General discussion


the de-evolution thread

By Oz_Media ·
After a comment by jdclyde, in the Tyra Banks BS thread, I started to really consider de-evolution, we've all heard the term used before and there is much doubt towards its possibility.

As one article stated, in movies we often see de-evolution of mankind, a person is turned into an ape for example. But de-evolution is also technically impossible in such a form.

DNA does not hold a time or date stamp, as our DNA is changed over the millennia, there is no way of telling what state A is compared to state B, so reverting from B to A would be impossible.

However, even if this WAS possible, would it not also be considered evolution, as the current state 'B' has changed into a new state 'A', thus evolving and not de-evolving.

On the other hand, how would we KNOW whether we had reverted or evolved?

An actual news story from the Daily Mail once stated "The human race will one day split into two separate species, an attractive, intelligent ruling elite and an underclass of dim-witted, ugly goblin-like creatures, according to a top scientist."

Now based on the 'Tyra Banks' post, this is very easy to see, however how realistic is it?

Ben Goldacre
Saturday October 21, 2006
The Guardian

?All men will have big willies?, said the headline of the Sun. This was the story of Dr Oliver Curry, ?evolution theorist? from the Darwin@LSE research centre. ?By the year 3000, the average human will be 6?ft tall, have coffee-coloured skin and live for 120 years, new research predicts. And the good news does not end there. Blokes will be chuffed to learn their willies will get bigger - and women?s boobs will become more pert.?

Wow, guys! Theres hope for SOME of us yet.

But this is not as absurd as it may seem at first. In medieval times, those fierce fighting knights were but the size of children today. The average man during medieval times was 5'7" tall; many knights were around the 5' mark. Having been to Madame Toussaude's was museum in London and seen the chamber of horrors, these life sized suits of armour and weapons look like they would be found in Toys R Us in late October, even as a short guy myself, i couldn't imagine fitting into the narrow shoulders and tiny arms that they had. It's easy to see how, in those days when larger predators were around, that people would describe dragons (probably just large lizards) and giants (exploring lands like Tonga where men and women would have been huge in comparison).

I remember when a 6' tall man was considered unusually tall, whereas today a great deal of our kids are taller than us, my 6'3" friend has one 17 year old son that is over 6'5" and another 21 year old that is 6'4" tall.

So we know we are PHYSICALLY evolving, in height anyway. What about mentally though?

Computers, do they make us smarter or do they make our brains lazier? We can pull up information in a heartbeat now that at one time we needed to read, study and remember.

Artistic skills such as handwriting and playing, writing music, are now as simple as stylized FONTS, sampled tracks and buying licence.

When it comes to television, the shows become dumber and dumber, while people tune in by the million and pay ridiculous costs to view such tripe. Humour which was once considered dark, witty or clever, is now so simple that, if anyone doesn't get it, the humour is deemed stupid instead of the person who just didn't get it.

People used to be able to make their own way in life, we used need to learn responsibility and planning, now the government can carry us and when we slip, the government can pick us up. If we get financially hurt in the process, the government can pay us for our troubles. We can make bad business decisions, and over invest with money we don't have, but the government will either help and bail us out or they will allow us to simply cry foul (bankruptcy), and start from square one again while ignoring our past financial mistakes.

We are de-evolving and all the while people are under the guise of a technological age that is becoming more and more stupendous in our efforts.

We can't even solve simple issue like renewable energy, we can't properly manage the free resources that are on our planet already, we can't function as a society without killing for more and more senseless reasons, we can't allow other people to live their lives as they choose without allowing others to either become vicious dictators or world police.

We can't even feed the starving people of our planet when we have more than enough food to feed the everyone in the world several times over, simply using our natural food resources; in short we have become pretty pathetic in many respects. We have become reliant instead of self sustaining, we have become shallow and intolerant instead of wise and understanding, what has time done to mankind?

Are computers responsible for the de-evolution and dumbing down of mankind? Perhaps in part.

Are we simply becoming lazy because we have made living, or simply existing, far too easy? I am sure we have in many ways.

Are we so lazy in fact as to remove ourselves from personal responsibility? We don't need to hunt and feed our families anymore, we can go to Safeway. If we don?t have money we don't even need to work for it anymore, the government will buy it for us.

I am not downing what I consider to be the evil but necessary social programs which do help many people in real need, such as medical support and welfare, but I am just thinking about how easy it is to NOT be a contributing member of society.

De-evolution, while scientifically impossible, sure seems to have become a reality today.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

That does it

by santeewelding In reply to the de-evolution thread

Tonight, I go home and shoot myself. Right after Oz does.

Collapse -

film at 11. ~nt~

by Jaqui In reply to That does it
Collapse -


by jdclyde In reply to film at 11. ~nt~

NOT at PST.... B-)

Collapse -

Watch the movie

by The Scummy One In reply to the de-evolution thread

idiocracy -- that is the direction we are leaning towards.
well either that or dead :0
Just stop questioning whatever happens and accept that someone smarter will fix it. When all of the smarter people are no more, we are left with incoherent idiots which will kill themselves off out of stupidity.

Collapse -


by Tink! In reply to the de-evolution thread

That's some deep thought there!

Quite frankly I don't know if there is anything substantial I could add to that, think you pretty much covered it Oz.

Collapse -

Evolution vs DE-evolution

by jdclyde In reply to the de-evolution thread

In my mind, evolution is the bettering of a species, allowing it to adapt to a changing environment. It is an improvement on the old model.

DE-evolution is a change, but not for the better. It is not an improvement, but a weakening of the species. More of a BAD evolution than any kind of reverting back to what used to be.

A surprisingly well written post, Oz. B-)

Collapse -

Reverting would be

by TonytheTiger In reply to Evolution vs DE-evolution

un-evolution, wouldn't it?

Helping the defective to breed may lead to de-evolution.

Collapse -

And encouraging

by jdclyde In reply to Reverting would be

is even greater the crime against humanity.

Collapse -


by Oz_Media In reply to Reverting would be

Evolving is just changing, whether positive or negative. HOPEFULLY we try to evolve in the sense of positive change, but that isn't always the case.

De-Evolution would be undoing the changes and reverting something back to the same state that it was in before it evolved.

Collapse -

I have my moments

by Oz_Media In reply to Evolution vs DE-evolution

Sometimes, even during the day, I will actually take time to think; not too often though, as I save my real thinking and creativiity for after hours when I get to work on my own projects and generate my own income.

Related Discussions

Related Forums