Human evolution: by natural or artificial selection?

Human evolution.We come in races. The proof of that pudding looks you in the face every day as you observe the racial variety of the people around you. I don’t remember anything in Genesis that explains this, so maybe God had nothing to do with it, assuming the existence of a bona fide supernatural creator God of course in the first place, although I’m about to be corrected by the lack of a biblical explanation by the proper authorities.

But if the Bible does not explain the origin of the various breeds of humans, neither does Darwin’s natural selection, in the same way that natural selection did not create, and does not explain our dog breeds. Survival of the fittest did not produce the French Poodle, we did it! But who (or what) created our diversity of races or races?

To stifle the reader’s immediate curiosity, my answer is solidly reduced in favor of our evolution by “artificial selection,” which does not detract one jot from Darwinism’s principles of evolution through natural selection. The difference between the two is that artificial selection is deliberately intelligence-driven selection; Natural selection is, well, natural, and not by design.

Humanity, humanity, human beings, no matter how you label us, are collectively made up of breeds like our own domesticated and bioengineered animals (artificially bred) (companions, farmers or other) and plants (crops or garden varieties). The keywords are ‘domesticated’ and ‘bioengineering’. We have been domesticated and bioengineered as well, but we do not domesticate and bioengineer our own human races as we domesticate and bioengineer our domesticated plants and animals. Someone or something else will take that credit.

Now, I’m not really talking here about the so-called scientific phrase that now replaces creationism: ‘intelligent design’. Intelligent design has the philosophical baggage of having a supernatural creator, a God, behind design. Unfortunately, in the case of the human being, if God designed us from scratch; from scratch, fine. Bioengineering 101 really failed. The various aches and pains we suffer from poor biological design testify to that!

No, I mean here the kind of artificial selection that we humans employ when we breed dogs or cats or livestock or drought-resistant crops or whatever for our particular real (or imagined) needs. I’m turning things around a little bit here in what is good for the goose is good for the goose. Like us, so they have done to us! The question again is: who did it to us?

To further stifle the reader’s immediate curiosity, the “who” collectively are the mythological gods, who are not really mythical, nor are they supernatural, but flesh and blood-aliens who have a special interest and abilities towards genetics.

The basic premise, as set forth in universal cultural mythologies, is that the gods created humans, creating humans to relieve the gods, and they do the hard work instead, and also serve the gods, and I don’t just mean kneeling down and praying and building buildings for them. Translated, in more modern terminology, flesh and blood aliens, who arrived on planet Earth many hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of years ago, set up tents. Eventually known, if not loved, as the gods, these ‘gods’ genetically manipulated humans from primate populations with the ultimate goal of making life for the ‘gods’ easier and more rewarding. Due to the genetic similarities with our modern self,

One of those “most rewarding” bits; one of the tricks of the “gods” in his genetic engineering experiment, one design element designed to appeal to the “gods” was to ensure that humans were sexually compatible with them, and by Jove, they once made use of that compatibility designed – at least if you take it literally and believe what happened according to mythological tales. Not a kid-friendly read!

Now the initial question is whether the general intention of the extraterrestrial “gods” is to create slaves to do the “gods” housework and serve the “gods” (sexually or otherwise), and all that has to Working is terrestrial life (less humanity), what kind of traits do you need to select in order to obtain a way of life that can build the pyramids and monumental structures that are built in order to serve the purpose of worshiping it? Clearly, only humans can build a pyramid, so what abilities or attributes do we have now that all other terrestrial life forms did not have then?

Two particularities stand out. One is that to build a pyramid, etc. it takes a couple of appendages (or more) to be able to manipulate things. How do you get a free appendage pair? Well, you have to go from a quadruped posture to a biped posture, thus releasing two appendages (i.e. arms). From a Darwinian point of view, that is a problem. There is a cost. Now we are clearly bipeds. But will a bipedal posture be selected naturally? On the other hand, there is not always a price to pay.

¡El segundo particular es que necesitas cierto grado de inteligencia! Traducido, para construir una pirámide, necesitas un cerebro relativamente grande y complejo. Muchos animales pueden ser lo suficientemente fuertes como para construir una pirámide, pero simplemente no tienen un cociente intelectual lo suficientemente alto para lograrlo. Sin embargo, nuevamente desde una perspectiva darwiniana, un alto cociente intelectual tiene un alto costo. ¿Se seleccionará la inteligencia alta de forma natural?

Although there are some limited perks to standing (other than freeing up two arms to do things like grabbing forbidden fruit a little higher up in the trees) – you can see further; fording slightly deeper waters, in general a biped pose has a considerable cost. Now two limbs have to take up the entire body weight instead of four legs (or six if you’re a bug, or eight if you’re a spider). If one of those two limbs fails, you’re in deep poop. However, survival is more likely if you have four (or six or eight) legs and one failure.

Also, if you are biped, your center of gravity changes, making you more likely to lose your balance and fall. Also, biped animals tend to run slower than a quadruped. Most dogs whose spine is at or above my knees, and cats, can easily run faster than me. The result of all this is that in the animal kingdom, only birds (and their ancestors, the bipedal saurischian dinosaurs of theropods) are (or were) bipeds, for quite obvious reasons. Two of its four “legs” have evolved to fly. Humans do not have such a recoil since we cannot wave our arms and fly.

Now several animals can, and do, for short periods, stand up, say prairie dogs, chipmunks, bears, etc. Some animals can be briefly taught to stand up like circus elephants. Kangaroos, wallabies and related animals are generally bipeds, but they jump, do not walk or run. Even our primate relationships don’t usually walk on two legs, although many can and do for short periods.

I think the advantages of a biped form of posture and locomotion are exaggerated, otherwise more animals would have evolved that posture; Hopefully, our cats and dogs don’t stand up and beg, but stand up and ask for special treats. Of millions and millions of vertebrate species that have existed in the last 300 million years of geological history, only a relatively small handful have embraced the biped lifestyle. It hasn’t been proven to be exactly an evolutionary success story unlike the most universal spine and skulls universal that all vertebrates have.

In general, in the biological scheme of things, we are not only a little more advanced in a biped way, we are VERY MORE advanced. The question is why? Again, why are humans so obviously biped? And if we are not inclined to be bipeds by natural selection, perhaps we have been so evolutionary inclined by artificial selection, by the ‘gods’ to free our upper limbs, a useful trait if the ‘gods’ put us to work.

We humans are now intelligent. We are at the top of the ‘food chain’ when it comes to IQ. We have very large brains in relation to our body size. We have very complex brains. But all that size and complexity comes at a cost. A baby’s head must be quite soft, soft, and malleable, and therefore very vulnerable to go through the birth canal, and it is still a struggle and a rather dangerous part of the life of a baby and its mother.

Ahora la inteligencia la capacidad de resolver las cosas, debe tener un grado de valor de supervivencia natural. Los gatos, los perros, los cerdos, las aves salvajes, los delfines, el pulpo humilde y nuestros primos primates no son tontos. Una vez más, a diferencia de la columna vertebral vertebral universal, las jaulas y los cráneos, millones de especies de vertebrados tienen (o tuvieron) una sola que se destacó -la más popular- en el cociente intelectual. PERO, no solo estamos un poco más avanzados en el departamento de IQ. Estamos masivamente más avanzados.

One might hope, based on natural selection, that if our average IQ was 100, perhaps our primate relationships have an average IQ of, say, 90. That is not the case. Most of the mammalian kingdom is clustered around a relatively narrow IQ range much lower than ours. A dog is not 100 times smarter than a cat or vice versa. But humans are 100 times smarter than our relationships with mammals (and all other vertebrates). Why? What natural evolutionary pressure do we face that thousands of other vertebrates, especially mammals, and especially, especially primates, did not? Some single human evolutionary pressure raised our IQ levels to such extraordinary heights,

It would be difficult to think of any other high intelligence IQ biped species that could build the pyramids, in fact, the answer is that no other Earth species could. Again, why were humans so blessed? And if we are not so blessed with a high IQ by natural selection, then perhaps it must be by artificial selection; Selection, or genetic bioengineering by, the ‘gods’?

Moving forward along the line, as each step in the forced artificial evolution of the gods was accomplished, slightly more upright posture; Slightly higher average IQ, the previous batch – the least advanced hominid species – were left to their own devices: extinction. There are many species of extinct hominids (for example, Homo habilis, Gigantopithecus, or the Neanderthals) that are evolutionary links that separate us from our primate ancestors, most likely chimpanzees, now our closest modern kissing cousins.

When the ‘gods’ finally had a reasonable facsimile of their goal, they gave us the gifts of knowledge (the basics anyway) and helped us get started on our path to civilized society. At some point or another, probably ungrateful tweets that we tend to be, we pissed them off and they packed their bags and left, perhaps leaving behind a symbolic presence (UFOs) to monitor us and make sure we never became a threat to ourselves. them and reverse the slave and master roles.

Are there other pieces that separate humans that might suggest that we get some kind of special evolutionary treatment, translated as artificial evolutionary treatment?

Since all humans are one species because we can all breed with each other, and since it presumably originated from small (population) beginnings in Africa, all of humanity must have been similar to a not-so-big melting pot. We were a uniform cup of coffee, a kind; one race Then we began to spread throughout the world (minus Antarctica) and for some unexplained reason they diverged into different races or ethnic classifications or races. The big question is, as big questions always are, WHY?

And here I want to focus on facial features. What is so different or unique about Asian environments to evolve into typical Asian facial features of humans, for example in relation to the Australian environment and its indigenous aborigines who also have distinguishable but different facial features compared to Europe, the European environment and Caucasian facial features vis a vis Polynesia and Polynesian facial features etc. Something is perverted somewhere! I can’t see how Darwinian natural selection can explain this aspect of human biology.

But what if human breeds, one species, now different breeds, are created or manufactured in the same way that we artificially select and create different breeds of cats, or breeds of cattle, or different varieties of plants like the many varieties of roses or orchards?

Al igual que los gatos y el ganado; rosas y huertos: una especie general; muchas razas o variedades creadas -también para los humanos- una especie entrecruzada que ahora existe como muchas razas (¿artificialmente seleccionadas?) todas ellas capaces de cruzarse. La selección natural darwiniana de la supervivencia del más apto no puede explicar esto. No hay explicación sobre las diferencias de raza en rasgos faciales raciales, aparte de recurrir, en mi humilde opinión, a la selección artificial, y los únicos seres capaces de hacerlo fueron los “dioses”: ¡los extraterrestres que tienen esto para la genética de bioingeniería avanzada!

Now if you have a species, and that population is separated by some geographic barrier, over time the two divided halves will slowly evolve inward I suppose two first separate races (which in theory can still interbreed), and then two separate species that cannot breed more and produce viable offspring. But, if you postulate that humans of a single species and race fled Africa and migrated across the world without hindrance, then presumably there were no insurmountable geographic barriers large enough to keep the various clans or migratory tribes or human herds forever and forever and thus avoid any crossing. However, the single species of one race became a species of multiple races, as if there were now geographic barriers and isolation between clans, tribes, and herds; whatever is. At least this alleged isolation from tribes only lasted until the ‘modern’ era of travel and exploration, and then all kinds of human tribes discovered all kinds of other human tribes. That is, of course, if you accept the traditional view of things. But the question remains: why there are no barriers to go from A to B, but once in B, not being able to go back to A again. I repeat that there is something wrong somewhere. But the question remains: why there are no barriers to go from A to B, but once in B, not being able to go back to A again. I repeat that there is something wrong somewhere. But the question remains: why there are no barriers to go from A to B, but once in B, not being able to go back to A again. I repeat that there is something wrong somewhere.

Perhaps a further explanation, but ultimately better or more plausible, is that the extraterrestrial “gods” genetically engineered or engineered the various human races in the African “laboratory” and then transported the various types of human races in various locations around the world. . The Asian-looking human population was transported, unsurprisingly, to what we now call Asia! And so the various human races, located in their respective dwellings, were transported by ET over natural geographic barriers, where they had to remain practically still, and came up with their own cultural and finally mythological variations or versions of their “creator god”. ” creations have been quite confused by all the super technology that actually ‘created’ them.

Similarly, other things associated with ‘gods’, say their pets or other entities, with more than one type of ET present, translated into some of the almost uniform and almost universal mythologies surrounding dragons and dragons (pets). or folk fairies (another variety of ET).

Anyway, why would the ‘gods’ create and transport different human races to different geographical locations? Why would they do it this way? Two possible reasons suggest themselves. ET is the “farmer” and they have, say, ten fields. They can plant a corner of a field (say, a part of Africa where their “laboratory” is) and wait for Nature to separate the seeds from the rest of that field and thus the other nine fields, or they could plant parts of all your ten fields at once. That is the same harvest in the ten fields. But maybe it’s better to have diversity. The second scenario is that you plant one crop (human race) in one field (let’s say Africa), another (human race) in another (let’s say Asia), a third human race in the field called Europe, and so on, although all ten. Why do this?

It doesn’t attack me as a natural state of affairs that naturally has a way back when only black Africans in Africa; Caucasians in Europe; Asians in Asia; Aborigines in Australia etc. This is because it is not as if Asians cannot survive and prosper in Europe; Caucasians can and do live well in Australia; Black Africans have converted the US USA At home as African-Americans. Every human race can find a successful biological niche in every geographic area, so why the initial geographic separation when human trafficking can supposedly go both ways, and segregation and evolution into races or races, if one assumes a natural state of things, it baffles me. Something is actually crazed somewhere!

Leave a Comment