Netcees - View Single Post - WHY DO WE NOT TAKE ADVANTAGE OF OUR SELF CONSCIENCE-NESS AND SELECTIVELY BREED

sral · 08-26-2016, 07:40 AM

LOL my trouble with your theory is that I don't think slave breeding has ever involved the discipline required, was widespread enough, or continued for the generations necessary to alter the gene pool.

There are sperm banks that will sell you the sperm of a Nobel prize winner, but that doesn't guarantee anything. There are extremely few families where even two generations are outstanding at anything, and there's always the chance of a slip up--Johnny & Edgar Winters family had no professional musicians or albinos in it prior to them.

Then again, to come back to Yao Ming - his parents were actively encouraged to marry and have children. And look at him!

So sure, this is possible... as long as we remember that the "Scandinavian" class standards are arbitrary. So we can arbitrarily say that the Scandinavian breed should be over 6 feet, straight blonde hair, copious beard in males, blue eyes, straight nose, skin pale as milk, with an aggressive disposition and an instinct for boating and looting. And we could breed humans to conform to that standard, and after a few dozen generations we could get a breed that would breed true.

That doesn't change the fact that most real life Scandinavians wouldn't conform to that standard, the standard doesn't exist in real life, any more than the standard for Jack Russell Terriers means anything more than we've decided that Jack Russell Terriers should be small, white with spots, smooth coated and yippy. If we decided tomorrow that Jack Russell Terriers should be large, long-tailed, black coated and with copious drool, then that's what the standard would be.

The standard will change. The breed standards for humans would be attractive in their own way, but they would need to fit the standard for that group as well. "Mutts" such as people that have obviously mixed heritage are right out... even if they are stunningly attractive. This would exclude most people, especially those in North America and wherever @Plot is from. We need the people that still appear as purebreds in the same way that dogs are; such as the white haired tall Scandinavians, the Chinese man with slight build and perfect eye slants, @Resin and some almost purple skinned African tribesman for example. @Vapeo This is fairly subjective of course but so is any concept of breeds that humans create.

08-26-2016, 07:40 AM	#11
sral LARSLARSLARSLARSLARS Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: CRUMPETVILLE Posts: 8,605 Battle Record: 28-3 Champed - Gimmick Battle League - The Winter Topical - Topical Martyrs - Lime Green Poetry Association - Lyric Olympics - Art of Writing League - Guerrilla Writing League (2x) - Black August II Rep Power: 85899396	LOL my trouble with your theory is that I don't think slave breeding has ever involved the discipline required, was widespread enough, or continued for the generations necessary to alter the gene pool. There are sperm banks that will sell you the sperm of a Nobel prize winner, but that doesn't guarantee anything. There are extremely few families where even two generations are outstanding at anything, and there's always the chance of a slip up--Johnny & Edgar Winters family had no professional musicians or albinos in it prior to them. Then again, to come back to Yao Ming - his parents were actively encouraged to marry and have children. And look at him! So sure, this is possible... as long as we remember that the "Scandinavian" class standards are arbitrary. So we can arbitrarily say that the Scandinavian breed should be over 6 feet, straight blonde hair, copious beard in males, blue eyes, straight nose, skin pale as milk, with an aggressive disposition and an instinct for boating and looting. And we could breed humans to conform to that standard, and after a few dozen generations we could get a breed that would breed true. That doesn't change the fact that most real life Scandinavians wouldn't conform to that standard, the standard doesn't exist in real life, any more than the standard for Jack Russell Terriers means anything more than we've decided that Jack Russell Terriers should be small, white with spots, smooth coated and yippy. If we decided tomorrow that Jack Russell Terriers should be large, long-tailed, black coated and with copious drool, then that's what the standard would be. The standard will change. The breed standards for humans would be attractive in their own way, but they would need to fit the standard for that group as well. "Mutts" such as people that have obviously mixed heritage are right out... even if they are stunningly attractive. This would exclude most people, especially those in North America and wherever @Plot is from. We need the people that still appear as purebreds in the same way that dogs are; such as the white haired tall Scandinavians, the Chinese man with slight build and perfect eye slants, @Resin and some almost purple skinned African tribesman for example. @Vapeo This is fairly subjective of course but so is any concept of breeds that humans create. __________________ - Netcees Rebuttal Tourney - Art of Writing League (x 4) - AOWL Season 11 Champion (Undefeated Season)