Will Gingers eventually dominate the world?

TeddyTedson

I heard the ginger gene is dominant.
Doesn't this mean in the future everyone will be ginger.

Humanity may split into two sub-species in 100,000 years' time as predicted by HG Wells, an expert has said. Evolutionary theorist Oliver Curry of the London School of Economics expects a genetic upper class and a dim-witted underclass to emerge. The human race would peak in the year 3000, he said - before a decline due to dependence on technology. People would become choosier about their sexual partners, causing humanity to divide into sub-species, he added. The descendants of the genetic upper class would be tall, slim, healthy, attractive, intelligent, and creative and a far cry from the "underclass" humans who would have evolved into dim-witted, ugly, squat goblin-like creatures.

Race 'ironed out'

But in the nearer future, humans will evolve in 1,000 years into giants between 6ft and 7ft tall, he predicts, while life-spans will have extended to 120 years, Dr Curry claims.
Physical appearance, driven by indicators of health, youth and fertility, will improve, he says, while men will exhibit symmetrical facial features, look athletic, and have squarer jaws, deeper voices and bigger penises. Women, on the other hand, will develop lighter, smooth, hairless skin, large clear eyes, pert breasts, glossy hair, and even features, he adds. Racial differences will be ironed out by interbreeding, producing a uniform race of coffee-coloured people.
However, Dr Curry warns, in 10,000 years time humans may have paid a genetic price for relying on technology. Spoiled by gadgets designed to meet their every need, they could come to resemble domesticated animals.

Receding chins

Social skills, such as communicating and interacting with others, could be lost, along with emotions such as love, sympathy, trust and respect. People would become less able to care for others, or perform in teams.
Physically, they would start to appear more juvenile. Chins would recede, as a result of having to chew less on processed food.
There could also be health problems caused by reliance on medicine, resulting in weak immune systems. Preventing deaths would also help to preserve the genetic defects that cause cancer.
Further into the future, sexual selection - being choosy about one's partner - was likely to create more and more genetic inequality, said Dr Curry.
The logical outcome would be two sub-species, "gracile" and "robust" humans similar to the Eloi and Morlocks foretold by HG Wells in his 1895 novel The Time Machine.
"While science and technology have the potential to create an ideal habitat for humanity over the next millennium, there is a possibility of a monumental genetic hangover over the subsequent millennia due to an over-reliance on technology reducing our natural capacity to resist disease, or our evolved ability to get along with each other, said Dr Curry.

This also interests us.
I don't want anything to do with that weaker race! What can we do to ensure we don't become the weaker race? Only breed with tall intelligent tanned women?

shizz

TeddyTedson wrote: »

I heard the ginger gene is dominant.
Doesn't this mean in the future everyone will be ginger.

Mmmmm no I'm pretty sure its a recessive gene.

TeddyTedson

shizz wrote: »

Mmmmm no I'm pretty sure its a recessive gene.

Are you sure, so they'll all die out eventually?

Capt'n Midnight

Please post links to stuff you quote http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6057734.stm

Please don't drag them from 2006

Please post the legitimacy of the quote if there is any doubt

He carried out the report for men's satellite TV channel Bravo.

Please do a little research if the claim is outlandish - when did the London School of Economics become a centre for genetics ??
http://www.badscience.net/2006/10/%E2%80%9Call-men-will-have-big-willies%E2%80%9D/

But the trivial problems in this trivial essay are not the issue: what’s odd is how it became a “boffins today said” science story, all over the media, with the BBC, the Telegraph, the Sun, the Scotsman, Metro and many more lapping it up, without criticism.

How does this happen? The “research” – or “essay” – was paid for by Bravo, a bikini and fast car “men’s TV channel” celebrating its 21st year in operation. Just to give you a flavour of Bravo, tonight at 11pm you can catch the movie classic Temptations: “When a group of farm workers find that the bank intends to foreclose on their property, they console each other with a succession of steamy romps. This might go some way to explaining the “pert breasts” angle of Curry’s “new research”


More and more, empty “science” stories are being generated by public relations companies, who team up with academics, and commission some spurious piece of “research” that will be attractive to the media, where the company is name-checked. The classic examples are the “equations for” stories. None of Dr Curry’s doubtless excellent scholarly work in political theory has ever generated media coverage like his silly futuristic essay. I spoke to friends on other newspapers (the Guardian didn’t cover the story, mercifully) who told me they had stand up rows with news desks, explaining that this was not a science news story

Also what is the relevance of this quote to hair colour ?

nozzferrahhtoo

TeddyTedson wrote: »

I heard the ginger gene is dominant.
Doesn't this mean in the future everyone will be ginger.

Well the Captain above showed pretty much every hole in your approach. So I will just point out a few in your concept too.

Just because an allele is dominant this does not mean it will eventually spread out and take over everything. Just because one is recessive does not mean it will eventually die out.

In fact depending on selection criteria sometimes the recessive allele for a trait is actually the one more commonly expressed. There are, for examples, lizards who live in sand. These lizards have a recessive allele for light colouring which helps them match the sand. The dominant allele is for a dark colouring.

Because of the advantage of the light colouring the recessive allele is the one selected for most and it spreads more successfully in the population than the dominant.