posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 12:57 PM
Originally posted by Urantia1111
I have little doubt this is true. Once you remove natural selection from the process, as we have done with civilization, its no longer the strongest
or smartest that reproduces most successfully. Its whoever has the most sex. Often intelligent people are so preoccupied with carreer that they never
get around to having kids. Idiots will have as many as possible.
Watch 'Idiocracy' to see where we're headed and why...
I think tha'ts basically what this guy is arguing in the OP. Since we've removed the culling that kills off the dumb people that means we've pushed
evolution aside and obstructed it. So now what?
Honestly, to preserve our humanity we had to do this. We're NOT heartless. We won't sit and let nature kill off dumb people because we're too social
as a species to let that happen.
I am not sure it really matters, though. I've made a couple previous posts to this already in this thread. Our technology and knowledge may make this
whole argument obsolete. With the ability to engineer our own genome and to augment our brain with computer technology, nanomachines and other things
to enhance intelligence or capability, it won't matter so much that natural evolution is slowed. It may be that this guy is right and yet wrong too.
It may be that we had to go through this period of loss to get to a period of surplus. And what follows after that is science fiction right now.
Consider this... Birds have wings to fly. We have airplanes. Fish have gills and fins to swim. We have submarines and oxygen tanks and ships. Spiders
have legs and webs to climb walls and hang from branches. We've got ropes and hydraulics and pulleys. Bats have eyes that can see in pitch darkness.
We have radar and sonar. Cheetah have strong legs and sharp bodies to attain 70mph running speeds. We have motor cars and jet cars that can go upwards
of 760mph. The list goes on and on of the things evolution can do that we've done with technology. But let me ask a question. Humans have big brains
to allow them to be intelligent. How is that different from birds having wings? We also have computer software AI and model-simulations that can
duplicate some of these intelligence feats. How long before our technology can duplicate all of it? And why should we be able to duplicate the feats
of flight and swimming underwater and climbing on walls and detecting objects at night and moving at fast speeds and NOT be able to duplicate the feat
of intelligence? It's logical...
What's going on is this:
1) We give our fate to natural evolution
2) We give our fate to controlled evolution
Or a ratio of the two together. It doesn't have to be either/or.
Evolution apparently doesn't understand the human heart. Because it wants to kill everybody that doesn't measure up to its standards. While we're not
immune to killing our own kin, we can exercise a more discriminating judgment. Perhaps that's why we're pushing aside natural evolution.
Now... I'm not sure I actually believe all that I just typed. In truth, I don't. There're too many assumptions. The OP is linking to a professor who
is making a HYPOTHESIS. It's not proof.
So this is a lot of wind. There's NO way I'd throw away the past 10,000 years. That's CRAZY. Humanity has made a lot of progress, as I see it. We're
better than we've ever been. We're living longer. We know how to live in a complex and expansive society. We've gained immense knowledge. NO WAY would
I throw this away. And I want more proof. Not just a hypothesis.
edit on 13-11-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)