Well there is no race, no breed. And it is not natural selection because it is still breeders selecting for them.
Here you are using “race” differently from how you defined it earlier.
The point, scientifically spaking, is that including breeding with animals outside the immediate gene pool is healthy because you are not trying to manually fly the evolution, perpetuating everything except some trait you are selecting, but (like with pitbulls) letting nature have its say.
The argument is that, one way or another, genetic diversity is important for its own sake.
You don’t create it. It at one point becomes a distinct local breed from breeders spontaneously selecting, say for good shepherds. Eventually a breed is recognized, traits codified, lines recorded, and an official breed exists.
Anyway, I agree that random breeding achieves nothing.
I just meant that actual measurable genetic divergence is, as with pitbulls, definitely a factor, for the reason that you are then directing evolution, rather than creating an artificial pool.
But I think you are more than directing evolution. You are preserving, or conserving, an existing evolutionary product, and directing its evolution by preserving it and also allowing it to breathe.
This is why, taking genetics out of the context of DNA, it is important to view the tribal totality, and seek to conserve it. That way you are letting nature have its say, micromanaging is a mistake. Often, the tribal genetics include wildly different DNA pools.
No. Sorry. There is just so much wrong here.
For starters without natural selection there is no evolution. There is no filter which would incentivize any one trait to be more beneficial than the other.
A pitbull is a pitbull because it was picked for a set of traits.
In essence, breeders replaced the role of natural selection and achieved results much faster.
Not directing evolution poses no direct benefit of any kind.
It just means that you are no longer directing. You let go of the wheel.
Who takes the wheel then?
Natural selection does.
The most beneficial genes survive and the rest dies. Thats what it means “not trying to manually fly the evolution“
So what does that look like in terms of human beings which have been not only removed from natural selection, but are actively saving every decrepit degenerate offspring that should have died off?
It looks like a pointless mess.
Thats what it looks like.
This argument makes no more sense than saying “lets sling together every dog breed on the planet and see what happens because being offhands and not directing evolution is surely beneficial”
Nobody sane would claim that this would result in anything beneficial.
It would result in millions of maladapted, useless, dying offspring for possibly hundreds of years before the genepool of the dog species would settle for the most beneficial traits as per natural selection.
But again: If there is no natural selection then all you are doing is just mixing every toilet in the neighborhood for no purpose, reason, intent or benefit.
So no. Inter-racial nothing.
It would be a different topic if natural selection was a thing for humanity.
It would still result in untold amounts of suffering and death, but sure: At the end of that road a genepool would emerge that is more suited for survival.
But devoid of that?
EDIT:
YES.
EXACTLY.
Thank you. Thats precisely what i was trying to get to.
Sure. I can agree to that.
Afterall the filter is not actually natural selection, but the breeders themselves.
You are completely right there.
But now use this exact idea you have expressed here and transfer it to humanity.
We are going hands off, letting natural selection take it’s course.
Except there is no natural selection for humanity.
We are trying to keep every and all human beings alive for as long as possible regardless of how unfit for life they are, and we are also letting them breed.
What do you think the outcome will be here regardless of whether or not we add interracial factors?
Thats all im saying.
Without natural selection all we are doing is random breeding.
And that achieves nothing as you put it yourself.
No I agree. Government is artificially randomizing, it’s like dog breed homogenity but worse.
I now see we probably agree on the problem and the science. Where I suspect there might be a difference is the solution.
I would guess, based on a notion, that you would support a governmental counter force. I would view that as old venom with new names. Trump is a genious because he understands that government doesn’t need curing, government is the disease.
You can’t just get off it, things need to be solved, etc. But people are naturally conservative. The pitbull breeder is the conservative impetus that develops everywhere where a tribe becomes distinct. Government is there to destroy this, not help it.
Also yes, government selects for weakness of spirit and of mind, for subservience and dependence, for a cripple in every sense except the sense in which some function needs fulfilling, if that.
It’s lamentable.
It’s not only tribal value that is being lost, but humanity’s very wits.
“Beneficial evolution is impossible without danger.”
Get with the program man, it’s all about globalism and global international capitalism on the ride to create global government.
The grand finale of technocratic and transhumanist architecture where human beings are transformed into more easily managed cows on the plantation or farm template matrix.
We’re going to mix all different racial and ethnic distinct identities into one singular giant super slave golem race of pure mental conforming obedience within the technological singularity under mass surveillance totalitarianism.
My mother is very much dead, probably had something to do with your mother resenting me for not having you aborted. I am your father, be amazed. You are my illegitimate love child.
@Socrates@MrAuthoritarian
Unofficial warning for the crazy insults you guys are throwing at each other. Please just quit talking to each other or find a way to disagree without the insults.
