/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.4242857]

Lets talk about the genetic diversity of our species.

Does anyone else realize that we are absolutely killing our genetic diversity?

>Incest is totally taboo and almost never produces offstpring.

Cousins marrying cousins was common just 150 years ago. Inbreeding is actually good for the development of a species because it allows for the expression of recessive genes and makes for more genetic diversity. Inbreeding is how we were able to breed all of the different kinds of dogs out there.

>Interracial relationships are no longer highly taboo

Obviously this is destroying genetic diversity. Let me just say, I am not worried about humanity becoming brown, I am much more concerned with genetic diversity from a survival perspective and what it means with respect to our progress. Even if the average IQ were to go up, it would probably be bad because the super intelligent are a result of diversity in the species.

Does anyone else see this as a threat moving into the future? The more we limit genetic diversity, the more we decrease the odds of someone being born with a mind to solve sciences most perplexing problems.

[Anonymous No.4242867]

Inbreeding is the reason why pure bred dogs have 2184309182301983 inllnesses and don't live as long as wolves.

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.4242873]

>>4242857
...part of how we get new breeds is cross-breeding, and inbreeding has lead to genetic mistakes because we have done way too much. We need cross-breeding, NOW, before we kill ourselves off.

[Anonymous No.4242895]

You say that what we need is inbreeding so that recessive genes show up and there can be diversity. However remember you don't know how many of all the recessive genes out there can actually be useful. Encouraging inbreeding may actualy make humanity end up with a higher percentage of faulty individuals and that... is ... not ... good. A more reasonable approach is the one nature has, the most successful individual gets to pass on its genes.

[Anonymous No.4242896]

>>4242867

So? More humans with genetic illness is part of genetic diversity. It is still ultimately a good thing, because this variation also allows for positive changes.

[Anonymous No.4242899]

>>4242895
not to mention nature increased mortality of faulty individuals produced by inbreeding
also:
ITT: OP wants to marry his/her cousin

[Anonymous No.4242906]

>>4242895

I agree about successful individuals having more children (which is the opposite of what is happening now)

I dont really see a few more faulty people as a problem. If their recessive genes are bad, they wont reproduce, and they will be culled. This process makes humanity much stronger in the long run.

[Anonymous No.4242918]

>different kinds of dogs
>forgets to mention the horrific amounts of genetic disabilities purebreeds have to suffer because cunts of human beings were looking for a few "AW SO PRUCUSS" phenotypical expressions

[Anonymous No.4242919]

>>4242899

So? In the long run is it going to matter? If anything it can be seen as us removing these bad recessive genes so that our future generations will be healthier.

[Anonymous No.4242921]

If there is a higher probability that genetic illnesses, rather than positive variation comes from inbreeding then what you say is like going to a casino with all of your savings and betting nonstop thinking like this: "If i keep playing I am more likely to lose each time, but that's good because that opens the posibility for me to win some times." Have you ever gone to a casino? that is one easy way to get poor really fast.

[Anonymous No.4242924]

>>4242919

In the long run, we'll have direct genetic manipulation before anyone takes your BABBY'S FIRST GENETICS AND UNCONSIDERED POSTULATIONS AS TO WHAT WOULD ACTUALLY IMPROVE SOCIETIES seriously enough.

[Anonymous No.4242925]

>>4242918

Not forgeting, just dont care.

Now imagine this breeding proccess for human, only going for intelligence rather than cuteness.

Type 1 civilization over night.

[Anonymous No.4242933]

>>4242925

You're a dumb naive fool. In a class-based society, "intelligence" is going to be twisted by the ruling class into criteria FIT FOR THE PERPETUATION OF THE RULING CLASS.

So the possibility of even ruminating about some eugenics that is supposed to elevate humanity is a joke.

[Anonymous No.4242934]

>>4242921

But you have to understand science advances one winner at a time.

If we trade 10 retards for one Einstein, guess what? We still have the theory of relativity.

[Anonymous No.4242938]

Faulty individuals you talk about won't necessarity be removed, or in any case will be removed veeeeeeery slowly. Nowadays people who have genetic diseases still get married and have children it's not like in the stoneage where they would just be separated and left to die.

[Anonymous No.4242952]

The 10 retards for 1 Einstein logic to increase the amount of intelligent people only works if you plan to increase the rate on births in the world....which is the opposite of what we want. Also who says dumb people won't kill the smart people? Or that the smart people won't feel muuuch less intellectual stimulus in a world where they occupy a smaller percentage of the population?

[Anonymous No.4242961]

>>4242952

That is true. Dumb people killing the smart people is a very real threat.

[Anonymous No.4242962]

>>4242857
This is so stupid. It has no logical sense to it.

The topic isn't even academic; it's been empirically verified. Whether for plants, animals, or humans: inbreeding decreases overall fitness.

[Anonymous No.4242972]

>>4242896
But in nature the ones with illness generally die, which gives the progression of good genes and elimination of bad. Human society doesn't allow children with genetic disorders to die.

[Anonymous No.4242984]

>>4242962

Overall fitness is not important.

I dont think you understand the logic.

[Anonymous No.4242986]

>>4242972

If you have a bad genetic disorder, you wont be reproducing.

[Anonymous No.4242993]

>>4242986
There are lots of non-fatal genetic disorders that would get you killed in the wild. Things like back problems or bad knees are a nuisance now but you'd be eaten by a lion if you were in a competitive environment. Small things like that fuel evolution.

[Anonymous No.4243003]

HURRR.

[Anonymous No.4243142]

>>4242984
If I don't understand the logic, it's because this argument has none. The OP is totally nonsensically, it's infuriating.