Total projection.You sure can ramble.
Yes, on some accounts.Guess I answered your question without understanding what you were looking for.
If:I said more affluent. That can be middle class and above.
Those that are striving for an elevated position in life will be putting having children in the background, and while not abstaining will exercise more discretion and ingest chemicals, some of which the long term effects on the body are not known. They will also tend to have children later in life, where those effects may show up. The pollutants of modern life have more time to work on them before breeding.
1. populations were isolated by class and
2. if middle class and higher were universally having children at older ages and
3. if this continued for hundreds to thousands of years then the average lifespan would increase among these populations (well, that part of it due to genetic factors).
If chemicals are having an additive effect on people (and they are), then we shall see selective pressures against those who are genetically vulnerable to industrial pollution - provided their vulnerability leads them to have increased difficulties reproducing relative to others.
These confounding factors, and gene flow, make it difficult to comment on all but the extremes of human society. You haven't gotten there yet in your speculation.But you have others breeding like crazy. One reason for baby Mommas and Daddies in this society. Some children damaged by drug use.
It's likely insignificant. For it to have a selective effect, it would have to be 1) long lasting (thousands of years), 2) due to genetics (and more strongly if fewer genes were involved) and, importantly, 3) impair the ability of the individuals to reproduce.Then you have the emergence of homosexuality on such a large scale.
Since homosexuals aren't necessarily exclusive in their sexual behavior, since it's a sexual identity and therefore a culturally expressed behavior, it likely won't last long enough or prevent individuals from having children. Let's say that 100% of homosexuals didn't reproduce - and then the culture changes along with the sexual identity in, just making this up for example, 200 years. It would have had almost no effect on human evolution.
I strongly disagree here. Religion has already bowed out to organized civil society. Strong government is a better choice for your above scenario.The intelligence of humans will survive, but the schools of thought they have produced will fade away. You are looking at a collapse of civilization unless some strong religion emerges to keep order.
You are so close here, Dave! The EM from the cell phone use doesn't (seem to) alter the circuitry. What it alters is the seal of the blood brain barrier (BBB). The BBB prevents large molecules, and the immune system, from entering the brain. Thus, almost no pathogen species can enter. It's an immunologically secure area - testicles, too.Cellphones at the ear put your brain right in the maximum magnetic flow of them, which induces electrical currents that work directly on neurons in the brain. They can and will rearrange the circuitry. Such is picked up from all around, but those are really concentrated. Talk about random chance for mutations. However, the risk of that EM is more to the brain circuitry than the body. You are affecting the processor more than the parts.
Funny, texting is safer than talking with those things.
However, if you subject the brain to a strong magnetic field, the BBB opens.
People develop cancer relatively often. It is almost always killed b/c their immune systems (IS) work well. But, if the BBB just happens to be open when a cancerous cell is floating in the blood stream before it gets destroyed by the IS, it can get into the brain and enjoy immunological freedom. It can subsequently fully develop.