Slashdot Mirror


Human Species May Split In Two

gEvil (beta) writes "According to an article at the BBC, an evolutionary theorist in London suggests that humanity may split into two sub-species within the next 100,000 years. From the article: 'The descendants of the genetic upper class would be tall, slim, healthy, attractive, intelligent, and creative and a far cry from the "underclass" humans who would have evolved into dim-witted, ugly, squat goblin-like creatures.'" No missing link here, we already have the troll-like humans to prove it.

14 of 1,000 comments (clear)

  1. if i recall my "time machine" properly by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Informative

    it was the "ugly, squat goblin-like creatures" who were not "dim-witted", but intelligent and ran the world (not an underclass, but they did live underground). While the "tall, slim, healthy, attractive" ones were not at all "intelligent, and creative," but were utterly empty headed vapid frail cattle... literally. they were food. they were all vegetarians and they were regularly slaughtered for the meat eating underrulers

    but why anyone would seek sustenance by eating a bag of antlers like lindsay lohan is beyond me. utter science fiction, on that point alone

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  2. Sauna-loving Swedes? by Soulfarmer · · Score: 4, Informative

    Swedes love their bastu, it is us Finns that love SAUNA. Sweden is practically the only western country that wants to use their own word for sauna, bastu.

    I just HAD to clarify this, since I love sauna and I am Finnish. And I am not even sure swedes love their bastu.

    Other than that, yaaar!

    --
    -Is the meaning of life vanity, or is vanity the meaning of life?
  3. Bush Family Trees by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 4, Informative

    George Bush Jr's grandfather Prescott Bush was a eugenicist, consistent with his work funding Hitler's Nazis. Prescott's law partner Tighe was the Connecticut (Bush family home state) director of the eugenics "Birth Control League". Prescott's boss Averell Harriman was one of the main promoters of American eugenics.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  4. Re:Morlocks and Eloi, anyone? by Mr.+Shotgun · · Score: 4, Informative

    A brief Bio of the guy:here
    and the course work offered at the London School of Economics: here
    He is apparently a researcher for the Evolutionary Moral Psychology Group at LSE. The group doesn't seem too keen on actual biology or evolutionary research, just extrapolating biological theory into philosophical concepts so his prediction should be taken with a rather large grain of salt.

    --
    Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the (supposed) good of its victims may be the most oppressive
  5. Re:So to be clear... by einhverfr · · Score: 4, Informative

    This was not a new idea when Huxley was writing.

    Time Machine by HG Wells, anyone?

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  6. Poor by Z34107 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Are you kidding me?

    India has seen the end of a caste system and has moved into a knowledge-based economy. Their poor are becoming literate, and taking "our" IT jobs. The prospects for the average Indian are getting better as the days go on.

    Ditto for China. The front page article of the Oct. 17 Investor's Business Daily is "Chinese Wage Growth Surging, But Hasn't Fueled Higher Prices." Although the focus of the article is on urban China (where unskilled/semiskilled workers have been seeing wage increases between 5 and 20 percent each year since 2000), it also mentions how efforts to "exploit" rural farmers for labor have also driven up their wages.

    Although the "Cultural Revolution" was definitely a setback for the Chinese economy, things have been going wonderfully for them since. Consider that in the 80s, Proctor and Gamble researched expanding into the Chinese shampoo market - only to realize that there wasn't any. The average peasant could only afford a bottle the size you find complimentary with your hotel room; and even then, only once a year, for a special occaision. McDonalds and other fast food places ha da little more success, but mostly with the wealthy and tourists - as in Russia, peasants would make pilgrimages of sorts to a fast-food restaurant that they could only afford to eat at once a year.

    Now, the standard of living in China is rising rapidly - people can not only feed themselves, but they have cars and consumer electronics! They have computers and internet - remember that big firewall China has? Their standard of living is rapidly approaching western standards - a far cry from when Mao Zedung encouraged peasants to smelt steel in their backyards.

    --
    DATABASE WOW WOW
    1. Re:Poor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      How do you know the people in the vinyl tests are untouchables? Did you ask them? People end up living in slums in India because the are *poor* not because of their caste. There are plenty of upper castes that live in slums because they cannot afford housing in the cities. I remember the news channels in India giving 24hrs coverage of the Tsunami in India with constant update of the number of missing or dead. I am not sure which rock you live under but you could have tried to turn on the TV or go online to any Indian news site. There were plenty of interviews of people from all walks of life. 27% of seats in institutes of higher learning are reserved for SC/ST (lower castes) in India. In some states the number is over 90%. Similar number of jobs in the public sector are also set aside for them. So no education in India is not restricted to the upper class. I am not saying all the issues with caste have been solved. But it is much better than what it was at independence and is improving everyday. In fact lots of people I know in India have married *outside* their caste.

    2. Re:Poor by loraksus · · Score: 5, Informative

      India has seen the end of a caste system
      Maybe officially, but I know a whole lot of people would call bullshit on that.

      and has moved into a knowledge-based economy.
      Sort of. Aside from a very small minority of extremely intelligent and motivated people who are doing some damn impressive work, most indians don't work in a knowledge based economy. Unless you count reading from a script... And those are the lucky ones. There are still lots of farmers....

      Their poor are becoming literate, and taking "our" IT jobs.
      Their "poor" are in villages in very remote areas where not even the Army dares to enter because it is controlled by warlords and they get massacred every time they go in (look it up). These are the same places where you hear of village elders who sentence the offender's daughter to be gang raped, wives being burned alive, etc.
      Yes, there are a good number of educated Indians, however keep in mind that India also has a lot of people. A whole lot of those people live in some pretty shitty places and don't even have power 24 hours a day.

      The prospects for the average Indian are getting better as the days go on.
      Maybe, but they still have a ways to go.

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    3. Re:Poor by XchristX · · Score: 5, Informative

      About poverty in India:

      It is a highly controversial topic. There is bias in all directions. Certainly, the western media (oddly, the liberals most of all) love to portray India exclusively as a country of beggars and untouchables. It certainly makes them feel secure in their hatred of Indians.

      However, there is no doubt that the human development index of India has risen remarkably over the last few decades (certainly a lot more than other countries in the subcontinent, where the poverty situation is worse).

      There is an ongoing controversy over poverty statistics and figures made during the nineties, with some economists, banks, sociologists siding with the figures that indicate reduced poverty and others siding with
      the "India is a country of beggars and untouchables" polemic.

      The world bank's assessment is below:
      http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES /SOUTHASIAEXT/EXTSAREGTOPPOVRED/0,,contentMDK:2057 4067~menuPK:493447~pagePK:34004173~piPK:34003707~t heSitePK:493441,00.html

      The Indian debate has run parallel to, and is itself a large part of, the wider debate about globalization and poverty. The economic reforms of the early 1990s were followed by rates of economic growth that were high by Indian historical standards. The effects on poverty remain controversial, and the official numbers published by the Government of India,showing a reduction of poverty from 36 percent of the population in 1993 - 94 to 26 percent of the population in 1999 - 00, have been challenged both for allegedly showing too little and too much poverty reduction

      Issues over "data and dogma" in a paper published by a Princeton Univ prof and a world bank guy:

      http://poverty2.forumone.com/files/15168_deaton_ko zel_2004.pdf

      There has been a consensus on the fact that liberalization has led to a reduction of income poverty. The picture, however, is not so clear if one considers other factors (such as health, education, crime and access to infrastructure). Some have criticozed the stats as too one-dimensional.However, they only criticize, and do not offer any ways to objectively gauge all the criteria for poverty in India, suggesting that they are simply whining.

      With the rapid economic growth that India is experiencing, it is likely that a significant fraction of the rural population will continue to migrate toward cities, making the issue of urban poverty more significant in the long run

      http://www.csh-delhi.com/events/downloads/Backgrou ndNote67102006.pdf

      Although there is no full consensus on what happened to Indian poverty in the 1990s, it is claimed that the official estimates of poverty reduction are too optimistic, particularly for rural India. This alleged overoptimism was amplified by statistical uncertainty that created space for commentators to argue that poverty had been virtually eliminated in India in the wake of the economic reforms.

      On the other side, well-known economits Pravin Visaria have defended the validity of many of the statistics that demonstrated the reduction in overall poverty in India, as well as the declration made by India's Finance Minister Yashwant Sinha that poverty in India has reduced significantly.

      He asserts that the state surveys were well designed and supervised and felt that just because they did not appear to fit preconceived notions about poverty in India,they should not be dismissed outright

      http://www.india-today.com/itoday/20010319/jairam. shtml

      Also, Nicholas Stern, vi

      --
      l'Homme n'est Rien l'Oeuvre Tout: Gustave Flaubert to George Sand
    4. Re:Poor by ma_sivakumar · · Score: 5, Informative

      Caste is still alive and kicking in India.

      • You can go to any online matrimonial sites for Indians (example (no affiliation) and look at ads categorised into castes.
      • All leading newspapers ( example (no affliation) run classifieds every week caste wise.
      • In major states there are caste based political parties gaining strength year by year. example BSP , PMK

      Having said that there are major initiatives to help the suppressed castes to come up in life. Reservations for the most backward castes (classified as scheduled castes) and tribal populations (scheduled tribes) are in vogue for decades in all central and state government employment and higher education institutions.

      Many states have gone further and implemented reservations for other categories of backward castes too. There is a raging debate about this issue. There are proposals to extend the reservation concept to the private sector too.

      In short, yes, the caste system is still alive as thousands of years of practices are hard to kick in decades. But, there are definite efforts to get rid of the stigma attached to the so called lower castes and help everyone to have a decent life.

      Those who live on the pavements are not necessarily of lower caste. They could be migrant farmers from the villages. The caste system operates with all its tragedies in villages, not in big cities.

      --
      yAthum UrE yAvarum kELir All the places are our place, everybody is our kin. (A Tamil Poet - 2000 years ago)
    5. Re:Poor by XchristX · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not only that, but the chief forger of the Indian Constitution, Bhimrao "Babasaheb" Ambedkar, himself a Dalit "untouchable", was extremely critical of religion and discrimination, specifically of the practice of discriminating against the Dalit "untouchables" in Hindu society and the rampant discrimination of the Arzal "untouchables" in Muslim society in South Asia.

      His position on castes was likened to that of the American founding fathers on the separation of religion and state. In addition, Amebedkar frequently cited the reforms of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk in Turkey as precedent for abolishing untouchability.

      He absolutely loathed the Varnas among Hindus and the Ashraf/Ajlaf divide + the Quomiyat/Beradari system among Muslims. His criticism was so aggressive that he became rather unpopular among orthodox Hindu Brahmins and orthodox Muslim Mullahs, particularly among the Muslim League people in Pakistan, which was formed during Ambedkar's time (all this despite that fact that Ambedkar supported the segregation of Pakistan).

      Plus, the president and commander-in-chief of India's armed forces from 1997-2002 was K.R. Narayanan, a Dalit "untouchable". The current president of India, Abdul Kalam, is an "Ajlaf" (low caste) Muslim.
      Also, Abdus Salaam, a famous physicist known for his work on the Glashow Weinberg Salaam electroweak theory that earned him a Nobel Prize, was a low-caste "Mojahir" Muslim by birth.

      Reservation in India (a more drastic version of affirmative action) is a horrible idea as it completely removes all concept of position by merit. The argument that "my granddaddy was forced to carry night soil from one end of my village to another so please give me a seat in IIT despite the fact that I don't know how to integrate x*e^(x) and have never heard of complex variables" only goes so far. It goes far enough to warrant, say a 20% quota, but 50%??? That's pushing it.

      Btw I say this as a low caste guy myself so am not partisan at all. Putting reservation in primary/secondary schools is ok as it gives the SC/ST/OBC's the boost they need to get into the education system. But it needs to end there. Admission to colleges and higher education should be largely on merit with a small quota for political correctedness. Same for IAS and other job appointments. I personally know several SC's who were my co-students in IIT who got in by virtue of merit and did well by virtue of merit. They did not need any quota to get in as they did well on their own abilities.

      The 50% quota thing is just a votebank move by politicians based on the fraudulent data inspired by the fraudulent Mandal Commission of the 70s. It is merely a ploy to get votes from the SC/ST blocs who have been polarized by sectarian "activists", themselves the most communal bastards of the lot.

      --
      l'Homme n'est Rien l'Oeuvre Tout: Gustave Flaubert to George Sand
  7. Re:So to be clear... by jafac · · Score: 4, Informative

    Actually - it's older than that.

    There's this book called The Bible (author; disputed, age; roughly 2500 years?) that tells the story of an ancient nomadic race of goat-herders called the Hebrews. One of their laws was to discourage marriage outside their own race. Only the Hebrews were the Creator's favored race, and the rest were damned.

    --

    These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  8. Caste system ended ? Not so. by aepervius · · Score: 3, Informative

    This is the official explanation. But the cast system is alive and well in India. Just not officially. I just had to look at the mariage of our outsourcing coworker, where they explained us who can marry whom, and why one could not marry another. They never mentionned cast, only stutbornly said "no he can't marry her, because of what he is and what she is." If this not caste, well that smell and looks like it. Taste like it too.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  9. Re:Correction to Last Sentence by nebosuke · · Score: 5, Informative
    When you have nothing, you have more drive to succede, and liberal capitalism allows that. If you are born rich, or already rich, what drive is there to create anything new?

    I grew up in a poor area, and my family made less than $25k take-home per year, with both my parents working full-time, living in a state with one of the highest COL's in the US. I made it to Harvard on a scholarship by studying so much in HS that I only slept around 4 hours each weekday (and most weekends) from the beginning of my sophomore year up until graduation. People with backgrounds like mine were the vast minority there, and they tended to be far less ambitious than kids born into power.

    Given that I went to a high school where over 85% children came from families who were below the poverty level, you would expect them to be the most motivated people in the state. Instead, that school is among the worst in the state by all metrics (from graduation rates and standardized test scores to teen pregnancies).

    While poverty can be a strong motivator for a vanishingly small minority, all measurable data indicates that the exact opposite is true for the majority. The poor are far less likely to pursue higher education, more likely to struggle economically throughout the entirety of their lives, and their children are more likely to maintain or drop below their parents' economic status.

    When was the last time that you saw news coverage about a millionaire's son being accepted to Harvard? How about a homeless man getting drunk and saying stupid things? Rags-to-riches success stories (e.g., Liz Murray) and lurid pieces on the boorish behavior of the wealthy (e.g., Mel Gibson) are newsworthy because they're exceptional, unlike those two everyday scenarios. Unfortunately, because the exceptions to the norm get a disproportionate amount of media coverage—including in school textbooks—many people tend to get the two terribly confused.

    Being poor is, statistically speaking, a massive demotivator, while starting rich has the opposite effect.

    The assertion that capitalism must be eliminating the 'rich caste' because the standard of living has been improving assumes a false dichotomy. Even a casual analysis of the economic trends in, say, the US, will show a steadily increasing stratification of society between the rich and everyone else, even as the standard of living has been improving.

    The change that capitalism brings is that intelligence becomes the strongest correlation to potential wealth. This actually increases the selection pressure towards divergence of the species along social lines because the social division correlates to a genetically heritable trait and reinforces the tendency for that trait's 'carriers' (for lack of a better term) to select other 'carriers' as mates. In other words, given that, in a western capitalist society:

    • People tend to marry people within the same socioeconomic class.
    • People tend to marry people with similar educational backgrounds and levels of intelligence.
    • Wealthy people tend to be smart.
    • Smart people tend to be educated.
    • Educated people tend to be relatively wealthy.
    You have a perfect recipe for the eventual divergence of a subspecies of smart rich humans.