Forced Evoloution.

[Mr. Purple]

Evolution takes so long that it would be pointless to force it on that level, it would be so much faster just to change fetuses genetics.

We should graft penises onto thier arms to make a race of penis-arm people.



YES ITS TOTALLY NECCESSARY!

Lol, you have a bunch of rather odd Ideas, dont you? XD

 

[Aardvark]

Forced evolution? We're Human Fucking Beings. We don't adapt to the environment, the environment adapts to us! Balls to you and your communist ideals, I say that if we find a planet that seems just a little on the chilly side, we import some greenhouse gasses from our home world and pollute the fuck out of it, until it's a comfortable temperature.

 

[Ace of Spades]

Your spelling hurts me, and you can't pass on learned characteristics to offspring.

 

[Notsomuch]

Lamarck? Is that you?

 

[CptCamoPants]

I just had a theory on how we could force evoloution onto peopple that I though was actualy rather good.

It came to me as I was watching a programme about a man who trained in the cold to help him indure it better. I thought that if you got a group of people and put them and their offspring through the same training for generations they would eventually develop a natural resstance to the cold, which would be usefull for colonosation of other planets ( they would be rather cold places)

Back to the volcano-lair!

What about the hot ones?
And what's the point if there's only a few people who can go and you have to force them to do it?

 

[Agrosmurf]

I'd like to think of evolution as an option. not a mandate.

Tehe.

 

[crudus]

I am all for forcing evolution (doubly so since it has been taking steps backwards). However, what you speak of is really just forcing people adapt, not evolution. "Training" is the word that gives it away. On another note people don't need to be trained against the cold since global warming is coming anyway. To make it faster is just kill the people on whatever half of whatever bell curve and go from there. For example, if you want smart people then you don't let people with an IQ less than 100 reproduce (easiest way is to kill them). That is how evolution works. To be honest it is much more complicated than that but it was an easy example.

[HEADING=3]THE PEOPLE MIGHT DIE[/HEADING]

[HEADING=3]THAT'S HOW EVOLUTION WORKS![/HEADING]

 

[Hot'n'steamy]

If we killed all the people who suggested these kind of things were killed, that would be a form of evolution.

And how exactly would that make you any better than them?
Oh wait, you'd be just the same and would have to die, too.

wow. Just, wow.

I'll amend my post:

[sarcasm]If we killed all the people who suggested these kind of things were killed, that would be a form of evolution.[/sarcasm]

 

[wordsmith]

Yeh, I herd that if u giv evry1 cancers then they al become immune or somthing. Cos instead of dieing a horible death ther kids get immunities and they pass it on to ther kids.

Or just wait for medical science to come along with a much less lethal method of curing the disease.

I hate this kind of thread, people talking about a very complicated thing as if they know all the little details of it.

It would solve our overpopulation problem and potentially cure AIDS, a theory I back-up with a group of prostitutes found in Africa who were AIDS immune, oddly enough.

Also, cancer is a cell error, how would you pass that on to a child?

Your "sarcasm" isn't very good, by the way.

Oh God, did you just say the way to solve 'over-population' problem would be to slaughter most of the worlds population? By your forced breeding to create a super race and your ideas on 'over-population' I can see that your opinion is a little wacko.

Also, the cancer bit was a bit of a joke on your expense, just to check if you got it.

I am working on my sarcasm, give me a while.

He has a point, and being as this conversation is hypothetical, it doesn't matter how "wacko" the ideas which he puts forward are, as it'll never happen.

Statement 1: There are too many people on this earth.
Statement 2: There are many life-threatening diseases
Statement 3: Surviving descendants of people with the disease will start to gain a natural immunity (Those with a lower immunity don't survive to pass the genes on)

Disagree with any of those three?

Solution to 1: Take some people off of earth. How do we do that? Either kill some, stop some having kids, or ship some off-planet. Taking them off planet isn't viable, so we've either got a China-style birth plan (which many reject out of hand), or genocide.

Solution to 2: Eliminate them. To do that, either stop the virus spreading until the last carrier dies, or give the populous immunity. The only ways to get immunity is by vaccination (dead virus cells injected into the body) or by natural selection (as this guy suggests), where the naturally immune survive to pass those on to the next generation.

Solution to 3: To give the larger number the chance of immunity, more must be infected. The more survivors there are, the easier it is to rebuild the population afterwards.

 

[Radeonx]

I am all for forcing evolution (doubly so since it has been taking steps backwards). However, what you speak of is really just forcing people adapt, not evolution. "Training" is the word that gives it away. On another note people don't need to be trained against the cold since global warming is coming anyway. To make it faster is just kill the people on whatever half of whatever bell curve and go from there. For example, if you want smart people then you don't let people with an IQ less than 100 reproduce (easiest way is to kill them). That is how evolution works. To be honest it is much more complicated than that but it was an easy example.

[HEADING=3]THE PEOPLE MIGHT DIE[/HEADING]

[HEADING=3]THAT'S HOW EVOLUTION WORKS![/HEADING]

Yes, but forcing people to give up their lives just so they can help spend thousands of years in freezing weather to give people a slight chance of developing a resistance to cold is a horrible way to force evolution.

 

[Miss_M]

Unfortunately this would only be possible with a eugenics programme - which in turn opens the door for enforced steralisation of women who might have diseased or deformed offspring, etc, a la Hitler. So probably file that under 'Bad Idea' =P

 

[Captain Wes]

Lamarck? Is that you?

for the record, that statement is brilliant

 

[Gerazzi]

ah, artificial selection.

i always hated it. the idea is good on principle, but it fails to take various human rights into account.

especially when you take it to the level my brother briefly thought of doing... that's the first time he really worried me.

What?
tell us more

Anyway, I guess you could theoretically do this, but I don't wanna, waste of time and resources, that could be used to genetically create an internet user that knows the difference between "your" and "you're"...
IT IS TOTALLY NECESSARY.

 

[Booze Zombie]

wow. Just, wow.

I'll amend my post:

[sarcasm]If we killed all the people who suggested these kind of things were killed, that would be a form of evolution.[/sarcasm]

The Internet has bittered me, I never assume anyone is trying to be clever on a forum.

 

[BuckminsterF]

[HEADING=3]THE PEOPLE MIGHT DIE[/HEADING]

yes, thats how evolutions works. The weak die, the fit survive

 

[Azraellod]

especially when you take it to the level my brother briefly thought of doing... that's the first time he really worried me.

What?
tell us more.

it's not that interesting really. it's unnerving, but not really interesting.

he basically wanted to recreate a system not unlike apartheid, but with different motives. thankfully the idea didn't last more then a week, but it was creepy while it did last.

 

[JoshFTL]

No need to be mean about the spelling of my fist post, calm down! I am usually a great spellererererer, it just seems so have slipped with the speed at which I was typing.

God-damn grammar Nazis *mumble mumble*

 

[Booze Zombie]

No need to be mean about the spelling of my fist post, calm down! I am usually a great spellererererer, it just seems so have slipped with the speed at which I was typing.

God-damn grammar Nazis *mumble mumble*

Here, have a flyer:

 

[crudus]

Yes, but forcing people to give up their lives just so they can help spend thousands of years in freezing weather to give people a slight chance of developing a resistance to cold is a horrible way to force evolution.

Ethics have stopped progress of too many things that need to be done! tbh resistance to the cold is a little pointless since we have already survived at least one ice age. This forced evolution is more useful for things that are strongly linked to genes.

 

[jboking]

I just had a theory on how we could force evoloution onto peopple that I though was actualy rather good.

It came to me as I was watching a programme about a man who trained in the cold to help him indure it better. I thought that if you got a group of people and put them and their offspring through the same training for generations they would eventually develop a natural resstance to the cold, which would be usefull for colonosation of other planets ( they would be rather cold places)

Back to the volcano-lair!

Imagine this, you train them to withstand vastly cold temperatures in order to colonize space. We decide we could just use robots instead and send the people back home. They succumb to heat stroke in 65F because they have been conditioned for extremely low temperatures to be the norm.

Aka, forcing evolution is a horrible, horrible idea.