Tag Archives: natural selection

Is natural selection for humans not occuring?

Posted on May 7, 2012 by admin| 3 Comments

Natural selection is basically “Survival of the fittest”. It is an important force for evolution… But, I observe that in the modern world, almost anybody can survive to reproduce. With the help of donations and ware fare, the most useless people could reproduce at an devasting rate. The “scum” of society, with unfavorable traits will reproduce. Which is “unnatural” in my opinion; they would die in true selection, if people where not so “humane”. Useless people will often reproduce at a much higher rate than those with favortable traits (those who are intelligent, skilled, or physically strong), hence the stereotype of the Redneck with 10 kids living off ware fare. It seems as if low class people are reproducing faster than higher class folks. Are we evolving backwards? Are the skilled overpopulated, and diluted by the unskilled?

I think donations to the poor are only fueling the fire, giving them the opertunity to reproduce. Why not just let them DIE!? When you donate, you are only wasting your money on some worthless unskilled failure. One whom will DIE in “true” nature. If i ran the world, I will only allow those who are extremely intelligent and do very well in school, those who have some useful skill, and those who are physically strong to reproduce. That ways the human race will be more powerful, and evolving “forwards” at an fast rate.

I am not an scientist of any sort. In fact I’m still a freshman at high school.

→ 3 Comments

Tagged ANYBODY, class, donations, evolution, fare, Force, natural selection, rate, redneck, scum, selection, stereotype, survival, ware, world

What do you think of my analysis of women and sex?

Posted on March 2, 2012 by admin| 4 Comments

The relationship women and men have when it comes to natural selection is that of teamwork.

Men’s biology focuses more on the physical and mechanical motions. In this regard, they can detect what types of physical attributes are good for survival. Stronger bones, smarter, faster or big hips to successfully bare a child. Many more details but these are just some.

Women tend to focus on the emotions, character and conceptual part of humanity. If a man has a strong emotional constitution and a good character, she can knows that he is reliable yet capable of more than just mechanical motions.

Take for example a very big and tough man. This man is very shy and cowardly. He will not be able to use his strength very much. Take for example, also, a very skinny, small muscle and weak man but with a big and brave personality. Sure, he can accomplish a lot. However, he will take a lot longer to do it. He will also not be able to defend anyone very well and might not be very useful with anything physical. Although, he will try.

So how does it apply to sex?

Well lets take what we commonly attribute to sexual requirements.

Looks, money, big penis, social skills, social connections are some.

Looks: The way your face looks communicates an emotional/personal quality to women. Faces can communicate — romance, confidence, daring, profundity, love, determination and so forth.

When men look at it, they only see that the face is symmetrical but our ability to determine its emotional quality is superseded by our evolutionary ability to wire healthy and symmetrical human outlines as a quality of mating.

Money- Women want to feel safe. A man that has money communicates that he has the mental requirements or social connections/skills to obtain this wealth. In having money, a woman will have a certain feeling of safety. There are many factors that play into all of these. Such as if he is rich but has a mild and needy attitude communicates something negative, however, the money is real.

Big penis- Similar to good looks. The trend is, anyone with a big penis is more confident. Since generation 1 or 2, men have always seen the penis as a status symbol (reference from certain sources). Thus a man with a big penis is likely to be more confident. The reasoning behind this being a status symbol is because men are physical.

The vaginal opening isn’t much wider than one inch side to side. 4 inches in. The physical aspect of this isn’t what gets women off in sex. It is something I call sexual tone.

Sexual tone is the context of events leading up to sex. Lets take a big, muscular and confident man and a skinny, artistic/stylish man. Both attract women but both make two different sexual tones to women.
Another example: Take a short, not very good looking, fat and balding woman. Now pit her against an attractive actor. The balding woman might very well be attracted to this actor if they met.
If they have sex, the sexual tone for the woman would be that she is very low in gene quality and is getting a good gene and that she is lucky.

Sexual tone for a strong attractive man and an attractive women is she is upgrading genes.
Sexual tone for artist is strong emotional sex and desires.
Sexual tone for player is, danger and excitement
etc.

So this outlines the bulk of what I analyze the game of sex to be.

What do you think? I can provide sources.
o.O

i have a theory about who enjoys sex more. The answer is, it’s both and neither.
The individual is the one who enjoys it more. It’s the same as a person who doesn’t enjoy wine and one who does. The way he/she mentally tunes into the enjoyment determines how many nerves the person uses in it’s experience.
report me

I have a girlfriend. So.. take your fail somewhere else.
Truthsee

Other scientists haven’t postulated this. At least not putting it together like this. All of this is known but in different contexts. Such as the study of the animal kingdom and also the study of the human mating system.

What I haven’t come across was the connection between the two gender’s mental functions and mating behavior.

Also, what does literature have to do with science?
Also, I didn’t waste my time. Writing this down is sort of practice for when I write research papers next year.
Report me

I’ll put up a pic of me so you can see if I’m really a skinny nerd.
my pic

http://s897.photobucket.com/albums/ac171/zotero123/?action=view&current=l_5b91ee31fe6143e1a292f03143cc30e0.jpg

→ 4 Comments

Tagged Analysis, natural selection, relationship, selection, sex, teamwork, women and men

How does evolution account for symmetry?

Posted on February 12, 2012 by admin| 8 Comments

Natural selection doesnt make any sense as an explanation for how things came to be. I guess strong species of animals kill weak ones. But, the killing is usually cyclical, where animals are killed off but reproduce to keep their populations in balance. Generally, extinction seems to occur like when something like an asteroid hits the planet or people kill them off constantly enough. So I guess, people can killl them off and in that instance, natural selection is true. But even fossils are symmetrical. So the whole idea that beneficial mutations beat out negative mutations to get the symmetry we see doesnt seem likely to me, because if it was, there’d at least be some sort of fossil that DID have random positions of feet and hands and arms and all that. Theistic evolution i suppose is plausible. But even the whole tree of life thing that says that every living thing, could it be upside down?. Whatever killed the dinosaurs, killed most of life on the planet, So would it not stand to reason that a lot of the fossils of extinct animals are NOT of weaker animals waiting to evolve into something better, but of animals that, like the dinosaurs, became extinct around the same period, because of the same asteroid impact? Not only that but a mass extinction should cut evolution off from occurring over billions of years to having to occur over only hundreds of millions of years. Yet. Supposably evolution can only occur if you give it over tons and tons of generations so any changes are supposed to be too small to even observe. Sure, microscopic organisms can change and be observed and “mutate”, but does that mean they can become a bear or a functioning person even if you give them a billion years? Animals can reproduce within their kind. Different breeds of dogs can obviously mate. But that doesnt mean a person and a monkey, who are apparently evolutionary cousins, can mate and have a Humonkey or something does it? Its kinda gross to think about, but over the years im sure people have tried different disgusting things or experimented and no ones come up with any breed of human-monkeys. So how then does evolution account for symmetry if even ancient fossils are symmetrical? I just do not see how it makes any logical sense.

→ 8 Comments

Posted in 2012

Tagged account, Asteroid, asteroid hits, asteroid impact, beneficial mutations, billions of years, breeds of dogs, cousins, different breeds of dogs, dinosaurs, doesnt, evolution, extinct animals, extinction, fossil, fossils, humonkey, mass extinction, microscopic organisms, natural selection, Planet, populations, random positions, selection, sense, something, symmetry, theistic evolution, tree of life

On “Equality”. Any flaws in reasoning?

Posted on February 2, 2012 by admin| 3 Comments

Equality is the assertion that ‘all men are created equal’ and that consequently, we are entitled to the same ‘unalienable rights’. I contest the former point, as we are constituted of attributes such as, but not limited to, intelligence and physical prowess. In a competitive environment, as in nature, how well we fulfill these criterion will determine whether or not we survive; natural selection will take its pick based on the inherent inequality within us. Thus, when a persons is quantified based on the ‘net survival skill’ he/she has, and compared to that of an ‘inferior’ being, the relation would be p1>p2 instead of p1=p2. It would thus not be logical for the relatively inferior human to be deemed the equal of a being superior in all aspects of life (this will not be subjective if they are assessed by a rubric).

This inequality does not connote any thing in the field of politics. Whether morality and ethics are intrinsic or empirical, we have learned to embrace ‘inequality’, as the alternative would be mass genocide and forced sterilization, as witnessed by the Third Reich’s Holocaust. We have learned to empathize with and accept the flaws of one another, and have established laws because of this capability. Equality is thus nonexistent, but we must not discriminate because of this. //

What are the weak points? Any logical fallacies? Anything you agree/disagree with? Which points could I expand upon? Thanks in advance!
What do you mean?

→ 3 Comments

Tagged aspects of life, assertion, attributes, competitive environment, contest, criterion, environment, equality, inequality, intelligence, natural selection, Nature, p2, physical prowess, Point, prowess, reasoning, rubric, survival skill, unalienable rights

Why might some species survive changes on Earth? (about natural selection) PLEASE HELP ME FCKIN ANSWER! =D?

Posted on January 14, 2012 by admin| 4 Comments

Scientists hypthesize that in prehistoric times, the impact of an asteroid might have caused a world-wide dust cloud that blocked sunlight and led to the extinction of many species. Why might some species survive such a change on Earth?

A. Natural selection would lead to the extinction of those species that did not depend on sunlight.
B. All species depend on sunlight for life processes and therefore would be affected by a period of darkness.
C. Species that populated the location of the impact would die off, while species located far away would survive.
D. Species that are less dependent on sunlight might survive, while others that rely on sunlight would go extinct.

I already have an answer on my mind. But due to educational purposes i would like to hear your answers and your opinions.
shouldn’t it be B. because ALL SPECIES depend on sunlight. Look at this way. herbivores eat plants. but plants die so herbivores die. if herbivores die then the carnivores will then die too because of nothing too eat. then if carnivores die humans will die next. so shouldnt it be B.

→ 4 Comments

Posted in 2012

Tagged answer, Asteroid, Dust, dust cloud, Earth, extinction, FCKIN, HELP, hypthesize, impact, natural selection, PLEASE, prehistoric times, scientists, selection, sunlight

Tag Archives: natural selection

Is natural selection for humans not occuring?

What do you think of my analysis of women and sex?

How does evolution account for symmetry?

On “Equality”. Any flaws in reasoning?

Why might some species survive changes on Earth? (about natural selection) PLEASE HELP ME FCKIN ANSWER! =D?

Search It!

Categories

Recent Entries

Links

Pages

Meta