Salma Hayek breast-feeds an African baby

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So did the Holocaust produce a "better" breed of human? Good luck justifying that one...

There's nothing implied about it. Natural Selection results in a tangible, observable biological change in the organism - like the way common bacteria have mutated to become resistant to antibiotics.

Edited February 13, 2009 by Paul Daniels

[justashooter 430]

So did the Holocaust produce a "better" breed of human? Good luck justifying that one...

There's nothing implied about it. Natural Selection results in a tangible, observable biological change in the organism - like the way common bacteria have mutated to become resistant to antibiotics.

actually, the first stages of it did eliminate undesireable genetic deviation. the later stages eliminated genetic deviation that was seen as undesireable by the enactors. their justifications i am not willing to argue on a public forum.

be aware that i am descended, in part, from germanic jews who left europe via holland in the early years of the last century.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You didn't really answer my question.

[justashooter 430]

You didn't really answer my question.

well, that makes us even, i suppose.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

In your mind perhaps.

You can't justify your argument in a specific way in relation to a specific example you presented so you resort to hand-waving generalities.

[Peikko 1,575]

This misunderstanding of natural selection is priceless. Darwin is rolling in his grave right now!

Edited February 13, 2009 by Madame Cleo

[slim 1,525]

I'll post a "specific generalization" here to break up this priceless misunderstanding. (It is quite entertaining though, that's for sure!)

How about when a group of people live in an area that will no longer sustain them because of drought (one of the specific examples provided before) but yet other people donate money to them in order for them to set up a well or another form of water gathering?

Wouldn't those people be somehow "selected" for change by being unable to support themselves in their own environment and would either have to adapt by taking in less food and water or move to another location?

And how is that not natural selection? Just not a long enough timeline, I suppose?

That would be an example of "natural" natural selection being impeded by outside influences.

Here's another one for you.

How about when folks live in a place so ravaged by incessant fighting that they can't establish any infrastructure and, as a result, can't acquire the food and water they need to sustain life. Arent' they also "selected" for change by either dying, relocating or taking action to create infrastructure?

Lastly, how about the guy that stands at the top of the exit ramp and holds the sign that says, "Homeless. Please Help. God Bless You." For whatever reason, wouldn't he be "selected" as one of the "weaker" of the species to die off? We as humans are the only species in the animal kingdom that holds a moral obligation to support and defend others of our species who aren't familiar to us. Why is that?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Its not "natural selection" because there are no resulting biological adaptations.

You also seem to be confusing 'natural selection' with 'artificial selection' which is doubly bizarre because both concepts refer to breeding and heredity.

[NickD 203]

Thought this thread was about Salma Hayek, but I guess off topic can really get off topic.

Was just concerned if Salma has an ample supply of milk.

This photo shows she does.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

She might have an ample supply of silicone...

[Ban Hammer 13,355]

Thought this thread was about Salma Hayek, but I guess off topic can really get off topic.

Was just concerned if Salma has an ample supply of milk.

This photo shows she does.

i think we need more pics to make an accurate assessment.