Speculative Evolution on a Post Apocalyptic Earth

[Armatus]

Greetings people of the sciences,

What brings me here today is mod research, essentially I'm trying to take a good hard look at what realism might provide verses just what *sounds cool* currently I'm considering several end of world possibilities which I believe in turn will dictate the impact of aftermath and recovery of civilization.

A few details,

The setting is North America
The apocalypse begins anywhere from 2012-2020
The game begins roughly 2000 years after the end of the world

There are small scattered pockets of advanced human civilization that were unhindered by the cataclysm or reformed much later as new cultures began to develop from the old.

"Scientists" a.k.a "wizards" build strongholds and live like medieval lords.

Now, I need to know what type of world ending scenario would give the best options for mutation and evolution, how quickly could we see new forms arise in the wild?

Additionally with some limited genetic engineering pursued by the scientists what types of creations might serve them best?

These are just a few things running around in my head right now, I'm open to any and all suggestions that are scientifically based or inspired with in good reason.

Thanks!

[Tankbuster]

You could look into the concept of rapid mutagenesis. It's an experimental method that seeks to accelerate the rate at which viruses mutate in order to use this process against them. Mutations usually go awry, which means that if a virus gets a number of mutations at a time, it is likely going to die.
The idea is that if we could create drugs that specifically target viral cells, they would essentially burn themselves out.

In a hypothetical world where this research gets very promising, therapies could be offered against many (perhaps all) forms of viral diseases. Since bacterias and other infections are becoming resistent to antibiotics anyway, a viral infection accompanied by bacterial infections could prove fatal to many people if they can't stave off the bacterias anymore. At this point turning to experimental anti-viral treatments would be very appealing (alternatively you could also say that an extremely lethal mutation of, say, the H5N1 virus occurs, and this treatment is the only way of beating it).

Then the problems start, because this treatment is accompanied by several risks, mainly that the drugs could not only target the viral cells but also the host cells itself (in fact that's exactly the problem in actual testing of this type of drugs).

So since everybody had to take these drugs to stave off the infections, everybody is going to start rapidly developing cancers (let's say a few years after the viral epidemic) now you've got a population with rapidly mutating host cells. The majority of the world's population would certainly die swiftly (there's your apocalypse), however one could say that new cancer treatments develop just in time to save a part of the population (scientists and their loved ones, for instance). But you'll still have a population that -if left untreated- will rapidly develop harmful mutations, though a certain number of them can also receive beneficial mutations (think X-men).

Considering the waste of these drugs would also impact the environment (perhaps left partially unabsorbed in urine) the way much of our current waste does, so animal species would undergo roughly the same phenomenon.

I'd have to think of some things to close off the loopholes in the script (like why there isn't a huge increase in miscarriages, which would stop the remaining population dead in its tracks) but perhaps you can take part of this and run with it.

Or you could try the hoary old script of "nukes go off everywhere and they magically change everybody's mutation rates"

[Aanker]

What do you call those cataclysmic releases of radiation in space? Gamma ray bursts? I heard there was speculation that some of the diversifications in the Earth's history were caused by the influence stellar radiation had on Earth, perhaps one such huge wave of radiation could essentially toast much of the surface of the world, while having some mutating effects on the organisms that lived in the oceans and beneath the surface of the world (i.e. humans hiding in refuge zones from the radiation).

Or something along the lines of what Tankbister said, bioengineering gone wild, say, attempts to "improve" the human race have just gone widespread, perhaps resulting in "hidden" damage that later, when accumulated through several manipulations across a number of generations, turn into disastrous amounts of cancers, organ failures etc.

Such projects wouldn't explain how or why the poorer humans without access to these bioengineering processes also suffered, though.

[Phier]

Scientists as wizards just isn't going to work despite how many times it turns up in sci-fi (I'm looking at you fallout 3).

While yes with some chemistry knowledge you could appear to be a wizard, in terms of doing REAL science like genetic work, it would require years of esoteric training and laboratories which would not be possible post apocalyptic catastrophe. Science like that, even if you had an entire university library at your disposal, would require a real, stable, civilization to work.

Mass/gross evolutionary changes would not happen without a mass extinction as well. Otherwise we would see 'normal' evolution of creatures already adapted to existing niches. With a mass extinction event, you would see a much quicker evolution of small fast breeding creatures like rodents to start to fill lifestyles where animals could 'make a living' that had been vacated due to the extinction.

Basically what I'm saying is if the dinosaurs never died in a mass extinction, today we would just seem more evolved versions of the dinosaurs. Because of the extinction, the tiny mammals got to spread out, expand, grow in size, etc.

Humans being isolated might be interesting if technology were completely destroyed. We were already on our way to becoming multiple species with our various 'races', but thats really come to an end/slowed down with the ease of transpiration. Give some small groups 30-60k years alone and they might be close to a new species.

[Gaidin]

While yes with some chemistry knowledge you could appear to be a wizard, in terms of doing REAL science like genetic work, it would require years of esoteric training and laboratories which would not be possible post apocalyptic catastrophe. Science like that, even if you had an entire university library at your disposal, would require a real, stable, civilization to work.

I think to really say this we need to know exactly what his apocalypse is.

[chamaeleo]

Right there w Phier: 200 yrs is at least 2-3 orders of magnitude too brief to see significant changes in anything except insects, fish, small mammals...all the nonsexy critters which hardly constitute a threat to humanity. Unless you get really abstract.

A few other points...
Rates of evolution are most limited by a species' intergenerational period. I'd expect an animal which becomes sexually mature after 1 yr will evolve roughly 10x as quickly as another animal which requires 10 yrs.

Look at what's around right now, and observe contemporary trends; which critter populations are declining? Which have expanded (generalists like crows, coyotes, rats, ants, etc)? Assume the declining pops go all the way extinct after BOOM event, or bounce back with a vengeance w the newly contracted human niche. Now, how will the remaining generalists diversify to fill the now vacant niches (including empty cities, etc).

The greater the extinction event, the fewer stock species you have available to manipulate, but there'd be a greater number of niches for them to diversify and exploit.

Best animals for exploitation would be those we're already using, unless the new environment is radically off-kilter. Consider that cold climates generally favor 'small surface area : mass' ratio (bigger), whereas warmer climates the opposite. For instance Southern tribes might ride horses, Northerners might ride reindeer or even bison! Wolf-drawn arctic sled-chariots, anyone?

Since smaller, faster breeding critters would undergo the most rapid evolution, you could exploit this to create 'horde' threats: mutant fireant swarms (steered by humans w torches or pheremone cans?) vs mutant termite swarms, for one.

Consider ecology. What's eating what, at what rates? Might food shortages cause behavioral changes...ie, mutant buffalo decline, suddenly humans start looking tasty to killer-coyote packs? What sorts of animals might humans herd? What environmental factors influence all of the above?

Old critters behaving in new ways, in response to different conditions, would be fun to play with. Imagine mountain lions banding together to hunt a la wolfpack. Youch.

Consider cyclical patterns and feedback loops. Radically altering one variable very quickly can have a ripple effect. Depleting pastures in one area would shift herbivores to another; carnivores follow. Native carnivores commence predating upon humans with the increased pressure.

I'd consider incorporating a buildup in gen eng tech prior to the collapse, where humanity creates new critters, BOOM event, then said creations shed their yokes. Consider it an evolutionary jumpstart.

Finally, don't neglect diseases. Fungi. Plants...especially plants! Animals are more interactive, but plants form the basis for their behavior.

I've actually been slowly developing a similar concept for years, except I'm thinking it'll have to be staged ~50,000 yrs in the future. Not so much post apocalyptic, as a re-emergence of civilization out of an (un)natural setting.

[Armatus]

You could look into the concept of rapid mutagenesis.

I think this is a potential within a scenario which includes multiple disasters leading to the end of civilization as we know it.

But you'll still have a population that -if left untreated- will rapidly develop harmful mutations, though a certain number of them can also receive beneficial mutations (think X-men).

I actually played the X-men pnp rpg back in the day, I'm not up on the latest mutations what is reasonable?

Considering the waste of these drugs would also impact the environment (perhaps left partially unabsorbed in urine) the way much of our current waste does, so animal species would undergo roughly the same phenomenon.

Another potential I think, I do believe there will be multiple causation our modern systems are too dependent upon each other, when those systems break down hell really does break loose.

What do you call those cataclysmic releases of radiation in space? Gamma ray bursts? I heard there was speculation that some of the diversifications in the Earth's history were caused by the influence stellar radiation had on Earth, perhaps one such huge wave of radiation could essentially toast much of the surface of the world, while having some mutating effects on the organisms that lived in the oceans and beneath the surface of the world (i.e. humans hiding in refuge zones from the radiation)

Would that create a desert like earth? Would people suffer skin cancers and would it kill most plants? If so I'm thinking I'd rather pass on this one, I'm thinking of a few advanced cultures which were able to maintain a high level of self sufficiency in the aftermath and with time began to bloom into a very high tech, something on the lines of what we would be capable of today if we put the best minds togather, gave them resources at their disposal and left them alone.

Scientists as wizards just isn't going to work despite how many times it turns up in sci-fi (I'm looking at you fallout 3).

While yes with some chemistry knowledge you could appear to be a wizard, in terms of doing REAL science like genetic work, it would require years of esoteric training and laboratories which would not be possible post apocalyptic catastrophe. Science like that, even if you had an entire university library at your disposal, would require a real, stable, civilization to work.

No really I don't want to get caught up in cliches, at least not well thought out cliches that is.

Mass/gross evolutionary changes would not happen without a mass extinction as well. Otherwise we would see 'normal' evolution of creatures already adapted to existing niches. With a mass extinction event, you would see a much quicker evolution of small fast breeding creatures like rodents to start to fill lifestyles where animals could 'make a living' that had been vacated due to the extinction.

Basically what I'm saying is if the dinosaurs never died in a mass extinction, today we would just seem more evolved versions of the dinosaurs. Because of the extinction, the tiny mammals got to spread out, expand, grow in size, etc.

Humans being isolated might be interesting if technology were completely destroyed. We were already on our way to becoming multiple species with our various 'races', but thats really come to an end/slowed down with the ease of transpiration. Give some small groups 30-60k years alone and they might be close to a new species.

I don't necessarily think that mass extinction is necessary for the game to change. Views on dinos today are much different or developed than what I was taught in school. I think the idea that dinosaurs up and vanished is more of a foot note on the paragraph of how they adapted and evolved into Avian species now.

But if I need to advance the plot several thousand k I will consider it to get new and interesting types of species. Except I'm hoping for short cuts.

Right there w Phier: 200 yrs is at least 2-3 orders of magnitude too brief to see significant changes in anything except insects, fish, small mammals...all the nonsexy critters which hardly constitute a threat to humanity. Unless you get really abstract.

2,000 not 200 and the "post-apocalypse" may also be spurred on by Tank Buster's mutagenesis and by moving the clock forward a hair as you say prior to "BOOM event" maybe humans have reached that scientific revolution we've been awaiting the last 20 years and what we've been fantasizing about for a century where diseases are cured, life spans are exponentially increased and technology no longer requires manuals, but is plug and play with an organic interface. Just some thoughts.

A few other points...
Rates of evolution are most limited by a species' intergenerational period. I'd expect an animal which becomes sexually mature after 1 yr will evolve roughly 10x as quickly as another animal which requires 10 yrs.

Look at what's around right now, and observe contemporary trends; which critter populations are declining? Which have expanded (generalists like crows, coyotes, rats, ants, etc)? Assume the declining pops go all the way extinct after BOOM event, or bounce back with a vengeance w the newly contracted human niche. Now, how will the remaining generalists diversify to fill the now vacant niches (including empty cities, etc).

The greater the extinction event, the fewer stock species you have available to manipulate, but there'd be a greater number of niches for them to diversify and exploit.

Best animals for exploitation would be those we're already using, unless the new environment is radically off-kilter. Consider that cold climates generally favor 'small surface area : mass' ratio (bigger), whereas warmer climates the opposite. For instance Southern tribes might ride horses, Northerners might ride reindeer or even bison! Wolf-drawn arctic sled-chariots, anyone?

I think about his a lot but I don't know where to start half the time, what comes first what is happening in between and what comes after, hopefully I can sort that out with time. I'd like to see the return of megafauna just as well all forms will have free reign once people are reduced.

Since smaller, faster breeding critters would undergo the most rapid evolution, you could exploit this to create 'horde' threats: mutant fireant swarms (steered by humans w torches or pheremone cans?) vs mutant termite swarms, for one.

That's some wild , insects... the all time champions of evolution.

Consider ecology. What's eating what, at what rates? Might food shortages cause behavioral changes...ie, mutant buffalo decline, suddenly humans start looking tasty to killer-coyote packs? What sorts of animals might humans herd? What environmental factors influence all of the above?

Old critters behaving in new ways, in response to different conditions, would be fun to play with. Imagine mountain lions banding together to hunt a la wolfpack. Youch.

This will all depend on the event I guess as climate and terrain will be two major consideration.

I've actually been slowly developing a similar concept for years, except I'm thinking it'll have to be staged ~50,000 yrs in the future. Not so much post apocalyptic, as a re-emergence of civilization out of an (un)natural setting.

That's basically what I want, I'm taking my inspiration from Thundarr the Barbarian, the bad thing is it's totally generic, in the sense that the catastrophic was a runaway planet hurdling between the earth and the moon leaving the moon split in half.... considering this was an early 80s cartoon which didn't have much backstory and no time to develop it either, it's fit for an overhaul.

I think to really say this we need to know exactly what his apocalypse is.

And now you know

Although I'm still trying to consider so many things at once, it's overwhelming and I thank everyone for their ideas.

To reiterate it's 2000 years in the future, but if that doesn't get me what I want it's not set in stone. I've watched the series Life After people which really just gets you started, but recently 'Aftermath' Population Zero where about the earth after people suddenly disappear, they take it up to 1,000 years to the point where our civilization is pretty much erased. Then something about another ice age for 250,000 years?

So advance another 1,000 years throw in some chaos and where are we is the question of the day.

I rather fancy the setting of Aeon Flux, not so much the story, but how they are living in the last city on earth and a highly advanced one at that amid a sea of wilderness.

[Tankbuster]

I actually played the X-men pnp rpg back in the day, I'm not up on the latest mutations what is reasonable?

Most of the stuff you get is pretty boring, really. But then again many traditional superpowers aren't that special anyway: increased strength, increased intelligence, increased hearing, increased healing, reflexes, that kind of stuff.
I did read a recent article about the gene that allows flies to... fly. Apparently it specifically creates a series of super-fast muscles that allow this.
But stuff like telepathy is just about fundamentally impossible. Even growing wings and buzzing off is, alas, physiologically impossible for us.

However at some point I think you can allow yourself some science-fiction freedom in the sense that you can kind of close your eyes and push a specific explanation. For instance, I think you can sort of say
(1) okay so there's rapid mutagenesis in host cells
(2) new anti-cancer drugs can take care of most of the malignancies (perhaps based on the specific chemical markers that cancer leaves)
(3) lots of time
(4) ???
(5) Profit!!

The whole scenario of genetic change doesn't have to make mathematical or statistical sense; as long as there's a somewhat plausible scenario, I think any good science-fiction reader is going to grant you that according to modern technology, the mathematics of the whole thing wouldn't add up... that's where you invoke Super Duper Specific Anti-Cancer Drugs to get you where you want

[Armatus]

I think that's pretty much the plan anyone writing sci-fi needs to follow. I'm not looking to make this a drama so similar withour current modern lives, but actually Sci-fi that has reasonable explanations vs purely absurd juvenile fantasies such as Warhammer 40K (NO OFFENSE to any WH fans, I actually think it's kinda cool)

[Inconsistent]

I think that's pretty much the plan anyone writing sci-fi needs to follow. I'm not looking to make this a drama so similar withour current modern lives, but actually Sci-fi that has reasonable explanations vs purely absurd juvenile fantasies such as Warhammer 40K (NO OFFENSE to any WH fans, I actually think it's kinda cool)

I don't think anyone will be, it seems as if the entire point of WH40k is to make things so unrealistically powerful that no other universe can compare. Lol, titans and Tyranids.

[chamaeleo]

I think that's pretty much the plan anyone writing sci-fi needs to follow. I'm not looking to make this a drama so similar withour current modern lives, but actually Sci-fi that has reasonable explanations vs purely absurd juvenile fantasies such as Warhammer 40K (NO OFFENSE to any WH fans, I actually think it's kinda cool)

I get seriously hung up on the problem of satisfying the energetic requirements of most super powers. The most plausible superhero I can imagine is a morbidly obese dude whose power is to quickly metabolize his reserves, going totally ballistic, ending his spree as a naked skinny guy who'll then need several months to recover his fatty potential.

As for WH40k...tyranids are actually the most realistic race in the concept. I buy genetically engineered, nomadic colony swarms before I buy psykers.

[Veliky Kaiser Theos]

I get seriously hung up on the problem of satisfying the energetic requirements of most super powers. The most plausible superhero I can imagine is a morbidly obese dude whose power is to quickly metabolize his reserves, going totally ballistic, ending his spree as a naked skinny guy who'll then need several months to recover his fatty potential.

As for WH40k...tyranids are actually the most realistic race in the concept. I buy genetically engineered, nomadic colony swarms before I buy psykers.

That wouldn't work out. If someone morbidly obese became skinny in a short amount of time, he'd have a massive excess of skin. Also it would raise problems with cooling the body.

[Agent Miles]

An alien probe lands in say, Kansas and begins xenoforming the Earth, i.e. transforming the Earth into the kind of planet the aliens require. It can change whatever you like, temperature, terrain, even flora and fauna through a virus that mutates DNA in existing organisms. So gradually, the two millennia go by as the Earth changes to whatever. More oxygen in the atmosphere would allow for huge insects. Silicon based life could manifest itself as rocks that seem to grow like plants. This premise leaves the door wide open, so you could have dinosaurs and dragons, really.

The pockets of humans that are able to isolate themselves from the transformation could have adapted technology from the xenoformer to make science that would be similar to what we see as magic today. For conflict, the humans need to find a way to reverse the process, or different groups could try to conquer the new Earth, or the aliens could finally arrive, or a mix of these.

[Armatus]

An alien probe lands in say, Kansas and begins xenoforming the Earth, i.e. transforming the Earth into the kind of planet the aliens require.

Now that's classic, I like it.

I think I'm going to decide on multiple events.

[Armatus]

I think I need to establish the actual doom before I can really attempt to answer any of these questions, partially why I posted here. I need more idea and alternate view points.

Viral Contagion
Climate Change
Bio / Nuclear terrorism
Nuclear War
Mega Earthquake
Mega Volcano
Doomsday Asteroid
Solar Storm
Gamma Ray Burst
Extraterrestrial Invasion (bio or tech or both)

[removeduser_4536284751384]

Doomsday Asteroid

This is the most realistic You can also say the asteroid impacts detonated nuclear weapons in their storage facilities, doing even more damage to certain areas. Enough heat will detonate the explosive lens initiators of a nuclear weapon.

None of the others except alien invasion would could end civilisation as we know it, and that's been done too much.

[Armatus]

The only problem with the doomsday asteroid is that it will create a sun blackout and might put us right into an ice before we get to 1,000 years later let alone 2,000 years, and I want thick forests.

I generally assume any one of these will create a chain reaction, so if one lesser event happens it could cause a chain of additional events, or if multiple events happen at once then we're likely to see the end as well.

Question is which is the best combo for multiple events if one big one is not right for what I'm looking for?

[Aanker]

The only problem with the doomsday asteroid is that it will create a sun blackout and might put us right into an ice before we get to 1,000 years later let alone 2,000 years, and I want thick forests.

I generally assume any one of these will create a chain reaction, so if one lesser event happens it could cause a chain of additional events, or if multiple events happen at once then we're likely to see the end as well.

Question is which is the best combo for multiple events if one big one is not right for what I'm looking for?

Then maybe go for some sort of supervirus (a bit too used and exaggerated perhaps but it still has some plausibility)? The afflicted did not always die, but were left with severe mutations as a result, while the ones who were resistant were too few to affect the massive damage that had been done to humanity as a whole.

I don't know how such an essentially non-combatable virus could evolve though, but it should be able to spread fairly well throughout the world if it is latent in the human body for long enough, before the symptoms start.

Perhaps something along the lines of:
~ Ten days' latency (allows the virus to travel across the world, though perhaps a longer time is better so as to let it arrive en masse through ferries as well)
~ Initial flu-like symptoms, the virus spreads from human to human
~ Gradually the symptoms increase, the virus settles in the brain behind the protection of the Blood-Brain Barrier (similar to Rabies), however the acceleration from the previous step to the next is very slow, so that the virus may treacherously appear to be only another one of those slightly annoying chills.
~ Mutation begins, and all the other deadly symptoms set in. Of course, one could stay original and say that they would not turn the afflicted into 'zombies' in typical Hollywood fashion, but instead perhaps edit some other interesting pieces of code, perhaps even the segments that affect mitosis/meiosis.

[Armatus]

so was watching a recent (2011) documentary on dog genetics, it seems that mutation is controlled by tandem repeating genes and for example in our practice of dog eugenics have been able to change things like the slope of the skull in dogs to the drastically arching Bull terrier in just 45 years.

Interesting! that and big foot sights in Rhode Island lol..

[Elfdude]

To be totally honest an apocalypse is more likely to wipe out complex life forms rather than evolve new ones. In 2,000 years I highly doubt any new species would arise naturually. The one option you have of radioactive inspired mutation is more likely to kill every complex lifeform before it can evolve an effective defense. Bacteria and what not are likely to survive but your speed of evolving is limited by how long your generations last.

Dog's tandem repeating genes are a rarity and is why they're so alterable not why evolution happens.

Your best bet is to use lab conditions to breed for animals which then escaped or to use a evolutionary accelerate like a virus or something. From there your doors are pretty wide open. Depending on the length of time the sun is obscured you could be looking at a world where mushrooms have supplanted most plant life as the dominant ground cover. It would take thousands of years for plants to recolonize the lands they lost due to lack of sunlight durring which time the organic material easily can create a self sustaining mushroom colony. After the dinosaurs went extinct some mushrooms grew to the size of trees in the nuclear twilight.