/sci/ - Science & Math

think about this: would you be able to kill thousands of babies for a living?

Agreed. I understand it's a life, but you people don't bitch about taking lives when it's war. Atleast this way you're not devastating families, countries, causing immense amounts of pain and suffering. They die quickly, painfully, for what amounts to less than what it costs to equip a soldier.

>>2037981

Problem is, what kind of group are you going to set up to do this act? Not like you're going to be able to find any sort of majority consensus even amongst your fringe group as to who should be the one/be on the panel who decides whether or not to kill the thing

>>2037993
Think about this, would you be able to slice open and gut thousands of cows for a living? Sure why not people do it all the time. And i'd say an abortion is a lot less disguisting at times than the cow.

The Nazis thought they were improving the quality of life by killing the Jews.

Ended up driving their country into the ground. Literally.

>>2038003
Well, yeah, but only because they had opposition.

Needs more data, you can't just quantify/determine how successful a human being is going to be at age 2 unless they have severe mental disabilities like downsyndrome.

Hell, you can't determine how successful someone is going to be at age 21.

In fact, if something has potential, you can't kill it. Fuck, even the goddamn fetus has potential to be born and have an IQ of 164 when it develops.

tl;dr You just can't quantify human beings like that, there is a lot of room for error.

>>2038001
i take your point

sure is jonathan swift in here.

I compared toddlers to dogs for a reason: we euthanize dogs every day and most people are perfectly fine with turning a blind eye to it. I believe that if we could instill the same mentality in a baby slaying program then society could benefit as a whole. It's basically natural selection, only regulated by intelligent minds.

>>2037993
I would, I think. It's hard to say how anyone would react in that situation, but again, back to the dogs.

>>2038003
Nazi's had the right idea they just chose who they eradicated for the wrong reasons. Besides, what if instead of killing the Jews they just sterilized them? They could have fixed their population in 50 years without killing anyone. Now imagine instead of Jews they sterilized people with a tendency to produce retarded babies and drug addicts and generally stupid people? Nazi's would be genius' right now; a whole nation of intelligent people.

>>2037998
What if there were certain laws set in place that allowed people to only have children if they meet certain criteria? Certainly a reasonable income, among other things, isn't so much to ask for when contributing a living, thinking being to this world? The most important thing people do for society doesn't require a license or a permit, doesn't require a fee; people will spend money on you if you just sleep around, just to keep your child in relative comfort. It's a fucking joke

>>2038013
you can definitely decide who's more likely to develop negative tendencies. Besides, if you come back to my point about potential...where do we draw the line on killing potential? One could truly argue that every time someone doesn't have sex and induce pregnancy, they are killing a potential person... I am only suggesting that we draw the line somewhere else

well that's a modest proposal, OP

>>2038065
What is your objective?

>Nazi's had the right idea they just chose who they eradicated for the wrong reasons.
>Now imagine instead of Jews they sterilized people with a tendency to produce retarded babies and drug addicts and generally stupid people?
>Nazi's would be genius' right now; a whole nation of intelligent people.

>Fails to understand environmental influence on intelligence
>Fails to understand how the genetics involved in producing "retarded babies" or "drug addicts" are often masked by other genes and cannot possibly be removed with knowledge of basic mendelian inheritance.
>Fails to understand how most genetic syndromes and diseases arise in new progeny.
>Fails to understand how culling any group of individuals reduces genetic diversity and is deterrent to the species

>>2038069
>>2038019

>mfw op doesnt realize.

>>2038071
Science, baby! Imagine all the possibilities! If, somehow, a system like this went into effect today, I think we could all notice a change for the better within 10 years. Within 50 years people would, on average, be more intelligent. I have no mathematics background so I can only make guesses, but imagine if the average IQ was 120? 150? If this system went into effect in 1900 we could very well be there today.

>>2038096
Define better.

>>2038103
Most of us may not be here

ITT: Hitler is amused

> I think we could all notice a change for the better within 10 years. Within 50 years people would, on average, be more intelligent.
>I have no mathematics background
>I can only make guesses

>>2038087
Culling the weak and sick from the herd has never been a deterrent to a species. There's enough of us to spare a few people from the shallow end of the gene pool so that we, as a people, become a deeper pool.

I don't even think it's debatable whether it would work or not. It's natural selection, unnaturally. There are very few predators of human that effect a persons chance of reproducing. Without predators culling the weak and the stupid, we no longer have natural selection beyond finding the best mate. I am suggesting that we replace the predators with laws.

>>2038122
if someone is willing to do some actual math to stand against me then come at me bro. I'm only suggesting the potential of the concept. yes I know using the word potential here is a jab at my whole argument

>>2038096

On a related not I would like to point out that intelligence among the population does not neccesarily equal a moral or respectful population until certain minimums are reached. that is to say, in a world full of smarter people, criminals would be far more dangerous. Also, the percentage of manipulative bastards among the population would also generally increase.

tldr: Lex Luthor for President. Lex Luthor for President everywhere

>>2038140

lol this

>>2038140
too pessimistic. I'm sure you've encountered stupid people that were so annoyingly stupid that you wanted to beat the shit out of them just for not being smarter. What if everyone was smarter? That's all I'm suggesting guys. Hell, we could selectively breed for better teeth by tracing pedigrees of people who tend to keep their teeth longer than the average and allowing people from those bloodlines to reproduce more

obligatory. Not on topic, but fuck you.

>>2038161

brool story co, but where do you draw the line? My teeth are just fine except for one fact: I have those extra little incisor-fang-things growin off of the sides of my upper Molar-3's

is that an undesirable trait? (I vote no)

> implying dental death panels

>Culling the weak and sick from the herd has never been a deterrent to a species. There's enough of us to spare a few people from the shallow end of the gene pool so that we, as a people, become a deeper pool.

http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/medicine/assist.shtml
There are over 6,000 genetic disorders -single gene disorders, mind you, meaning it does not account for largescale genetic disorders such as monosomy or polyploidy. There is an occurrence of 1 disorder in every 200 live births, and most of these are either recessive or either incompletely dominant. So for a hypothetical recessive disorder, the frequency of the allele in the population is √200 = 14
1 in every 14 people will have some manner of a genetic disorder.
And guess what. If you kill or sterilize all the people who have a genetic disorder for any one genetic disease, the occurrence of genetic disorders will stay the same because you will have more people with different genetic disorders breeding with a smaller population, and consequently the likelyness of other disorders will proportionally increase.

Even if you hypothetically killed or sterilized every person with a trait for a genetic disorder you're still going to have retard babies because things like predisposition to drugs or alcoholism or any addiction is quantitative and cant be removed because such traits are a lot harder to map than with basic Mendelian inheritance patterns. This is why Hitler fails at eugenics and this is why YOU fail at genetics as well.

>>2038196

>implying the Master Race is a lie
>science vs politics fuck yea

>>2038174
what's up then

I think its time for baby charters.

You could only apply for having a baby if you could provide a decent background a upbringing, otherwise it would be forcibly aborted.

Overpopulation solved, poverty solved, hereditary diseases solved, much less drain on social security etc.

>>2038196
we cull by pedigree. we can't go looking for these genetic markers in everyone everytime someone wants a kid. we can, however, look at if their families have problems often

Having a children with 100% chance of genetic defect should be a crime, yet it happens all the time.

Its the worst crime you could think of, willingly and knowingly condemning a future person to a wretched life.

>>2038205

Well look at dogs. We've purebred the shit out of them and now they have all sorts of problems. Bull terriers have increased susceptibility to tumors and fucked up eyes; western terriers have fucked up femurs which can often be angled inwards too much and they also have skin problems. Border Collies have increased chances of having eye, ear, brain and immune system impairment and epilepsy compared to other dogs.

Large populations are more successful because the chances of masking genetic disorders are higher than in smaller groups. This is why selective breeding will ALWAYS bring out problems. Smaller populations makes things worse.

>we cull by pedigree. we can't go looking for these genetic markers in everyone everytime someone wants a kid. we can, however, look at if their families have problems often

Yea what's your point? 70-80% of non-teen abortions in Europe are because the genetic screening test told the would-be parents that their kid has Down, Pateau, or Edwards syndrome. Like I care.

I'm jus saying you'll never make a perfect race.

>>2038231
if we bred dogs to not have tumors or fucked up eyes they would be fine. I'm not saying we should shrink the population, i'm saying we should balance it.

Hospitals should kill all babies that have severe disorders while they're still in the womb. Preferably as soon as possible

>>2038229
>>2038230


Genocide is aways the best solution. The FINAL one, in fact.

>>2038196

(1/14)*6000000000 = 428571429

Oh look, thats just about the population of 'MURICA. Funny that.

>>2038087
Only person in the thread with anything past a high-school level understanding of genetics.

>>2038136
Culling the sick people from a heard ALWAYS acts as a deterrent to a species. As >>2038196 already said, reducing population size at all increases rare allele frequency for hundreds of other recessive problems that will start showing up in smaller populations.

Also, by prematurely euthanize individuals, you drastically cut your chances of observing a beneficial new allele. And you loose valuable MHC diversity. Since they're MHC doesn't work against one disease, it's obviously different enough to have a better chance of working against the next one.

Point is, genocide is always wrong, regardless of whether it is done at birth or to adults, and will never advance humanity as a species. Dumb bitches who disagree should get at least a B.S. in Genetics before arguing.

>if we bred dogs to not have tumors or fucked up eyes they would be fine. I'm not saying we should shrink the population, i'm saying we should balance it.

They're trying that, you fucking idiot. They've been doing that with dogs for several thousand generations now -and there's still fuckups even in the offspring of prize progeny.
When you remove alleles from a gene pool new mutations resulting in detrimental phenotypes are going to crop up that much faster because the odds of those mutant alleles running into another one has become much smaller from your culling. But they'll still be around and you cant crop them out because recessive traits can go several generations without being expressed. You'll have to sterilize entire families to avoid them being passed on, and with such a small gene pool to work with the chances of new disorders appearing increases heavily.

Learn2complementation.

I don't think the government should have the power to kill its own citizens, period. Otherwise, I have no problem, OP.

>>2038308

Actually, they have that power ages ago, every policeman using lethal force is empowered by the government to act on his behalf and the government is acting on the peoples behalf.

>killing retarded babies will remove genetic diversity!

anyone saying anything like this is retarded, and don't say that noone is

>>2038351
Right, so a policeman should not be ordered to kill someone. Self-defense is a right of all humans. Policemen are humans. Ergo...

Whoa. Op, do you realize that the problem for the plague of stupidity are just brain implant?
Who cares about genetics. The flesh is weak.

>killing retarded babies will remove genetic diversity!

>anyone saying anything like this is retarded, and don't say that noone is

Noone is.

we still ought to kill inferior babies. nothing so far has made me believe otherwise. if natural selection works, this will work. that's fact. all I'm suggesting is we introduce predators in the form of laws that cull the weak. its what drives genetic improvement

>>2038371

You know that policemen can use lethal force in other cases than self-defense right?

>>2038557
> my understanding of what counts as inferior directly maps onto fitness in the future environment because I am a wizard

>we still ought to kill inferior babies.

You don't need to kill babies that's what genetic screening, pedigree analysis, and abortions are for.

>>2038573
I wasn't asking whether or not it would work. It would work. It's an extension of natural selection which, as far as I'm concerned, works. I posed the question here to discuss the moral ramifications.

>>2038636

>Thinks his highschool level genetics gives him in-depth knowledge on how to create a master race
>Doesn't realize that the cumulative frequency of all alleles for genetic disorders is so high that every human is heterozygous recessive for at least one disorder.
>Should look up genetic tradeoffs, complementation, penetrance and expressitivity, heterozygote advantage, and talk out of his ass less.

>>2038636
It wouldn't work.

In the glorious land of Neverwinter there lives a colony of squirrels. There are brown squirrels, the leaders of the colony. They blend in nicely with the soil and forest canopy, and their excellent camouflage allows them to gather more nuts. There are however very few of them, most of the squirrels in Neverwinter are solid white. The white squirrels, despite being most of the colony, have to constantly watch for hawks which can easily spot them and catch them for dinner, thus the white squirrels gather far fewer nuts.
The brown squirrels resent supporting the white ones, and the white squirrels resent their own dependence and the nature that produces it. However the white squirrels can’t get rid of the brown squirrels they rely on to survive, and the brown squirrels aren’t numerous enough to survive a revolt by the white ones. The brown squirrels live in fear of white squirrels stealing their nuts, but also fear the white squirrels banding together and seizing power.
The browns hatch a diabolical plot. In the spring they go around to all the white squirrel nests while the parents are out gathering nuts, and they gnaw the heads off the little bitty babies. Then they arrange a series of accidents resulting in the deaths of almost all of their white squirrel neighbors. Come winter they simply refuse to feed the remaining white squirrels, and all die.
The brown squirrels enjoy their new bounty without fear or need to share.
The next summer it snows and all the brown squirrels in Neverwinter, easily visible to the hawks against the white landscape, die.

The end.

>>2038573
This.

Any eugenics plan to create a master race is doomed to failure because in the attempt to "purify" a group of people all of the diversity gets bred out as well.

Purebreed dogs are a good example of this; a mixed breed mutt will live much longer than any purebreed, because the purebreeds all have tons of problems from having all the genetic diversity bred out of them.

>>2038803

Purebred dogs are bred for standard looks, not for work.

In fact, working purebred dogs are amogst the healthiest of all breeds.

Also, genetic defects != diversity. Its just typical liberal humping of "diversity"

>>2038836
There only thing which would qualify as a defect would be something which inhibits reproduction. By culling people for their diversity, you are making it into a defect, quite literally. If it were truly a defect, they would cull themselves without your help.

I think the reason this sort of thing fails is because we don't have any fair or, for want of a better word, "objective" way of evaluating which individuals should be allowed to have kids and which ones shouldn't, on any large scale.

Eugenics seems, to me, unethical because it's the sort of thing where any flawed system or institution would bring about grave injustices for too many people.

Why not just raise them as slaves?

Take them away from the incompetent and give them to the government to raise, basically, the equivalent of orphans but, ya know, slaves

>>2038742
I don't care about the damned squirrels. I want to D00 Aribeth, the Elven Paladin.

Just wait a few decades for designer babies, and all this talk will be pointless. That is the future of eugenics.

>In fact, working purebred dogs are amogst the healthiest of all breeds.

Citation or example needed.

>>2038052
is this some sort of new type of troll?

the nazi's did sterilize the mentally/criminally unfit, and earlier than the jews. The Nazis tried first to get rid of the jews through emigration and legal status, in some ways 10 + years before hitler even took power. For example, Jews lost their german citizenship that much earlier. They were trying to ship them all to the palestine but then a revolt happened there and the brits said no more jews. The nazi's got rid of most of the german jews in this method. After the war broke out, they conquered vast segements of land with high populations of jews, and they didn't know waht the hell to do with them. So they put them in ghettos and camps (but not gassing yet) while they tried to settle the war. After they got routed in USSR, they thought what the hell gas the jews.


TL:DR you sound exactly like a nazi would have before they took power.

>>2038836
I can tell you're not a biology major or even a computer programmer. Anyone who has studied evolution and evolutionary algorithms can tell you that even defects that make a creature "less fit" are sometimes necessary for future evolution. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._coli_long-term_evolution_experiment


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sickle-cell_disease is a classic case of a "defect" being overall beneficial to the breeding group, even though it is harmful to any individual that has it.

>>2038849

Someone with a down sydrome could live a long life and pump up littlre retardchildren without being unable to tie his shoelaces

>>2038893

Google is your friend. You didnt source any of your claims either.

>>2038959

>BAAAW DEFECTS R GUD CUZ DEY MAEK PPL DIVERSE AN DIVERSITY IS GUD RITE :DDDD

Typical liberal bullshit about "diversity" drooling retards draining funds from taxpayers isnt "diversity"

We could be exploring space or the deep seas with that money, instead of throwing them at useless wastes of resources who only exist just because mommy retard thought its her RIGHT! to have a children despite her genetic defects then whined for social security.

>>2038990
You seem to be overlooking the obvious.

Your idea is stupid, you are stupid (for reasons already explained). So if we ever implement it, you will be one of the first we sterilize or kill.

We should perform vasectomy on every male reaching puberty. Then when he wants to have a baby, parents social, financial and mental situation would be checked prior to allowing him to reproduce.

>>Google is your friend. You didnt source any of your claims either.

I gave you an example of three working purebred dogs -west highland terriers, Bull terriers, and border collies.

You need to go no further than to type those names into wikipedia. Statistically Bull terriers are in the higher tier for muscle and working dogs, westies and their counterpart scotties and yorkshires are/were used in rodent control, and border collies are bold, ambitious, and ranked as one of the smartest dog breeds in the world.

And they all have their associated problems. Maybe if you even put a half-assed effort into even defining what your impression of fitness is, or what a "purebred working dog" is, I would be able to further show how retarded your idea is. But alas, with ignorance comes broad, vague, generic statements reflecting your inability to go into detail because you refuse to admit that you know fuck all and you refuse to learn or change your mind.

When you graduate highschool or take a post-highschool genetics course you'll realize how retardedly retarded your argument is, until then just STFU and GTFO /sci/, or stick to your domain

>>2039012

>BAAW URE STOOPID


Typical liberal tard, when disproven, starts the ad hominems.

>you will be one of the first we sterilize or kill.

For disagreeing with liberals? This just shows how creepily fucked up and agresssive liberals under their paint of happy happy sugarcoated "diversity" humping retard smiles.

>>2039049

I said working dogs. Dogs doing actual work and purebred for that.

>Statistically

Oh wait, you are pulling numbers out of your ass now.

>BAAAAW URE DUMBBBB

You should try debating with fat emo girls on LJ. You would fit just right in.

>we do nothing, because we need diversification.
how about a hybrid solution?
limited percentage of uncontrolled births?

Typically extremely energetic, acrobatic and athletic, they frequently compete with great success in dog sports, in addition to their success in sheepdog trials, and are often cited as the most intelligent of all dogs.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_Collie

Bull Terriers can range greatly in size (35-72 lbs), but no matter what the weight, these dogs are built like tanks! The breed is generally quite friendly and playful with its family and other humans but they can have issues with dog aggression.
http://www.dogguide.net/muscular-dogs.php

West Highland White Terriers, commonly known as Westies, are a breed of dog with a distinctive white coat. Originating in Scotland, the breed was used to seek and dig out foxes and badgers.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Highland_White_Terrier

Oohhh, that was so hard.

You should feel proud for being a waste of time

>>2039053
I'm not a liberal, and I'd see you eliminated for being stupid, not for disagreeing with anyone.

Your brand of ignorance is actually a threat to humanity, we've killed almost everyone we could find that was as stupid as you, and one day hopefully it'll be your turn.

You are the disease in need of curing, it's simply wise evolutionary policy.

>>2038990

3/10, you need to be able to refute common pro-diversity arguments better if you ever want to be a better troll.

>>2039094

>DIVERSATAAAAY

>I'd see you eliminated

Its nice when agressive, homicidal fucktards show their true colors.

>we've killed almost everyone we could find

Typical liberal, this shit basically sells itself.

>You are the disease in need of curing,

Borrowing rhetorics from NSDAP again?


It seems you cant hold your own in a debate and resort to emotional fallacies and hatemongering to counter your weaknesses, like a true politician.

>>2039178

>I dont know anything about genetics so I'm just going to stir up shit until I get the last word

>>2039175

>pro-doversity

Care to bring up a scenario, no matter how unlikely when down syndrome becomes genetically advantegeous

I thought not. Getting rid of retards and genetic criminals polluting humanity and our future isnt about eliminating gingers and people with no wisdom teeth.

>>2039178

Learn2samefag moron.

I haven't been arguing with you, I just stopped in to insult you. You didn't win any debate with me, because I haven't been debating. All the important information has been stated, and you're too busy being a dipshit to notice.

>Its nice when agressive, homicidal fucktards show their true colors.

I'm a psychopath, as are you.

The irony being that I haven't suggested anything you didn't yourself suggest first, I merely stated the obvious...

it is you that needs to die, it is you that has the dangerous defect.

>>2039187

>no comeback

I think that concludes your defeat.

>>2039222
idiot

>>2038557
>all I'm suggesting is we introduce predators in the form of laws that cull the weak

...and all I'M suggesting is that we introduce predators in the form of actual predators.

>>2039188
>>Getting rid of retards and genetic criminals polluting humanity and our future

You realize this can't actually happen, from a genetic point of view? This "pollution" is subjective; all that evolution "cares" about is if that person has lots of kids or not. Someone with down's syndrome is unlikely to have kids (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Down_syndrome specifically "There is infertility amongst both males and females with Down syndrome; males are usually unable to father children, while females demonstrate significantly lower rates of conception relative to unaffected individuals. Women with DS are less fertile and often have difficulties with miscarriage, premature birth, and difficult labor. Men with DS are almost uniformly infertile, exhibiting defects in spermatogenesis. There have been only three recorded instances of males with Down syndrome fathering children.") and so this "pollution" is a non-problem.

>I'm a psychopath
>I just stopped in to insult you

>>2039243

>nature vs nurture again

Try harder troll.

You're all idiots, arguing about purebred dogs vs. mutts. Mutts can be just as healthy as purebred dogs. The point I was making was looking for specific things to try and enhance in the human population. We don't eliminate any sections of the population altogether.
Even Jews can contribute their ability to get money from anything

>>2039257
Funny cuz it's true, but I've found hanging out on 4chan a couple hours a day has actually made me a much more bigoted, foul mouthed, mean son of a whore in real life.

It's good to have a hobby.

also, down's syndrome usually isn't hereditary. it can't be bread out of society like midgets could be. not saying there's anything wrong with little people, it's just the only example I can think of off the top of my head. maybe sickle cell anemia, I don't care to look it up though. you should all understand the point I am making by now

A Modest Proposal. Read it OP.

>>2039259
Didn't even read my post; people who have down's syndrome are mostly infertile and as such cannot pass on their DNA. Nothing in the post about "nature vs. nurture".

>>2038019
>>2038069
>>2039352
Just read it, thanks for turning me onto that. It's completely unrelated though. Funny as hell but unrelated