| > can natural evolution show signs so fast? Yes, in fact, I think the accepted dominant manifestation of natural evolution is rapid change in trait distribution in response to significant change in enviromental pressure, and near stasis otherwise, not continuous slow change. Changing a trait from near certain death of mother and child to one which, while it has some increased risk, is normally survivable without lasting adverse consequences for either mother or child is an enormous change in terms of the degree of selective pressure against the trait. That's not to say there aren't other potential contributors, but it's not unreasonable for natural evolution to have measurable effects in the timeframe in question in those circumstances. > maybe babies are also bigger? The article expressly calls that out as a contributing evolutionary trend that was itself limited by the fact that beyond a certain point, that becomes fatal. So, that's certainly true, but in no way a contradiction to the point in the article. |