You must log in or register to comment.
It’s simply a matter of what genes get passed on. That still applies even with gene editing.
It’s even worse then that. There are many forms of evolution beyond just evolution via natural selection and genetic mutation. Evolution simply means that by some mechanism, certain traits propagate and some die out. But this applies to things like religions, technologies, beliefs, styles, etc. It’s no coincidence the largest religions on the planet have doctrines telling people to spread the religion. Religions that stay local and don’t have a drive to spread die out with time.
Said specifically ‘Darwin’s’.
The kind of thing the guy with glass vats with monsters/body parts swimming in a liquid would say.
Life goals.
Not Darwins just evolution. Evolution doesn’t control anything, it just is. This I just as dub as saying gravity won’t control humans because we can fly. It’s still there even if humans fight against it.
Every living is “controlled” by evolution. Adding in gene therapy or artificial selection does not mean evolution goes away
I think there’s sometimes a misunderstanding of how evolution works and also how long it takes. I’m a dentist and people sometimes ask me if we are going to evolve out of having wisdom teeth. The question kind of takes me aback because…lots and lots of people have to die of wisdom tooth infections in order to evolve away from having wisdom teeth.
If lots and lots of people die of having wisdom teeth it won’t affect evolution because they’re likely already passed child bearing age. If a trait doesn’t kill a host until later in life evolution doesn’t act on it.
Yes and no. The selective pressure matters. If the teeth are no longer advantageous they will disappear over a longer time. Think of cave fish that loose their eyes. Eyes are not useful in a cave, and they require extra energy to make and maintain. It’s low selective pressure.
If the teeth were very disadvantageous, and causeing death,they would disappear much quicker. Think of island animals, typically large animals get much smaller than their mainland counterparts. There is less food available for their size. The smaller individuals don’t starve. High selective pressure, happens much faster.
It only means it becomes better. Faster.
…purer!
Just a bunch of patches and the occasional virus DNA.
holds bag of rare candies
“who’s the bitch now, Gary?”
Personally, I think it sounds like a random note you find in a resident evil game, or something on a terminal in a vault in fallout
Or bioshock
Funny, I don’t feel controlled. I mean I know I am by the fundamental laws of nature, but that’s a given. These guys just wanna play god but don’t wanna say it.
He’s known for using gene splicing on babies without consulting anyone in the scientific community first and was later found guilty of illegal practice of medicine. So, yeah lol
All that talk about no longer being controlled by evolution, and he won’t even give the world cat girls? What a jerk.
Oooh I was going to ask if that was that person.
Holy smokes, well then.
Well here I came to imply that he might be a Nazi…
I forget which of the originals it was from … It wasn’t a romhack, it was OG like maybe yellow. But if you walk away from prof when he offers you the original 3 Pokemons, you have the option to choose Pikachu or prevent the Epstein class from ever existing.
Honestly I’ve always been torn on this. We have an ethical duty to the generations to come. If we can insert genes to block genetic diseases and make people resistant to bacterial/viral disease we absolutely should.
However, I don’t think we can be trusted with this technology. It will be used to serve vain and racist ideologies. Also if we get into an arms race with the natural order we have to include every human. If we make People resistant to disease then those organisms will evolve to be more infectious. If not everyone has been altered to be more resistant then those without will be at risk. Currently this type of tech will only be used to benefit the wealthy.
Of course I guess that’s the issue with all human progress, when have we ever been ready to utilize our technologies for the greater good?
What is the greater good though, just keep hurtling our monkey bodies through the cosmos as far as we can, possibly with the help of robots? I think we need to ask ourselves a lot of questions about the technology we use to heal people. As it is right now it’s a very classist and racist system of who gets the current technology. I don’t see it getting particularly better in the future, and with even more advanced technology, then yes you are going to further drive a wedge between the people who live 160 years and the people who live 50 years.
This. The main issue in advanced technology like genetically modified corn or genome editing isn’t that it’s “counter nature” (the concept itself is irrational imo), but that they make capitalism worse
Things you find in a audio recorder in Bioshock
He better keep his head down, a Demon Cyborg will level his House of Evolution.
I wouldn’t mind him destroying my house
You must choose between the Cyber Demon buns of steel or the Cacodemon’s cacussy.
profile picture checks out
So this guy watched Gattaca and thought “yeah this what i’ll use for my villain arc”.
We have superseded many of its aspects but the law still stands.
We will either be lead down a path of ever worsening gene pool as the weak multiply indefinitely (see: idiocracy).
So what shall replace it? For the human species to endure on a longterm scale we must replace its effects. Our ootions arw as follows:
- increase the risk to life in society in general. Remove safety railings, electrocution warnings, safety training etc.
- Make conscious decisions about who and what metrics.
- Realign the incentives on procreation. Again raising questions who and what metrics.
Option 1 will be immediately compensated for by the laws of capitalism and self preservation essentially we have got situation 3 where who is the rich and the metrics are wealth and self preservation.
Option 2 is just strait up eugenics.
Option 3 is eugenics lite.
This is something that the human species will eventually have to contentd with. If we are to condemned eugenics in all scenarios are we morally justified in ushering in a society or ineffective idiots?
Should we simply let the human species die. In this case many will revolt and institute option 2 or 3.
Do we hope that AI becomes capable to take care of all of us? In that case we are handing the future of our own species over to something other. Dogs did that and look where that got them. We have not been kind to the k9 species over the centuries. It was our doing in creating them as they are we are responsible for ensuring they do not live short lives of suffering and mystery as many do. Will the ai simply decide its not worth it and kill our species or implement options 2 or 3?
I see no moraly justified solution to this problem. Fortunately morality doesn’t exist its just a social construct we made the fuck up and thus can be rewritten.
Genetic abnormalities will be corrected via gene therapy, and competition for mates didn’t stop when we stopped being part of the food chain. Most people do marry in their socioeconomic range
That’s the do nothing case. Research consistently finds a negative correlation between IQ and the number of children people have. Thus people will get dumber and dumber (see: idiocracy).
Humanity as a whole evolved beyond the usual environmental pressures when we invented civilizations. We won’t de-evolve intelligence genetically anytime soon! Societal demphasis on learning, that’s a different matter.
Things were so much easier before this Darwin guy invented evolution.
A sentence I expect to read on a computer terminal in a lab overrun by Those Things [TM]
Haven’t we been fighting against Darwinian evolution for a while now? I should be dead if it depended on my shitty body.
Don’t sell yourself short! No other animal has anything close to your capacity for understanding the many things wrong with your body.
I bet this guy wouldn’t even get the boss music. Just the regular encounter music.
What is a level 44 Crobat?
Nice.
So… is it any good?
It’s fine, but the kind of thing a henchman in the middle-late part of the game might have. Level 100 is the max, end of game fights are around 70 maybe. Most trainers say someone before and after you fight them. The baddies can get pretty grandiose even when their name is something like “Scientist ♂️” and they’re in a room with 4-5 similar NPCs
No, not particularly. But a lot of pokemon that are lesser used in the main game end up being great in pvp or multi person raids. That said, I do not think I have ever used a crobat.
thank you for asking the real questions people are afraid to ask
