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.

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

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (33603)	4/2/1999 3:05:00 PM
From: Jacques Chitte	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

This reminds me of the folks - good scientists and decent-hearted people - who opposed putting men on missiles because the speed would kill them. This guy needs to think out of the box a bit.

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (33603)	4/2/1999 6:35:00 PM
From: nihil	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 108807

Interesting article, especially the idea that one genetically modified individual cannot affect human evolution -- a common mistake believed by biologists who disregard the possibility of associative and selective mating. USSR scientists breeding to domestic silver foxes for domesticatability produced in 10 (?) generations friendly tamable foxes, who barked, were social (foxes are normally solitary) and, unfortunately, had variegated coats. King Charles had his lap dog spaniels bred to become gentle, friendly, vapid dogs in a few generations. All throughbreds trace their ancestry to one or more of three sires who (not alone) created the race of fast horses. 4000 or more dog breeds have developed into an astounding variety of smart and dumb, active and lazy, obedient and independent dogs (each of them looking like its master). Many believe that selective breeding of people ought not to be tried. But it is done everyday. In closed populations, wide variety is observed frequently. The alii(ruling classes) in some closed Polynesian island groups approached 300 or 400 pounds on 6'5" frames (men and women both). The commoners and especially slaves were much smaller. Some isolated tribes (pygmies and negritos) are genetically dwarfed. I believe (but cannot really prove) that Americans breed almost instinctively for height and size (NBA prospects), beauty, aggressiveness, sociability, and intelligence. If you don't believe this, teach or attend classes in both highly selective elite private colleges and in low income area community colleges. There has been a powerful selection in choosing students -- "the good ones" going elite, the community college mostly others left behind. I am not talking "race" for every elite college is loaded with (highly selected) African-Americans, Asians, and Hispanics, and community colleges are dominated by the local racial numbers. These two experiences are like dealing with two higher species (except these classes are probably interfertile, although they rarely date) like gorillas and bonabos. As we use more assortative education for our youth, and if associative mating continues as strongly as it has been, I predict we will produce a larger variance in the success of our children, along with greater height and weight dispersion but lower skin albedo. We may even see a return of NCAA dominance to the Ivy league, or at least to members of the Association of American Universities (select universities) members like Duke, Michigan, Berkeley, etc. Princeton always plays good BB (Bradley was a star). Jordan starred at UNC.