Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 57

Thread: Richard Dawkins on Eugenics

  1. #21
    tWebber Starlight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    New Zealand
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    9,391
    Amen (Given)
    2804
    Amen (Received)
    1785
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparko View Post
    Yes, there are different dog breeds. However if you wanted to breed dogs to be twice as big as any dogs that currently exist, it's going to take you quite a long time and quite a lot of generations even if you start with only the biggest breeds of dogs that exist today.

    And no matter which set of dogs you start with and breed together, it's going to be many, many, many, many generations before any of them have wings.

  2. #22
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    57,519
    Amen (Given)
    1198
    Amen (Received)
    21065
    Quote Originally Posted by KingsGambit View Post
    I have to disagree with many of my fellow Christians who believe the normalization of pedophilia is on its way. If anything, it seems to me like it's being more stigmatized these days. The French writer Gabriel Matzneff, who wrote for decades in open site about having sex with children abroad, is finally being "canceled" in culture at large and facing legal consequences. Part of his excuse was based on nihilistic philosophical defenses then-popular in academia, which apparently no longer fly. Border authorities are no longer looking the other way at people flying to Thailand or Vietnam for child sex tourism, whereas this sort of thing was previously an open secret that nobody did much about. And if society didn't take pedophilia seriously, then why would Catholics have cause to complain that society is too hard on them for the sex abuse scandal?

    French society is one of the most atheistic on earth, and even without objective moral values, they have managed to ostracize Matzneff from their culture.
    While still embracing and sheltering folks like Roman Polanski

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

  3. #23
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    57,519
    Amen (Given)
    1198
    Amen (Received)
    21065
    Quote Originally Posted by Starlight View Post

    The statistics Rogue cited here about it taking 22 generations to breed out a trait seem rather pessimistic, but are far more on the money than those who think we can just snap our fingers and change something from one generation to the next. To take your example, even if you went 100% draconian and slaughtered all the short people in the world and only let tall people breed to the next generation, you'd still get plenty of short people in the generations being born after than because genetics is complicated and people who are themselves tall can still have short offspring.
    The person who did the calculations was Reginald Punnett, who created the Punnett square, a tool still used by biologists to predict the probability of the genotypes of a particular cross or breeding experiment. That said I find it to be a bit risky to apply mathematical formulas to biology. The former follows strict rules while the latter has been described as being a glorious mess. That and, as we all know, the maths are of da debil.

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

  4. #24
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    57,519
    Amen (Given)
    1198
    Amen (Received)
    21065
    Quote Originally Posted by Starlight View Post
    Yes, there are different dog breeds. However if you wanted to breed dogs to be twice as big as any dogs that currently exist, it's going to take you quite a long time and quite a lot of generations even if you start with only the biggest breeds of dogs that exist today.

    And no matter which set of dogs you start with and breed together, it's going to be many, many, many, many generations before any of them have wings.
    You'd need more than many, many, many, many generations before any dogs had wings. You'd need straight out genetic manipulation to even have a chance.

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

  5. #25
    tWebber Starlight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    New Zealand
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    9,391
    Amen (Given)
    2804
    Amen (Received)
    1785
    Quote Originally Posted by rogue06 View Post
    The person who did the calculations was Reginald Punnett, who created the Punnett square, a tool still used by biologists to predict the probability of the genotypes of a particular cross or breeding experiment.
    Sure, but in 1907 he didn't have the slightest clue as to what the actual genetic causes of 'feeble-mindedness' were and chose to model it as it if were a single recessive gene. Which, of course, it isn't. There seem to be at least 500 genes that affect intelligence. And I'm sure there's plenty more genes where modifications cause mental disorders. So his 1-gene punnet-square model has limited applicability. Modelling the breeding of improving 500+ genes at once is far more complicated.

    Relatively few interesting traits can be tied back to a single gene. The famous example, used for Punnett-squares, is eye color. But actually, that only holds up for the common European brown-blue variations, and the explanation quickly gets more complex once other eye colors are considered.

    A trait that is often discussed on these forums, homosexuality in humans, appears to be a result of over a thousand genes interacting. Which kinda answers the question of why it doesn't 'die out' if gay people don't reproduce. All the genes involved in it are widely present among the heterosexual population, and so each generation, as the genes of the parents combine randomly, you'll continue to get gay children born to heterosexual parents and heterosexual children born to gay parents.

  6. #26
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    57,519
    Amen (Given)
    1198
    Amen (Received)
    21065
    Quote Originally Posted by Starlight View Post
    Sure, but in 1907 he didn't have the slightest clue as to what the actual genetic causes of 'feeble-mindedness' were and chose to model it as it if were a single recessive gene. Which, of course, it isn't. There seem to be at least 500 genes that affect intelligence. And I'm sure there's plenty more genes where modifications cause mental disorders. So his 1-gene punnet-square model has limited applicability. Modelling the breeding of improving 500+ genes at once is far more complicated.

    Relatively few interesting traits can be tied back to a single gene. The famous example, used for Punnett-squares, is eye color. But actually, that only holds up for the common European brown-blue variations, and the explanation quickly gets more complex once other eye colors are considered.

    A trait that is often discussed on these forums, homosexuality in humans, appears to be a result of over a thousand genes interacting. Which kinda answers the question of why it doesn't 'die out' if gay people don't reproduce. All the genes involved in it are widely present among the heterosexual population, and so each generation, as the genes of the parents combine randomly, you'll continue to get gay children born to heterosexual parents and heterosexual children born to gay parents.
    This would suggest that his 22 generation prediction far from being rather pessimistic was overly optimistic.


    ETA: It was 1917 not 1907 but I think your point still stands.
    Last edited by rogue06; 02-20-2020 at 03:21 AM.

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

  7. #27
    Professor KingsGambit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Triangle
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    11,044
    Amen (Given)
    1823
    Amen (Received)
    4834
    Quote Originally Posted by rogue06 View Post
    While still embracing and sheltering folks like Roman Polanski
    His name is mud in society at large. You seem to be making my point for me.

    The greater point that I was trying to make that nobody addressed was that Matzneff depended on academic defenses of his sexual proclivities that have now gone out of fashion, and this particular realm of academia seems to be what you all are most afraid of.
    "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

  8. #28
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    57,519
    Amen (Given)
    1198
    Amen (Received)
    21065
    Quote Originally Posted by KingsGambit View Post
    His name is mud in society at large. You seem to be making my point for me.
    I daresay that for the most part the "public at large" would likely say "Roman Pulled-who"? His peers have never cared as evidenced by the number of awards and nominations he's garnered through the years.

    Quote Originally Posted by KingsGambit View Post
    The greater point that I was trying to make that nobody addressed was that Matzneff depended on academic defenses of his sexual proclivities that have now gone out of fashion, and this particular realm of academia seems to be what you all are most afraid of.
    I think this might be due far more to a rejection of the sort of nihilistic philosophy that he espoused than a sudden shift back to basic morality.

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

  9. #29
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    52,645
    Amen (Given)
    5353
    Amen (Received)
    23248
    Quote Originally Posted by Starlight View Post
    If you also change all your positions to being right on all the other issues.
    I'm always right.

  10. #30
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    52,645
    Amen (Given)
    5353
    Amen (Received)
    23248
    Quote Originally Posted by Starlight View Post
    Yes, there are different dog breeds. However if you wanted to breed dogs to be twice as big as any dogs that currently exist, it's going to take you quite a long time and quite a lot of generations even if you start with only the biggest breeds of dogs that exist today.

    And no matter which set of dogs you start with and breed together, it's going to be many, many, many, many generations before any of them have wings.
    Wings sure, but I think the amazing diversity between dog breeds show that selective breeding can indeed make large changes over time in a species. It would work for people as well. Nobody said anything about having to accomplish it in a couple of generations.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •