hjn0mkomi,-0ui9mko ([info]theinamorato) wrote in [info]_discussion,
@ 2005-09-29 14:50:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
evolution
One thing that I have a problem with is the statement that the purpose of evolution is to pass on genes that would push forward the human race, therefore; by that statement of 'fact', where do people like this fall into?


















It seems I am surrounded by these people on a daily basis, this would be a degenerative thing, not progressive, like a sess pool genes. I think it would be a unanimous consensus that the majority of the population is stupid, so where is the explanation for it?

I postulate that this can be partly contributed to the modern western diet that consists of dangerous foods laced with hormones i.e. Mcdonalds; it would probably be better feeding the baby crack then this. Would this be an explanation of this phenomenon? Or else I think I just proved the fallacy of evolution

(Post a new comment)


[info]darwinian_finch
2005-09-29 06:57 pm UTC (link)
Evolution only works if society does not spoon-feed its inhabitants, which it does.

Those first two individuals MUST be the result of inbreeding, which goes against the fundamentals of progressive evolution.

As for the others, that's just behavioral/nutritional setbacks.

Thusly, no, you have not proved the fallacy of evolution, just exceptions to it.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

(Deleted post)
(no subject) - [info]darwinian_finch, 2005-09-29 07:09 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]theinamorato, 2005-09-29 07:19 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]rev_hicks, 2005-09-30 04:18 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]theamaranth, 2005-09-30 06:36 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]rev_hicks, 2005-10-02 09:17 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]feei, 2005-09-29 10:12 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]theinamorato, 2005-09-29 10:23 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]feei, 2005-09-29 10:25 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]feei, 2005-09-29 10:28 pm UTC

[info]lakidaa
2005-10-05 02:50 am UTC (link)
They are the result of inbreeding. I've seen that image before; it's of a pair of two South African men who kept it in the white family.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]jeremy_liberius
2005-09-29 07:34 pm UTC (link)
It is a common misunderstanding that evolution is progressive. It is not. Organisms simply adapt to their surroundings. If you take humans, and put them in cages, feeding them very little, it would be the more efficient beings who survive. Brains take a lot of energy, so eventually, their brains would become smaller and more efficient, considering that you do not need vast amounts of brain power to be fed. Of course, any actual changes would take many generations.

In modern society, there is very little natural selection. Most everyone can survive with minimal effort, and medical progress has eliminated most of the danger caused by contagious and hereditary diseases. Therefore, stupidity and sickliness is no longer being selected against.

As for the pictures above...

1. The individuals appear to be the result of a genetic deformation, possibly caused by inbreeding. I highly doubt that you encounter people like this every day, unless you live in the south. If you honestly think that these two will be able to pass on their genes (except perhaps with their sisters)you have no idea how sexual relations work.

2. I don't exactly see what is wrong with this character, except perhaps his choice in facial accessories. That and his facial hair are primarily cultural.

3+4. You know, at one point, this would have been an evolutionary advantage. When food is scarce, you want to pack on as many pounds as you can, and you would still never get this large. Damned evolution, it couldn't completely change the human genome in the past couple centuries in which starvation has been wiped out for the most part.

Jopeph, you show a great misusnderstanding of the theory of evolution. I suggest you learn a little about a science before you declare it false.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]theinamorato
2005-09-29 07:40 pm UTC (link)
good post! but a capitalistic, monetary society is what we all live under and is what it is applied to; it would seem best to adapt to those situations principally. The Freudian theory that natural drive for satisfaction and well being is foremost in everybody - or the drive for survival. I would figure this is what would be the bearer of evolution

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
(no subject) - [info]theinamorato, 2005-09-29 07:43 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]theinamorato, 2005-09-29 08:49 pm UTC

[info]myeloma
2005-09-29 11:28 pm UTC (link)
Just as an aside, the misconception that Southerners are nothing but inbred ner-do-wells is just that, a complete misconception. It's the redneck, backwards-thinking, Klan-loving freaks that get the press. That coupled with our overly polite natures and slow speech patterns seem to give the impression that we're not quite as sharp or quick as a Northerner.

I hate to tell you, but that's far from the truth. Not only are we far more polite on the whole than most other places in the States, but we have some of the premire scientific research facilities in the nation. M.D. Anderson, The Myeloma Institute at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, University of North Carolina, Mayo Florida, Tulane (a bit underwater at the moment), Vanderbilt, and Baylor are all supremely competitive research institutions. My institute, for example, is the leading myeloma research centre in the world, thank you very much.

In the future, do try not to judge us by our representatives in Washington or the Jerry Springer Show. They may be scary in their similarities to each other, but not to the rest of us.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
(no subject) - [info]theinamorato, 2005-09-30 12:20 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]myeloma, 2005-09-30 01:08 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]theinamorato, 2005-09-30 01:11 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]myeloma, 2005-09-30 01:20 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]rev_hicks, 2005-09-30 04:20 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]jeremy_liberius, 2005-09-30 07:09 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2005-10-05 12:07 am UTC

[info]igorius_maximus
2005-09-29 10:05 pm UTC (link)
Evolution takes not thousands, but hundreds of thousands of years to take effect.

Having that in mind, think about the modern society and how long it's been around... 100 years? And think about how quickly it's been changing! I think we can blame this rapid change on technological advancements.

Ever since we decided fire was useful, technology has been evolving much faster than our physiology. We started hunting more efficiently not because we became smarter or stronger, but because we acquired sticks. Sure, the change had to have taken place in our brain size to start the wheel spinning. Pun intended. But since about 60 million years ago (correct me if I'm wrong) the homo sapien species has remained physically the exact same.

You are stating that evolution has failed to kill off the imperfections in humanity such as stupidity and obesity. These characteristics have been a major concern only recently, where you can be stupid and/or obese and survive just fine, because our modern society allows it.

But evolution hasn't yet had a chance to take effect. Give it a few more thousands of years, and I can assure you, such societies that thrive on stupidity will cease to exist, taking with them stupidity itself.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]theinamorato
2005-09-29 10:22 pm UTC (link)
Evolution takes not thousands, but hundreds of thousands of years to take effect.

Says who?
There are many examples of it being instantaneous, specifically during times of disease

The rest of that is just the same mind bile you regulated, then:

But evolution hasn't yet had a chance to take effect. Give it a few more thousands of years, and I can assure you, such societies that thrive on stupidity will cease to exist, taking with them stupidity itself.

But yet again, it doesn’t take hundreds of years. Actually we have had hundreds of years were physical beauty and intelligence is desired, if you look at roman empire they had pretty much the same values and aesthetic desires as we do - you can go even further back when intelligence was the pinnacle of society.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
(no subject) - [info]theinamorato, 2005-09-29 10:34 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]igorius_maximus, 2005-09-29 10:41 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]theinamorato, 2005-09-29 10:49 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]igorius_maximus, 2005-09-29 11:17 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]theinamorato, 2005-09-29 11:29 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]igorius_maximus, 2005-09-29 11:46 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]theinamorato, 2005-09-30 12:01 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]igorius_maximus, 2005-09-30 01:06 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]hollowman, 2005-09-30 01:06 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]theinamorato, 2005-09-30 01:13 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]jeremy_liberius, 2005-09-30 07:32 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]igorius_maximus, 2005-09-29 10:37 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]theinamorato, 2005-09-29 10:51 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]theinamorato, 2005-09-29 11:35 pm UTC

[info]feei
2005-09-29 10:26 pm UTC (link)
hahaha. igor!

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
(no subject) - [info]igorius_maximus, 2005-09-29 10:27 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]feei, 2005-09-29 10:28 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]igorius_maximus, 2005-09-29 10:31 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]feei, 2005-09-29 10:33 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]chickenthegreat, 2005-09-30 12:26 am UTC

[info]ghostlight
2005-09-30 01:52 am UTC (link)
Evolution takes not thousands, but hundreds of thousands of years to take effect.

Utterly false.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
(no subject) - [info]igorius_maximus, 2005-10-01 02:31 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]ghostlight, 2005-10-01 04:47 am UTC

[info]epictetus_rex
2005-09-30 12:50 am UTC (link)
Yah it's been said but evolution has no "purpose". It is not goal-directed, yo.


Except possibly to make people feel self-righteous about the "naturalness" of their opinions.


(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]theinamorato
2005-09-30 12:54 am UTC (link)
Such as that you are a fucking idiot that just made me waste precious seconds reading this post?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
(no subject) - [info]static_rhapsody, 2005-09-30 01:40 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]epictetus_rex, 2005-09-30 03:48 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]rev_hicks, 2005-09-30 04:24 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]epictetus_rex, 2005-09-30 01:57 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]cornered_buddah, 2005-09-30 12:48 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ecstacypsu, 2005-09-30 02:06 pm UTC

[info]hollowman
2005-09-30 12:59 am UTC (link)

Evolution is designed to make people who breed more effectivly. It couldn't care less if we're smarter. If birth rates are higher in the Ozarks than in Universities, then the people of the Ozarks are evolutionarily better designed and more fit than the people in universities.

I would say, assuming a majority of people are, as you claim, stupid, then the explanation is pretty obvious. Being stupid is a superior evolutionary strategy.

(Reply to this)


[info]aj_reloaded
2005-09-30 04:59 am UTC (link)
Tell me, Joe. Are you merely an aberration in the gene pool, or are societal constructs to blame for your unfathomable faggotry?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

(Anonymous)
2005-09-30 02:12 pm UTC (link)
Now THAT was an 8/10. Sharp, concise, lots of syllables, biting. Bravo!

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
(no subject) - [info]igorius_maximus, 2005-10-01 02:32 am UTC
Evolution != progress
[info]schol_r_lea
2005-09-30 06:14 am UTC (link)
Evolution doesn't have a purpose; it has a behavior, that's all. There isn't any 'better' or 'more evolved' to it - just more adapted to the current circumstances. A tapeworm is just as evolved as we are, if not more so - it doesn't try to live in environments it isn't suited for.

This means that natural selection works just fine with the current social changes - it's simply that the current selective advantages have gone to those who work the political and economic system best.

Darwin went out of his way to disavow the interpretation of natural selection as a form of progress, but people keep trying to read what they want into it.

(Reply to this)


[info]i_am_pellucid
2005-09-30 07:58 am UTC (link)
We are stupid because our society has caused us to be. It's not genetics; it's the idea that being "cool" is more important than being intelligent.

(Reply to this)


[info]cornered_buddah
2005-09-30 12:51 pm UTC (link)
I wish I had a tail, but evolution got rid of it. Damn bastard evolution with all those "progressive" tricks up its sleeves.

Evolution isn't as linear as "progress" or "regression". Thats already been said ten times over but I felt like saying it again.

(Reply to this)


[info]toxicaberration
2005-09-30 08:05 pm UTC (link)
evolution is to perpetuate genes. what is most adapted to the environment survives, whether or not it will "improve" the race. if it is most advantegous to be ugly in some strange area, then ugly people are more likely to survive there and more likely thus to spread their genes.
right now, unfortunately, what with this new-fangled "health-care", people live on and reproduce even if they have utterly devastating diseases, are stupid, have bad habits, etc. "health-care" has messed up proper evolution.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]cornered_buddah
2005-10-02 07:55 am UTC (link)
Whats proper?

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]cornered_buddah
2005-10-02 05:00 pm UTC (link)
I forgot to add that I think that three-toed sloths are one of the coolest species for "devolving" into something considered "inferior" (slow, sleepy, lacking senses, etc) and have no predators (correct me if I'm wrong on this) because of these "inferior" qualities (algae and bugs cover them because they move so slow which acts as camoflage so they apear like a stationary tree or something; since their senses are so poor they don't get startled by possible predators and so have no need to move fast).

I think that dolphins may get offended if we said they had "devolved" into a marine mamal since they were required to do so because of environmental issues. They would probably be offended in saying that the natural course of evolution was evolution from the oceans to land, because they are intelligent beings, aparently more intelligent than humans judging by cranial capacity. But their huge brains don't help much in a "non-primitive" body capable of going fast speeds, doing crazy flips and spotting prey with sonar (we just have these hairy, monkey bodies with hands capable of making tools). Like humans and sloths, dolphins don't really have natural enemies (except for humans, as is the case for the other two).

(Reply to this)


[info]cornered_buddah
2005-10-02 05:42 pm UTC (link)
I think that judging people is an unintelligent thing to do especially when those things being critiqued (physical appearence, diet, and beliefs) have little bearing on the criteria for judgement (in this case it is intelligence/stupidity which is being judged).

Furthermore, intelligence and stupidity are very subjective and rely on an array of norms and values. So yes, the majority of the population is stupid if by majority you mean everyone and if stupidity is judged from everyone's standards.

(Reply to this)

Lesson 1
[info]muhammad_allah
2005-10-04 11:48 am UTC (link)
1. Inbreeding =/= evolution.
2. Inbreeding = devolution.
3. Ask your parents if they are siblings. NOW!

(Reply to this) (Thread)
Re: Lesson 1
[info]cornered_buddah
2005-10-05 07:44 pm UTC (link)
Mine arn't. They arn't even 5th cousins or anything closer.

(Reply to this) (Parent)
pictures of people
[info]freightcardiner
2005-10-05 09:13 am UTC (link)
it seems incredibly shortsighted to me for someone to think these people have no purpose. the most obvious purpose to me now pertains directly to science. a fat person has a heart attack and goes into a hospital. the construction of the body is such that a new procedure has to be done while on the table. the new experimental procedure is experimented with and becomes a new effective way to save lives.

we have the capacity to learn from every 'mistake' we make. whether that be a brother and sister having sex or a man having nothing more fulfilling in his life than food.

beyond that, i'm sad that we're all so calice about human beings. in most cases the difference between people is simply the environment and the construct of the body. wake up and realize you're so incredibly like these people that to spit on them is to spit on yourself. to distance ourselves from 'mistakes' in our society is to breed ignorance on both sides and further alienate the whole society. give anyone who isn't irreperably demented a strong mentor, a million dollars, and 3 generations and they'll be on this side of the fence looking at pictures of someone else's kids.

(Reply to this)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…