• Bluelight HOT THREADS
  • Let's Welcome Our NEW MEMBERS!

Eugenics

DNICEONER

Ex-Bluelighter
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Messages
296
Location
Rotterdam
The assurance of a pristine survival of the human race? sounds like you've been reading up on Adolf Hitler.

"dude sphinx probably knows more about steroids, hormones, exotic musclebuilding compounds etc. than you ever will. He knows his shit, trust me. I can assure you he's not stupid"
and roids and fitness and bb'ing is about as necessary as dirt is to eating, in the grand scheme of things.

I have valued Sphinx's info however.
 

Jungboho

Bluelighter
Joined
Apr 2, 2004
Messages
295
If you 'better' the world today, the results of it will not be seen for 30+ years. Why do you care about the future human race?
 

dbighead2

Bluelighter
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
Messages
3,698
if we never try, we will never see results.

I always thought that we did things now to better the living experiences of our children.

are you that selfish jungboho?


there are quite a few excellent men who DIED to better the world. Are you saying these people died for nothing because "the results of it will not be seen for 30+ years" ?
 

Bad_Boy_Blue

Bluelighter
Joined
Jan 2, 2004
Messages
1,765
5alphareductase said:
In the true sense of the word, sphinx is right. By letting people with inferior genetics survive, like type 1 diabetics, and having them spread the genes for that disease even more, we are reggressing as a specices, and not progressing. In the wild, these people would die before they were one year old, but with the medical advancements that we have, they can lead pretty normal lives and reproduce their genes.

Of course we arent saying that these people should be killed, but it is a fact that we are regressing as a species.

Hang on, there's no reason they should be increasing in number; they have no advantage over anyone else. Usually mutations become more prevalent in a population because they give individuals an advantage that makes them more likely to survive and reproduce. The fact that we aren't killing them doesn't mean that they are 'spreading'.

Tell me if I'm wrong.
 

5alphareductase

Bluelighter
Joined
Feb 25, 2004
Messages
964
Yes, they are increasing in number. THings like type one diabetes are genetic defects, and these people would be dead within a few months of their life, but with advances in medicine, they are living close to normal lives and are able to reporduce. By reproducing, they are spreading the "defective," genes.
 

Jungboho

Bluelighter
Joined
Apr 2, 2004
Messages
295
dbighead2 said:
if we never try, we will never see results.

I always thought that we did things now to better the living experiences of our children.

are you that selfish jungboho?


there are quite a few excellent men who DIED to better the world. Are you saying these people died for nothing because "the results of it will not be seen for 30+ years" ?


What I am saying is that there is no need for eugenics in this day and age, the future will probably bring genetic modification technology, letting us 'evolve' ourselves through science. :)
 

Bad_Boy_Blue

Bluelighter
Joined
Jan 2, 2004
Messages
1,765
5alphareductase said:
Yes, they are increasing in number. THings like type one diabetes are genetic defects, and these people would be dead within a few months of their life, but with advances in medicine, they are living close to normal lives and are able to reporduce. By reproducing, they are spreading the "defective," genes.

But not at a greater rate than non-'defective' individuals. Or was that not what you were trying to say?

BTW, please don't get the impression that I'm flaming (sometimes I come across that way without intending).
 
Last edited:

5alphareductase

Bluelighter
Joined
Feb 25, 2004
Messages
964
Not a problem at all man, dont worry about that.

The point is that the people with "defective," genes are getting to reproduce at all, when they really wouldnt get to without our medical advnacements.
 

Bad_Boy_Blue

Bluelighter
Joined
Jan 2, 2004
Messages
1,765
I think I misread what you said. You were saying that they increase in number, but their percentage of the population as a whole doesn't increase. If that's what you meant, I agree with you.

What I do disagree with is the fact that society is regressing. They may be increasing in number, but healthy people are also increasing in number (at an equal rate).
 

5alphareductase

Bluelighter
Joined
Feb 25, 2004
Messages
964
Yes, the healthy people are increasing in number, but those with "defective," genes would eventually die out, and the disease, and genes for that disease, wouldnt exist anymore. Since they can reproduce, the disease will stay on continuously, rather than just being erradicated if the inferior genes couldnt reproduce. The survival of the fittest isnt being followed, as the weaker people (defective) are planned to die out through nature, but they are still reproducing.

I realize this is a kind of morbid topic for some, but dont think that we want to kill all of those with disabilities or something like that. We are just disscusing the nature of evolution, and how medical advancements are thwarting what has worked for billions of years.
 

Sphinx

Ex-Bluelighter
Joined
Nov 8, 2002
Messages
915
Location
Canada
I dont understand wut your saying BBB.

Wut im trying to say is what alphy has pointed out, but not just diabetes, but strokes, heart disease, cancer, etc. People who are prone to such diseases/disorders. I dont hate these people or nuttin but in the honest sense of survival of the human race they eventually hafta go or else their genetics spread by repoduction and taint the gene-pool more than it already is. And the more tainted it becomes, the faster it will become more tainted, picking up speed every generation till it overwhelms.

Ya you can say that healthy people will be reporudcing as well so it should keep a balance. But this is obviously not the case, cause if you look, hell even 20 years back, the amount of such disorders has increased tremendously.

As winston churchill I beleive once said, its not the end of the world, but it is the end of the beggining, or the beggining of the end.
 

5alphareductase

Bluelighter
Joined
Feb 25, 2004
Messages
964
Yes, and I was going to go in to that just a bit, but I forgot to in my last post. People who are dominant/reccesive (Bb) will still carry the gene for a certain disease, and if they reproduce with another Bb, then the disease will show up in a small number of cases. By eradicate, I dont mean that the disease will be totally gone, just that the number of people who have the disease will be very small.
 

MaliceNwunderland

Bluelighter
Joined
Mar 12, 2003
Messages
2,394
Location
PDXXX, OR USA
I guess i'll reply to this thread because I started it (sort of).

Eugenics will not solve the obesity problem in USA, because we have developed an enviorment and culture based around over eating. It's a social problem not always a genetic one.

PS DJNICEONE- WTF are you talking about?
 

DNICEONER

Ex-Bluelighter
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Messages
296
Location
Rotterdam
umm, some of you were speaking of killing masses of cripples and inbreds and what not for the better of mankind. I'm not religious like that, but damn. and what about the mental/emotional damage that can pass from generations knowing what their forefathers done for their betterment. ...ok thats a stretch.
 
Top