Poll: Is Darwin's Law failing us??

[kintaris]

Or, to simplify that barely coherent rant, just because the weak and dumb are able to survive doesn't mean that natural selection is failing, but rather the success of natural selection has allowed the weak and dumb to survive.

This.

I agreed with the barely coherent rant too, but it wasn't as quotable

 

[Danzaivar]

...I'm an Arts major personally...

Well if you manage to breed then it's more proof that Darwins law is failing I guess.

/snarkysciencegraduate

OT: Yeah it kind of is. Theres an excellent bash.org quote about how we should just take the warning labels off of stuff and let nature take its course.

 

[Elle-Jai]

OT: Yeah it kind of is. Theres an excellent bash.org quote about how we should just take the warning labels off of stuff and let nature take its course.

Which is another point: Political Correctness run mad. However I refuse to derail my nice /snarkysciencegraduate grabbing thread just for the sake of giving PC more coverage than it deserves.

*sticks very pretty nose in air*

And you Science people are all alike anyway. At least we Arts students are free thinking!! One of my lecturers very kindly pointed out that science is driven by imagination. Incongruities build up surrounding various theories, so someone takes an imaginative leap, comes up with a new theory, and we work with that until in time, it too is disproved.

Which is why it never ceases to amaze me as to what a bunch of unimaginative, closed-minded thinkers science folk really are...

*sits back with cheeky grin*

 

[HuntrRose]

Darwin's Law is working, people in the western world is just using medicine to skip it that is all.

 

[someotherguy]

Can't have "natural" selection in a society like ours.

Oh, and the post in the OP just seems like some angsty teenager with a poor grasp of it, a species like ours can't survive being misanthropic cry babies.

edit: Oh, and in nature it is only failing when we stop it, ie: Pandas.

This guy knows what he's talking about, and sums up my thoughts on this thread, and the op.

 

[DSK-]

I don't think it's failing. We depend more heavily on technology now than we every did in the past in order to overcome our limitations and for overall convenience. That doesn't mean to say we are all 'thickies' but I believe we are lazy because of technology.

Fitness in terms of Natural Selection is still very relevant today, and probably will for a few more centuries, it's just that humans have altered the world they live in so that it suits them.

Sorry I might be talking off topic here :S

 

[Danzaivar]

One of my lecturers very kindly pointed out that science is driven by imagination. Incongruities build up surrounding various theories, so someone takes an imaginative leap, comes up with a new theory, and we work with that until in time, it too is disproved.

Whereas one of my lecturers pointed out that you should never let an art graduate know you're a science graduate cos otherwise they'll spit into your double cheeseburger when they go fetch you it.

Your [person] sounds less bitter. Does not compute.

 

[Guitarmasterx7]

Nope, people with talent succeed. People that succeed are able to have more sex and support more children. Although this is considerably more evident in less developed countries, it's still in effect everywhere.

Bull shit, none of the lawyers, doctors, ect. I know personally have more than 2 kids. On the other hand, I've seen substantial numbers of probable welfare cases running around with litters of children.

In the end, in most countries it's pretty hard to flat out "fail" to the point where you can't SURVIVE. Sure you might end up living in the projects, but the government won't let you starve, and really, anybody who goes out and makes an attempt to get laid very well can (which most people will at some point.)

Also, a pretty high portion of smart people don't want kids, so they DON'T procreate.

I would say that humanity is such a mixed bag that it's really hard to judge, but Darwin's theory kind of dissipates once a society with any remote sort of welfare system comes to be.

 

[Elle-Jai]

Can't have "natural" selection in a society like ours.

Oh, and the post in the OP just seems like some angsty teenager with a poor grasp of it, a species like ours can't survive being misanthropic cry babies.

edit: Oh, and in nature it is only failing when we stop it, ie: Pandas.

This guy knows what he's talking about, and sums up my thoughts on this thread, and the op.

Now now, don't be rude!

Also, Swarley was referring to a link I later removed, which was to the original post by the friend that caused me to create this thread. Since this link is no longer available, you are actually unable to form an agreement based on your lack of complete information. (This was intentional, to protect my friend from any further fallout.)

Also, "angsty teenager" is an overused phrase, and if you wish to know my age, check my profile. (Hint: I graduated high school in 2004, and unless I was 13 at the time, I would no longer be in my teens.)

 

[Elle-Jai]

When did I ever say I wasn't part of the problem??! For all I know, I am. Maybe I'm just too stupid to remove myself from the gene pool. *shrug* But that's me, now what about you?

A) I am far, far, faaaaaaaaaaaaaar too pretty to ever be considered flawed genetically.

2) I already have removed myself from the gene pool. I have chosen to never ever have children and as soon as I am old enough I will get the snip just to make sure.

I'll have to take your word on the pretty lol. As for the gene pool, *shrug* you makes yer own choices.

 

[someotherguy]

Can't have "natural" selection in a society like ours.

Oh, and the post in the OP just seems like some angsty teenager with a poor grasp of it, a species like ours can't survive being misanthropic cry babies.

edit: Oh, and in nature it is only failing when we stop it, ie: Pandas.

This guy knows what he's talking about, and sums up my thoughts on this thread, and the op.

Now now, don't be rude!

Also, Swarley was referring to a link I later removed, which was to the original post by the friend that caused me to create this thread. Since this link is no longer available, you are actually unable to form an agreement based on your lack of complete information. (This was intentional, to protect my friend from any further fallout.)

Also, "angsty teenager" is an overused phrase, and if you wish to know my age, check my profile. (Hint: I graduated high school in 2004, and unless I was 13 at the time, I would no longer be in my teens.)

My apologies, then. Perchance it was your friend then he meant to perceive like that? I'm not sure, I really just felt as if I needed to post in this, and he seemed to sum up my thoughts.

 

[Spencer Petersen]

The whole "Idiocracy" point of view is kind of skewed in that, for one, its a comedy movie, so the whole survival of the fittest intro is blown out of proportion for the sake of comedy, and two, trends in human evolution are incredibly, INCREDIBLY slow. Another thing to remember is that our genome is smart enough to keep things interesting with random mutation. This may pop up as genetic defects but it always serves as a method of keeping the gene pool varied enough so we don't stagnate evolutionarily.
Don't lose hope just yet. People have worried about this for hundred of years, and worrying about it only cause more damage than actual "reverse evolution"

 

[Elle-Jai]

One of my lecturers very kindly pointed out that science is driven by imagination. Incongruities build up surrounding various theories, so someone takes an imaginative leap, comes up with a new theory, and we work with that until in time, it too is disproved.

Whereas one of my lecturers pointed out that you should never let an art graduate know you're a science graduate cos otherwise they'll spit into your double cheeseburger when they go fetch you it.

Your [person] sounds less bitter. Does not compute.

*Gently* My Scientist. He was a Scientist.

Hence, one of yours

And I wouldn't spit in your burger while fetching you it... I'd have my nice thugs Security Guards kick you out of my nightclub after I'd been sneaking Bacardi 151 into your drink instead

I'm an entrepreneur, not a waitress. Sheesh.

/giggle

 

[Elle-Jai]

My apologies, then. Perchance it was your friend then he meant to perceive like that? I'm not sure, I really just felt as if I needed to post in this, and he seemed to sum up my thoughts.

Lol. We're good. I merely dislike being judged on the basis of shaky criteria (for example, an internet thread), and prefer to challenge said assumptions whenever and wherever they arise.

Thank you for contributing to the discussion

 

[Elle-Jai]

Isn't the whole Darwin awards thing, more in line with social Darwinism than Natural Selection?

Yes, yes it is. Hence the point.

 

[Eijarel]

There is also a small theory that we might have reached the peak of our natural evolution, and now we are closer and closer to de-evolve or present mental mutations in the upcoming generations, (regardless if is evolution or counter-evolution)
however is expected that the evolution of our species will be defined by the environment and not so much by our "alleged" predators (often times man itself) example of environmental changes;
regardless of geography the skin of future generation will increase its concentration of adenine, due to the increase of solar radiation.

 

[Double A]

Wait, are you talking about all those idiots from Disney channel?

They only came to be because Disney (which has more money than several countries) promoted them so much and put so much money into making other idiots think they were good.

They will fail, but it's just taking more time than with most.