So I got to thinking... Would evolution take place as rapidly if there was no genocide or population replacement? But then a part of me asked, using the evidence of the theory of evolution, how are the two related? (genetic drift, artificial selection etc)

You guys got any input?

I doubt it. Evolution will only occur at a critical point. I say the total opposite. that way w/e the species may be one out of w/e # will evolve and rest will Parrish.

evolution is always happening in living species it doesn't just happen sometimes.

Genocide would inhibit evolution via a bottle neck effect.

The cause and effects would be detrimental by staunching genetic variance among the population (which is integral to Natural Selection).

get educated before you post in this forum.

Modern society has eliminated nearly all biological pressures of evolution. Genocide, like pid said, would create a bottleneck effect by artificial selection, but evolution works differently in man than in other species because most human traits for survival come from ideas and not genes.

It was my understanding that a bottleneck effect only occurs during ecological disasters not ones created/caused by humans. I could be wrong though. Evolution wouldn't be needed if there was never change of environment but genocide tends to spur from two groups fighting over land, for instance darfur.

One of the prominent examples of a bottleneck is the Florida Panther.

100% caused by human expansion.

If the genocide was a result of two species in direct competition for a certain niche in their ecosystem and the winner won because of superior genetics...

then the genocide is helping evolution.

We're going to figure out when/if fukushima gets hit by the tiniest earthquake...I don't understand how it's not a global threat yet...We're supposed to trust concrete ruble and radioactive water, to protect us from extinction. Great.