On the one hand, changes within species is generally driven by a change of environment; either climate change, or a subset of a species driven by population pressure to adapt to a new environment.
Since we are moving more and more into controlled environments, it is difficult to see further human evolution -at least while we remain on this planet.
On the other hand, 'Survival of the Fittest' ain't necessarily so. The Peacock is quite definitely not 'designed' to survive. It spends almost a year putting a significant amount of energy into growing a tail which not only hinders it's flight and take off times, but makes it visually very obvious.
It appears evolution is about female choice, and arbitrary notions of what makes a good mate; perhaps a case of; "if I stand next to this guy, guess who the tiger eats"...
There is some evidence to suggest enduring cultural notions of beauty can have an affect on racial features, so who knows?

Actually AJ, (and Grim maybe)

I am a bit with examinator on this one, human evolution has not stopped. In fact, the evidence from linkage disequilibrium studies suggests the opposite, that human evolution has been accelerating in more recent times.

One of the causes could possibly be that the pressure from stabilising selection so often found in nature has been reduced through cooperative effort and thus the variety of alleles that can be selected upon has increased and continues to increase at an accelerated pace. The upshot of this is not that humans will evolve into subspecies or a different species, but that the number of loci that can be selected upon through positive selection can increase, because many of negatively selected ones don't become such a burden.

We may have freed ourselves from the 'natural environment', but natural selection is still operating across the species as a whole.

Don't confuse this with speciation though, that tends to occur where there are isolating factors and genetic bottlenecks (often caused by catastrophe or envirnometal change), but if humans continue on as we are, with technology and 'civilisation', then all I can see that there will be two competing types of selection: natural selection still operating (especially when not yet recognised), and that we choose for ourselves (often called 'artificial' selection). Humans remarkable ability for conscious action, cooperation and the ability to plan ahead and alter their surrounding environments will not stop evolution, it will only take us in directions that would not have otherwise been possible.

I'd like to add a couple of notes, because several posts in this thread inadvertently fall prey to the Intelligent Design rhetoric methods that many creationists have picked up from the internet.

1. As Bugsy points out, genetic engineering and selective breeding are not drivers of evolution, but are the sorts of examples creationist loonies like to point to when claiming that the Holocaust wouldn't have happened without Darwin's theory of evolution.

Incidentally, Joseph (Jesus' other dad) was a shepherd. He'd have known pretty much everything about selective breeding that Hitler did.

2. Thermodynamics is cropping up because the second law was used as an early Intelligent Design argument against evolution. That line's been dropped now because it's very easy for people to understand the differences between closed and open systems of energy. The Discovery Institute now sticks to more reliable methods of debate, such as quote mining and plagiarism.

Bugsy<<..human evolution has been accelerating in more recent times...the pressure from stabilising selection..has been reduced through cooperative effort...>>>what cccrap bugsy...see how now many fatal genes..from the past are NOW..allowed expression/via 'surviving'....whereas before..their fatal fruit would see them extinct/morte/dead..thus their genes kept out of the gene pool

but then you state the inverse..[a typical evolutionary/science type re-direction teqnique...lol..claiming both sides..of their own fence..lol

<</...the variety of alleles that can be selected upon has increased and continues to increase at an accelerated pace.>>yet before they were reduced via<<..cooperative evolution...thalidamide evolution comes to mind..lol..[look mum no hands...

that wernt nuthin to do with alleles..that were chemical mutation/..evolution WITHIN THE SPECIES..within the genus..not into new species nor genus

but your inverse logic is ongoing..<<The upshot of this is not that humans will evolve into subspecies or a different species,..>>or any other GENUS..species/genus are not interchangable...not that you evolving nutters even grasp the difference

<<but that the number of loci that can be selected upon through positive selection can increase,..because many of negatively selected ones don't become such a burden.>>...lol positive selection..often results in many unknowable knowns not resulting in good fruit[ie 99 percent of mutation is injurous to the mutant..see last evolution debate]

<<We may have freed ourselves from the..'natural environment',..but natural selection..is still operating across the species as a whole...Don't confuse this with speciation though,>>YEAH YOUR CERTAINLY RIGHT[AND YET WRONG]..LOL

see humans is our genus..black white brindle are its species[eskimo/injun/ab-origonal/native...them is the species within the human genus

<<..Humans remarkable ability for conscious action,..cooperation and the ability to plan ahead..and alter their surrounding environments will not stop evolution,..it will only take us in>>un NATURAL<<directions that..would not have..otherwise been possible.>>

yes lets have more mutagenes mutatye the genus[the forst not human genus...will prove evolution..of genus/into new genus..[cause nothing else has]

<<see how now many fatal genes..from the past are NOW..allowed expression/via 'surviving'....whereas before..their fatal fruit would see them extinct/morte/dead..thus their genes kept out of the gene pool>>

This is exactly my point, OUG.

When it comes to not understanding pretty much anything you argue about, there is no greater example than your good self OUG.
Personally, I would lay off the 'genus' stuff for a while, it makes you look rather ignorant to those that actually know what one (and how they're 'made').

For those religionists who fear the development of super races.

It's too late. It is already happening. There are intellectuals who will do the thinking and ferals who will do the meanial tasks. In the middle there will be the ones who will take orders from the Intellectuals & sort out the unworkable crap, then make the ferals do the work. And so it should be. Now, if we could only breed some decent polititians.