SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Dayuhan who wrote (32998)3/22/1999 8:09:00 PM
From: Jacques Chitte  Respond to of 108807
 
<Homo Alone>?
<Nobody Homo>?

999 - Number of the Beast in Australia



To: Dayuhan who wrote (32998)3/22/1999 9:12:00 PM
From: E  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 108807
 
Homo Sappy?

Homo OhNo?



To: Dayuhan who wrote (32998)3/23/1999 3:02:00 AM
From: nihil  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 108807
 
Think it's called Homo sapiens sapiens. Human brains are on average smaller than years ago, and there has been variation in characters like size, skin color, etc. The human species is one because of the cross-fertility of known varieties (e.g. "races"). Please note that all terminology in this area is arbitrary. Obviously, Homo sapiens has undergone variation and specialization as it dispersed and broke up into relatively isolated breeding subpopulations, over the last few hundred thousand years. Modern transportation improvements over the past 500 years have reunited nearly all of the people of the world into a single a breeding population. It is too simple to say that "hybrid vigor" is appearing in the human population as a result of interpopulation crossing, but it stands to reason that crossing of various specialized genetic stocks that produces new varieties (sets of alleles) will produce some that are significantly different in abilities and potentials than any that exist. I think it is clear that the human population is becoming more varied, with links being built between different subpopulations, rather than more divided. I don't think there is enough evidence yet to draw conclusions about stock-mixing and intelligence, but in terms of beauty (perhaps because of cultural convergence in criteria) and athletic performance, I believe the resulrs are obvious. If one tries to put together a track and field team made up of a single "pure race" or nationality, you have a losing team against one free to choose from the "gorgeous rainbow" of humanity. I believe that as advanced education spreads world wide, that different nationalities and mixes will appear in somewhat disproportionate numbers among the most successful practitioners. Much of the human differentiation is purely cultural and learned, but some probably results from genetic specialization. Generations of selection for abstraction, scholarship, memorization, philosophy will concentrate whatever alleles there are associated with the particular trait, and it could work rather quickly. If I were seeking an arctic animal tracker, I would concentrate on the Inuit (even though few may do it today). If I were seeking a memory expert I might check out Theravada monks.