- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why does society worship science, but ignore natural selection in the human race?
Posted on 5/5/21 at 12:12 am to McCaigBro69
Posted on 5/5/21 at 12:12 am to McCaigBro69
quote:
Reading that it makes me wonder why we spend millions every year protecting at-risk individuals for common viruses, terminally ill individuals and those with severe mental illness around that in many cases are not producing anything towards the betterment of society and in some cases are nothing more than a drain on resources?
...
I am asking why we follow science blindly without question in many areas, including the response for the CCP Virus and the theory of evolution, but ignore natural selection and it’s importance to the ongoing survival of a species?
Looks like you've completely misunderstood what natural selection means, and also how we evolved to where we are.
First, as a product of nature, we are natural, so whatever we do is also natural. Evolution has no direction or endgame, so if the course we're on is detrimental to our fitness, we will either evolve different traits or go extinct.
Second, given the fact that we are not the only species that lives in groups and protects one another, it seems unlikely that this tendency evolved in the form of a mental calculation of resource expenditure vs. societal benefit. More likely it is a deep-rooted desire or instinct to protect your own, and this extends to sacrificing everything we have up to and including our own lives to save someone else's. Pack life works for some species, while others live alone. It seems to have worked out well for us so far.
0
Posted on 5/5/21 at 12:18 am to McCaigBro69
Fat people aren’t fat because it’s their fault. Where you been.
Posted on 5/5/21 at 12:23 am to Ric Flair
quote:There is no "interpretation". Darwin's theory is what he said it is. The "sociological interpretation" is not "natural" selection. By definition, it’s "what society tells you should be natural" selection.
I do Find both the sociological and evolutionary interpretation of his theory both interesting. Probably the sociological interpretation is more fun to discuss since we can see a shift over a few generations as opposed to hundreds to thousands of generations
This post was edited on 5/5/21 at 12:43 am
Posted on 5/5/21 at 5:47 am to SammyTiger
quote:
Fitness in an revolutionary sense just means the ability to pass on your genes.
If you die 10 second after you had you’re 10th kids at 30 you’re more “fit” than an 80 year old with 1 kid.
Because you passed on you’re genes 30 times.
As to “natural selection”
We don’t live “natural” lives. In nature you usually have to worry about dying from starvation or predators. So any useful trait that keeps you alive long enough to frick helps make you “fitter”
All this. Which makes the covid argument pretty useless since most of those who died from covid were well into their reproductive ages.
Posted on 5/5/21 at 6:38 am to McCaigBro69
quote:sam colt took that one out of play for humans
This survival of the fittest
Posted on 5/5/21 at 6:40 am to McCaigBro69
quote:
This survival of the fittest,
Ok, explain to me what YOU think this means.
(And then I'll tell you what in means in real scientific terms)...
FWIW, I wrote my masters thesis on Population genetics.
This post was edited on 5/5/21 at 6:53 am
Posted on 5/5/21 at 6:52 am to SammyTiger
quote:
If you die 10 second after you had you’re 10th kids at 30 you’re more “fit” than an 80 year old with 1 kid.
This isn't necessarily true. It also depends on if you have brothers, sisters or cousins and how many kids they have and if they reproduce. All of those relations have genes common with you. Therefore you have to calculate the contributions of nieces and nephews and 2nd cousins into the mix.
Posted on 5/5/21 at 6:58 am to McCaigBro69
quote:
Reading that it makes me wonder why we spend millions every year protecting at-risk individuals for common viruses, terminally ill individuals and those with severe mental illness
So, are you going to be the one that determines when an old person gets put down, or the kid struggling in middle school is taken out? Some of what your describing has nothing to do with genes or being the fittest. Next you’ll be saying only rich smart kids will be allowed.
Posted on 5/5/21 at 7:13 am to McCaigBro69
We don’t worship science in this country. We worship consensus, deceptive statistics, grant chasers, and propaganda.
True “science” is the endless search for objective truth despite its popularity. And objective truth makes this society vomit.
True “science” is the endless search for objective truth despite its popularity. And objective truth makes this society vomit.
This post was edited on 5/5/21 at 7:15 am
Posted on 5/5/21 at 7:16 am to DiamondDog
quote:
It’s murder
Well, it’s definitely KILLING.
MURDER has a specific definition.
Posted on 5/5/21 at 7:18 am to McCaigBro69
IMO, Darwin conflated selection with evolution of a species to another species.
I believe that is an error of assumption
Chickens can’t evolve into eagles but can evolve into better chickens
Likewise , humans did not evolve from apes
We’re both hominids and share code but we’re very different anatomically
The avg person doesn’t distinguish between the two do the conversation often becomes convoluted
I believe that is an error of assumption
Chickens can’t evolve into eagles but can evolve into better chickens
Likewise , humans did not evolve from apes
We’re both hominids and share code but we’re very different anatomically
The avg person doesn’t distinguish between the two do the conversation often becomes convoluted
Posted on 5/5/21 at 7:23 am to McCaigBro69
Democrats need voters. Unfortunately, natural selection tends to pick those mouth breathers off.
Posted on 5/5/21 at 7:25 am to McCaigBro69
They don't actually follow science.
Posted on 5/5/21 at 7:31 am to McCaigBro69
Because physical prowess, physcial limitations do not necessarily correlate with someones mental ability.
We would be vastly less technologically advanced without the sort of medical intervention and research which you reference.
That is just the cold calculation reasoning.
Nobody wants their loved one to die from a curable disease is the real reason.
The keeping terminally ill people barely holding on and the amount of money the U.S. spends on end of life care is just cause this country hates dealing with or discussing mortality. So we are terrified of moving on
We would be vastly less technologically advanced without the sort of medical intervention and research which you reference.
That is just the cold calculation reasoning.
Nobody wants their loved one to die from a curable disease is the real reason.
The keeping terminally ill people barely holding on and the amount of money the U.S. spends on end of life care is just cause this country hates dealing with or discussing mortality. So we are terrified of moving on
This post was edited on 5/5/21 at 7:33 am
Posted on 5/5/21 at 7:43 am to McCaigBro69
quote:
Why does society worship science, but ignore natural selection in the human race?
Why does the left worship science, but ignore natural selection in the human race?
Posted on 5/5/21 at 8:09 am to ccomeaux
quote:
IMO, Darwin conflated selection with evolution of a species to another species.
I believe that is an error of assumption
Chickens can’t evolve into eagles but can evolve into better chickens
Likewise , humans did not evolve from apes
We’re both hominids and share code but we’re very different anatomically
The avg person doesn’t distinguish between the two do the conversation often becomes convoluted
Lol, I guess if you believe the earth is 6,000 years old, you might be partially right. There is no distinction between micro and macro evolution.
Posted on 5/5/21 at 8:40 am to theunknownknight
quote:
We worship consensus, deceptive statistics, grant chasers, and propaganda.
The whole "publish or perish" mentality in a academia is a bigger issue than most realize. The volume of low-quality research that is published is far and away out pacing credible material. Especially research aimed at political hot-topics touching on the environment, public health, gun-control, and social sciences; overwhelming garbage that is mindlessly and proudly parroted by the media and Left Wing Nut Jobs.
Posted on 5/5/21 at 9:03 am to ccomeaux
quote:Well, we did, but we also still are apes.
humans did not evolve from apes
quote:For every difference we can find 100 similarities.
We’re both hominids and share code but we’re very different anatomically
Posted on 5/5/21 at 9:25 am to McCaigBro69
quote:because there’s 7 billion of us... we’re not in any danger of going extinct
but ignore natural selection and it’s importance to the ongoing survival of a species?
Posted on 5/5/21 at 9:28 am to McCaigBro69
quote:
I have voted conservative in every election and I’m pro-choice. So please do not group us all into that group think.
Pro murder is pro murder, voting platform is irrelevant
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News