Please Stop Evolution !

opopanax

OneManArmy

luciddream
Evolution has not stopped, it is silly to say that.

But what happened is that Natural selection has been turned off, aka, the weak are allowed to survive.

Which means, the evolution cannot work properly, defected people will breed defected people, thus defeating natural selection.

To put it bluntly, even tho it seems cruel, if you need a drug, machine to stay alive, you are in the weak, which means, you offspring might be damaged, as well as will not have good role model.

The eugenics is strong in this one.

Would you like to dispute the post you quoted with facts, or just imply some sort of guilt by association?

Many of those who, in the past, might not have survived to reproductive age due to, say, genetic disorders can now stay alive and breed thanks to modern medicine. Some of those people will pass along hereditary diseases to their progeny. Is this not the case?

Your point like most eugenics in general is easy to dispute.

Eugenics is a shortsighted and lopsided outlook. After all, it is the idea that there are "superior" genes and "inferior" genes and if you remove the inferior genes, then you make the species stronger. Unfortunately for them if they ever had their way once all the "inferior" genes were removed it would most likely soon be followed by the complete extinction of their superhuman race, either from being too genetically simular to breed; being much like inbreeding, or they would encounter a virus that would rip through the whole population, since their would be very little genetic barriers to spreading.

That is one thing eugenicists always overlook; in evolution and survival of the species there really isn't any inferior or defective genes, they all serve a purpose even if it is nothing more then adding to the genetic diversity of the entire species, thus giving them added protection against both genetic bottle necking and bacterial and viralogical pandemics.

I actually see lack of gentic diversity becoming a huge problem in the future for humans, especially when genetic engineering becomes common place. After all if everyone wants to be or have thier children be completly free from all genetic ailments and to be the fastest, the strongest, the best and the most fit, how many genes in common will they all be sharing and how many different genes will be weeded out.

Maybe a recipe for the fittest, but not for survival. Oh wow maybe Darwin was wrong and the fittest don't always survive, just the most varible and adaptable.

Anyway just my opinion.

reply to post by prisoneronashipoffools


people are not animals,,animals breed,,people make love,,,in case u did not undersatand,, there is a big,,big,,difference.

and i am curious why u would not know that.?

reply to post by opopanax

AbleEndangered
It should have stayed with "LAND OWNERS ONLY" Votes.

The land owners are the ones with something at stake.

Also:
Every American (or the readers sovereign nation) should have a Family stake in Land, instead of selling it off the the highest foreign bidders!!

The head of the Household gets the vote!

edit on 27-10-2013 by AbleEndangered because: added: (or the readers sovereign nation)

AbleEndangered
Its just why would a Father let his young foolish son cancel out his vote?

In the same regards a spouse.

The Father/Husband should be the representation for the whole family!!

Then when his son branches off with a family, land and home he has earned a vote.

Forming another Family unit.

opopanax
Ah yes, this is all because men made the mistake of letting women have a say instead of keeping them in their place. Thus falls civilization, and so on.

As for the OP, is it that much of a surprise? Ridiculously appealing, realistic, and comparatively easy/rewarding video games and solo sex options + rigid, stressful societal expectations/situations --> increasing rates of people "opting out" of "real life."

Adding:
A widow can take over voting if her Husband passes before her. Which is statistically likely.

This will Encourage more Land and Home ownership as well.

Building Stronger families and in turn stronger countries!!

overratedpatriotism
If i were still single i'd head over there and step up to the plate.

men we need volunteers to go repopulate japan.

Anyone?

Me too my friend. I'd be 1st of the list

BobAthome
reply to post by prisoneronashipoffools

 

people are not animals,,animals breed,,people make love,,,in case u did not undersatand,, there is a big,,big,,difference.

and i am curious why u would not know that.?

People ARE animals. The only difference is we asked "why?" we learned to read and write and share knowledge, but we still act like animals with that knowledge.
Just have a little look at industrial meat farming, you will see our animalism in full effect.

reply to post by OneManArmy


guess u just havent been thunderstruck yet,, good luck,, but it will happen,, ohhh ya,,yup,,

ohh and u know, men are stronger because they on an average statically eat more iron rich foods,

it aint called iron for nothing,,now eat your liver,,,cooked with onions,, sautauyed in a bergandy red,,opps.

BobAthome
reply to post by OneManArmy

 

guess u just havent been thunderstruck yet,, good luck,, but it will happen,, ohhh ya,,yup,,

ohh and u know, men are stronger because they on an average statically eat more iron rich foods,

it aint called iron for nothing,,now eat your liver,,,cooked with onions,, sautauyed in a bergandy red,,opps.

edit on 10/30/2013 by BobAthome because: (no reason given)

What does this comment even mean? How does it negate the fact (it is a fact) that humans are animals?

reply to post by opopanax


because humans Love totally completely,,withought fear or anger,,or need,, we just do.

makes us higher than the animals,, but they were here first though,, so like any guest,,,be respectfull.

BobAthome
reply to post by opopanax

 

because humans Love totally completely,,withought fear or anger,,or need,, we just do.

makes us higher than the animals,, but they were here first though,, so like any guest,,,be respectfull.

everything you describe us humans as, we are not.

We are equal to the animals, no one loves totally and completely without fear or anger or need for survival, because if we didnt have those emotions/instincts we wouldnt be human at all.

you were right in that yes we are guests, but we are trashing our room.

VoidHawk
The urge to multiply is one of the strongest urges we have. If they are losing it then something must be causing it.
Fluoride?
Vaccines?
Air pollution?

Social pressure and epigenetic response?

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


why cant it just be "generation gap" or teenage angst,,or maybe its the "get ready too duck under your desk",,
from the 60's,,,we survived kids,, u will as well,, so play nice,,

OneManArmy

damwel
And how may I ask do you arrive at that conclusion.

I arrived at that conclusion from the fact that the oldest homo sapiens sapiens fossil is aged at just under 200,000 years.
And at the fact that no new species has evolved into existence since. And due to the fact that not a single transitional form has ever been found. We have a long history of primate fossils being called pre-humans, when they are just primate fossils, the differences between the primate fossils and the human fossils are so vast that it does not suggest small changes over time. Homo sapiens have been around for at least half a million years.

Things have and always will get worse with time, not better.
We are going backwards. No mutation has ever been proven beneficial.

edit on 201310America/Chicago10pm10pmWed, 30 Oct 2013 13:08:02 -05001013 by OneManArmy because: (no reason given)

I would suggest that you study anthropology before you make such incorrect statements about early man. You are right about the law of entropy (I think that is what you are trying to cite) however you missed the one exception to that law. The one thing in the universe that organizes in the face of entropy...Life!

reply to post by BobAthome


More populated areas tend to have more outrageous sexual proclivities accepted as a norm.

All forms of life have various responses to population stresses. It would seem reasonable that when you get into crowded areas, sexual differences would begin to arise. That is far less extreme than some other creatures which will just change gender altogether.

reply to post by OneManArmy

The eugenics is strong in this one.

Common scientific understanding is weak with this one.



It is a simple of matter of relying on a invention to escape death(rather prolong). Which in fact goes against NATURAL selection because people with weak genes will produce weak genes.

It is not eugenics, its simple scientific or rather common fact. If you take out medicine and life sustaining devices, people will die.

It happens all over the animal kingdom. Humans are just sympathizers, we will and want to save everything.

Nature will win in the end.

luciddream
reply to post by OneManArmy

 

The eugenics is strong in this one.

Common scientific understanding is weak with this one.



It is a simple of matter of relying on a invention to escape death(rather prolong). Which in fact goes against NATURAL selection because people with weak genes will produce weak genes.

It is not eugenics, its simple scientific or rather common fact. If you take out medicine and life sustaining devices, people will die.

It happens all over the animal kingdom. Humans are just sympathizers, we will and want to save everything.

Nature will win in the end.

No its simple compassion, caring and using technology to make lives easier for people.
Isnt that the WHOLE POINT OF MEDICINE?

Or would you rather we abandon technological advancement and throw any type of evolution(meaning technological) out of the window.

SMH. And then allow "nature to take its course". That will involve starving half the worlds population to death, allowing sickness that could be easily treated to kill people.
Sounds great.... NOT!!!

And im the one "lacking basic scientific understanding"?
lol.

reply to post by OneManArmy


Compassing? empathy? caring?

What does that have to do with Evolution not working?

I merely stated why evolution is not working, that is because we keep the weak(genetically) alive to procreate. Just because i stated why does not default me into saying they should die or eugenics..

they will die regardless if it weren't for the artificial support we invented, which is interfering with natural selection process.

All our invention doing is prolonging their death, so they can procreate and pass on the disease.

If you bring compassion and other emotion, it would not fit scientific attitude.

luciddream
Just because i stated why does not default me into saying they should die or eugenics..

they will die regardless if it weren't for the artificial support we invented, which is interfering with natural selection process.

All our invention doing is prolonging their death, so they can procreate and pass on the disease.

So then what exactly is it that you are proposing, because you lost me?

There is a difference between prolonging a death and adding years to a persons life.
"Prolonging a death" suggests prolonging pain and suffering, which simply isnt true.
Besides the true downside to prolonging life is the large increase in degenerative brain disorders.
It would seem we are damned if we do and damned if we dont anyway.
So what genetic diseases should be regarded a taboo?
High blood pressure?
A history of mental illness in the family?
A genetic propensity to cancer?
Blindness?
Dwarfism?

Blond hair and blue eyes?
Who judges who can have children and who cant? The Nazis already tried that one.

And of course climate science has nothing to do with emotion does it?

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


"More populated areas tend to have more outrageous sexual proclivities accepted as a norm. "

ya and something which birthed the INTERNET,,,porn,, sad but true,, as far as sexual awakening at a much,,much,, too early stage in human developement.
in my opinion.
so,, city/urban/internet,,,,its all about reavealing too the innocent,, sometimes the underbelly of humanity.
way too early.
maybe the price for freedom,,is death of innocence.

BobAthome
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

"More populated areas tend to have more outrageous sexual proclivities accepted as a norm. "

ya and something which birthed the INTERNET,,,porn,, sad but true,, as far as sexual awakening at a much,,much,, too early stage in human developement.
in my opinion.
so,, city/urban/internet,,,,its all about reavealing too the innocent,, sometimes the underbelly of humanity.
way too early.
maybe the price for freedom,,is death of innocence.

edit on 10/31/2013 by BobAthome because: (no reason given)

The internet wasnt birthed from porn, although it is porns greatest vehicle.
With regards to sexual awakening, that happened with the appearance of mankind, it has been encouraged or suppressed ever since.
The internet is guilty of one thing.... making information freely available, now the quality of that information is debatable at times, but its information none the less.

The price of freedom is the blood and lost lives of those that stand up and fight to defend it.
The price of freedom of information is the death of innocence.

BobAthome
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

"More populated areas tend to have more outrageous sexual proclivities accepted as a norm. "

ya and something which birthed the INTERNET,,,porn,, sad but true,, as far as sexual awakening at a much,,much,, too early stage in human developement.
in my opinion.
so,, city/urban/internet,,,,its all about reavealing too the innocent,, sometimes the underbelly of humanity.
way too early.
maybe the price for freedom,,is death of innocence.

edit on 10/31/2013 by BobAthome because: (no reason given)

The internet is just the vehicle.

In larger cities people are still people. "The innocent" could also be called "the ignorant". Life stifles naivety and losing naivety is losing innocence. I don't know if that is a bad thing, depending on how it goes.

Regardless, varied sexual proclivities are not bad. There is nothing wrong with sex. I am a 42 year old man married 20 years. And it is of a very high level of importance to both of us.