To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (71801 ) 3/10/2011 11:10:41 AM From: Maurice Winn 3 Recommendations Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 219832 We have come a very long way: <we have not come very far mentally really... if at all.. > Eugenics has been going flat out with the good ones selected to go on to the next generation [for the most part though some barbarians slip through]. Just as a poodle and a labrador are nothing like a wolf, though there is a passing resemblance [compared with a tree or a bird], similarly the average human today bears little resemblance to the humans of only 1000 years ago let alone 20,000 years ago. While the actual DNA available is not very different from 2000 years ago, the filtering, reassortment and proportions have changed dramatically and continue to do so. Scientifically, you can check the Flynn Effect for quantifying one aspect of the change. [Ask Google] While the word 'eugenics" is unfashionable, people, particularly women, are wildly enthusiastic proponents of eugenics. They are relentless and merciless in their elimination of unwanted DNA. Nature is also harshly selective of suitable DNA, recycling the losers' proteins and carbon into the ecosphere to try again. The world could have 10 billion people easily. There is no shortage of room or resources. That's not to say 10 billion of the current semi-simian humans would be ideal. It would be better to accelerate the eugenics process to go for quality rather than quantity. Women are working on it. To see the process in action, wander down the street and offer your reproductive services to a dozen attractive young women. You will find that your DNA is unsuitable to be included in the next generation in most instances if not all. Mqurice