Or maybe it's just American tradition.

Moderator: Orlion
You may lament this, but there's a good chance that the majority of us would be dead by now without the "encroachment" of civilization on natural selection...Lord Foul wrote:Oh, how civilization has encroached on natural selection, methinks.
Why does everything I say cause a thread to eventually get split?Orlion wrote:You may lament this, but there's a good chance that the majority of us would be dead by now without the "encroachment" of civilization on natural selection...Lord Foul wrote:Oh, how civilization has encroached on natural selection, methinks.besides, natural selection doesn't always lead to stronger species or desirable traits (demonstrated by the prominence of sickle-cell anemia in some African populations or the inability of ancient American cultures to fight against pathogens introduced by Europeans).
That may be. But, I feel that for the most part, we're the undiluted product of natural selection. I know I am, at least.Lord Foul wrote:Oh, how civilization has encroached on natural selection, methinks.
Lord Foul wrote:This book is the #1 bestseller on Amazon.com.
Or maybe it's just American tradition.
We're importing a British tradition. He's the "Dr. Phil" of the UK, according to the description.Lord Foul wrote:This book is the #1 bestseller on Amazon.com.
Or maybe it's just American tradition.
Because what you end up saying is more interesting than the original topic of the threadLord Foul wrote:
Why does everything I say cause a thread to eventually get split?I'm just saying--developed civilization has turned quite a few people into veritable vegetables. Then again, maybe the food-stuffing-into-mouth and collecting body lard trait is a new development. Perhaps we were meant to be giant ticks?
The topic was boring, I agree. And I agree--I create future topics from my interesting insides. *strokes ego* There you go, baby...oh yeah... Excuse me, we need some time alone! The rest of this topic will go to my auto-pleasuring.Orlion wrote:Because what you end up saying is more interesting than the original topic of the threadLord Foul wrote:
Why does everything I say cause a thread to eventually get split?I'm just saying--developed civilization has turned quite a few people into veritable vegetables. Then again, maybe the food-stuffing-into-mouth and collecting body lard trait is a new development. Perhaps we were meant to be giant ticks?
![]()
Are you suggesting Vain is also me; or that my account is a proxy of his? What Pandora's box have you opened, my good man!? For God's sake--for the peace of us all--don't look too deeply into this issue! I warn you!lurch wrote:Okay..okay try this Vain/Foul
You might have to pay Chuck Palahniuk royalites...lurch wrote:Lord Foul wrote:This book is the #1 bestseller on Amazon.com.
Or maybe it's just American tradition.
Of Course its just American Tradition,,American Hucksterism has not let up over the years and am willing to bet ..that " diet" books have had their " OVER SHARE" on the last 30 years of Best sellers list...So..whats next..well of course, a book on how not to make your wallet thin by paying for yet another diet book...Wait a minute..wait a minute here..
So..like Vain is trying to figure a way around the Grand Hoax,and Foul is looking directly at it. Okay..okay try this Vain/Foul..set up a Charity..global in scale..all donations in human fat..as say from liposuction..are pasteurized then sent off to countries where people are starving. Theres not a looser in the loop. Every one wins!..and who is at the center of it all..why its Vain, with nothing to do but collect his administration costs for running a totally " green" charity..Recycled human fat, Nothing goes to Waist!
In reality, not so much of a Dr. Phil as a re-invented pop radio station DJ...Damelon wrote:We're importing a British tradition. He's the "Dr. Phil" of the UK, according to the description.Lord Foul wrote:This book is the #1 bestseller on Amazon.com.
Or maybe it's just American tradition.
I'm tempted to try to make money out of a book called "Fat??? Pffft, you're FIT!!!" proving conclusively that fat people are actually the fittest of all. Let's face it, if you're say 50 pounds overweight, you're conducting all your daily activities effectively wearing a 50 pound weighted suit. This must mean that, within the "suit", you're incredibly fit, compared to skinny namby-pambies who don't physically challenge themselves in such a rigorous, consistent and dedicated way.wikipedia wrote:Paul McKenna started in radio aged 16 at in-store Radio Topshop, and went on to present for stations including Radio Jackie, Radio Caroline, Chiltern Radio, Capital Radio and BBC Radio One.
A hypnotist who guested on his show led to a developing interest in the subject, initially for reasons of self-development, although entertainment was later to play a big part. Whilst still working at Capital, he began experimenting with small hypnotic shows, first for the amusement of friends, then for audiences in pubs and clubs. McKenna then started doing regular Sunday night shows at the Duke of York's Theatre, which was owned at the time by Capital. The success of those shows led to his playing other theatres across the UK, Ireland, The Netherlands, the US, Australia and Hong Kong.
After a brief spell at Radio 1 in the early 1990s, McKenna decided to quit radio, which was not his speciality. In 1993, ITV broadcast The Hypnotic World of Paul McKenna, which featured audience members volunteering to be hypnotised to act in comedic ways, the show subsequently being aired in 42 countries.
Why wouldn't I like that? It seems to have been the point of my postpeter wrote:You won't like this Orlion but in that case most of us deserve to be dead.
I'm going to be blunt. I had quotes around encroachment because natural selection always happens. It's methods/paths may be different depending on the environment (Desert Earth will have a different natural selection than Snowball Earth) and is happening to us even within civilization. Being civilized doesn't cancel out natural selection, it still works to produce individuals better capable of living in it. (For example, given enough time, a breed of humans might arise resistant to certain cancers if we all were frequent fliers for a couple thousand years). That's my other point. Natural selection is still happening, but natural selection always only favors those that can survive the current environment (hence, racoons that can eat out of a trash can will survive in the city, while racoons that do not will have to move or die).A small number of highly fit individuals is always preferable to a multitude of unthrifty ones and this is what natural selection provides in it's 'survival of the fittest' stage. It may have been tough - but it worked for a good few hundred thousand years in our case at least. I can't see that our intervention has improved matters to any great degree to be honest. We have 7 billion people and a f****d up world to live in thanks to the advances of 'civilisation'.
Medical technology is part of the system, peter. Much like if you happened to live in a place with cancer-fighting berries, your body wouldn't have as much cancer-fighting capabilities as those who live in Cancerland. I always think it's funny that we (humans) are suppose to be somehow outside of naturepeter wrote:I'm sorry, but modern technology - particularly in the field of medicine - does have the power to subvert the process of natural selection. Genes that are artificially maintained within the population eg those responsible for type 1 insulin dependant diabetes, ultimately increase in thier frequency untill they are represented in 100% of individuals and thus the 'fitness' of the population is reduced. This takes time - but it does happen. Now I do not suggest that all medical research should stop or that treatment to normalise peoples lives should be witheld - but I do think a recognition of the limitations of our knowledge and a healthy respect for the systems that nature has developed to order the world is in order. I doubt that we in a few hundred years of study will better those systems developed by nature over millenia. Hackneyd a phrase it may be - but I believe we play at being God at our very grave risk.
That's interesting, and leads to some funny places. For instance, natural selection is directly responsible for selecting those people capable of creating the technology/knowledge that allows us to alter natural selection.peter wrote:I'm sorry, but modern technology - particularly in the field of medicine - does have the power to subvert the process of natural selection. Genes that are artificially maintained within the population eg those responsible for type 1 insulin dependant diabetes, ultimately increase in thier frequency untill they are represented in 100% of individuals and thus the 'fitness' of the population is reduced. This takes time - but it does happen. Now I do not suggest that all medical research should stop or that treatment to normalise peoples lives should be witheld - but I do think a recognition of the limitations of our knowledge and a healthy respect for the systems that nature has developed to order the world is in order. I doubt that we in a few hundred years of study will better those systems developed by nature over millenia. Hackneyd a phrase it may be - but I believe we play at being God at our very grave risk.