|
| Thread: Natural selection | |
|
Ghost
Undefeatable Hero
Therefore I am
|
posted February 18, 2019 10:29 AM |
|
Edited by Ghost at 10:43, 18 Feb 2019.
|
Natural selection
The Deaf are natural selection to survive. If not many Deaf children are born. Deaf are extinct. I have invented an answer. When/because I have a Darwin book. He said the species fighting for life and death. Therefore species were extinct. Darwin believed skeletons are anthropoids without proof due to missing link. Those skeletons can be just a monkey species and part of an official human species. When we have caucasoid, negroid and mongoloid own species/races with different skeleton-looking. It's a sure conflict with natural seleccion. I have learned that the human mind is impossible to study, an example of someone asking questions, people respond to a different answer. The correct answer is always a loss. But the reason for the training has been taught by the "right answer" which hasn't been discussed. Therefore, thinking of natural selection also means the birth of a new species. Darwin was a teologian, so the book of the Origon of Species is a religion. Because of Darwin's own opinions. It also means potential lies. So cause fear and anger that Caucasians would be born with little kids or doctors deny Deaf growth. Eg. mulatto. When I think they oblige the Bible. Even during the time of Moses said don't touch Deaf. New Testament time to improve deaf(ness) who were hearing. If you read more. But the human mind with no "right answer" or different religion teaching "right". Stalemate! So much easier to make a distorting thing eg Deaf history. Irony yes if Deaf succeed in capturing the world and Deaf are a new species. But now there is a natural selection for the ear. The question is the ideal picture. What you think of natural selection.
|
|
AlHazin
Promising
Supreme Hero
النور
|
|
posted February 18, 2019 11:51 AM |
|
|
Ghost said:
What you think of natural selection.
I think it's a dangerous idea and that's why most people don't actively believe in it. If we would follow that concept, we would not take care of people with handicaps for example, which is not what people do. So even if you'll find people indeed subscribing to the theory, they also think it's an obsolete concept for humanity to apply.
The idea is partly built on the concept that if I want to have more, someone else has to have less, which is ridiculous because life is not a zero sum game.
As for the deaf I don't think as well you're going to rule the world Ghost, that said I understand when you want to remain deaf and don't want to ever start hearing. I am myself living with a terrible eye sight and I can't get myself to get surgery to fix it once and for all.
Which is a waste, we should not think that way. So get implants if you can.
____________
Nothing of value disappears from this world, it will reappear in some shape or form ^^ - Elvin
|
|
Ghost
Undefeatable Hero
Therefore I am
|
|
posted February 18, 2019 01:02 PM |
|
|
|
You have forgotten the gene. And they develop a better version. Development never towards the end. This way it duplicates a useful gene/quality. Natural selection is the evolution process for them.
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 18, 2019 02:38 PM |
|
|
AlHazin said:
I am myself living with a terrible eye sight and I can't get myself to get surgery to fix it once and for all.
if you're referring to lasik surgery, that isn't permanent. if i had the chance, i'd go back in time and stop myself from ever having that surgery; because not only will my night vision never again be what it once was, but i also will have to get glasses again, because the fix isn't permanent. 
|
|
blob2
Undefeatable Hero
Blob-Ohmos the Second
|
|
posted February 18, 2019 02:54 PM |
|
Edited by blob2 at 15:03, 18 Feb 2019.
|
I wonder if I will be able to see fully-working, commercial cybernetic implants in my lifetime. And I don't mean things we have so far like hearing aid, but genuine hi-tech, sci-fi/cyberpunk actual substitutes/improvements for our original organs. Because that would probably shed new light on your theory: replace dysfunctional parts with "working ones".
Or exoskeletons. The later we already have https://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/ford-workers-exoskeleton-vests/, but I wonder when this will be, like, a thing. Interesting to see how society will evolve with the introduction of those. Almost immediately we will probably get crime related to them...
|
|
Elvin
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Endless Revival
|
|
posted February 18, 2019 03:30 PM |
|
|
What has being deaf to do with natural selection? It's not an inherently genetic issue, right?
I also don't get what your'e saying al. Natural selection is.. natural. Those with stronger characteristics have higher odds of surviving and passing on their genes. The species naturally adapts and specializes according to its environment, yes? If say humans decided they were better off culling the weaker ones that would be artificial selection, not a natural course of things.
Also, what you're saying about more and less is hardly ridiculous and often applies. Even in chemistry, the rich become richer and the poor become poorer. Most humans will happily trample upon another's interest if it serves theirs. Are there better ways? Can this change? Yes but there are certain requirements to meet, starting with the mindset. And until we reach a society where everyone is taken care of, we are better off finding ways to be useful to the rest.
____________
H5 is still alive and kicking, join us in the Duel Map discord server!
Map also hosted on Moddb
|
|
Maurice
Hero of Order
Part of the furniture
|
|
posted February 18, 2019 03:50 PM |
|
Edited by Maurice at 15:52, 18 Feb 2019.
|
Natural selection works on different but interconnected levels. It's one of the reasons we humans are working towards our global extinction, without anyone being able to really change much about it.
Going back to basics, life in itself is a struggle against the environment that life dwells in. The life forms that can overcome the challenges of their environment, will continue to live on. Those that can't, will die and fall by the wayside. Global warming is going to present a serious challenge to many lifeforms, but it's a gradual change, so the hurdle may be steep, but not insurmountable. Stuff like the meteor impact about 65 million years ago in the Gulf of New Mexico caused a nuclear winter on a scale that most of the large(r) dinosaurs couldn't handle, but all smaller species survived - they were able to cope with the sudden changes in their environment, unlike their big cousins, who all fell flat on their faces.
Life isn't static. Life is about the challenge to accomodate itself to the environment it's in - either by adapting that environment, or by adapting itself. Genes that provide a benefit will carry on, while genes that provide less benefit or genes that are even detrimental will cause those life forms to either procreate less succesfully, or perish altogether.
This survival of the fittest has also caused behavioural changes: a fair number of species have formed groups to survive. Humans in particular have always formed groups that helped eachother, while struggling to control anything that endangered their existence. Through the ages, we've become so adept at changing our environment, that we've become the dominant species on the planet, in the sense of control. It won't be far-fetched science fiction before we're headed out into space - albeit in our own solar system for the time being.
However, that benefit of taking care of one another, while having such total control, also has a downside: weak(er) genes get carried on through the generations, whereas in a rough, raw world that's about "eat or be eaten", those members would have died. Their existence means they get to carry over their weak(er) genes to future generations, weakening our species as a whole. And yes, I have diabetes, so I also have some genes that probably shouldn't carry over to future generations; the fact that our scientific progress has enabled me to survive decades beyond what would have been possible in the rough, raw world is something I am grateful for of course - I enjoy living - ... but it would enable me to carry over those defective genes to future generations as well. If future generations keep accumulating such defective genes, then at what point will life itself for us humans become impossible? At what point will we expire as a result, because we couldn't surmount our biggest hurdle: ourselves?
Or will we be able to really get a grip on our DNA and correct all the numerous flaws that have accumulated across the centuries? And if so, how would that evolve in an ethical sense? When is altering DNA a fix to an existing problem and when does it become a cosmetical fix? The threat of creating "super-humans" becomes very real then.
____________
The last Reasonable Steward of Good Game Design and a Responsible Hero of HC. - Verriker
|
|
Ghost
Undefeatable Hero
Therefore I am
|
|
posted February 18, 2019 04:13 PM |
|
|
Elvin said:
What has being deaf to do with natural selection? It's not an inherently genetic issue, right?
My ex-gf said her natural selection is a Deaf couple. She wants Deaf child. She got a Deaf child. Many Deaf seaches for Deaf companion. And they build the small community. It's an example.
A very effective gets Deaf child.  I'm satisfied.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 18, 2019 10:50 PM |
|
|
It would be nice to begin by realizing that natural selection is not an idea or ideology but a natural phenomenon. Long before Darwin, people already knew this on an intuitive level, that’s why we have ages old proverbs such as “big fish eats the small one” or “wolf will snatch the sheep that leaves the herd” etc.. People always knew nature was about survival, they directly had to anyway. You can also trace back the concept of evolution itself to times of Ancient Greece, Anaximandros being the first one coming up with it, at least the first one we know of, making a deduction by looking at seashells on mountain tops, saying “life must have started on the sea.” Darwin’s specific importance is about how he combined these two obviously old observations: Evolution + Survival. There were other people around the time who concluded the same, Wallace etc, but Darwin’s book was precise, he worked hard on it for years before publishing, his data was detailed and scientific, not just logical, so he is justifiably considedered the father of the theory. But the theory was inevitable, the amount of fossils and extinct life forms you discover by industrial revolution’s mine digging, the already developed methods of categorizing such data, Cuvier, the variety of life forms among all continents, now indexed with such method... Had it not been Darwin, it was certainly going to be some other smart guy.
Does all of this mean civilization or altruism is simply an illusion. Such a shallow jump of reasoning. First of all, natural selection does not necessarily dictate “dog eat dog” it also explains why “pack of dogs” are a pack. And as Maurice explained quite well already, on a scale, civilization is not about natural selection anyway, it is about softening natural selection. Nature is “the wilderness” Civilization is the struggle against such wilderness, it exists because nature is wild. Had it not been, we’d have no need to invent civilization to begin with.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Ghost
Undefeatable Hero
Therefore I am
|
|
posted February 20, 2019 01:02 PM |
|
Edited by Ghost at 13:04, 20 Feb 2019.
|
@Maurice
I was young student in the comprehensive school. Sometimes otologist visited our Deaf school. Ok he showed the implant. And then he asked who wants. But argument started. The last word of otologist said Deaf extinction.
Yeah Maurice, the Deaf are 70 milloin in the world. And Deaf couple born Deaf child. It's not easy. When no matching couple can be found. A slow event, but our natural selection.
@artu
No religion thinks seashells on mountain tops happened in the Flood. I think they didn't want to find really ancient fossils. Where was full of sea from Cambrian, Ordovician and Silurian.
|
|
AlHazin
Promising
Supreme Hero
النور
|
|
posted February 20, 2019 03:09 PM |
|
|
fred79 said:
AlHazin said:
I am myself living with a terrible eye sight and I can't get myself to get surgery to fix it once and for all.
if you're referring to lasik surgery, that isn't permanent. if i had the chance, i'd go back in time and stop myself from ever having that surgery; because not only will my night vision never again be what it once was, but i also will have to get glasses again, because the fix isn't permanent.
I thought it had like 5% chance of it not giving good results. I heard about some side effects like seeing a constant hallow or a problem with perspective. I didn’t know it could completely fail though.
We’re you myopic?
____________
Nothing of value disappears from this world, it will reappear in some shape or form ^^ - Elvin
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 20, 2019 04:57 PM |
|
|
yes, and it's worsening again. i only had 20/20 vision in one eye after they did it, they screwed the other one up slightly because they told me that it didn't matter where my pupil was, the process would take the edges down evenly. they did my right eye first, and the light made me look away for a second, which ended up screwing the process slightly.
know that, if you intend to go through with it, your night vision will likely be damaged, as mine was(because they're shining a bright-ass light directly into your pupils, is my guess); and that if you move your eyes at all during the process, the results won't be optimal. lastly, of course, the process isn't permanent; your eyes will worsen again. it'll take some years, but you'll end up needed either contacts or glasses again.
also, your eyes will dry out a whole lot easier. so much so that it hurts to open them after sleep sometimes; because you're literally dragging your eyelids over dry eyes.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 20, 2019 05:43 PM |
|
|
You must have had some horrible doctor fred, I also had the surgery, I was told success rate was 96 percent and no success meant going back to way things were, not blindness or anything. The surgery went well, it’s been like 15 years, I can still see pretty good, say, read subtitles of a movie easily (which wasnt the case before), maybe I lost just a little bit of accuracy over the years but nothing compared to pre-surgery times. My eyes dry out a little easier, you’re right on that, but only if I zoom in a screen for countless hours or similar situations like that, and when they dry out, some tears come, I rest for like half an hour and I’m good to go again.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 20, 2019 05:51 PM |
|
Edited by fred79 at 17:53, 20 Feb 2019.
|
it's been a little over 10 years for me.
maybe it's because they were military doctors. everybody working for soldiers, every single soul(including in the civilian sector), suck mothersnowing ass at their jobs; so no surprise there. they told me that the results will vary from person to person; that may have been true.
the surgery was free anyway; so... 
|
|
AlHazin
Promising
Supreme Hero
النور
|
|
posted February 20, 2019 06:33 PM |
|
|
I might simply keep my glasses then. Not worth the 6k dollars if it’s not permanent and might have so many side effects. I don’t see well at night that said, so if it gets any worse I guess the next step is night complete blindness, I’d better go on ultrasound after that.
____________
Nothing of value disappears from this world, it will reappear in some shape or form ^^ - Elvin
|
|
Maurice
Hero of Order
Part of the furniture
|
|
posted February 20, 2019 06:34 PM |
|
|
fred79 said:
they did my right eye first, and the light made me look away for a second, which ended up screwing the process slightly.
They didn't fix your eye? When I had my retinae lasered, I got special eyedrops to basically numb the muscles that can move the eye (feels really weird, too - it's like your eye is completely dry, although it isn't, and causing friction with your eyelids if you do try to move them). Also, the laser pulses were a minor fraction of a second with each pulse they did, so there wasn't much time to move the eye after they triggered the pulse.
____________
The last Reasonable Steward of Good Game Design and a Responsible Hero of HC. - Verriker
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 21, 2019 02:13 AM |
|
|
You can only get the procedure done once. They did put drops in my eye beforehand, sure. But they didn't know how buff my eye muscles are. Not their fault they didn't know to inject morphine into my face so i would be properly subdued. 
|
| |
|
|
