O.K. while I know that many on this board lack the abillity to think critically I would like to point out that the "worker slave" hypothesis makes
absolutly no sense when viewed in the context of human nature.
Take for example an animal which we know for a fact to be "designed" (through selective breeding) as a labourer.
Oxen.
Now oxen have been used by man for millenia, and over that time we have as a species bred theses beasts of burden for specific traits.
1) Endurance
2) strength
3) docility
In addition we have intentionally tried to breed certain traits out of these beasts the biggest being agression, both directed torwards other speces
and thier own. After all if you have to work two oxen in a team you don't want them fighting do you?
Now what does this have to do with the "worker slave" hypothesis?
Well to put it simply humans are among the most agressive beings on the planet, both torwards ourselves and other species. Cruelty, violence,
rage etc are a part of our nature.
My point is had we been "designed", whether through selective breeding or genetic tech to be workers these traits are amongst the first traits that
would have been removed. Add to that our innate fear of things we don't understand, which invariably leads to agression and humans emerge as a
species fantastically unsuited for slave labor. Hell we still kill people because they are a different color, much less a species from an
entirley different planet.
Now the idea of humans having been bred as a soldier race, well that is, at least based on human nature, somewhat plausible.


