Incorrect.
The problem is that people don’t fully consider what the term “environment” encompasses. It’s not just hot/cold, sun/shade, and so forth. It’s also toxins, diet, disease, and so forth.
As just one example: the ability to continue to digest lactose into adulthood is a relatively recent mutation that became widespread after certain human groups domesticated cattle and started using their milk for food.
Another one: the sickle cell trait, which became common because having one gene for this gives you improved resistance to malaria, and it continues to be perpetruated due to malaria still being a serious and widespread disease.
Another one that is a double-whammy: “thrifty genes” that enable more efficient food storage for people in environments subjected to food shortages but that also make diabetes more likely when food is more plentiful and steady in supply. On the flip side, other groups that lose these genes when they acquire and abundant and steady food supply that makes for less efficient food storage (perhaps the energy is used elsewhere, for growth or reproduction or something) but also reduced chance of diabetes in such an environment. People with hunter-gatherers as their immediate ancestors tend to have “thrifty genes”, people whose ancestors have had agriculture for long periods tend to have the other version. These are both in response to the local environment.
I have no doubt that we are currently undergoing selection for resistance to various new chemicals and toxins that were previously either extremely rare or entirely non-existent in our environment thanks to the chemical wonders of the past century and a half.
Immunity/resistance to some diseases is known to have a genetic component, and humans have been impacted by the Black Death, smallpox, measles, malaria (already mentioned), and there are gene-based variations in resistance to HIV as well (from delayed illness to complete immunity). Some of these will become more or less common as such diseases spread, retreat, or are entirely eliminated.
That’s just the natural selection we are still undergoing.
Assuming some sort of controlling entity (aliens, human despot, whatever) using just current human diversity we could probably be breed for a considerable range of heights (probably around 4 feet up to 7 or so), variations of pigmentation from extremely pale to very dark, different textures and straight/curly hair variations, different eye colors, musculature ranging from lean/endurance to stout/burst strength (a mutation already exists that gives a person significant more muscle than the average), ear/ear/nose shape, and probably a bunch more.
We might also be bred for longevity - there is already some evidence that families that go generations of reproducing later than average not only tend to retain their fertility to a later age, but also tend to live longer with the reverse - those that go generations reproducing early tending to die slightly earlier - also having some evidence. If either a natural cause, societal pressure, or alien overlord intensifies selection to favor the late-breeding folks then humans will, after many generations, tend to reproduce later and life and live longer… but since that trait also seems coupled with slightly lower overall fertility that would be incompatible with a situation with high mortality among the young (which tended to be the case for a lot of human history).
Likewise, ANY trait that has a genetic component can be increased or decreased by selective pressure, either natural or artificial. That could be intelligence, dexterity, language ability, all sorts of things… many of which we probably were selected for in the past, hence our intelligence, dexterity, language ability… The only hitch is that in biological systems trade-offs are the norm. A trait beneficial in one environment (genes that promote iron intake, making anemia less likely) can be detrimental in another (iron overload when a person eats an iron-rich diet can damage major organs and kill the person relatively young).
That’s just the tip of the iceberg. We still have pressures on us as a species, they’re just not as obvious as a tiger leaping out of the bushes to eat us.