Is that it doesn't actually select for the fittest creature/human. It selects for the government/eugenistics opinion of a superior being which might be functionally inferior. For instance most people want to be taller but if being taller was objectively better we'd all be 7 feet tall. 7 feet tall people are generally not the fittest people objectively. Someone you might thing is ugly might actually be more genetically viable than someone you find beautiful and everyone deserves a fighting chance. That being said Jews artificially creating a race of mutts to the detriment of white men is also unfair.
The problem with Nazi Eugenics
Carson Lopez
Jayden Cox
>Is that it doesn't actually select for the fittest creature/human
incorrect!
the problem is people playing God.
Thomas Reyes
that's my dog.
Landon Ramirez
Pretty much my point, numbnuts.
Joseph White
You have a set of criteria, if it fits into the criteria then it passes, it was never about the tallest, nor who had blond hair or blue eyes. The fruits of Eugenics can only be observed after many generations and going for the tallest is a silly goal to begin with. There will always be those who are taller or shorter even if you put two tall people together not all their offspring will be tall. It will take many lifetimes to begin to see the fruit of the work and will require dedicated people to observe and record results. But with our understanding of genitics nowdays it's easier if science wanted to to breed for nearly any trait desired. If you wanted height or stout little dwarfs or something even.
Jaxon Smith
>bump
Xavier Bell
>Is that it doesn't actually select for the fittest creature/human. It selects for the government/eugenistics opinion of a superior being which might be functionally inferior.
If handled unethically that certainly can become the case. Hence why most proponents of eugenics really are only asking for more research into the field. The more we know the more informed decisions we can make in regards to it. Fact of the matter is we view such a science as highly immoral (thank the Jewish propaganda after WW2) so the research into it is sparse.
>For instance most people want to be taller but if being taller was objectively better we'd all be 7 feet tall. 7 feet tall people are generally not the fittest people objectively.
Sure, but the point of eugenics is not so superficial. It is focused more on eradicating illnesses or just generally improving the genetic stock by ensuring good genes (High IQ, athleticism, stamina, immunity to certain mental Illnesses, memory, etc.) pass on.
>Someone you might thing is ugly might actually be more genetically viable than someone you find beautiful and everyone deserves a fighting chance
Eugenics doesn't mean eradicating everyone deemed unfit, at least not to such a degree. It would be more along the lines of removing mental illnesses and preventing people with severe genetic illnesses. Now we don't even need to do it so esoterically with the advancement of gene editing. Two people could provide an egg and a sperm and genes responsible for Alzheimer's, for instance, could be removed. It brings in a whole new world of ethics questions, which is why we need to study more into it.
Blake Robinson
Yes, you can turn your selected population into hummingbird beaks if you only account for a single group of traits, just like chinese who due to their long history of gaining social status due to exams, have generated extremely good memory but unwittingly degraded creativity.
But just because man does not guide evolution, doesnt mean nature wont box us into the same evolutionary dead end as well. Africa is a perfect example of what an uncontrolled reproduction in a low-effort environment generates. And due to technology, the entire world is now african-tier ease of survival.
Matthew Price
heres a red pill if the nazis were sterilizing mentally incapable people why go to the trouble of gassing jews when they could just be serilized
Daniel Roberts
CdzKn
Andrew Collins
The problem is you cannot really do that. The same gene that causes ilness may have unseen advantages and vice versa, so this would way too easily lead to defects. Much more viable seems "soft eugenics" where you create a select group where only those fulfilling criteria are allowed to join in and leaving the rest alone, in order to keep the gene pool intact..
Owen Long
Nazi eugenics wasn't a thing, and they opposed IQ testing because Jews did well on them. Their views on race were closer to that of shitlibs today. It was all about appearances, and the idea was that those appearances were correlated with other desirable traits. The top thinkers on eugenics at the time were in the UK and US. After the war ended, those ideas got sidelined in western countries. I'm sure that was just a coincidence though.
Levi Ramirez
Eugenics isn't about killing off people by looks retard, it's about putting down people with severe disabilities and problems because they're life is going to be miserable anyways. Even Alexander Graham Bell was pro eugenics for awhile cause his own kid had a hearing problem
Daniel Evans
I think JF has an interesting view of it, but any artificially selected human group will in the end outcompete a natural one given enough time, since even if the traits that are benefited might not be more "healthy", they will be traits that ease technological control over the selected population and are therefore promoted by the technological system.
Its a by-effect of selection based soly on efficiency, rather than some more human idealistic traits.
Carter Peterson
>taller was objectively better
Humans have been getting taller since, forever. As in we have collectively been selecting for taller people. Your 7ft number is completely arbitrary, faggot.
Taller is objectively better.
Juan Cook
Also, fun fact, Japan's average height has increased since its "westernization" and introduction to the global markets since WWII.
Wyatt Cooper
Then how come humans are smaller than Elephants if bigger is better?
Nathaniel Hernandez
Obviously the answer would be cause live Jews were still a threat to them even if they couldn't have children.
Daniel Cook
That's absolutely ridiculous to make that comparison. A better one would be comparing our height now to humans 500, 1000, 10000 years ago. Human sexual selection has nothing to do with elephants and everything to do within our own natural selection.
Jack Harris
Okay lanklet keep crying
Jackson Nelson
Because evolution tales time. However it isn't better biologically speaking for humans to be 7+ft in height as it results in various spinal issues as well as making you a bigger target.
Adam Perry
No we haven't lol
Nathaniel Myers
MANLET COPE
Evan Evans
Why are you faggots so obsessed with irrelevant information?
Jackson Wood
Oh so you're 7 feet tall?
Ian Howard
That's true, but at least I've goy a bigger trunk.
Luke Torres
The "problem" is Goverment Eugenics the Smart people can do It, and do It
If we dont care about others is bc natural selection...
Camden Martin
What about eugenics in nature, where only the strongest breed, while weaklings starve and die? I don't see a problem with that. Roses, bananas, peas, corn etc etc etc, wouldn't exist without eugenics. It's a proven system at works. I think your gripe is that you're a genetic dead-end and you know it. A handicapped faggot that cries on the internet with pictures of puppies.
Adam Hall
That's nature you fucking idiot. The difference is you're trying to artificially oppose subjective "eugenics" based on your subjective opinion of what is pretty.
Adam Gomez
Yeah that's pre-civilization genius. Sick and tired of Darwin fags from reddit trying to relate two completely different theories because I can BTFO that argument a million times looking back through history
Thomas Jackson
Did I say "eugenics" or did I say "Nazi eugenics" you fucking idiot? You act superior yet you don't even have basic reading comprehension skills.
Jonathan Cook
Roses, corn, peas, etc etc etc wouldn't exist without it. Why is it bad? Good and bad are subjective terms that mean absolutely nothing.
>I can
Do. Just do. I'll wait.
Chase Morgan
Evolution didn't end when civilization started retard.
Jacob Wood
What's the difference? Are dog breeders Nazis for selectively choosing the strongest stud to sire litters?