TV Time
As a reflection of your dreams and aspirations, as a manifestation of your fears, as a record of your past not how it was but how you wish it were I must say that television exposes your species as the pathetic, underachieving laughing stock of the galaxy which you are.
What you call “entertainment” is puerile trash. What you think of as “Educational” is inaccurate at best, more commonly hyperbole and sometimes pure nonsense, and your “News” is so bad (most of it being paid for by special interests or dictated by governments) that the best informed amongst your kind are by extension the most out of touch with reality.
I spend roughly a third of each Earth day monitoring your entertainment. I would prefer not, but as your species requires sleep I have a great deal of free time. For me to complete one Earth year of observations, for example, requires 18 of your Earth months as a result of your species need for sleep. This leaves me with six of your months to fill.
Sometimes it makes me want to position myself upon a “transporter.”
“It is clear that the majority of the world’s people have not received the memo, but many scientists have been saying for decades now that biological races are not real. They do not exist. They do not occur naturally. We made them up. Generations after generations of children have been taught to believe in races as if their existence is a matter of commonsense knowledge and something nature forced on us. Meanwhile, scientists keep saying that we are one species and that’s it. We are not a collection of biological races or subspecies. Races, they say, are cultural creations rather than biological realities. There are no walls between us except those we imagine.”
- Guy P. Harrison from Race And Reality: What Everyone Should Know About Our Biological Diversiry
“Rousseau wrote three works on the damage done to our species by 1) leaving nature for 'culture,' which weakened our strength, 2) 'civilization,' which caused inequality and mutual oppression, 3) presumed 'moralization,' which brought about unnatural education and the deformation of our way of thinking.”
—Immanuel Kant’s Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View
“Did you know that for pretty much the entire history of the human species, the average life span was less than thirty years? You could count on ten years or so of real adulthood, right? There was no planning for retirement. There was no planning for a career. There was no planning. No time for planning. No time for a future. But then the life spans started getting longer, and people started having more and more future. And now life has become the future. Every moment of your life is lived for the future--you go to high school so you can go to college so you can get a good job so you can get a nice house so you can afford to send your kids to college so they can get a good job so they can get a nice house so they can afford to send their kids to college.”
—Paper Towns, John GreenOur true dawn: Pinning down human origins - life - 26 November 2012 - New Scientist
newscientist.comLINE them up in your head. Generation after generation of your ancestors, reaching back in time through civilisations, ice ages, an epic migration out of Africa, to the very origin of our species. And on the other side, take a chimp and line up its ancestors. How far back do you have to go, how many generations have to pass, before the two lines meet? This is one of the biggest and hardest questions in human evolution. We know that at some point we shared a common ancestor with chimps, but exactly when - and what that ancestor was like - have been maddeningly hard to pin down. Palaeontologists have searched for fossil remains, and geneticists have rummaged through the historical documents that are human and chimp DNA. Both made discoveries, but they did not see eye to eye. No more. New estimates for when our lineage and chimps went their separate ways suggest that some of our established ideas are staggeringly wrong. If correct, they demand a rewrite of human prehistory, starting from the very beginning. When was that beginning? The obvious first place to look for answers is in the fossil record. But fossil humans - or more strictly hominins, the group that includes us and all our extinct relatives from after the split - are notoriously thin on the ground and difficult to interpret.
Human evolution and an economical factor
Human species ‘may split in two’The following article was scrapped from BBC news.
My initial perception after reading this article was that it is more likely to observe this happening within couple of centuries since people obviously look for cuter guys and hotter girls. And eventually this leads to mating among dominants even though it’s an act rather caused by emotional, often unexpected spark. I think most people, including myself, tend to draw a bottom line, for qualities possessed of whom they undergo intimate relationship with. When it comes down to offspring generation purpose, through a common practice called marriage, due to law of natural selection, people would be more reluctant to choose more good-looking ones.However, several characteristic that distinguishes humans from other animals gives some twist in this forecast. It is not that humans have ability to think, but this theory does not involve economical factor. This economical factor, or should I say how much money one has in his or her own pocket plays a significant role in choosing mates as well, and this is not necessarily affected by physical appearances. Another factor to be considered, more significant, is determinism plays a huge role in shaping not only their own life, but also in selection of well-fitted partner and their offspring. So, which will have greater impact on later generations, natural dominant traits or one’s determination?점점 커지는 빈부격차, 하나라는 세계에서 심해져가는 경쟁속에 인류는 후에 두 species로 나누어지게된다는 이론이 나왔네요. 물론 결혼상대를 정할때 이런양상을 분명 이사회는 보여주고있지만, 일부 개개인의 야망과 굳은 결의는 이사회의 시스템에 결점이 되는 큰역할을 않나싶습니다. 인생은 미리 정해지기도했지만, 생각이 바뀌는순간 자기가 만들어갈수도 있는거니깐요.
Will these Genetically Modified Babies Alter Human Species?
articles.mercola.com
According to the story featured in the UK’s Daily Mail, 30 genetically modified babies had already been born since 2001.
