- Joined
- May 3, 2019
OP probably shouldn't breed. Luckily, I don't think we need to do anything to him to accomplish that.
Is natural selection gone? - What should we do about the mentally and psychically inferior in-order to progress the human race?
- Thread starter goldmanjoe
- Start date
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2018
Just push everyone autistic and retarded to cut off his dick, so they can't produce offspring anymore.
Troonery is saving the human race.
Troonery is saving the human race.
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2018
To suggest that modern medicine has killed natural selection is to be arrogant enough to presume to know a "goal" to evolution.
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2019
In his own theoretical utopia of forced sterilization, he'd be the first snipped, because he isn't as smart as he thinks he is. His historical analog about the Spartans isn't even true. Xenophon wrote quite a bit on how to breed strong Spartan soldiers, but never mentions infanticide as a means to do so. Agesilaus II, King of Sparta, was fucking short and lame. The actual quote from Lycurgus about forced infanticide is attributed through Plutarch from the 2nd Century AD and is almost certainly just bullshit.
Infanticide for infants with severe deformities in the ancient world was a practice to prevent resources from being directed towards an infant that would likely die anyway due to the special care they might require; not because letting them live made that particular culture or race "weak." Even then most infanticide was due to a child being born, regardless of their health, that couldn't be fed. Upwards of 50% of births in the Neolithic period were met with infanticide -- usually by abandonment.
Gravityqueen4life
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- May 29, 2019
atleast in the west thanks too the wellfare system. makes you wonder what will happen once the system gets removed.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2018
There is simply one solution. We take it into our own hands and naturally select those that need to be removed from this world in order to make it a better place. I suggest we start with @goldmanjoe . We can't expect God to do all the work.
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2017
Science is already working on getting rid of genetic diseases with CRISPR, but, of course, that could not satiate Kiwi boner for mass murder at all
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2018
Natural selection is not strictly speaking "survival of the best", it is survival of the fittest. People still manage to either not reproduce or to create dead ends due to their offspring's failed adaptation to society at large. The "fittest" in modern society are those who are capable of navigating civilization. Whether that be a fairly mundane variety like holding a job and just creating a healthy child that doesn't do stupid shit, or in a more romantic fashion "conquering" your environment, it's all about SUCCESSFUL reproduction.
If a gay man has a baby with an egg donor and that child grows up to become a functional adult and then reproduces with someone else then it is technically a success, in a strictly Darwinian sense.
Conversely, if Jamal and Amara have a kid out of wedlock and Jamal Jr. gets swiss cheesed trying to rob a gas station, that is obviously a failure.
It's all about a) reproducing and b) making sure that reproduction reproduces, ad infinitum.
If a gay man has a baby with an egg donor and that child grows up to become a functional adult and then reproduces with someone else then it is technically a success, in a strictly Darwinian sense.
Conversely, if Jamal and Amara have a kid out of wedlock and Jamal Jr. gets swiss cheesed trying to rob a gas station, that is obviously a failure.
It's all about a) reproducing and b) making sure that reproduction reproduces, ad infinitum.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2019
The idea that natural selection is gone, is a foolish idea.
Of course this requires the delineation between what is natural and what is human in the first place. We essentially have some shared understanding of the idea that the unnatural is things that man has invented, conceived or produced, particularly those that we disagree with.
Like we wouldn't call building and living in a hut unnatural, but living in a house is. Even though rodents, insects and other live things also have no problem living in that same house.
Nature doesn't care. That's the great tragedy. The complete indifference to our existence. Every day ancient genelines die off permanently. There are those who don't get to mate, those who see all of their progeny die, those who get to mate but think there's too many kids in the world already, those who choose to wait too long.
Conversely here is Jan Karbaat who fathered over 60 children by secretly using his own sperm in his sperm bank:
www.dailymail.co.uk
(as well as impregnating over a thousand women in Netherlands and Austria with the sperm mentally handicapped man)
Natural selection is ongoing and infinite. You might call it unnatural selection because the conditions are brought forward by humans, but we are ourselves part of nature and so is everything we create.
Or is there some other distinction between natural / unnatural that would make more sense for me to adopt?
Of course this requires the delineation between what is natural and what is human in the first place. We essentially have some shared understanding of the idea that the unnatural is things that man has invented, conceived or produced, particularly those that we disagree with.
Like we wouldn't call building and living in a hut unnatural, but living in a house is. Even though rodents, insects and other live things also have no problem living in that same house.
Nature doesn't care. That's the great tragedy. The complete indifference to our existence. Every day ancient genelines die off permanently. There are those who don't get to mate, those who see all of their progeny die, those who get to mate but think there's too many kids in the world already, those who choose to wait too long.
Conversely here is Jan Karbaat who fathered over 60 children by secretly using his own sperm in his sperm bank:
Head of Dutch fertility clinic 'used his OWN sperm' to father children
Jan Karbaat, who died last month, aged 89, is accused of using his own sperm instead of that of chosen donors at the fertility clinic he ran close to the port city of Rotterdam.
(as well as impregnating over a thousand women in Netherlands and Austria with the sperm mentally handicapped man)
Natural selection is ongoing and infinite. You might call it unnatural selection because the conditions are brought forward by humans, but we are ourselves part of nature and so is everything we create.
Or is there some other distinction between natural / unnatural that would make more sense for me to adopt?
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2019
genetics doesn’t work like that though. It’s not a case of ‘genetically weak lines’ that if you snuff them out you’ll end up with a ‘strong and pure’ population.
1. We all carry potentially harmful mutations -most of them are recessive and so unless we breed with someone else with the same one it never even gets noticed.
2. Many mutations and other genetic issue arise de novo - Down syndrome for example arises when chromosomes don’t segregate properly during reproduction and that’s (almost) always just random.
3. Some genetic conditions are single gene but many are multigenic and so you can’t just screen for Gene x and sterilise everyone with it.
4. People with low intelligence can have clever babies and vice versa. Intelligence has about 50% heritability. It’s not a fixed upward or downward trajectory, it’s more like a reshuffling of the deck in each generation.
In short, if you stopped everyone who had any potentially damaging genetic mutation breeding you’d end up with about twenty people left alive.
1. We all carry potentially harmful mutations -most of them are recessive and so unless we breed with someone else with the same one it never even gets noticed.
2. Many mutations and other genetic issue arise de novo - Down syndrome for example arises when chromosomes don’t segregate properly during reproduction and that’s (almost) always just random.
3. Some genetic conditions are single gene but many are multigenic and so you can’t just screen for Gene x and sterilise everyone with it.
4. People with low intelligence can have clever babies and vice versa. Intelligence has about 50% heritability. It’s not a fixed upward or downward trajectory, it’s more like a reshuffling of the deck in each generation.
In short, if you stopped everyone who had any potentially damaging genetic mutation breeding you’d end up with about twenty people left alive.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2019
Bit of a nitpick, but 50% is lowballing it somewhat. IQ between children and birth parents has a correlation closer to 65%, though studies do vary on this subject a lot, -from .45 up to .80 depending on the study.
That is still a huge correlation. It's more accurate to say that people with low intelligence can have average intelligence babies. It's like saying you can survive a fall from the second floor compared to saying you can survive a fall from the twentieth floor. It's both true of course, but one is so rare that it makes more sense to say it's almost impossible.
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2019
Natural selection still occurs, rather than environmental threats that are the chief decides it tends to be ones capacity to navigate society and influence others that ensures reproductive success
As @Exigent Circumcisions pointed out; our genepool is tiny and some diseases can have some relativley useful side effects. We're not in a position right now where we can make use of them via genetic engineering reliably or in a controllable way; but it seems a mistake to destroy them when they could potentially be useful in the future.
Things like Savantism are especially interesting to me in this regard; could you imagine if we could give everyone a photographic memory or that capacity for concentration without the downsides that people like Kim Peake or Temple Grandin suffer?
As @Exigent Circumcisions pointed out; our genepool is tiny and some diseases can have some relativley useful side effects. We're not in a position right now where we can make use of them via genetic engineering reliably or in a controllable way; but it seems a mistake to destroy them when they could potentially be useful in the future.
Things like Savantism are especially interesting to me in this regard; could you imagine if we could give everyone a photographic memory or that capacity for concentration without the downsides that people like Kim Peake or Temple Grandin suffer?
Clop
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2018
Stupid people already think they're young forever and they can fuck like rabbits with zero consequences. Result: Sexually transmitted diseases run rampant, and these fucking dumbasses will be extremely unlikely to have kids, and any who are unfortunate enough to let the rubber rip are going to produce prison population, who are even less likely to continue the family tree.
Keep in mind that the population explosion happened only recently in relation to the timeline of humanity. Nature always weeds itself more thoroughly than we ever could. Natural selection will never be beaten. Nature always wins.
Keep in mind that the population explosion happened only recently in relation to the timeline of humanity. Nature always weeds itself more thoroughly than we ever could. Natural selection will never be beaten. Nature always wins.
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2019
Y
YW 525
Guest
kiwifarms.net
Natural Selection never went away and in fact the sequel Natural Selection 2 is still kind of alive. We're talking great FPS gameplay, great tactical gameplay, tons of options, and rewards for experience and knowledge.
Maybe you want to settle into some classic FPS action by blowing up aliens or maybe you want to spice up your FPS and play as the aliens, crawling and flying around the map in all new ways.
Or maybe you've grown weary of the experience on the ground and want to take command. Well, any successful team in NS needs a commander and in that role you will be helping your troops from the overhead map.
It's awesome. No, Natural Selection is not gone. It is better than it has ever been!!
It's awesome. No, Natural Selection is not gone. It is better than it has ever been!!
E
ES 195
Guest
kiwifarms.net
Are you saying people from a long time ago were not savage barbarians but instead think and act just like we do now? Get out of here with that crazy talk.
An Account
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2019
Use CRISPR to genetically engineer Umbrella-style abominations that are programmed to commit mass murder. Now everyone's happy!
- Joined
- May 14, 2019
I can't find it now, but I saw this one video that covered that topic. Even Paleolithic campsites have evidence of cripples and freaks having been part of their society. Normal mothers don't go and kill their children just because there's something wrong with them.
E
ES 195
Guest
kiwifarms.net
I'd believe it. It's not like empathy was some renaissance invention or something.
