Sponsor | |
|
|  btedrow | Apr 24, 7:15pm | | Hmmm! Very interesting indeed! TY for posting this. |
|
|
|  gubatron | Apr 26, 4:35am | | I recently heard on PBS that we were actually evolving slower since we take longer to reproduce nowadays. We live longer, we want to do more before having kids. |
|
|
Sponsor |  Thomas-Jefferson | Apr 26, 9:31am | maybe that is true for you and other PBS watchers, but chavs, hip hoppers and happy slappers are breeding like rats... Never mind the birth rate amongst muslims and in the developing world.
Have you seen idiocracy?
youtube.com/watch [youtube.com/watch] |
|
|
|  Bijou242 | Apr 30, 10:04am | What about the so called 'developed world' having children by means of IVF treatment,and using frozen eggs. The results being multiple births? I think your perception of birth rate is quite selective.
Humans may be evolving physically but mentally they have stopped evolving as can be shown by the state of the world today.Instead of worrying about birth rate we should be trying to preserve what we have already. |
|
|
Sponsor | | Thomas-Jefferson | Apr 30, 10:58am | "your perception of birth rate is quite selective"
You mean how I am focused on actual birth rates, rather than hypotheticals?
globalgeografia.com/world/birth_rate.gif [globalgeografia.com/world/birth_rate.gif]
"Humans may be evolving physically but mentally they have stopped evolving as can be shown by the state of the world today.Instead of worrying about birth rate we should be trying to preserve what we have already."
????:S
Are you saying that instead of paying attention to how things work (natural selection for instance...) we should maintain a strict reactionary stance?
How does the state of the world today suggest to you that humans have "mentally ... stopped evolving"? That is not an impression which we share... |
|
|
| | InadvertentlyMe | Apr 30, 3:03pm | 1 - Ok - the more births, the more opportunity for mutations and their survival. Does that really mean it's sped up, or that there have been more frequent surviving births? Hence more mutations...
3 - Some would argue that could mean fewer, but healthier kids. A temporary quantum leap in health. Even if for one or two generations everyone did that... it would represent a very large change in the quality of the gene pool. imo.
4 - Idiocracy sucked. The fundamental premise is amusing and interesting. That's not to say, however, that he's right.
6 - That quote uses bad logic. You know as much. "The state of the world today" could be caused by many factors - decreased mental function COULD be one... given the state of science and psychological understanding... I doubt that line of reasoning holds.
Resources, religion, fear mongering, have's and have-not's... the same issues we've always had. It is nice being able to turn on a little box and find out that somewhere out there someone is at war with someone else... it makes anecdotal the-world-is-falling arguments more intuitive. Just not more right. |
|
|
Sponsor | | Thomas-Jefferson | May 1, 9:50am | | I think we can all agree that ideally people would expend more resources per child, and not have children if they weren't ready to care for them. therefore our birthrate across the globe would decrease. That just isn't happening. |
|
|
Sponsor | | notsharp | May 1, 7:23pm | 8: sure, as long as i'm the child...
perhaps, however, the crucible is the thing... Life can really take it out of you (or can it?). |
|
|
Sponsor | | Thomas-Jefferson | May 1, 7:27pm | meritocracy. People should compete for hierarchy and prestige.
Where is the human predator? What thins the herd? What is our process for culling the irredeemably dysfunctional or sociopathic? More "evolutionary" benefit could come from reducing our number through attrition than through abortion or sterilization. Consider natural selection. Of course uplifting and nourishing those who are capable of being functional (starting with the youngest!) is most urgent of all.
Contemplate the ethics of death, choice and experimentation. Real science and ethics need to be applied to engineering the social "sciences" Marxism needs to be transcended in academia. The humanities departments in particular seem to suffer from a lack of art or science.
We need qualitative, revolutionary progress in culture if we intend to prevent "idiocracy". |
|
|
|
Futurism → Discussion![[globalgeografia.com/world/birth_rate.gif]](http://www.stumbleupon.com/url/www.globalgeografia.com/world/birth_rate.gif){kind=link}