"Could 800,000 Years Produce 'Morlocks'?" Topic

IF a branch of humanity evolved underground for 800,000 years . . . as in the setting for Time Machine . . .

After 800,000 years I imagine they would be pale, albino-like, with poor eyesight (if they even have eyes), coming out only at night . . . much like Goblins!

But, would they be taller, shorter, lighter, heavier, etc., than their above ground kin? Based on past and current human evolution, is it possible to extrapolate what would happen?

Would they be like any of the Orc-like Morlocks in the Time Machine films?
picture
picture
picture
link
link

Or would they be more like wimpy Greys?

CC

Could human live underground at all? What would they eat? wouldn't inadequate sunlight exposure lead to severe health problems?
If you adapt the underground to be like the surface, i.e. a bunker, then you lessen the elovutionary pressures to change at all.
I imagine skin might pale, eyesight might have to adapt a bit to artifical light.

These writers seem to think it would take much longer to produce such drastic results:

msnbc.msn.com/id/7103668
link

And most don't even consider the underground scenario, or think that high tech will be a constant.

Any thoughts?

CC

I am sure that Morlocks inhabit New York City even as we speak.

Now, THIS is more like it!

picture

CC

In some post-apocalyptic settings I could see Morlocks evolving. Maybe in a scenario of an Ice Age that forces survivors underground for a long length of time. They might have more light sensitive eyes but I don't know what other traits could evolve.

Michael: "I am sure that Morlocks inhabit New York City even as we speak."

You mean like these "Mole People"? :)
link

Or these?
link

CC

Michael: "I am sure that Morlocks inhabit New York City even as we speak."

I think some even may post here.

Would some of them be like this fella?

picture

CC

Now, THIS is more like it!

picture

CC

That looks like me! Well, in about 20 years, when the last of hte hair falls out and the wrinkles finally overtake the rest of me… But the spatulate finger, double chin and enlarged… – all me!

HAHAHAHAHAHA. Yes, this is supposed to be funny. No, its really not all that clever. But it amused me to type it. So there.

Told you…

Oh, and from a scientific standpoint, all I know is that we need sunlight to properly process a vitamin (D, I think – my degree is in history, not biochemistry). So longterm undergroundness Would Be Bad.

John: Okay, you got me.

Sophomoric humor is about as good as it gets when you have spent the last four hours around sophomores.

Hmm. Could you get enough vitamin D by eating surface dwellers?

It's been decades since I read "The Time Machine" but didn't the Morlocks start out as a subservient worker class, consigned to the underground by the proto-eloi? In which case I'd think any amount of genetic manipulation or selective breeding may have been done to them to accelerate adaptation to an underground existence.

As far as vitamin D deficiency, I'd guess that they chow down on Eloi to compensate for nutritional deficiencies in their normal diet. Well, that and they taste so darn good.

CalypsoCommando,

Here's your chance!

link
Or
link
Or
link

Enjoy!

CC

Chapter V is where the Morlocks are first mentioned, if I am not mistaken:

link

CC

LOL!

MORLOCKS ARE ALREADY HERE!

CC, i have personally observed morlocks at wargames gatherings around the USA since 1974!

bad complexion, red eyes, unkempt hair, rotted teeth, latrine breath, dirt packed, untrimmed nails, extreme lack of personal hygiene, shuffling , stooped gait, lack of communcations skills, willing to eat anything that is free/available . . .

in recent years these creatures had added various size, shape, and luridly colored backpacks to their wardrobe . . .

LOL.

So, wargaming can produce in just a couple of generations what evolution cannot do in 800,000 years?

CC

@ Cacique Caribe – Keep in mind that evolution can be so haphazard, while the Morlocks that DAWGIE saw were doing it with intent.

Hey, if you can imagine them, you can paint them!

TMP link

CC

I just want to know why, in the 1960 film version, the Morlocks exploded when set on fire?

Exploded? well, their diet must have been pretty spicy!

I dunno where you guys been, but you can adopt Morlock babies.

trollhouse.dk

I think Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt have one.

I dunno where you guys been, but you can adopt Morlock babies.

trollhouse.dk

I think Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt have one.

Exploded? Well, didn't the one that was set on fire run into an engine room with pools of dripping petroleum/oil or something of that sort.

I never thought eating Eloi produced that much gas!

CC

I don't recall where I read this, but I think by Wells' time there was a tendency for the British upperclass to be taller and slender while the lower classes were shorter. So, go with shorter Morlocks.
Would 800,000 years do the trick? The evolution chart from my college anthropology chart showed periods of rapid change--labeled 'adaptive radiation' (of course, it also showed Piltdown Man!)--so, perhaps, if this was a period of just such rapid change.
What other characteristics? Less need for Vitamin C, probably. I don't think white hair would be predominant, though I can see pale skin, particularly given the British population at Wells' time. I don't think they'd be blind, since they seem to come out in the dark, but the balance of rods and cones in the eyes would have changed so they could see in the dark like a cat.
We seem to have a great deal of stamina for the long chase (think 1st German Army on the right wing during the execution of the Schlieffen Plan in August 1914). I'd see no need for that capability underground and on brief surface raids where stealth and a sudden rush would be more effective (if the Morlock doesn't catch you in the first 50 meters, he'll go hungry), again shorter legs and perhaps an increased ability to leap. Perhaps stooped (but as training or habit, due to low tunnels, and not an evolved condition), even walking on knuckles as gorillas sometimes do (there's a word for that, but it's gone now).
As for vitamin deficiencies and other health problems living underground, keep in mind there is no evolutionary excuse for the average life span being in the 70s. All we need to do is live long enough to reproduce--25 or 30 years--and we would be a going concern as a species. Evolution might even favor a younger reproductive age, like the pregnant 8 year olds in darkest Peru in the tabloids.
Just a few thoughts to pursue. I have no thoughts at all to share about Angelina and Brad.
Grelber

Didnt modern humans develop in the last 100,000 years? Until about 40,000 years ago there were two human species on the planet. while several million years agoe there 4 or 6 species of humans. So I dont see why there couldnt be 2 or 3 different hunman species on the planet in 800,000 years. But to change a species has to change to fill a niche in the environment. With our modern society, we change the environment around us, and modern medicene prevents a lot of mutation. People wont get a chance to develop an immunity to small pox for example, because there is a vaccine now. But at one time Europeans only suffered about 25% mortality from small pox, while native americans suffered like 75%, due to no prior exposure.

Neanderthals became extinct 24000 years ago.

You sur Zarqoun? I seem to meet them in the street regularly!

A face only a mother could love (the one on the right, of course):
picture

This one really make them look like E.T.:
link

CC

That last link had a more bat-like look to me, at least in the face. I think that the forehead would have to be more pronounced to aid the visual centers in a low-light environment.

It still looks really cool though.

Bat-like? Ummmm. I wonder if the Morlocks had some sort of sonar sense that the Timetraveler didn't know about?

Like these?

picture
picture

Or this well known fellow:
link
link

CC

LOOK AT THIS!!!

link

CC

I see that only two people have asked the really petinent question:

How long does it take for something to evolve (in this case a humanoid or homonid)?

Most homonids evolved in around 25,000 years between speciation….

Up to 100,000 years at the longest… Other species (birds, reptiles and such) have evolved in much shorter times… It just depends uon how hardy a species is and how quickly adaptive changes that benefit it propogate through its population

Judas,

So, what would you call the next few species after H. Sapiens?

CC
PS. Also, what would you call "Morlocks"?

Would "Morlocks" be "Homo Subterraneus"?

CC

"Most homonids evolved in around 25,000 years between speciation….

Up to 100,000 years at the longest…"

Hang on Judas,

Our lineage has this time scale:

Around 2.3 million years ago H. Habilis developed from A. Australopithecus

Around 1.7 million years ago H. Erectus developed from above

H. Sapiens developed about 500,000 years ago from above

Anatomically "modern" H. Sapiens have been around since 100,000 years ago

Neanderthals died out 40,000 years ago

We can't make too many comments on speciation as we can't tell who could interbreed and we don't have a full complement of the Neanderthal (or any others)genome.

For interest a 1.2% divergence in genetic material takes about 5 million years and this is a close approximation for most species studied. For instance we share 98.4% of our genome with Chimpanzees and therefore diverged from them about 6.5 million years ago.

(data from Jared Diamonds "The Third Chimpanzee")

Ralph

In about 800,000 years H. Subterraneus (the Morlocks) would diverge by about .3% from the H. Sapiens genome. Could the physical changes shown by the Morlocks from the "Time Machine" book/movies be due to a .3% genetic change? I don't know.

Ralph

Ralph,

From that list, it seems that mutations were very far between in the distant past, but more frequent later.

If that's really the case, do you think 800,000 years would be sufficient then to produce another "race", specially if humans and the "others" are somehow separated (one below ground, the other topside) by a cataclysm of apocalyptic proportions?

CC

Ralph,

You seem to have answered my question before I got a chance to ask it!

Are you psychic or something? :)

CC

Could our underground cousins end up looking something like this?

picture

CC
TMP link

The Morlocks are an example of a "devolved" species, something which is popular in literature, but that doesn't really fit into evolutionary theory. The 19th century's view was that if you take away culture, we devolve back into beasts physically as well.

Evolution is due to mutations that increase the likelihood of an organism's survival given the extant conditions in which it lives. However, humans exert great control over their environment – and can modify their environment much more quickly than nature can modify them.

Even given a drastic environmental change (like moving underground, another ice age, or global warming) there are few mutations that would provide such major advantages that they would give those individuals a marked increase in survival (particularly given human society's concern for its weaker members).

One exception, of course, is disease. Disease can rapidly decimate a population of all but the few who have a favorable mutation.

Another exception is eugenics – whether planned or cultural. But whereas disease can literally affect the entire human population in a very short period of time, genetic manipulation (right now) can only affect small homogeneous subpopulations.

Who says Morlocks are a separate species? Look at what we have done with domestic animals such as dogs. Morlocks may be 'human' and capable of interbreeding with other 'human' species. Also, the physical changes could happen over a few generations if the conditions are right.

One of the things I think people need to think about, though, is how fast humans evovle on a more cosmetic scale. Consider different ethnic groups, and how rapidly (evolutionarily speaking, that is) groups change their facial features, hair, skin color, etc. In 800,000 years I can definitely see Morlocks, though probably they wouldn't have the melted face seen in the 1960 movie. But larger eyes (similar to deep water fish and lizards evolved in caves and all that), limbs evolved to survive in caverns and underground – I wouldn't put it past the realm of possibility.

Interesting BBC article implies a similar divergence:

link

CC

I guess it must be true. The paranormal community seems to agree:

link

CC

Here are some non-Morlock faces I'm working on:

link

CC

Wasn't there a newspaper flurry on this a couple of months back? How in thousands of years there would be distinct genetic haves and have nots, the degenerate type e.g. having weak jaws from generations of diet of processed food etc

"The Morlocks are an example of a "devolved" species, something which is popular in literature, but that doesn't really fit into evolutionary theory. "

Actually there are cases where environmental changes have been such that some species have returned to a more simple, but more highly adaptable version. Unfortunately, the only example I can remember is a species of moss. Not really exciting I'm afraid.

"Look at what we have done with domestic animals such as dogs. Morlocks may be 'human' and capable of interbreeding with other 'human' species. Also, the physical changes could happen over a few generations if the conditions are right."

Yes but selective breeding is not Natural Selection! The breeder selects the attributes he/she wants, and this has nothing to do with a species "fitness" in light of environmental changes.

"One of the things I think people need to think about, though, is how fast humans evovle on a more cosmetic scale. Consider different ethnic groups, and how rapidly (evolutionarily speaking, that is) groups change their facial features, hair, skin color, etc…"

But that's not evolving either. For example children share the superficial facial features of their parents, that doesn't mean they have evolved. That means that each kid is a new combination of the parents genes.

Let's do an example: To get a super long tooth that the Morlocks display, you will need a series of mutations that govern tooth size, tooth eruption rate, embryonic tooth formation rate, etc. Now add to the fact that they have lost 2 fingers. How many mutations are responsible for that? What about their lovely facial features? How many mutations account for those? And then you have 800,000 years to do this? As stated before, that time period would account for a .3% drift in the genetic material from us today.

Ralph