Apart from resistance to certain diseases, do you feel that modern society discourages evolution? Since 'survival of the fittest' isn't particularly relevant anymore, "good genes" are passed on just as much as "bad genes". I'm not saying it's come to a complete standstill, but we no longer have as much a need to adapt to our environments.

Thoughts?

I'm no expert on evolution and it's principles, but the way I see it is that animals have always had to change and evolve to suit the changing environment. But now that humans have real technology, we can create our own adaptations with things we can make.

For example, say somehow all of the earths temperatures dramatically dropped to the point where you can't even be outside for more than a few hours at a time. In today's world we would be able to adapt ourselves by staying inside and using heating systems. Basicly we can emulate ideal conditions and therefore there is no need for our body's to evolve if we can always have these ideal conditions. But if this happened and humans didnt have modern day technology, I would assume that we would maybe start growing hair all over our bodies again to stay warm.

Like I said, I dont really know a whole lot about evolution principles, but its just a theory.

I'm no expert on evolution and it's principles, but the way I see it is that animals have always had to change and evolve to suit the changing environment. But now that humans have real technology, we can create our own adaptations with things we can make.

For example, say somehow all of the earths temperatures dramatically dropped to the point where you can't even be outside for more than a few hours at a time. In today's world we would be able to adapt ourselves by staying inside and using heating systems. Basicly we can emulate ideal conditions and therefore there is no need for our body's to evolve if we can always have these ideal conditions. But if this happened and humans didnt have modern day technology, I would assume that we would maybe start growing hair all over our bodies again to stay warm.

Like I said, I dont really know a whole lot about evolution principles, but its just a theory.

That's my point.

what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. society takes away pain, people become weak and stupid and mass produce.

Think Wall-e (If you've seen it)

Technology will allow humans to control our own evolution with genetic engineering, cybernetics, intelligence enhancement etc. I can't believe nobody mentioned this, just parroted the usual bullshit like a bunch of brainwashed sheep.

Totse is the last place I'd expect to see such things.

Technology will allow humans to control our own evolution with genetic engineering, cybernetics, intelligence enhancement etc. I can't believe nobody mentioned this, just parroted the usual bullshit like a bunch of brainwashed sheep.

Totse is the last place I'd expect to see such things.

Last I looked around this country is just full of stupid fucking worthless people. Theres nothing to kill off the dumb masses and due to our "fantastic democracy" there will never be ANY limit on birth or reproduction (excluding abortion) that will keep dumb, fat, stupid motherfuckers from breeding at an alarming rate. Maybe there will be an influx of "genetically superior" people but to think that they will take over the world is just stupid.

Intelligence enhancement? The majority of the world doesn't even get basic schooling and your talking about providing them intelligence enhancement? Get real, theres no money in that.

I think Carlin hits this topic perfectly. (Below)

http://youtube.com/watch?v=_ssPhXuH-JU
The stupid masses will always breed in extreme numbers. There is NO check on that. If we really wanted to control our own evolution we could easily do it through eugencis, but that will never happen.

Last I looked around this country is just full of stupid fucking worthless people. Theres nothing to kill off the dumb masses and due to our "fantastic democracy" there will never be ANY limit on birth or reproduction (excluding abortion) that will keep dumb, fat, stupid motherfuckers from breeding at an alarming rate. Maybe there will be an influx of "genetically superior" people but to think that they will take over the world is just stupid.

Intelligence enhancement? The majority of the world doesn't even get basic schooling and your talking about providing them intelligence enhancement? Get real, theres no money in that.

Hey dumbass, average IQ has been increasing over the years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect

There goes your entire argument.



I think Carlin hits this topic perfectly. (Below)

http://youtube.com/watch?v=_ssPhXuH-JU
The stupid masses will always breed in extreme numbers. There is NO check on that. If we really wanted to control our own evolution we could easily do it through eugencis, but that will never happen.

Please don't quote a fucking stand-up comedian to bolster your argument. Eugenics is an extremely crude tool that completely ignores the possibilities of near future technologies. It's worthless. Stop trying to be a Nietzschean Superman. You fail at it.

Technology will allow humans to control our own evolution with genetic engineering, cybernetics, intelligence enhancement etc. I can't believe nobody mentioned this, just parroted the usual bullshit like a bunch of brainwashed sheep.

Totse is the last place I'd expect to see such things.

In what period of time do you expect humans to reach the level of technological sophistication required to accurately and safely integrate artificial devices into their physiology and accurately target codon sequences?

Taking into account the fact that there are obstacles such as cost, religion, environmentalism, political agenda, war, natural disaster and technological limitations such as the Casimir effect restricting nanotechnology?

And what is your idea of "intelligence enhancement"?

Hey dumbass, average IQ has been increasing over the years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect

There goes your entire argument.

How does that detract from my point that stupid and worthless people are still continuing to exist without any barriers?

And read your own article...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect#Has_progression_ended.3F

"Test scores are certainly going up all over the world, but whether intelligence itself has risen remains controversial"

I'm glad to see that test scores have become the benchmark for societal progression...


Eugenics is an extremely crude tool that completely ignores the possibilities of near future technologies. It's worthless.

Preventing certain people from breeding or just preventing breeding in general could be extremely effective in making life for the living much better. Your lack of an argument against eugenics isn't very effective.

And like I said, regardless of technology that arises there are still going to be stupid people having stupid kids. Do you really think that the average person can afford genetic enhancement for their child when 50 million people in America can't even afford healthcare?

How does that detract from my point that stupid and worthless people are still continuing to exist without any barriers?



Because if modern civilization has caused the intelligence of the average person to rise, than they aren't exactly 'stupid' are they?


And read your own article...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect#Has_progression_ended.3F

"Test scores are certainly going up all over the world, but whether intelligence itself has risen remains controversial"

I'm glad to see that test scores have become the benchmark for societal progression...

IQ is the best statistic I know of for estimating intelligence. I guess you'd just prefer to throw around loaded subjective terms like 'stupid' and 'worthless'.



Preventing certain people from breeding or just preventing breeding in general could be extremely effective in making life for the living much better. Your lack of an argument against eugenics isn't very effective.

Except it would take a long time to have much effect, could result in inbreeding, seems more suited for a totalitarian state than a decent place to live. Allowing people to use technology to upgrade themselves is just more efficient and would produce greater gains in intelligence than eugenics ever would.


And like I said, regardless of technology that arises there are still going to be stupid people having stupid kids. Do you really think that the average person can afford genetic enhancement for their child when 50 million people in America can't even afford healthcare?
In the future, sure. The overall trend has been for medical costs to go down and technology to grow. I see no reason why this trend should magically halt.

Technology allows humans to control their own evolution with genetic engineering, cybernetics, intelligence enhancement etc.

This.
(minor fix)

I haven't read the other posts so i don't know if this idea has been sprung up but I think our society has passed that point. Now, knowledge is the new evolution and the more thats obtained, the more we mentally evolutionize. There's no simple way to say, NO society has stopped progressing because that really isn't evident. But look at it this way, America's superpower will fall, then China's and Indias and at one point they might be comparable to Africa. Either way, everyones fucked.

America's superpower will fall, then China's and Indias and at one point they might be comparable to Africa. Either way, everyones fucked.

I'm not sure I quite understand what you mean here.

this will cause positive human evolution to take a longer time to develop.

Because if modern civilization has caused the intelligence of the average person to rise, than they aren't exactly 'stupid' are they? IQ is the best statistic I know of for estimating intelligence. I guess you'd just prefer to throw around loaded subjective terms like 'stupid' and 'worthless'.

You still failed to address the issue of human progression ending...Also the people who conducted the study said themselves intelligence itself isn't necessarily rising, just test scores.


Except it would take a long time to have much effect, could result in inbreeding, seems more suited for a totalitarian state than a decent place to live. Allowing people to use technology to upgrade themselves is just more efficient and would produce greater gains in intelligence than eugenics ever would.

Agreed, I just think that eugenics is a much more feasible solution than genetic engineering. Like I said, most people can't afford healthcare, let alone genetic enhancements which are without a doubt going to be expensive.


In the future, sure. The overall trend has been for medical costs to go down and technology to grow. I see no reason why this trend should magically halt.

50 million without health care. Obviously the system isn't working.

Advancements in technology have definitely hindered major adaptive evolution, but there are still a lot of genes which can be selected for or against, such as genes which cause or prevent incurable diseases or diseases which are hard to cure. Less economically developed countries would have a significantly higher number of selectable traits in the population than we do, but evolution is, by definition a change in gene frequencies in a population over generations. Covert changes can still have effects and evolution is not a process we can ever halt. Intelligence hasn't been evolving recently, the quality of education has just increased, and the availability of it.

Apart from resistance to certain diseases, do you feel that modern society discourages evolution? Since 'survival of the fittest' isn't particularly relevant anymore, "good genes" are passed on just as much as "bad genes". I'm not saying it's come to a complete standstill, but we no longer have as much a need to adapt to our environments.

Thoughts?

In my opinion it takes a different kind of 'fitness' to survive in modern societies.

Human evolution is inherent in the way we reproduce. Modern society does not change the process of evolution, it changes the environment that evolutionary forces pressure mankind to adapt to. If it is true that 'bad genes' get passed down as often as 'good genes', then this is because the 'bad genes' offer the same chances for reproduction as 'good genes'. This doesn't mean evolution has stopped working, it just means it doesn't work towards the goals you want it to.

Human evolution is inherent in the way we reproduce. Modern society does not change the process of evolution, it changes the environment that evolutionary forces pressure mankind to adapt to. If it is true that 'bad genes' get passed down as often as 'good genes', then this is because the 'bad genes' offer the same chances for reproduction as 'good genes'. This doesn't mean evolution has stopped working, it just means it doesn't work towards the goals you want it to.

QFT.

Evolution isn't being prevented by society. Evolutionary pressures have simply changed.

Africans will be the master race soon enough by that logic

Africans will be the master race soon enough by that logic

You are aware that a significant change via evolution would most likely not fit into the timeframe you consider 'soon'...

Africans will be the master race soon enough by that logic

What logic?

In what period of time do you expect humans to reach the level of technological sophistication required to accurately and safely integrate artificial devices into their physiology and accurately target codon sequences?

Taking into account the fact that there are obstacles such as cost, religion, environmentalism, political agenda, war, natural disaster and technological limitations such as the Casimir effect restricting nanotechnology?

And what is your idea of "intelligence enhancement"?


According to an article in Wired, we will hit Singularity at the year 2030. This is assuming that technology continues to increase exponentially.

So maybe we'll have cyborgs and stuff, wouldn't that be neat.


Here's a little more information on Singularity and Ray Kurzweil (a guy who's taking a shitload of vitamins and stuff to try and stay alive until Singularity, at which point he thinks we will be able to become immortal)

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/05/will-the-singul.html

You still failed to address the issue of human progression ending...Also the people who conducted the study said themselves intelligence itself isn't necessarily rising, just test scores.

What issue of human progression ending? You seem to think modern civilization results in a bunch of stupid people, I showed that its actually increased the average intelligence. And IQ tests are the best metric of intelligence I know of. If you can find a better one, please do so.

And in your imaginary eugenics police state, how are you going to determine who gets sterilized and who doesn't? Cause if your goal is to sterilize the stupid people, you're probably gonna be using an IQ cutoff as your criterion for stupid. Unless you'd prefer to have a dictator (your angsty self) going around making these decisions.


Agreed, I just think that eugenics is a much more feasible solution than genetic engineering. Like I said, most people can't afford healthcare, let alone genetic enhancements which are without a doubt going to be expensive.

More feasible? Good luck setting up the massive police-state apparatus that an effective eugenics program would require.



50 million without health care. Obviously the system isn't working.
The modern world is more than just the USA. Not to mention the USA is moving in the direction of a nation health care system. Not to mention this has nothing to do with my point that the trends indicate health care gets cheaper over time.

I bet people in favour of eugenics wouldn't be so supportive of it if they were targeted.

According to an article in Wired, we will hit Singularity at the year 2030. This is assuming that technology continues to increase exponentially.

So maybe we'll have cyborgs and stuff, wouldn't that be neat.


Here's a little more information on Singularity and Ray Kurzweil (a guy who's taking a shitload of vitamins and stuff to try and stay alive until Singularity, at which point he thinks we will be able to become immortal)

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/05/will-the-singul.html

I've already stated in another thread that I consider Kurzweils predictions to be fantasized. I don't believe intelligent systems will be comparible to human thinking by 2035, neither do I believe his theories on nano tech to become reality in the timeframe he gives. However this in essence is the answer to this thread, due to the information age our evolution has actually sped up in terms of our tool making skills, and this technological evolution due to enhanced understanding will converge with the human body. Look at pacemakers, bionic limbs, the bionic vision used to give blind people sight; It's all coming together to create human 2.0, H+, >H, transhumanism or whatever else you want to call it. People are already experimenting with implanted cybernetics, check out Kevin Warwicks 'Project cyborg'.

I have no doubt that the natural human body will continue to evolve to accomodate with its surroundings aswell, but it will be somewhat overshadowed by the progression of bionic implants. For example I'm sure that humans will adapt to the decline of oxygen in the atmosphere by a biological evolution of the lungs in some way. AND on the other side of the argument we will combat dying organs with technology, like as I said pacemakers, bionic vision, maybe one day veins and arteries made in a lab.

In my opinion society isn't preventing futher evolution, it's spurring it on in a different direction.

Really what you should be asking is what will humanity look like and act like in 100+ years time, will we become obsessed with implants to the point that we become a 'Borg' like race or will there be two types of human, the super intelligent, stronger, modified Human+, and the weak, standard intelligence, normal human.

What issue of human progression ending? You seem to think modern civilization results in a bunch of stupid people, I showed that its actually increased the average intelligence. And IQ tests are the best metric of intelligence I know of. If you can find a better one, please do so.

This wasn't actually my opinion. It was the opinion of the article you showed me...Here, look again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect#Has_progression_ended.3F

Also, the people conducting the study said themselves and I quote...once more...

"Test scores are certainly going up all over the world, but whether intelligence itself has risen remains controversial," -psychologist Ulric Neisser

And like I said...Test scores should not be the benchmark of societal progression.

And in your imaginary eugenics police state, how are you going to determine who gets sterilized and who doesn't? Cause if your goal is to sterilize the stupid people, you're probably gonna be using an IQ cutoff as your criterion for stupid.

1.) If the biggest problem that arises is "who to sterilize" we should be okay. Lets see, the undoubtedly insane, those genetically predispositioned to die or born with diseases, mentally retarded, essentially anyone who is clearly bringing down the human race. I suppose each person could argue their case in front of a judge and jury just like in a criminal trial and they could be found worthy or not by their peers. Sounds fair to me. It sounds vague and obscure when put into definition but I doubt it would really difficult to identify the people unworthy of reproduction.

2.) This has happened in America before, it's not an original idea...http://www.sntp.net/eugenics/eugenics_america.htm

"In 1974, Federal District Court Judge Gerhard Gesell estimated that "over the last few years" between 100,000 and 150,000 low-income persons were sterilized under federally funded programs."

Now, thats unfair b.c. level of income doesn't necessarily correlate with low intelligence but the point is, this could happen again and is certainly feasible.


The modern world is more than just the USA.

Fine but we have one of the better health care systems in the world and we still can't take care of a solid 50 million Americans. If we (The most powerful country on Earth) are incapable of providing everyone with basic medical needs how the in hell is this country supposed to provide all Americans with unnecessary genetic enhancements, let alone the world?? The majority of the people in this world don't have basic medical needs and I assure you those will come before intelligence enhancements.


Not to mention the USA is moving in the direction of a nation health care system.

Nothing has been done to change it. There was the bill (SCHIP) to give children healthcare who were below a certain income level but even that died in the Senate. The only chance of that even starting is if Obama is elected. Since McCain obviously won't wish to socialize the system.


And just a side note: I don't REALLY support eugenics I just think it's an interesting idea and I hate alot of the stupid worthless people I see on a day to day basis and its fun to think how I could get rid of them. Also Plato was right there with me on eugenics, except his concept was much more passive and non-confrontational. But in our society (since we don't live in The Republic) sterilization seems to be the best bet.

's not society per se, but an alien awareness that feeds off of humanity that stops us from evolving from animals to magical beings capable of amazing feats of perception and existence

fine but we have one of the better health care systems in the world

LOLOLOLOL....how wrong you are...

Last I looked around this country is just full of stupid fucking worthless people. Theres nothing to kill off the dumb masses and due to our "fantastic democracy" there will never be ANY limit on birth or reproduction (excluding abortion) that will keep dumb, fat, stupid motherfuckers from breeding at an alarming rate. Maybe there will be an influx of "genetically superior" people but to think that they will take over the world is just stupid.


Like the Freemasons?
Never say never...

Evolution is different now.

Genes don't really play an all that important role nowadays - willpower, however, does. With enough willpower, you can shape your body into whatever you want, you can be fit, you can be good in the sack, you can be successful.

Evolution is different now.

Genes don't really play an all that important role nowadays - willpower, however, does. With enough willpower, you can shape your body into whatever you want, you can be fit, you can be good in the sack, you can be successful.

Willpower is a product of genetics just as much as anything else.

Human evolution is inherent in the way we reproduce. Modern society does not change the process of evolution, it changes the environment that evolutionary forces pressure mankind to adapt to. If it is true that 'bad genes' get passed down as often as 'good genes', then this is because the 'bad genes' offer the same chances for reproduction as 'good genes'. This doesn't mean evolution has stopped working, it just means it doesn't work towards the goals you want it to.

Exactly. Evolution is all about reproduction; that's what makes it work. Evolution can only stop under certain conditions, conditions that society doesn't meet.

The fact is, looks and the will to have a kid (and/or) the lack of contraceptives are the biggest factors in reproduction in American society anyway. That's what we're evolving towards.

Society doesn't discourage evolution. Fallinghouse is right, the pressures have just changed, not gone away.

LOLOLOLOL....how wrong you are...

37/193

I would say thats pretty good. Compared to Western countries and in relation to our power and money? No. But to the rest of the world? Yes.

Evolution has no goal. We are constantly evolving regardless. Every time we combine a male and female genome into a new one it changes. Not to mention the other mutations in our genes that are happening all the time. Most of the time in a part of our DNA that doesnt effect anything, but it is still happening.

Just because natural selection as we have seen it shape current life doesnt effect us, is beside the point.

Evolution has not ceased, obviously.

For the sake of humanity, I believe selective breeding should be expanded, and depopulation or population-stabilization should be adopted as a political policy. The gene pool of the Homo sapien has been greatly contaminated, as the old factors which determined who prevailed in the competition for mating have long since disappeared.

Nevertheless, I do see a bright future. Genetic engineering possesses tremendous potential. No longer will our environment and breeding habits dictate who and what we are.

This wasn't actually my opinion. It was the opinion of the article you showed me...Here, look again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect#Has_progression_ended.3F

So in the last few years we haven't been seeing an increase? Fine. That doesn't take away the massive strides our civilization has made over the last century. Once the new technologies get on board, expect it to start increasing again, but this time exponentially.


Also, the people conducting the study said themselves and I quote...once more...

"Test scores are certainly going up all over the world, but whether intelligence itself has risen remains controversial," -psychologist Ulric Neisser

And like I said...Test scores should not be the benchmark of societal progression.

And as I said before, these test scores are the best estimator of intelligence we have, so stuff it. If you have any data showing intelligence is decreasing feel free to post it.

1.) If the biggest problem that arises is "who to sterilize" we should be okay. Lets see, the undoubtedly insane, those genetically predispositioned to die or born with diseases, mentally retarded, essentially anyone who is clearly bringing down the human race. I suppose each person could argue their case in front of a judge and jury just like in a criminal trial and they could be found worthy or not by their peers. Sounds fair to me. It sounds vague and obscure when put into definition but I doubt it would really difficult to identify the people unworthy of reproduction.

You named a few things that are easy to identify but how do you identify 'stupid worthless people'? Those are the people you talk about the most.

2.) This has happened in America before, it's not an original idea...http://www.sntp.net/eugenics/eugenics_america.htm

"In 1974, Federal District Court Judge Gerhard Gesell estimated that "over the last few years" between 100,000 and 150,000 low-income persons were sterilized under federally funded programs."

Now, thats unfair b.c. level of income doesn't necessarily correlate with low intelligence but the point is, this could happen again and is certainly feasible.

Not unless popular opinion undergoes a seismic shift. And the American eugenics progams never attempted to sterilize such a massive fuzzy category as 'stupid and worthless' people.

Fine but we have one of the better health care systems in the world and we still can't take care of a solid 50 million Americans. If we (The most powerful country on Earth) are incapable of providing everyone with basic medical needs how the in hell is this country supposed to provide all Americans with unnecessary genetic enhancements, let alone the world?? The majority of the people in this world don't have basic medical needs and I assure you those will come before intelligence enhancements.

We could have a national health care system, but we don't cause we're more capitalistic than Europe. And all trends point to an increase in medical care and technology. I don't expect it to happen overnight, but it will eventually happen.

Nothing has been done to change it. There was the bill (SCHIP) to give children healthcare who were below a certain income level but even that died in the Senate. The only chance of that even starting is if Obama is elected. Since McCain obviously won't wish to socialize the system.

Obama is the frontrunner.

And just a side note: I don't REALLY support eugenics I just think it's an interesting idea and I hate alot of the stupid worthless people I see on a day to day basis and its fun to think how I could get rid of them. Also Plato was right there with me on eugenics, except his concept was much more passive and non-confrontational. But in our society (since we don't live in The Republic) sterilization seems to be the best bet.
So all this eugenics shit was motivated because the popular kids make fun of you? Nobody in a semi-balanced state of mind, not even the smartest in the world go around fantasizing about killing off stupid people. I don't know WTF is wrong with your life but take this shit to Headshrinkers instead of rationalizing it into a Eugenics fantasy, or better yet go see a licensed shrink.

Evolution has not ceased, obviously.

For the sake of humanity, I believe selective breeding should be expanded, and depopulation or population-stabilization should be adopted as a political policy. The gene pool of the Homo sapien has been greatly contaminated, as the old factors which determined who prevailed in the competition for mating have long since disappeared.

Nevertheless, I do see a bright future. Genetic engineering possesses tremendous potential. No longer will our environment and breeding habits dictate who and what we are.

If you tolerate this, then your children will be next.

If a new flu like the Spanish one hit our world (would be easy enough with all the immigration), obviously most people would be fucked since no one has a good immune system anymore except us elitists who jog for like 1 hour a day, dont eat sugar, and get lots of sleep + vitamin D. Even then, for people like me... some of us would still get fucked due to genetics.

Evolution still exists, whether we like it or not. It will stop existing for humans if we somehow can transfer our consciousness to machines-- and even then only the *best* machines survive; but its much less of an application than animals in the wild.

Anyone see the movie Idiocracy. Where 500 years in the future people have basically de-evolved to the point of being retarted. I think thats the direction we're heading right now. At least in the U.S.

Anyone see the movie Idiocracy. Where 500 years in the future people have basically de-evolved to the point of being retarted. I think thats the direction we're heading right now. At least in the U.S.

It's spelled "retarded".

Apart from resistance to certain diseases, do you feel that modern society discourages evolution? Since 'survival of the fittest' isn't particularly relevant anymore, "good genes" are passed on just as much as "bad genes". I'm not saying it's come to a complete standstill, but we no longer have as much a need to adapt to our environments.

Thoughts?

absolutely. but i have a feeling it wont be like that for much longer.

So in the last few years we haven't been seeing an increase? Fine. That doesn't take away the massive strides our civilization has made over the last century. Once the new technologies get on board, expect it to start increasing again, but this time exponentially.

Yeah and I'm sure we will have found an alternative source of fuel by whatever unspecified time your proposing we start initiating these hypothetical genetic enhancements :rolleyes:

And as I said before, these test scores are the best estimator of intelligence we have, so stuff it. If you have any data showing intelligence is decreasing feel free to post it.

Unless I'm mistaken my argument was never that intelligence was decreasing...I was simply saying that there's no check on the stupid, weak masses; you no longer need to be a superior being to survive and reproduce. Society has been intentionally designed to benefit worthless troglodytes incapable of basic thought and there is nothing even reminiscent of a check on their behavior.

You named a few things that are easy to identify but how do you identify 'stupid worthless people'? Those are the people you talk about the most.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it

If it works for the Supreme Court it works for me.

Not unless popular opinion undergoes a seismic shift. And the American eugenics progams never attempted to sterilize such a massive fuzzy category as 'stupid and worthless' people.

Yes they did. 150,000 poor people. Substitute poor with worthless because that was obviously the mind set by those initiating the sterilization process. Like you said "stupid and worthless people is a fuzzy category" so they obviously assumed that poor people were "worthless and stupid" since level of social status and income seems to measure worthlessness (in their eyes)

We could have a national health care system, but we don't cause we're more capitalistic than Europe. And all trends point to an increase in medical care and technology. I don't expect it to happen overnight, but it will eventually happen.

I have a feeling its going to take alot longer than expected. The fact that SCHIP failed shows just how strong opposition is towards socialized medicine.


Obama is the frontrunner.

He also vowed earlier in the year to filibuster the surveillance bill allowing wire tapping and spying of US citizens then a couple weeks ago voted for it without hesitation...So, I wouldn't be to sure he's really going to change things, that is even if he gets elected.

So all this eugenics shit was motivated because the popular kids make fun of you?

Yes, thats it, I'm a loner with no friends and I take out my teenage angst over the Internet because I've been picked on to no end. :rolleyes:

It's actually called observation and the Carlin video that you refused to watch earlier in this thread gives a perfect description of what I'm talking about. Also, I was captain of the football/lacrosse team but you're probably right that I was made of fun of all the time since you have nothing logical to say and are simply relying on ad hominem. :rolleyes:


Nobody in a semi-balanced state of mind, not even the smartest in the world go around fantasizing about killing off stupid people.

Thats not true. Come on, do I really need to give you a list of the millions of famous people (comedians, philosophers, politicians and so on) who do that shit constantly.

John McCain literally sang a song on a stage with the lyrics "Bomb Iran, Bomb Bomb Iran, Bomb Iran" to the tune of Barbra Ann

Carlin has a sketch called "I like it when alot of people die"

Peter Singer has openly supported eugenics and selective infanticide


I don't know WTF is wrong with your life but take this shit to Headshrinkers instead of rationalizing it into a Eugenics fantasy, or better yet go see a licensed shrink.

You seem to be more of a concrete, literal thinker...My whole argument is extremely abstract (this is humanities) I'm proposing a hypothetical solution here, something in theory. Stop acting like I'm trying to get a law passed here. Its not a "eugenics fantasy" its just proposing a theoretical solution that in reality, I would prefer not to see passed, but in thought, is very interesting.

What? Are we not supposed to discuss things if they're upsetting or go against social norms? I'm proposing this idea in abstraction not practice. Perhaps this whole "thinking outside the box" thing is just a little over your head...

Yeah and I'm sure we will have found an alternative source of fuel by whatever unspecified time your proposing we start initiating these hypothetical genetic enhancements :rolleyes:

Here's something to think about. Our society actually NEEDS stupid people to things like work at McDonalds, mop floors, drive busses, etc. When we've reached the technological level where robots can replace the jobs of stupid people, it's fairly likely we'll also have genetic enhancements.


Unless I'm mistaken my argument was never that intelligence was decreasing...I was simply saying that there's no check on the stupid, weak masses; you no longer need to be a superior being to survive and reproduce. Society has been intentionally designed to benefit worthless troglodytes incapable of basic thought and there is nothing even reminiscent of a check on their behavior.

Define superior being. Africa's "society" is rather different from ours. Is it selecting for "superior beings"? What about medieval society or hunter-gatherer tribes? Did they select for intelligence?

The check on the 'stupid weak masses' is education and nutrition, which has made the 'stupid weakling' of today have an IQ significantly above the average of a century ago. And stop complaining about the tests. Have you ever taken an actual intelligence test? They test very basic cognitive processes that you can't really study for. If the scores are steadily going up, somethings definitely happening.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it

If it works for the Supreme Court it works for me.

That's a test for if something is porn. It doesn't cut the mustard when you're talking about a human life.


Yes they did. 150,000 poor people. Substitute poor with worthless because that was obviously the mind set by those initiating the sterilization process. Like you said "stupid and worthless people is a fuzzy category" so they obviously assumed that poor people were "worthless and stupid" since level of social status and income seems to measure worthlessness (in their eyes)

And as you pointed out, they failed.


I have a feeling its going to take alot longer than expected. The fact that SCHIP failed shows just how strong opposition is towards socialized medicine.

We'll see.


He also vowed earlier in the year to filibuster the surveillance bill allowing wire tapping and spying of US citizens then a couple weeks ago voted for it without hesitation...So, I wouldn't be to sure he's really going to change things, that is even if he gets elected.

You're wrong about what the bill actually said, but this is kind of off-topic.


Yes, thats it, I'm a loner with no friends and I take out my teenage angst over the Internet because I've been picked on to no end. :rolleyes:

It's actually called observation and the Carlin video that you refused to watch earlier in this thread gives a perfect description of what I'm talking about. Also, I was captain of the football/lacrosse team but you're probably right that I was made of fun of all the time since you have nothing logical to say and are simply relying on ad hominem. :rolleyes:

Thats not true. Come on, do I really need to give you a list of the millions of famous people (comedians, philosophers, politicians and so on) who do that shit constantly.

John McCain literally sang a song on a stage with the lyrics "Bomb Iran, Bomb Bomb Iran, Bomb Iran" to the tune of Barbra Ann

Carlin has a sketch called "I like it when alot of people die"

Peter Singer has openly supported eugenics and selective infanticide

Fair enough. I guess they're just blowing off steam and so are you, in your own way. It just annoys me how often I see this kind of attitude of superiority on TOTSE.


You seem to be more of a concrete, literal thinker...My whole argument is extremely abstract (this is humanities) I'm proposing a hypothetical solution here, something in theory. Stop acting like I'm trying to get a law passed here. Its not a "eugenics fantasy" its just proposing a theoretical solution that in reality, I would prefer not to see passed, but in thought, is very interesting.

What? Are we not supposed to discuss things if they're upsetting or go against social norms? I'm proposing this idea in abstraction not practice. Perhaps this whole "thinking outside the box" thing is just a little over your head...

If you had actually posed an original idea, instead of "lol lets kill all teh stupid people", my response would have been different. But your thoughts on Eugenics were nothing but stale, vapid dogshit, so I reacted accordingly.

Anyone see the movie Idiocracy. Where 500 years in the future people have basically de-evolved to the point of being retarted. I think thats the direction we're heading right now. At least in the U.S.

that film was mentioned on totse ages ago, and i haven't been able to find / remember it. Thanks:)

If you had actually posed an original idea, instead of "lol lets kill all teh stupid people", my response would have been different. But your thoughts on Eugenics were nothing but stale, vapid dogshit, so I reacted accordingly.


I was just making a small point, not even trying to start a debate, you responded to it as if I was actively pressing this idea across the board (say..by posting a thread on it?) Which I obviously didn't. Then the whole escalated and now it seems like I'm trying to get this eugenics thing in effect when my only point was "there are alot of worthless people in the world who don't need to be around"...You took it to the next level and I, unfortunately, responded. Perhaps my thoughts on eugenics weren't very detailed b.c. I was half-kidding about and just felt like arguing...

I do however, still disagree that the people who really need the genetic enhancements will ever see them, just like how the people who really need food, money and shelter, never seem to see those either. But, that's how things work and I guess only time will tell.

Oh an Obama did vote for a surveillance bill allowing the government to spy...I don't know what you were referring to about how I misinterpreted it, unless CNN has misinformed me.

You guys fail to realise that there evolution doesn't mean something becoming "better" or more complex (smarter, stronger).

Who says evolution has to be biological? In the most fundamental terms, evolution is just a process by which matter self-optimises its own replication. Increasing intelligence is a form of evolution, allowing for breakthroughs in technology that help us survive and reproduce. If we can keep people alive longer and enable them to breed more quickly or more successfully through technological means, we're evolving. A logical pinnacle of biological evolution would be the complete supplantation of reproduction via the genome by reproduction via robotic/cybernetic means. Quicker, more efficient, much quicker potential for self-optimisation.

How many times does this thread get posted a month?

Evolution doesn't just stop because you think our lifestyles are fairly comfortable. You can argue that what constitutes "the fittest" is changing, but seriously, quit posting this crap, jesus christ.

The gene pool of the Homo sapien has been greatly contaminated

With what? Tree DNA? Rocks? Retarded posts?

if you want to see where our evolution is headed, take a look at who is reproducing the most.

With what? Tree DNA? Rocks? Retarded posts?

Slow down for a moment and think. What possibly could I have been implying?

Due to modern medicine, those who would not normally be capable or even permitted to mate may now partake if they wish, effectively passing on undesirable genetic material. Inheritable medical conditions have flourished.

Slow down for a moment and think. What possibly could I have been implying?

Due to modern medicine, those who would not normally be capable or even permitted to mate may now partake if they wish, effectively passing on undesirable genetic material. Inheritable medical conditions have flourished.

Ah-huh, but you missed the most important part of that - anybody who is able to reproduce because of technology who would otherwise not be able to could only pass on genes for a problem which we have a solution for.

With what? Tree DNA? Rocks? Retarded posts?

With people who have no idea what DNA stands for, let alone how it functions.

Ah-huh, but you missed the most important part of that - anybody who is able to reproduce because of technology who would otherwise not be able to could only pass on genes for a problem which we have a solution for.

Not necessarily. Small faults of about 1kb pairs or under may be rectified on specific genes but not on others. The structure of some genes may have evolved around their faults, and removing this fault will remove the entire gene, which can cause even more damage to the organism considering that several genes will most likely govern the development of the affected tissues/proteins etc.

Genetically modifying an entire multicellular organism is currently impossible as well. Luminous mice may seem impressive to a little kid, but with them, only a tiny amount of DNA is cut out and replaced, using only one or two restriction enzymes.

Trying to modify the 31000 genes of a human to an extent where all hereditary disease is eliminated is currently impossible, and even if it were possible, mutation would just occur again and again because even with the best technology you can devise, there will always be undetectable errors in replication.

As I see it there are many things that seem to be set in motion and together can seriously fuck everyone and everything alive.

*Energy... Oil/gas/coal/wood is a nice available fuel just waiting to be burned, however we don't plant enough trees to negate the increased CO2 within our lifetime and it just keeps getting worse. The amazon is often called the planets lungs. FUCK YOU AMAZON! I'm gunna cut you so bad... you gunna wish I didn't cut you so bad! Oh and if the amazon continues to be in a drought much longer it will start rotting... meaning even more CO2 and even less trees to scrub it.... Oh and we are building ever more roads for cars... when we should have built mass transit only in the first place.

*Food... Invasive pesticide resistant weeds, bees dieing, population booming and demanding more food... But there is only so much land... Then their is hydroponics... But where are you going to get the energy to run a serious huge hydroponic farm?

*Pollution... Not just from coal/petro. Chemical levels are rising all over the place. Some lakes can't even support the wildlife they could before. What if we poison the planet to a point it can't recover from? Or find out too late that a certain thought harmless chemical or chemicals in the atmosphere in such and such ppm will decrease the chance of fertillization of eggs by such percent? What if that chemical is CO2? Or the sodium benzoate in your soda? What if the damage doesn't effect you, but instead hits your kids?

*Overpopulation... Cities keep growing vertical packing more people into one area. Now you have sick and healthy people very close all the time. You walk past a beautiful lady on the street. You just caught some random germ. You will be catching more weird germs and viruses with more people constantly in and out of packed areas. This might make your immune system stronger. But oh wait... with CO2 and pollution and everything climbing... and more sub-par food... if not less food... and no food for some... your immune system is already not at its best. WHAT NOW? ... Yeah now your starting to wish you lived out in the country with a nice small farm to sustain yourself. Hicks might not be bright, but they don't seem so stupid now do they? Hell they might be the people who are growing your food. Do you really know anything about growing and harvesting your own food?

*People are learning more at schools... Perhaps... Oftentimes no... But are they learning the really important shit?

*Text messaging... Texting sucks... calling and talking is more efficient. Texting is a waste of time. Hell morse code a 140+ year old technology is faster. How many young people in the world are using a slow fucking retarded scam of a way to send messages?... Now what was that about people getting smarter again?...

*The changing freedoms of society... Many freedoms are going away... The freedom to experiment isn't gone... but it is being activly limited... Young poeple are being scared into fearing pretty much all chemicals. When they are scared of science and chemistry and the only labs they do are fucking simple and retarded they don't get inspired to get into science degrees as often. So relativly less poeple getting into and working on the problems with the enviroment, industrial and other pollution, and other such fields... so yeah theres not as many people working on this shit... and its our own fault. IE are fears are screwing ourselves.

*Business... huge corporations who just want to make a profit in the short term for their immediate self without caring about the consequences beyond that because hey ill be dead fuck all yall.

*News... continually getting more retarded. AND WE CONTIUE TO STILL BELIEVE ALMOST EVERYTHING THEY SAY. What was that about people getting smarter again?

*The futility of going apeshit trying to illegalize a plant that grows like a weed.... and the "war" on drugs to begin with.... and the freedoms it takes away from responcible drug users and such.

*Everyone bending over and taking it from the man.

*Religion.


...
SOYLENT GREEN IS PEOPLE!