is something you can do with mere rich people today.
