Projecting Human Evolution: 5 traits we might possess in the future

Internet author Bryan Nelson makes some interesting and entertaining predictions in his article Mother Nature article “Projecting human evolution: 5 traits we might possess in the future” from May 2012. Using current and past trends to predict our next evolutionary traits, his article is certainly stirring some debate.

Bryan suggests that future humans will lack wisdom teeth, become hairless, become resistant to heart diseases and diabetes, be of a similar race and be relatively weak with susceptible immune systems – all traits- he says- that will develop because we no longer use them or will get used to them.



Could this be a future human? Small, hairless, no wisdom teeth.

The Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, an evolutionary principle says that evolution is possible whenever anyone influence of natural selection, gene flow, genetic drift, mutation or non-random mating is present. Naturally, the conclusion is evolution is an ongoing business. After all, as he clearly points out, we depend heavily on machines to do heavy work, so will become weaker in future and wil become susceptible to pathogens because we don’t need our natural immune systems due to modern medicine.  And from history, he claims, humanity has always shed off traits it doesn’t need.

So according to Mr. Nelson, we will evolve into a completely machine dependent species owing to our increasing dependency on them, lose our wisdom teeth because we no longer have stuff as hard as our ancestors had to bite into, our bodies will eventually get used to the junk food we eat and develop resistances to diseases that these foods cause, and that currently increasing interracial sexual relationships will ultimately make us all of one race.

You can find his original article on the Mother Nature Network.

The Future of Homo Sapiens

By professor Jacob Palme, First version 29-May-2006, last revision 23-Mar-2012

Will the human species, Homo Sapiens, continue to evolve in the next millions of years? If so, how? What can we learn from what we know about Homo Sapiens development until now?

The Creation of Homo Sapiens

The human species (Homo Sapiens sapiens) started its existence between 110 000 and 50 000 years ago. Its development diverged from the apes about 5 million years ago.

The earth has been capable of supporting life for about 3 billion years, and is expected to continue being able to support life for between 200 million and 5 billion years in the future.

Using the higher estimate, if we view the period of being able to support life as 24 hours, then we are now about 9 o’clock in the morning, humans diverged from the apes about a minute ago and the human species started to exist 1-2 seconds ago.

Using the lower estimate, if we view the period of being able to support life as 24 hours, then we are now about one hour before midnight, humans diverged from the apes about 2 minutes ago and the human species started to exist about 5 seconds ago.

The average life span of a species on earth is a few million years. Every year, thousands of species cease to exist and thousands of new species are created. Will thus the human species cease to exist in a few million years, like most other animals? If so, why, and what will replace it? Or are humans so unique and different from other species, that experience from other species cannot be applied, and humans may continue to exist for a much longer time?

Note: This paper discusses many ethically and politically sensitive issues, and some readers will probably be offended by this. But the goal is not to give any views on what is right and wrong, what should be permitted or forbidden. The goal is only to discuss what will probably happen in the future of human evolution.

Differences between Humans and other Species

Humans differ so much from other species, that human future development may not be governed by the same principles as other animals. [Miller 2004] says that humans and human society should be seen as a fourth system of structured energy, Tetrology, different from the previous atomic, chemical and biological systems.

Miller says that humans differ in the use of advanced technology, use of controlled energy, use of clothes, use of sense-enhancements like glasses, telescopes or microscopes, advanced social organization, advanced language.

Also many religious organizations and other belief systems regard humans, or sometimes a subset of humans, as the chosen people, made by God to mimic himself.

On the other hand, it is apparent that many typical animal behaviors also occur in humans, as has been pointed out by [Morris 1967-1997] and [Diamond 1993]. Humans have a mating behavior and an aggressive behavior which is obviously inherited from our animal ancestors.

This is important when discussing the future of the human species, because humans may be so different that experience from animals cannot tell us anything about the future of Homo Sapiens.

How a Species Ceases to Exist

To discuss this issue, one must first discuss which processes causes a species to cease to exist. Some such processes are:

  1. The species is specialized to a natural habitat, which ceases to exist. The risk for this is rather low for the human species, because of its high adaptability to changing environments. A cosmic catastrophe like a giant meteorite will certainly kill most people on earth, but some will probably survive, and will rapidly proliferate again.
  2. In the case of humans, because humans have so thoroughly modified their environment (cutting down forests, carbon dioxide pollution, etc.) there is a risk that humans will themselves modify their environment in such a way that they cannot survive in it any more.
  3. The species is out-competed by another species, like the Neanderthals were out-competed by Homo Sapiens. There is today no existing species which might threaten the human species. There is a possibility that a new species, based on humans, may replace the human species, but then humans do not stop to exist, just continue in another form.
  4. The species gradually evolves, through natural selection, into a new species. Such evolution is however slow for such a large and wide-spread species as the human. It usually occurs in small, geographically isolated environments.
  5. The species is exterminated by a ruthless predator. This is the way the ruthless predator Homo Sapiens has exterminated almost all big animals on the earth. Also within the human species, races have been exterminated or nearly exterminated by other races, for example the Australian aborigines. Such extermination is nowadays labelled “genocide” and is very much disapproved of. No non-human predator threatening humans is likely to evolve, expect possibly a new species based on the human species.
  6. The human species might also be threatened by a new virus or bacteria, but experience indicates that it is unlikely that such a threat will appear, such that we will not be able to combat it or that the whole species will be exterminated by such a threat.
  7. When bacteria grow in a mold, they reach a stage where there are too many bacteria, and they all die because of overpopulation.

How a New Species Can Replace Homo Sapiens

A new species, to replace Homo Sapiens, might be created in different ways:

  1. By natural selection in a limited population (New species occur mostly in limited populations, [Mayr 2001 p. 136]. Widespread species undergo little evoutionary change [Mayr 2001 p 254].) This is not very probable, since the tendency to intermingle among all humans is very large. Much more probable is that the human species itself evolves without splitting into a new species [Mayr 2001 p. 191], but also such evolution is not very probable, at least in a short time range [Mayr 2001, p. 261].
  2. By explicit creation through breeding or genetic manipulation of Homo Sapiens. This is the most likely alternative. When parents are given the option of creating better-than-average children, it can be expected that many parents will choose this option. Even if politicians talk a lot about the ethics of genetic manipulation, they will in practice probably not be able to stop some people using this option.
  3. By explicit creation through breeding or genetic manipulation of another species. But no such species very suitable for replacing humans exist.
  4. By an artificially created species. This might even be based on computers and not on biology. However, we are very far from this option today [Pearson 2004]. “Artificial intelligence” is a branch of computer science, but its results until now are very far from creating a species which can outcompete humans. No computer has the general adaptable intelligence of humans, nor can they even reproduce themselves.

Has Homo Sapiens Evolved Before?

Modern Homo Sapiens originated between 110 000 and 50 000 years ago. But until 50 000 years ago, it existed only in Africa. Then, in just a few thousand years, the art suddenly expanded into the whole of Europe and Asia, and eradicated all the rests of previous humanoids like Homo Neanderthalus and Homo Erectus [Klein 2004]. Many anthropologist believe that this must have been caused by a genetic mutation, for example a mutation which increased the language capabilities. Other’s claim that the human brain has not changed for 150 000 years [Mayr 2001, p. 252]. But they base this claim on fossils, and fossils may not show changes in the organisation within the brain.

After that, Homo Sapiens continued to live as a hunter-gatherer until about 10 000 years ago, when agriculture suddenly began and rapidly changed the prosperity of Homo Sapiens. Why did this suddenly happen 10 000 years ago? Many anthropologists believe that again, the cause was a mutation, probably in the area of linguistic skills.

Genetic research shows that certain genes related to the brain size did change between 5 800 and 37 000. Exactly this gene cannot explain changes in humans, since not all intelligent humans have this particular gene. But the fact that genes related to brain size have changed in this time span indicates that humans are still evolving [Warner 2005].

One of the researchers behild this result is qouted as saying “Our studies indicate that the trend that is the defining characteristic of human evolution — the growth of brain size and complexity — is likely still going on If our species survives for another million years or so, I would imagine that the brain by then would show significant structural differences from the human brain of today.”

Thus, it seems as if Homo Sapiens has evolved, and as if the major evolutionary events occurred quite suddenly. If this continues, we can expect that a sudden good mutation perhaps 10 000 years into the future can again change Homo Sapiens by natural selection. Of course we do not know exactly when this mutation will evolve.

How Homo Sapiens can Evolve

Homo Sapiens can evolve through natural selection or through breeding or genetic manipulation. Breeding and genetic manipulation is most probable for a few people in technically evolved countries.

Natural selection is most effective when many animals die before reproduction. Thus, natural selection is more effective in developing countries. In industrial countries, medical development allows most of those who would die to live and reproduce.

The size of the brain of humanoids has increased three times in the last two million years [Hofman 2002]. This icnrease has meant more connections, less nerve cells. This means that with the current design, the brain cannot become more than three times larger than it is today. Other studies [Pearson 1997] indicate similar results.

Note that a species need not evolve. Some species remain identical for hundreds of thousands or millions of years [Meyr 2001, p. 193, 195]. And the evolution of humans has had long periods of little change, such as the Homo Erectus which did not change very much for 1.5 million years.

Will Homo Sapiens Deteriorate

Some people say that the lack of effective natural selection for humans in industrial countries will cause the human species to deteriorate, since natural selection is necessary to keep a species healthy. As a simple example, the existence of spectacles would cause more people to be born near sighted.

However, this is counteracted by immigration of people from less developed countries. This immigration is today so large, that it can probably counter the risk of deterioration of the species as a whole.

Also, future use of genetic manipulation and intentional breeding can be expected to counteract degradation.

Genetic Manipulation and Artificial Breeding

Genetic manipulation and artificial breeding is today disliked, because it was used in earlier years by governments in questionable ways. Most known is the Nazi ideas of killing or sterilizing “inferior people” like Jews and people with mental illnesses. Also in non-Nazi countries, enforced sterilization was common earlier, but is not done so much today.

The reason for this is that such government control is today not regarded as ethical, and also that the efficiency of such schemes is debatable. All schemes which reduce the genetic variation within the human species can cause more harm than value.

In spite of this, it is my belief that genetic manipulation and artificial breeding will be important in the future, but not done by the governments but by parents. Already, today, more and more pregnant women voluntarily screen for disabilities and genetic diseases of the faetus and choose abortion rather than giving birth to a child with a genetic illness [Tännsjö 1999].

This will probably become much more common in the future, with better medical and technical options of influencing the genes of future children [Pearson 1997]. There will certainly be a lot of discussions about the ethics of this, but my belief is that positive genetic manipulations will eventually become accepted ethically. And this might create a race of superhumans, which might even become a new species threatening its creator.

Evolution of Human Cultures

One can note that a Darwinian type of evolution today does not exist only for Homo Sapiens itself, but for various cultural organisations of humans. In particular, the economic competition on the world market has many Darwinian features, with survival of the fittest as one central function.

Do You Agree?

If you do not agree, or have more ideas on the future of Homo Sapiens, you are welcome to comment on this paper. Your comments may influence future versions of it. A forum for discussion is available.


The original of this paper can be found at

There is not very much written about the future of Homo Sapiens. There are a large number of books about evolution and human evolution and about how humans were formed by evolution, and this is important for understanding what will happen in the future. Here are presentations of some such books:


  • [Leakey and Lewin 1977]
  • Origins: The Emergence and Evolution of Our Species and Its Possible Future
  • By Richard E. Leakey and Roger Lewin.
  • ISBN 0-525-48013-7.
  • E. P. Dutton publishers 1977.
  • A detailed and interesting overview of all the stages of evolution of Homo Sapiens since the separation from the monkeys 5-7 million years ago.
  • [Mayr 2001]
  • What Evolution Is
  • By Ernst Mayr, Basic Books, 2001.
  • Lots of information about how Darwinian evolution works.
  • [Miller 2003]
  • From DNA to ABC
  • By Joel Miller.
  • ISBN 91-972454-3-7.
  • BenTarZ Productions, 2003.
  • A collection of essays, many of them give interesting ideas on human development and human languages development. Are humans distinguished from the monkeys by the use of tools? But monkeys also sometimes use tools. Are human distinguished by building houses? But beavers and birds also build nests.
  • Miller claims that modern human society is a distinct new stage which he calls “civil society”. I wonder if historians five hundred years from now will agree with this?
  • On the future, the author says that implanting of electronics inside the human body will be an important feature of how people live in the future. I agree with him, this is quite probable an area where major changes in our lifestyle will come in the future.
  • [Bryant 1999]
  • Evolution of animals and the age of reptiles
  • by Peter J. Bryant
  • An overview of how life started and developed on earth. Life started 3 billion years ago, multi-cellular organisms 2 billion years ago, complex organisms 600 million years ago, mammals outcompeted the dinosaurs 65 million years ago.
  • [Miller 2004]
  • Tetrology and the Tetrastic System
  • By Joel Miller
  • A presentation of the view that the human system of organizing knowledge is so different from the previous atomic, chemical and biological systems, that is should be seen as a forth, Tetrastic system.
  • [Pearson 1997]
  • The Future of Human Evolution
  • By Ian Pearson
  • Darwinian Evolution will have limited impact on the future of Homo Sapiens, since other kinds of evolution, such as breeding, genetic engineering and electronics will take over as dominant factors.
  • [Warner 2005]
  • Human Brain Still a Work in Progress
  • By Jennifer Warner, The Human Genome Project, citing: Evans, P. Mekel-Bobrov, N. Science, Sept. 9, 2005; vol 309: pp 1717-1720; 1720-1722. News release, Howard Hughes Medical Institute. News release, University of Chicago Medical Center, Science Daily.


  • [Morris 1967-1997]
  • The Naked Ape, The Human Zoo and Intimate behavior, The Human Sexes, The Naked Eye
  • By Desmond Morris
  • ISBN: 0-385-33430-3, 1-56836-163-7, 0-09-1878675, 0-563-38358-5.
  • These three books which give many interesting insights into how human behavior is governed by our animal past.

Related information


Original Article reprinted with permission from here.

Peter Ward’s “Future Evolution”

In our Future Vision page we paint one likely scenario for Future Human Evolution, that of diversity through genetic alteration and cybernetic utility, and a propagation of the species throughout the galaxy and beyond. As the web’s oldest site dedicated solely to the future of human evolution, we based this scenario on the convergence of genetic engineering, artificial intelligence, and space colonization. We were pleased to see this convergence and the extrapolation of these themes catching on in popularity after having been somewhat of a lone voice working to popularize thinking and speculation about the diversified future of humans.

MSNBC ran a series on the Future of Human Evolution several years after our site’s 2003 debut and despite the fact that Alan Boyle did not include us in his article ;-) we like the fact that his promotion of the ideas taken from Peter Ward is in line with our primary purpose: Stimulate our collective thinking. We therefore gladly present a summary of the ideas he wrote about, most of which can be explored further on this site.

In his book “Future Evolution”, University of Washington paleontologist Peter Ward (he also wrote “Rare Earth”) argues that we are making ourselves virtually extinction-proof by bending Earth’s flora and fauna to our will. It might be assumed that the human species will be hanging around for at least another 500 million years.

Here are five highly speculative, but theoretically possible paths, ranging from homogenized humans to alien-looking hybrids bred for interstellar travel that could be the Future of Humankind.

1. Unihumans: Will we all be assimilated into one?



Different populations of a species must be reproductively isolated from each other in order for those populations to diverge into separate species. That’s the process that gave rise to 13 different species of “Darwin’s Finches” in the Galapagos Islands. The human species may no longer be open for divergence. Our gene pool has been converging for tens of thousands of years, and Stuart Pimm, an expert on biodiversity at Duke University, says that trend may well be accelerating.

The raw matter for evolution is variation and humans seem to be losing that variability very quickly. As a suggestive example, we humans speak something on the order of 6,500 languages. Yet, the number of languages we will likely pass on to our children is about 600. Cultural diversity, as measured by linguistic diversity, is fading, as human society becomes more interconnected globally, Pimm has argued. As a monoculture, our future species could be more susceptible to quick-spreading diseases, as last year’s bird flu epidemic illustrated. A Unihuman culture would have to cope with evolutionary pressures such that toxins that which like estrogens and are found in pesticides and industrial PCBs, have been linked to early puberty for women, increased incidence of breast cancer, and lower sperm counts for men.

2. Survivalistians: Coping with doomsday and Mass Extinctions



Surviving doomsday is a story as old as Noah’s Ark, and as new as the post-bioapocalypse movie 28 Days After. Mass extinctions have greatly influenced the evolution of species on Earth (example: the extinction of dinosaurs 65 million years ago).

Catastrophes ranging from super-floods to plagues to nuclear war to asteroid strikes could erase civilization as we know it, leaving remnants of humanity to go their own evolutionary ways. A civilization-shattering catastrophe (say a meteor strike) serves to divide humanity into separate populations, vulnerable once again to selection pressures. For example, people who had more genetic resistance to viral disease would be more likely to pass on that advantage to their descendants after a mass extinction-like event.

If different populations develop in isolation over many thousands of generations, its conceivable that new separate species would emerge. For example, that virus-resistant strain of post-humans might eventually thrive in the wake of a global bioterror crisis, while less hardy humans would find themselves quarantined in the worlds safe havens. Maybe its already happened. Patterns in the spread of the virus that causes AIDS may hint at earlier, less catastrophic episodes of natural selection. Stuart Pimm has said that there are pockets of people who don’t seem to become HIV-positive, even though they have a lot of exposure to the virus – and that may be because their ancestors survived the plague 500 years ago.

Even in the event of a post-human split-off, evolutionary theory dictates that one species would eventually subjugate, assimilate or eliminate their competitors for the top job in the global ecosystem. Just ask the Neanderthals.

3. Numans: Rise of the Superhumans

The future of enhanced humans



The age of new genetic and pharmacological ways to improve human performance is upon us. Could they represent a new form of evolution a radical kind of evolution that moves much more quickly than biological evolution which can take millions of years, or even cultural evolution, which works on a scale of hundreds or thousands of years.

Three kinds of Numan human…

Such enhancements first appear on the athletic field and the battlefield, indicates social commentator, Joel Garreau, (author of the book Radical Evolution), but eventually they appear everywhere. You’re talking about three different kinds of humans: 1) the enhanced, 2) the naturals, and 3) the rest Garreau said. The enhanced are defined as those who have the money and enthusiasm to make themselves live longer, be smarter, look sexier.

The naturals will be those who seek enhancements for higher reasons, just as vegetarians forgo meat and fundamentalists forgo what they see as illicit pleasures. Then there’s all the rest of us, who don’t get enhanced only because they cant. However, advances in medical science have actually been great levelers of social equality. For example, age-old scourges such as smallpox and polio have been eradicated, thanks to public health efforts in poorer, as well as richer countries. That trend is likely to continue as scientists learn more about the genetic roots of disease.

To date, genetic medicine has focused on therapies that work on only one person at a time. The effects of those therapies aren’t carried on to future generations. For example, if you take muscle-enhancing drugs, or even undergo gene therapy for bigger muscles, your progeny will not have similarly big muscles. In order to make an enhancement inheritable, you’d have to have new gene code spliced into your germline stem cells – creating an ethical controversy of transcendent proportions. Tinkering with the germline could conceivably produce a superhuman species in a single generation – but could also conceivably create a race of monsters.

4. Cyborgs: Merging with the machines

Will intelligent machines enable, enhance, or replace us?



Until a few years ago, that question was addressed only in science-fiction plot lines. Today however, the rapid pace of cybernetic change has led some experts to suggest that artificial intelligence may outpace Homo sapiens natural smarts. The pace of change is often stated in terms of Moore’s Law, which states that the number of transistors packed into a square inch of computer chip should double every 18 months. Moore’s Law is now on its 30th doubling. We have never seen that sort of exponential increase before in human history, said Joel Garreau.

In some fields, artificial intelligence has already bested humans – with Deep Blues (IBMs Mainframe) 1997 victory over world chess champion Garry Kasparov providing a vivid example. It has been speculated that a truly intelligent robot may arise by the year 2030 (Bicentennial Man). Once an intelligent robot exists, is it only a small step to a robot species – to an intelligent robot that can make evolved copies of itself ?

Assimilating the robots…

To many scientists and science fiction writers, it seems more likely that we could become part-robot ourselves: Were already making machines that can be assimilated including prosthetic limbs, mechanical hearts, cochlear implants, and artificial retinas. Why couldn’t brain augmentation be added to the list?

5. Astrans: Turning into an alien race

If humans survive long enough, there’s one sure way to grow new branches on our evolutionary family tree: by spreading out to other planets.



Habitable worlds beyond Earth could be a 23rd century analog to the Galapagos Islands, Charles Darwin’s evolutionary laboratory, just barely close enough for travelers to get to, but far enough away that there’d be little gene mixing with the parent human species.

If we get off to the stars, then yes, we will have speciation, said University of Washington paleontologist, Peter Ward. But can we ever get off the Earth?

Currently, the closest star system thought to have a planet is Epsilon Eridani, 10.5 light-years away. Even if spaceships could travel at 1 percent the speed of light – an incredible 6.7 million mph – it would take more than a millennium to get there. However, Mars might be far enough: If humans established a permanent settlement there, the radically different living conditions could change the evolutionary equation. For example, those who are born and raised in one-third of Earths gravity could never feel at home on the old home planet. It wouldn’t take long for the new Martians to become a breed apart.

As for distant stars, we at the future human evolution website have been thinking through the possibilities and compiled our favorite methods on our Space Colonization – Journey page in 2003. Here are our “most likely candidates”.

Suspended Animation – Non or slow aging sleep until we get there.
FTL – Faster Than Light Travel (i.e. Warp Drive) – Eliminates the barriers of time and space.
Generational Star Ships – live, love, and propagate in space engineered bodies.
AI/Machine Enablement – Machines make the trip for us and we visit virtually.
Incubatorial Craft (Seed Ships) – Machines drive and then create human factories.

Enter the Astrans: Humans that are genetically engineered to tolerate ultra long-term hibernation aboard robotic ships. Once the ship reaches its destination, these Astrans are awakened to start the work of settling a new world.

Shostak of the SETI Institute suggested another possible approach: we could be to send the instructions for making humans (much like the movie Species I, II, and III) and just going to beam ourselves to the stars. The only trouble is, if there’s nobody on the other end to put us back together” said Shostak. So are we back to square one? Not necessarily, suggests Shostak. Setting up the receivers on other stars is no job for a human, but the machines could make it work. In fact, if any other society is significantly further along than ours, such a network might be up and running by now. The machines really could develop large tracts of galactic real estate, whereas its really hard for biology to travel, Shostak said.


It all seems inconceivable, but if humans really are to be extinction-proof – if they manage to survive global catastrophes, genetic upheavals, and cybernetic challenges- whos to say what will be millions of years from now? Please see our diversified view of future human evolution, and our visions of the far future for more on these speculative fields of inquiry.

The choices we make during this generation will have a profound and lasting effect on our future. The more scenarios we examine, the more our choices are carried to their possible conclusions, the more our bearings on today’s position and the actions affecting our trajectory are revealed.

The Distant Future of Human Evolution

We have shared one vision of diversity for the future of human evolution for many millennia to come, for the period during which the universe remains the hospitable, vital environment that it is today, and within the context of the four known, presently observable dimensions, with no hostile life forms to end our expansion. But as we look at each of these assumptions in turn, more speculation is called for to even begin scratching the surface of possibility.

The Fate of the Universe

future-human-evolution-and-the-fate-of-the-universeThe fate of humanity is inexorably tied to the fate of the universe. There are three possible fates for our universe as we now perceive it to exist.

1. Continued expansion and ultimate cooling,
2. An equilibrium such that the present expansion ceases and the universe goes on forever, or
3. The eventual contraction of all matter as gravity finally wins out over the current outward acceleration caused by the big bang.

Which of these three theories is correct depends on a number of variables including the amount of dark matter assumed to exist in the universe. There are a number of websites that deal specifically with these theories and we are building a links page to make them easier to find. The short of it is that the scientific community widely agrees that the universe has a finite age and that scenario number 1, continued expansion and cooling will ultimately result.

What does this mean to the future of the human race? It is necessary to make certain assumptions that we can in no way validate. Among these are that we will always have, in one form or another, the ‘instinct’ for survival. Based upon our experience with biological forms of life, this is a fairly safe assumption, but it is not necessarily a prerequisite for sentient life forms. Given the ability to ‘program’ both artificial life forms and our own genetic make-up we can easily envision whole classes of beings created for hazardous duties intended to serve the greater community. This notwithstanding, we believe that the majority of beings will strive to survive in the face of a dying universe.

In keeping with our theme of diversity, we recognize that branches of humanity may eventually become purely silicon-based, some of us may find ways of imprinting our essence onto the fabric of space-time itself, while still others will remain largely carbon-based biological beings. As the universe begins it’s decline, these disparate species could conceivably come together, each contributing to the ability to manipulate matter and energy in a different and unique way. Some could operate on the subatomic level while others deal with the universe on a cosmic, macro scale. The objective would be to stabilize and prevent the continued expansion and cooling of the universe. Self preservation or the search for God?

Aliens and the Distant Future of Human Evolution

With mounting certainty at least in the possibility of extraterrestrial life, aided in no small part by the recently decommissioned Kepler Telescope which identified thousands of potential earth-like planets in a tiny portion of our galaxy, scientists grow more hopeful that some form of life may be possible on other worlds. Fermi’s paradox notwithstanding (if aliens exist why haven’t we seen them?), in the distant future about which we speculate here, intergalactic distances may be assumed to pose no more of an obstacle than the interplanetary distances of our near-term future (thereby adding 100 billion galaxies into Drake’s equation). Conceivably this could bring us in contact with sentients who in the short term may vie for the same limited resources, but who in the face of a commonly cooling universe may band together to solve the ultimate threat to survival.

The Multi-Dimensional/Multi-Universe Model

Of course we may soon find that what we see is not what we get. The ending of the universe as we perceive it today may be no more significant in the scheme of things than the loss of an atom’s electron. There may well be an infinite number of dimensions or even ‘universes’ beyond the reality that we experience. Our job then would become mastering the transdimensional/transuniversal mobility, and perhaps even striving for the unification of these multiverses. There are a few websites that deal with these philosophies and over the next few months we will be identifying and presenting more on this speculative field of study.

Future Branches on the Human Tree

Ian Pearson – BT’s Futurologist – presents insights into the future of many aspects of our daily lives – from work to leisure, and from capitalism to the care economy. To quote Ian, “Accuracy is impossible for all but the most trivial question, but blurred vision is better than none at all.” Here are Ian Pearson’s views on possible branches of the human tree, complete with time line.

Robotus primus

future-human-evolution-com-robotus-primusFor a time at least, we will be the second smartest beings on Earth. Computers will probably surpass us in intelligence around 2025*, and it will be some time after that before they develop the technology to bring us up to speed. So the first major impact is a new intelligence sharing the planet. We call this Robotus primus. In the 2025* time frame, it is reasonable to expect that these computers could be accompanied by sufficiently developed robotics technology to make them fully mobile, though their minds are not tied to any particular machine or location – but distributed. The early generations will rely on relatively crude robots, but these will quickly evolve into sophisticated androids. We stress again that Robotus primus is not the android itself, which is merely a tool, but the intelligent mind inside. We will of course see many grades of computer intelligence, just as we do now. A toaster cleverer than man would seem somewhat superfluous. Rapid speciation of this artificial intelligence can be expected, with elite models rapidly losing position to their descendants.

Homo cyberneticus

future-human-evolution-com-image-of-post-humanEven today**, people have developed silicon chips which can interface directly to human nerve cells. Various cybernetic prostheses and other extensions to the body are in development. Others have demonstrated that thoughts can be detected and recognized, even without physical contact with the body. It seems reasonable to assume that it will not be long before a computer can interface directly to a human, producing artificial senses and reading the persons thoughts. Although no-one has yet demonstrated a means of putting thoughts into a human, it does not seem unreasonable to assume it can be done, perhaps by creating appropriate electric fields at appropriate points, which again should not require any direct contact.

We thus expect that at some point after human machine equivalence, perhaps just a few years, the technology will be developed to make a full duplex mind link between man and machine. Then we will be able to enhance our mental ability by using external processing as an adjunct to our own brains. Since by this time the machines will be much smarter than we are, this will be a large step for mankind.

Those people who accept this technology will instantly have a great advantage over those who do not (and there will be many). In the same way that people rejecting IT today are a dying species, excluded from a new workplace and society by their own hand, then future rejections will be more exaggerated and speedy. So they will be so far removed from Homo Sapiens that they will in effect be the start of a new species, which we call Homo cyberneticus. As the technology rapidly develops, the differences between Homo cyberneticus and Homo Sapiens will increase. However, since the early Homo cyberneticus is a conjunction of conventional humans with machines, there is obviously room for improvement.

Homo hybridus

It is likely that many of the people who accept cybernetic enhancement would lend themselves to genetic enhancement too, or would allow enhancement of their offspring. A further branch of optimized biological man with some cybernetic links can therefore be expected. Perhaps their genes could be selected to work better with cybernetics than conventional organisms. We call this species Homo hybridus. This species is the one which makes Homo optimus rather redundant, very soon after its creation. Similarly, the first generation of Homo cyberneticus would become obsolete, since the human bodies connected would be inferior to those of Homo hybridus.

future-human-evolution-com-terminator_2Changes generally bring stress, and this often leads to conflict. The many new species would not coexist easily with Homo ludditus, and there would be some competition for resources between these species too. Whether peaceful coexistence is possible or not, it would seem unlikely, give the well known nature of Homo ludditus. Science fiction has already begun exploring this conflict, with The Forbin Project, Terminator 1 & 2 being famous examples. However, in Terminator, Homo ludditus wins, which seems an unlikely outcome. Perhaps the 2200 estimate for human extinction seems optimistic in this light.

We can also expect friction within our species as machine intelligence improves. The industrial revolution reduced the value of muscle power and in the same way computer evolution will reduce the value of brain power – to zero. One by one, jobs will be lost to machines, whether robots or computers. Our corporations will be run and staffed entirely by machines. Those using humans will not be able to compete and will go under. People will have fewer and fewer attributes to sell. Of course, production and output could greatly increase while human input could decrease, so we could all have a better quality of life without having to work. A fully automated economy could still be bigger than one which involves people. Early 21st century*** economics will not work in the future – the cracks are already getting bigger – machines take out delay and uncertainty, displace humans and reveal economics for what it is, a game of numbers in a spread sheet! . Our current concepts of wealth, money and ownership will take a severe battering. Perhaps we will enter an age of leisure, where any work we do is voluntary and is based on spending time with other people. Or perhaps people will be overtaken by fear as they lose control over what is happening. Then wars might break out. In any case, this age will not last long as we are absorbed into the higher existence offered by the machine world.

future-human-evolution-com-brain-to-computer-interfaceWhen a direct link from the computer into the human brain is achieved, thought transmission will give us telepathic communication not only with machines but with other people. We will be able to enjoy a shared consciousness with other humans and synthetic intelligences such as Robotus primus. Our evolution to Homo machinus will therefore be set against the background of a global consciousness. Individuals will still exist, but we will also have a group existence. As we achieve this link, we will also be able to make copies of our minds in the machine world – a backup in case of accident. We will become immortal, even if our mobility and physical existence is restricted until a suitable replacement body or android is produced for us. Death will be just a memory of a primitive past.

We may have an alter ego in the machine, or many. We may try out different situations or life decisions, or different personalities. These alter egos could occasionally make trips into the real world, time sharing robotic bodies. These bodies would not necessarily be humanoid, so we could really be the fly on the wall. Procreation could be a highly creative act, with any number of people combining (N – Sex) selected characteristics from themselves or their imaginations to create new beings. Each person could give rise to large numbers of personal offspring in this way. The number of beings which could coexist may be limited by the size of the host infrastructure, but they could timeshare or lie dormant until more space is created.

Homo machinus

The two enhancements of biological optimisation and connection to synthetic intelligence are not equal in potential impact. Due to speed of development, we can reasonably assume that some of each of the above species would exist, but we can argue that they would soon become obsolete. Homo optimus, would have been left behind by Homo cyberneticus and they in turn would be succeeded by Homo hybridus. However, as the mind machine link becomes completely transparent, and as materials and cybernetic technology improve, Homo hybridus would rapidly find most of its intelligence and most of its physical capability residing in the machine rather than the organic side. As the human mind gradually moves further into the machine world, it would become apparent that the organic body is redundant. If it died, it would be a minor inconvenience, requiring a cybernetic replacement to be commissioned. As the bodies die out, Homo hybridus would too, becoming a non corporeal being, which we call Homo machinus.

This new species retains some elements of the earlier human race, but is vastly more intelligent and has access to whatever physical capability is required. It can travel at the speed of light, exist in many places at once, and would be essentially immortal. It would coexist with Robotus primus, but we could expect that the two would closely interact and may quickly converge.

Summarizing, we can draw an outline of or projection of human evolution from the distant past to the relatively near future.




Space exploration is currently very expensive, so we havent got far yet. However, when we exist only as information within a machine, we could be copied into a very small device, encapsulated in a very small shell with some nano-technology machines, nanites. By this time, we could expect that nanites would be able to make replicas of themselves, and of anything else we desire. These small shells would be like seeds. We could accelerate them to near light speeds and send them off to other planets around other stars. The nanites would be able to fabricate a suitable environment and suitable body for us, and then upload us into them. The environmental requirements of Homo machinus might not be very demanding. We may not even be limited by the speed of light, if we can master warp drive, wormholes or tachyon transmission, all of which we know are possible in principle. Surely a few years of research by mid 21st century super-beings will crack the problems of bringing these principles to fruition. Many other exciting areas previously beyond us will be a natural part of our everyday existence.

  • *Originally predicted at 2015
  • **Originally stated 1995
  • ***Originally 20th Century

Please visit our Futures Portal for more on future scenarios and futuring methods.