| Communism |
| Author |
Message |
| Posted on Fri Oct 06, 2006 6:54 pm |
Niushirra
Joined: 17 Jan 2006
Posts: 299
|
I just said we were evolving. We are always evolving. The traits that give an organism reproductive advantage over other ones are always going to become more frequent in a population. I just see our next step as a de-evolution because it does not favor the smart individual. It favors the irresponsible genes. Learn to read Derrick.
|
| Back to top |
| Posted on Fri Oct 06, 2006 10:05 pm |
Tankdown
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 688
|
If you didnt understand that, I think I can make it more simple.
Evolution is not always a good thing, its goes down also.
|
| Back to top |
| Posted on Sat Oct 07, 2006 11:19 am |
derricktheone
Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 356
|
| Niushirra wrote: |
| I just said we were evolving. We are always evolving. The traits that give an organism reproductive advantage over other ones are always going to become more frequent in a population. I just see our next step as a de-evolution because it does not favor the smart individual. It favors the irresponsible genes. Learn to read Derrick. |
| Niushirra wrote: |
| On the outside life may look chaotic and it is. Thus chaos does take you far in life but it ends at a certain point and then chaos destroys itself. Deep down life is a machine so the most organic thing to do would be to shape soceity like a machine. Or maybe even like cells. Then the cells/communes would go through natural selection just like the ancient bacteria and new macroorganisms would form. Like planet wide. It's a fact humans have really reached a peak of evolution and now the only evolution we are taking is to have the stupid people who don't use condoms spread the stupid condom gene around. That's our next evolutionary step. Intellectual people for the most part do not want to have lots of kids but stupid people just have lots of kids, most of the time. |
You said IT'S FACT that we've reached the PEAK OF EVOLUTION jackass, not we're always evolving. I wanted proof of these FACTS. Who needs to learn how to read now moron?.
I completely understand evolution works on the downslope as well. That's not what I was asking.
|
| Back to top |
| Posted on Sat Oct 07, 2006 11:40 am |
Niushirra
Joined: 17 Jan 2006
Posts: 299
|
| derricktheone wrote: |
| Niushirra wrote: |
| I just said we were evolving. We are always evolving. The traits that give an organism reproductive advantage over other ones are always going to become more frequent in a population. I just see our next step as a de-evolution because it does not favor the smart individual. It favors the irresponsible genes. Learn to read Derrick. |
| Niushirra wrote: |
| On the outside life may look chaotic and it is. Thus chaos does take you far in life but it ends at a certain point and then chaos destroys itself. Deep down life is a machine so the most organic thing to do would be to shape soceity like a machine. Or maybe even like cells. Then the cells/communes would go through natural selection just like the ancient bacteria and new macroorganisms would form. Like planet wide. It's a fact humans have really reached a peak of evolution and now the only evolution we are taking is to have the stupid people who don't use condoms spread the stupid condom gene around. That's our next evolutionary step. Intellectual people for the most part do not want to have lots of kids but stupid people just have lots of kids, most of the time. |
You said IT'S FACT that we've reached the PEAK OF EVOLUTION jackass, not we're always evolving. I wanted proof of these FACTS. Who needs to learn how to read now moron?.
I completely understand evolution works on the downslope as well. That's not what I was asking. |
We control our enviroment so that every human has a pretty much equal chance of survival. Now it's only up to the genes that code for not using condoms. These are probably not even genes which means humans have truly gone past normal genetic evolution. Soceity shapes our personailty not genes so there probably isn;t a stupid condom gene. This means we much take the initiative and start evolution over with us as the "genetic material"... sort of. We create the communes and treat them as cells with us as the organelles always working towards the good of the community. It's just gonna start out as communism and then lead into something much bigger. Don't make yourself look stupider Derrick and stay on topic.
|
| Back to top |
| Posted on Sat Oct 07, 2006 12:48 pm |
derricktheone
Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 356
|
| Niushirra wrote: |
| derricktheone wrote: |
| Niushirra wrote: |
| I just said we were evolving. We are always evolving. The traits that give an organism reproductive advantage over other ones are always going to become more frequent in a population. I just see our next step as a de-evolution because it does not favor the smart individual. It favors the irresponsible genes. Learn to read Derrick. |
| Niushirra wrote: |
| On the outside life may look chaotic and it is. Thus chaos does take you far in life but it ends at a certain point and then chaos destroys itself. Deep down life is a machine so the most organic thing to do would be to shape soceity like a machine. Or maybe even like cells. Then the cells/communes would go through natural selection just like the ancient bacteria and new macroorganisms would form. Like planet wide. It's a fact humans have really reached a peak of evolution and now the only evolution we are taking is to have the stupid people who don't use condoms spread the stupid condom gene around. That's our next evolutionary step. Intellectual people for the most part do not want to have lots of kids but stupid people just have lots of kids, most of the time. |
You said IT'S FACT that we've reached the PEAK OF EVOLUTION jackass, not we're always evolving. I wanted proof of these FACTS. Who needs to learn how to read now moron?.
I completely understand evolution works on the downslope as well. That's not what I was asking. |
We control our enviroment so that every human has a pretty much equal chance of survival. Now it's only up to the genes that code for not using condoms. These are probably not even genes which means humans have truly gone past normal genetic evolution. Soceity shapes our personailty not genes so there probably isn;t a stupid condom gene. This means we much take the initiative and start evolution over with us as the "genetic material"... sort of. We create the communes and treat them as cells with us as the organelles always working towards the good of the community. It's just gonna start out as communism and then lead into something much bigger. Don't make yourself look stupider Derrick and stay on topic. |
How am I making myself look "stupider" (not a word, pretty ironic)? Good job at avoiding the original question. Proof of peak evolution?? No?? Then shutup.
|
| Back to top |
| Posted on Sat Oct 07, 2006 1:09 pm |
Niushirra
Joined: 17 Jan 2006
Posts: 299
|
I just gave you proof. Take some English classes.
|
| Back to top |
| Posted on Sat Oct 07, 2006 3:09 pm |
Lightbringer
Joined: 29 Jan 2006
Posts: 293
|
Niushirra, you really need to brush up on the terminology surrounding materialism, evolution and natural selection. You may have a very valid point but no one here can really decipher what it is unless they've been subjected to (or have subjected themselves to) the same misinformation you have.
I don't want to insinuate that you don't know what you're talking about because I believe you have done some research but simply lack the vocabulary. Perhaps it's best to suspend the debate until you brush up on the terms used to denote that which you are grasping to describe since miscommunication is the reason this debate is not moving forward and has degraded into name-calling. Just reiterate your point when you're comfortable with the jargon of evolutionary biology, this thread isn't going anywhere 
|
| Back to top |
| Posted on Sat Oct 07, 2006 6:27 pm |
Niushirra
Joined: 17 Jan 2006
Posts: 299
|
I thought people were smarter than this. I'll spell every little thing out.
Evolution is the process of certain mutant alleles becoming more prominent in a population because the mutant alleles give an organism a trait that gives it a reproductive advantage over the wild type allele. This process will happen over and over again and thus change the population's genome into something else. Evolution in my eyes would have to be changing the population's genome into something more advanced or more positive but evolution is not based upon the alleles that advance the population the most. Evolution is solely based reproductive advantage so say in the human population that there are two single alleles that code for the mental trait of 1) being smart and only having enough kids that they can handle or 2) having lots and lots of kids thus raising the frequency of that person's genes in the population. If there was such a 2) trait it would probably be more than one gene but more than likely this does not exist. I guess this increase in an allele frequency could not be considered evolution but I would consider it evolution for a negative change which I call de-evolution. This is not genetic though. A personailty is based mostly on the soceity the person is raised in but the increase in population means a spreading of that soceity. Our positive evolution has stopped because more advanced mutant humans usually don't have a reproductive advantage. Let's just say psi was coded in a mutant allele. Psions don't get more babies even though they are more "advanced." The only positive evolution now would be soceital.
|
| Back to top |
| Posted on Sat Oct 07, 2006 9:23 pm |
JOHNNYBEGOOD
Joined: 17 Jul 2006
Posts: 354
|
Wikipedia:
Evolution and devolution
One of the most common misunderstandings of evolution is that one species can be "more highly evolved" than another, that evolution is necessarily progressive and/or leads to greater "complexity", or that its converse is "devolution".[53] Evolution provides no assurance that later generations are more intelligent or complex than earlier generations. The claim that evolution results in progress is not part of modern evolutionary theory; it derives from earlier belief systems which were held around the time Darwin devised his theory of evolution.
In many cases evolution does involve "progression" towards more complexity, since the earliest lifeforms were extremely simple compared to many of the species existing today, and there was nowhere to go but up. However, there is no guarantee that any particular organism existing today will become more intelligent, more complex, bigger, or stronger in the future. In fact, natural selection will only favor this kind of "progression" if it increases chance of survival, i.e. the ability to live long enough to raise offspring to sexual maturity. The same mechanism can actually favor lower intelligence, lower complexity, and so on if those traits become a selective advantage in the organism's environment. One way of understanding the apparent "progression" of lifeforms over time is to remember that the earliest life began as maximally simple forms. Evolution caused life to become more complex, since becoming simpler wasn't advantageous. Once individual lineages have attained sufficient complexity, however, simplifications (specialization) are as likely as increased complexity. This can be seen in many parasite species, for example, which have evolved simpler forms from more complex ancestors.[54]
Anyway, let's get back on topic, shall we?
|
| Back to top |
| Posted on Sun Oct 08, 2006 12:20 pm |
derricktheone
Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 356
|
| JOHNNYBEGOOD wrote: |
Wikipedia:
Evolution and devolution
One of the most common misunderstandings of evolution is that one species can be "more highly evolved" than another, that evolution is necessarily progressive and/or leads to greater "complexity", or that its converse is "devolution".[53] Evolution provides no assurance that later generations are more intelligent or complex than earlier generations. The claim that evolution results in progress is not part of modern evolutionary theory; it derives from earlier belief systems which were held around the time Darwin devised his theory of evolution.
In many cases evolution does involve "progression" towards more complexity, since the earliest lifeforms were extremely simple compared to many of the species existing today, and there was nowhere to go but up. However, there is no guarantee that any particular organism existing today will become more intelligent, more complex, bigger, or stronger in the future. In fact, natural selection will only favor this kind of "progression" if it increases chance of survival, i.e. the ability to live long enough to raise offspring to sexual maturity. The same mechanism can actually favor lower intelligence, lower complexity, and so on if those traits become a selective advantage in the organism's environment. One way of understanding the apparent "progression" of lifeforms over time is to remember that the earliest life began as maximally simple forms. Evolution caused life to become more complex, since becoming simpler wasn't advantageous. Once individual lineages have attained sufficient complexity, however, simplifications (specialization) are as likely as increased complexity. This can be seen in many parasite species, for example, which have evolved simpler forms from more complex ancestors.[54]
Anyway, let's get back on topic, shall we? |
Thanks for clearing things up. Very good post.
|
| Back to top |
