Posted on 07/10/2004 7:06:11 AM PDT by jalisco555
We correct the vision. People with vision defects have children with vision defects. They get corrected. Eventually everyone will have vision defects and if our technological civilization fails at that point everyone will die of things they didn't see coming. We make it possible for every sacred life to be lived, and in so doing guarantee the eventual extinction of the species.
I agree. How can a clueless person ramble on so long?
Unlike plants and wild animals, human evolution is not a natural process. It occurs mostly during war. During the 20th century 180 million people were killed in 165 wars, about 1 in 10 people. Usually it’s the smartest that survive. That's why modern man developed intelligence far beyond that needed to find food. Most human genetic traits are all about winning at war.
Compared to natural evolution, war is very high speed. Genetic mutations in the wild can take 100,000 years to vet, while war can dramatically change the human gene pool in a few years. This high speed evolution is the reason humans are the most genetically advanced animal ever, even though we are relatively new on the scene.
War is also the reason there is little genetic variation among humans. We've killed off all competitors, such as the Neanderthals. This is very different than plants and wild animals. Monkeys have many genetic variations. Humans do not.
Fifty years ago 50% of the Jews in Europe were killed. What genetic impact did this have? Many of the Einstein types survived. The Jews have been the target of many mass killings over thousands of years. I suspect that is the reason that the average Jewish person alive today, in general with many exceptions, is smarter than average.
If they did, they'd simply feel it justified adding another 18,336,576 to their totals in 2004.
With a few exceptions wars have only killed off a vanishingly small portion of the population to cause much of genetic impact. Any impact it has will pale in comparison to the effect of the tendancy that those with a PHD tend to have far less children then those who dropped out of high school.
Well, I don't want children. But that doesn't seem relevant, since I still don't have any desire to engage in activity that puts me at high risk for contracting HIV.
I'm in Georgia. Here, there is no such word as "evolution". Instead, we're supposed to use the phrase "changes over time". Ain't that a kick?
You are proposing potential consequences to evolution that I don't like. Therefore they are false.
That brings up another subject. With the invention of the pill in the 60s, double X chromosome intelligence has become a self-limiting trait. I don't think men with Ph.Ds father significantly less children. The pill hasn't been around long enough to have had a major genetic impact but it will be significant in the future. Before the pill, highly educated women had many children.
If you don't think wars have had a significant genetic impact, look around. How many Native North Americans do you see? Thinking that world wars have ended is a bad bet. It's just a matter of time before the terrorists get a nuclear device and kill millions of people, setting off another revision to the gene pool.
Anything not yet fully explained is a miracle. Not only that, but anything that I don't (or refuse to) understand is also a miracle. Any attempt to debate me is satanic. Give me political power and I will burn you at the stake.
</fanatic Luddite mode>
Darwin's model only works in the wild; everything else is influence.
Walk us through the proof, or stop selling the fantasy.
Your choice.
I made an almost identical statement to a woman I worked with about 20 years ago, she went over to the temple on station and laid a curse on me, or so she said.
Ack, somebody else knows the secret!
There are over 600 known inherited genetic diseases. There is only one known positive mutation, and it's not clear yet whether or not it has negative side effects.
Therefore it seems easy to conclude that enough negative effects from random mutation make it pass stage two, that the genetic gene pool will see continuous degradation. And that not enough positive mutations occur to offset the negative load.
It's de-evolution. Man isn't coming from the apes, he's going to them.
I come with a message of hope and love, and you attempt to marginalize with Liberal tactics. Believing in a Creator is not a bad thing that should be equated to unthinking fanaticism. Your characterization is demonstrably inaccurate.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.