if you would read my earlier posts again, you will realize that I never limited myself to two generations. I said technology, which means tools, which means all the way back to when the first caveman rolled a boulder of of a cliff to kill a mastodon down below or used a spear to get rid of the saber-toothed tiger. so in other words, it's not just keeping hawking alive, it's when over 1.8 million years ago various homo erectus started to stay alive when otherwise without the spears and stuff they would have died.
yes, there are breeds of dogs that would not survive, and you pointed out the reason: MEN did this to dogs, just like they did to pidgeons, etc. which is not natural at all.
what you don't seem to get is that the rules of 'what is fittest' have not changed at all. what HAS changed is mankind's ability to alter their environment, which makes the rules no longer apply to humans. there is no longer any significant amount of evolution because we can keep those with normally fatal diseases alive, and stupid fat people aren't eaten by lions and tigers, et cetera. my point is that technology has made it so that anyone can survive, however unfit they are.
not really. being beautiful is definitely important, however, the ugly people keep reproducing. it's not like the beautiful people alone are allowed to reproduce. also, I kind of fail to see how being rich impacts evolution. the poor (as well as middle-class) people keep fucking like rabbits, and there are more of them, too. as to stephen hawking, he is an example of how natural selection is NOT happening: normally (in the jungle) people with that disease would die a quick death, now, with the intervention of technology, he's being kept alive (no I'm not complaining).
I fail to see how natural selection comes into play at all.
Slashdot Mirror
if you would read my earlier posts again, you will realize that I never limited myself to two generations. I said technology, which means tools, which means all the way back to when the first caveman rolled a boulder of of a cliff to kill a mastodon down below or used a spear to get rid of the saber-toothed tiger. so in other words, it's not just keeping hawking alive, it's when over 1.8 million years ago various homo erectus started to stay alive when otherwise without the spears and stuff they would have died.
yes, there are breeds of dogs that would not survive, and you pointed out the reason: MEN did this to dogs, just like they did to pidgeons, etc. which is not natural at all. what you don't seem to get is that the rules of 'what is fittest' have not changed at all. what HAS changed is mankind's ability to alter their environment, which makes the rules no longer apply to humans. there is no longer any significant amount of evolution because we can keep those with normally fatal diseases alive, and stupid fat people aren't eaten by lions and tigers, et cetera. my point is that technology has made it so that anyone can survive, however unfit they are.
not really. being beautiful is definitely important, however, the ugly people keep reproducing. it's not like the beautiful people alone are allowed to reproduce. also, I kind of fail to see how being rich impacts evolution. the poor (as well as middle-class) people keep fucking like rabbits, and there are more of them, too. as to stephen hawking, he is an example of how natural selection is NOT happening: normally (in the jungle) people with that disease would die a quick death, now, with the intervention of technology, he's being kept alive (no I'm not complaining). I fail to see how natural selection comes into play at all.
it's too bad natural selection no longer really applies to humans in a 'civilized' setting...