The Evolution and Natural Selection Debate
Discussion
So,
This is a discussion I pick up with my friends and family from time to time.
It's about "natural selection" and its complete non-existence in our countries.
What I mean to say is that there are a lot of species that have a rate of "becoming adult (ie fertile)" of 0,5 %, a lot of lower species (lots of insects) have only a fraction of that.
But, in our developed countries, this rate is well over 98% for people.
And the less than 2% filtered out are often far from genetcally inferiour.
So, how are we going to end up? What will happen if this continues?
Another big fact is that a lot of "smarter" people will go to college/university, thus starting to have children on average 6 years later than people who didn't go to university. In the end often having much fewer children.
This means we're actually facing de-evolution.
Now I'm not for genocide or even "birth control", but I do think there should be solutions to this problem (that may take generations to show itsellf), I just wouldn't have an idea.
What are your toughts?
Am I making things up and worrying for nothing?
PS: sorry for the SP, English isn't my first language.
This is a discussion I pick up with my friends and family from time to time.
It's about "natural selection" and its complete non-existence in our countries.
What I mean to say is that there are a lot of species that have a rate of "becoming adult (ie fertile)" of 0,5 %, a lot of lower species (lots of insects) have only a fraction of that.
But, in our developed countries, this rate is well over 98% for people.
And the less than 2% filtered out are often far from genetcally inferiour.
So, how are we going to end up? What will happen if this continues?
Another big fact is that a lot of "smarter" people will go to college/university, thus starting to have children on average 6 years later than people who didn't go to university. In the end often having much fewer children.
This means we're actually facing de-evolution.
Now I'm not for genocide or even "birth control", but I do think there should be solutions to this problem (that may take generations to show itsellf), I just wouldn't have an idea.
What are your toughts?
Am I making things up and worrying for nothing?
PS: sorry for the SP, English isn't my first language.
Surely God will sort all this out? 
I was having this conversation last night, it also led onto medical matters, that we're the only race that can fix our bodies using results of scientific study. What kind of impact might 'curing' cancer or any other genetic mutation have on our evolution?
Maybe I've just taken X-Men too true to heart.
I was having this conversation last night, it also led onto medical matters, that we're the only race that can fix our bodies using results of scientific study. What kind of impact might 'curing' cancer or any other genetic mutation have on our evolution?
Maybe I've just taken X-Men too true to heart.
ZesPak said:
So,
This is a discussion I pick up with my friends and family from time to time.
It's about "natural selection" and its complete non-existence in our countries.
What I mean to say is that there are a lot of species that have a rate of "becoming adult (ie fertile)" of 0,5 %, a lot of lower species (lots of insects) have only a fraction of that.
But, in our developed countries, this rate is well over 98% for people.
And the less than 2% filtered out are often far from genetcally inferiour.
So, how are we going to end up? What will happen if this continues?
Another big fact is that a lot of "smarter" people will go to college/university, thus starting to have children on average 6 years later than people who didn't go to university. In the end often having much fewer children.
This means we're actually facing de-evolution.
Now I'm not for genocide or even "birth control", but I do think there should be solutions to this problem (that may take generations to show itsellf), I just wouldn't have an idea.
What are your toughts?
Am I making things up and worrying for nothing?
PS: sorry for the SP, English isn't my first language.
Ask yourself what would things be like if everyone was one of the 'smarter' people.This is a discussion I pick up with my friends and family from time to time.
It's about "natural selection" and its complete non-existence in our countries.
What I mean to say is that there are a lot of species that have a rate of "becoming adult (ie fertile)" of 0,5 %, a lot of lower species (lots of insects) have only a fraction of that.
But, in our developed countries, this rate is well over 98% for people.
And the less than 2% filtered out are often far from genetcally inferiour.
So, how are we going to end up? What will happen if this continues?
Another big fact is that a lot of "smarter" people will go to college/university, thus starting to have children on average 6 years later than people who didn't go to university. In the end often having much fewer children.
This means we're actually facing de-evolution.
Now I'm not for genocide or even "birth control", but I do think there should be solutions to this problem (that may take generations to show itsellf), I just wouldn't have an idea.
What are your toughts?
Am I making things up and worrying for nothing?
PS: sorry for the SP, English isn't my first language.
Who would drive the train that took you to your smarter workplace?
Who would clean your workspace?
Who would do the manual labour to build the road to enable you to drive the big car bought with money earned from your smart job?
Who would deliver the goods, materials, foods etc to the shops and markets you visit?
Who would represent you in parliament?
Who would collect the refuse?
Who would clear the sewers?
Who would provide the cheap, low skilled labour required for the low skill-requirement vacancy?
If you happen to be one of the 'smarter' people, don't begin to think you don't need the less smart amongst us.
It is only the underclass, those living in the background of society, in the forgotten no-go council estates that pose a problem. But the problem is one that is self-restrained to a great degree. This class will always be a drain but will never have power.
Personally I think your "debate" falls flat on it's arse in that there's no genetic difference detectable between dolites and the socially successful.
So the two gene pools are largely identical and the pressures remain the same (both manage to reproduce albeit at different rates) no positive selection can take place.
Your genes don't care what you do for a living.
So the two gene pools are largely identical and the pressures remain the same (both manage to reproduce albeit at different rates) no positive selection can take place.
Your genes don't care what you do for a living.
Swilly said:
Ask yourself what would things be like if everyone was one of the 'smarter' people.
Who would drive the train that took you to your smarter workplace?
Who would clean your workspace?
Who would do the manual labour to build the road to enable you to drive the big car bought with money earned from your smart job?
Who would deliver the goods, materials, foods etc to the shops and markets you visit?
Who would represent you in parliament?
Who would collect the refuse?
Who would clear the sewers?
Who would provide the cheap, low skilled labour required for the low skill-requirement vacancy?
Who would drive the train that took you to your smarter workplace?
Who would clean your workspace?
Who would do the manual labour to build the road to enable you to drive the big car bought with money earned from your smart job?
Who would deliver the goods, materials, foods etc to the shops and markets you visit?
Who would represent you in parliament?
Who would collect the refuse?
Who would clear the sewers?
Who would provide the cheap, low skilled labour required for the low skill-requirement vacancy?
Swilly said:
Ask yourself what would things be like if everyone was one of the 'smarter' people.
Who would drive the train that took you to your smarter workplace?
Who would clean your workspace?
Who would do the manual labour to build the road to enable you to drive the big car bought with money earned from your smart job?
Who would deliver the goods, materials, foods etc to the shops and markets you visit?
Who would represent you in parliament?
Who would collect the refuse?
Who would clear the sewers?
Who would provide the cheap, low skilled labour required for the low skill-requirement vacancy?
If you happen to be one of the 'smarter' people, don't begin to think you don't need the less smart amongst us.
It is only the underclass, those living in the background of society, in the forgotten no-go council estates that pose a problem. But the problem is one that is self-restrained to a great degree. This class will always be a drain but will never have power.
I was stating an example, I chose to go to work because I knew I can't study for university.Who would drive the train that took you to your smarter workplace?
Who would clean your workspace?
Who would do the manual labour to build the road to enable you to drive the big car bought with money earned from your smart job?
Who would deliver the goods, materials, foods etc to the shops and markets you visit?
Who would represent you in parliament?
Who would collect the refuse?
Who would clear the sewers?
Who would provide the cheap, low skilled labour required for the low skill-requirement vacancy?
If you happen to be one of the 'smarter' people, don't begin to think you don't need the less smart amongst us.
It is only the underclass, those living in the background of society, in the forgotten no-go council estates that pose a problem. But the problem is one that is self-restrained to a great degree. This class will always be a drain but will never have power.
I happen to "roll" into a nice well paid job over time, but that's another story.
I am however, in no way relying on any form of support, I have a fianceé now and bought myself a house and starting up my own business and we will not start with children until we know we can fully cover it.
I also happen to think that, since I'm a very very good taxpayer and do a lot of work, I actually deliver something to society (the main part of our "advancement").
I also don't know if any of this is geniticaly embedded, and I didn't state in any way that I was superiour to that.
In any case, my fiance had to have surgery two months after she was born, so by "natural selection", she would be out. But what she had was not genetic, so it's actually out of the question too.
The problem is deeper, and it's with things like cancer, lots of scientists have proved that we have new factors "triggering" our "cancers" (eg pollution, stress,drugs,...), but you have to be "receptive" of that type of cancer. Now the receptiveness for cancer is largly geneticaly embedded.
And people get cured of cancer more and more, but some get cancer at such a soon age (and often get it several times in their lives, living with the disease all their lives), they normally couldn't have had children, but now they have. And those are generally more receptive to cancer too.
Now it is possible that these people can contribute to society, but it is higly unlikely they do (costs of treating cancer are often way higher than most people earn in their lives).
I'm not saying they should let those people die, hell, I would of lost a lot of close ones then. And I bet a lot of us would have (because, you see, cancer is getting more and more abundant).
To make a long story short: I just wanted to start a debate to which I don't really know the 'solution'. Or even if it's a real problem.
s breeding.G_T said:
Personally I think your "debate" falls flat on it's arse in that there's no genetic difference detectable between dolites and the socially successful.
So the two gene pools are largely identical and the pressures remain the same (both manage to reproduce albeit at different rates) no positive selection can take place.
Your genes don't care what you do for a living.
True that! But, like I said, it has little to do with what you do for a living. It has more to do with the quality of the "human race".So the two gene pools are largely identical and the pressures remain the same (both manage to reproduce albeit at different rates) no positive selection can take place.
Your genes don't care what you do for a living.
Like discovered, we are now at our tallest we will (presumably) ever be. We will shrink from here on...
What if this happens to intelligence? I don't want to say everybody should be able to study, but I'm talking about general intelligence. I wouldn't mind a "stalemate", where we are at our top, but what if we start going backwards.
The science behind this? "bad" mutations are always more common than "good" mutations, and normally "bad" mutations are filtered out by natural selection, but this is not the case anymore -> de-evolution.
Anyway, comming from a workers family, I have as much respect (if not even more) for the busdriver as for the million-dollar executive. But imagine if the current general IQ (which is, of course, 100), within 20 generations, is what we now would see as 80. That means, that the average person then would now be seen as "borderline" (we would be gifted).
Would you let your bus be driven by someone "borderline", or your company managed for that matter?
The Curn said:
Swilly said:
Ask yourself what would things be like if everyone was one of the 'smarter' people.
Who would drive the train that took you to your smarter workplace?
Who would clean your workspace?
Who would do the manual labour to build the road to enable you to drive the big car bought with money earned from your smart job?
Who would deliver the goods, materials, foods etc to the shops and markets you visit?
Who would represent you in parliament?
Who would collect the refuse?
Who would clear the sewers?
Who would provide the cheap, low skilled labour required for the low skill-requirement vacancy?
Who would drive the train that took you to your smarter workplace?
Who would clean your workspace?
Who would do the manual labour to build the road to enable you to drive the big car bought with money earned from your smart job?
Who would deliver the goods, materials, foods etc to the shops and markets you visit?
Who would represent you in parliament?
Who would collect the refuse?
Who would clear the sewers?
Who would provide the cheap, low skilled labour required for the low skill-requirement vacancy?
xr287 said:
What your thinking is pretty much the background story to the film Idiocracy. World ends up populated by retards.
Just looked into it! Got that "laying around" here 
.I'll watch that tonight.
I watched it, and indeed, it was exactly what I ment.
How would that be for a world?
Imagine, we always could keep up with the problems we created (that's what I think at least), the hole in the ozon layer is closing due to the restrictions on CFK's, we will find solutions (valid, not hybrid) to slow down or stop "global warming". But the movie shows what happens when we degrade and have to rely on what was invented before, because we can't even understand that?
Oh, and the movie was as stupid as the world our good Luke Wilson landed in, but that's quite logical imo (hard to make a movie less stupid than the world it is depicted in).
Edited by ZesPak on Friday 8th January 10:52
alfa pint said:
I have no concerns over IQ levels; my concern is what used to be working class (my family background) is gradually being overtaken by a benefits class. Kill off the benefits class by prevention of breeding and we'll have a non workshy population.
Exactly, and while not genetically related, it is "inherited". It's all part of the education parents should give imho.Yet we support these people and even support them to have children.
Another debate, but I think that every "controller" on this fact (separating the people that had bad luck/having a really bad year from those who are living off the system) is worth ten times his months pay.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff