Comment on Has the time since the invention of agriculture been long enough for any evolutionary changes to occur, and if so, what are some of those changes?

• squaresinger@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  It is, if you count humans as part of nature, which they are in respect to natural selection.

  Flowers and blossoms are selected by their attractiveness to bees and other insects. Apples were selected by their attractiveness to bears (yes, bears where the first to domesticate apples). And watermelons were selected by their attractiveness to humans.

  Only GMOs don’t fall into the category of natural selection.

  source

  • superkret@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I agree that humans are part of the ecosystem in principle.
    But if you count humans as part of nature, the word “nature” pretty much loses all meaning.

    Cause then drones, microplastics, nuclear power stations and computers are also part of nature.

    source

    • squaresinger@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I don’t think so, at least in the context of natural selection.

      GMOs for example are certainly not part of natural selection.

      source

      • superkret@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        That’s exactly what I mean. Bears are part of nature, everything they do is natural.
        If you count humans as part of nature, everything they do is natural, including GMO.
        Which means, if you count humans as part of nature, the term nature has no meaning.
        It’s only meaningful as the opposite of “man-made”.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• Cryophilia@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  No, but it is evolutionary

  source
• TheRealKuni@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  It’s artificial selection, still a process that drives evolution. Just drives it a lot faster.

  source