Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (3199)	1/10/2006 1:08:18 PM
From: elmatador	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 219379

The issues I described were the means. You're touching the ends what those means could achieve. Surviving means not only get enough for his own. The guy who was more successful in getting the goodies, 10.000 years ago, had a lot of females who want to get a share of those goodies. They were willing to provide sex to them in exchange for a part of the catch. Sex for the female were a means to get what they want, i.e., babies. Then the guys started being charged with more and more babies. He wanted to put a cap on this and with that family born. If he limited the number of females, he knew whose babies he had to provide for. Not only that, this guy started having more goodies than he could spend during this life time. He had to leave them to someone else wife and kids. Which follows he should know who could inherit the stuff he had.

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (3199)	1/10/2006 1:58:45 PM
From: Gib Bogle	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 219379

"one has to keep in mind the peacock's tail." I was waiting for you to mention that. The tail got bigger because the males with big tails had a better chance of getting a mate, and despite the other disadvantages of the big tail. Males with small tails didn't mate at all. In the case of human beings in NZ, it could well be that males with bigger tails (better genes for intelligence) find it easier to attract mates. But the tails will only get bigger if: (a) Mating leads to offspring - choice and contraception interfere here (b) Small-tail males don't mate. One way or the other, big-tails have to have more offspring than small-tails. I don't see this happening in NZ, or the USA, or Europe (except for men with very small tails, the bottom couple of percent). I'm prepared to believe it is still the case in Africa. Social, cultural and technological factors have greatly altered the old picture. Of course, we can always redefine "intelligence" to mean "having lots of kids" ;-)