destruction to the idea of natural selection...

[SkiWampas]

alright, this will be my first topic here, and lets hope it can be a pretty interesting and stimulating debate, discussion, whatever.

ok, so it's not really religion or polotics, but it's philosophy and it's beem on my mind recently. but first, is anyone familiar with darwin and his works?

he had come up with this idea of natural selection, being that nature cancels out what it doesnt need anymore, and thus becomes survival of the fitest (sorry for the cliche' phrase). anyway, i think that with all the advancments we've made in technology or society as a whole, that this idea is becoming outdated, and the very idea is dying.

how so? well look at it this way, supose two giraffes are born. one with a short kneck, one with a long one. the long one can reach trees and eat fruits and such, higher up in the air, whereas the short knecked one, cant and dies out of hunger thus, when the longer kneck gene is eventually passed on, the short kneck just ends with the giraffe dying.

looking at this from a more modern look, we see how through different ways of canceling out mother nature, we can give that "shorter giraffe" the upper hand. people who have eye problems get glasses, people who have ear problems get hearing aids, etc.

nature, is no longer an issue in survival, because we can freely adjust ourselves, and eventually we dont need to worry about survival because we know that whatever bad gene we inherit, we can wipe out.

now the real question: could this really be such a bad/good thing?

thoughts? questions? opinions?

[Halo]

Well is what really a bad thing? Altering our bodies to make us be able to to do things? No. I wear glasses, but just to make me see detail. I went 13 years without them. But some natural selection as you describe it does take place. Lke some children born paralized or didn't get enoguh oxygen in the womb or other things may die because they can't take care of themselves.

[SkiWampas]

thats the thing though. tamper with nature to much and you end up in real tight bind.

i myself need contacts to see, without them and alot of other things that help along the way, i'd probably not be here. howerver, despite the good things, i was talking about cloning and some of the genetic and/or physical problems that could tak place once people start doing it more exclusively.

one problem that sticks out in my mind is population.

[Gojira]

Hmm, this could fit under the Evolution thread, me thinks. Strike two, Doc. You missed the Newbie Thread and this could easily fit under the Evolution thread.

Anyway, survival of the fittest will always reign. There isn't a way to stop it, really. Humans are making advancements in technology, which is very true, but it also has to do with survival of the fittest. The way we evolved is so that we could incorporate technology. That's why we are weak and slow compared to other animals. Advancements in technology just shows that we are fit to survive, thus survival of the fittest.

Also, I don't think there is anything wrong with tampering with nature. We've been doing so the past million years we've been on Earth. Domestication and agriculture are two examples. Genetic engineering is just the next step (well, technically, domestication and agriculture are genetic engineering). Whether you support cloning or not is really more of an ethics question on your part. I think trying to re-create organs and tissues is a great idea, but I really don't think re-creating full humans is a good idea. But, we are somewhat far-off in the cloning area. Most of the cloned animals that we have done were pretty much failures. We need to profect it first on animals before us.