Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

They haven't obvisously visited the outer suburbs of VIC

Discussion in 'The Pub' at netrider.net.au started by pro-pilot, Oct 28, 2007.

  1. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/li...ogy.html?in_article_id=489653&in_page_id=1965

    Human ra will 'split into two different species'

    Last updated at 16:18pm on 26th October 2007

    The human race will one day split into two separate species, an attractive, intelligent ruling elite and an underclass of dim-witted, ugly goblin-like creatures, according to a top scientist.

    100,000 years into the future, sexual selection could mean that two distinct breeds of human will have developed.

    The alarming prediction comes from evolutionary theorist Oliver Curry from the London School of Economics, who says that the human race will have reached its physical peak by the year 3000.

    The report claims that after they reach their peak around the year 3000 humans will begin to regress

    These humans will be between 6ft and 7ft tall and they will live up to 120 years.

    "Physical features will be driven by indicators of health, youth and fertility that men and women have evolved to look for in potential mates," says the report, which suggests that advances in cosmetic surgery and other body modifying techniques will effectively homogenise our appearance.

    Men will have symmetrical facial features, deeper voices and bigger penises, according to Curry in a report commissioned for men's satellite TV channel Bravo.

    Women will all have glossy hair, smooth hairless skin, large eyes and pert breasts, according to Curry.

    Racial differences will be a thing of the past as interbreeding produces a single coffee-coloured skin tone.

    The future for our descendants isn't all long life, perfect bodies and chiselled features, however.

    While humans will reach their peak in 1000 years' time, 10,000 years later our reliance on technology will have begun to dramatically change our appearance.

    Medicine will weaken our immune system and we will begin to appear more child-like.

    Dr Curry said: "The report suggests that the future of man will be a story of the good, the bad and the ugly.

    H G Wells' Science Fiction novel The Time Machine (which was later adapted into two films - this picture is from the 2002 version) the human race has evolved into two species, the highly intelligent and wealthy Eloi...

    ...and the frightening, animalistic Morlock (as seen in the 1960 film version of the classic book)

    "While science and technology have the potential to create an ideal habitat for humanity over the next millennium, there is the possibility of a monumental genetic hangover over the subsequent millennia due to an over-reliance on technology reducing our natural capacity to resist disease, or our evolved ability to get along with each other.

    "After that, things could get ugly, with the possible emergence of genetic 'haves' and 'have-nots'."

    Dr Curry's theory may strike a chord with readers who have read H G Wells' classic novel The Time Machine, in particular his descriptions of the Eloi and the Morlock races.

    In the 1895 book, the human race has evolved into two distinct species, the highly intelligent and wealthy Eloi and the frightening, animalistic Morlock who are destined to work underground to keep the Eloi happy.
  2. It'll never happen.

    Al Gore says global warming will get us first, and he must be right :?
  3. Not least because evolution is a fiction, right? :LOL:
  4. predictions on evolution are bullshit, happhazard guessing at best. and this "hypothesis" on an evolutionary pathway coming from a economist is even more laughable.

    some predictions on medical dependancy and interbreeding leading to a "single" race have some merit, but that is assuming something catosptrophic doesnt happen between now and then. and anyone reasonably abreast on current affairs, with basic scientific knowledge could deduce the same prediction after a night on the piss whilst attempting to solve the problems of the world with his best mate, then realising its pharked, and we are all gonna die anyway so who gives a rats arse?

    +1 paul, old mate uncle Al G will be hailed as a divine profit by the survivors of the human race one day.... :rofl:

    EDIT: opps only just linked the content to the thread heading, LOL but ill refrain from any social commentry petaining to sydney. damn my tertiary education forcing me to look at everything from an academci view point :roll:
  5. Um, actually the London School of Economics is at the forefront of thereotical evolutionary biology, as the two disciplines are remarkably similar.
  6. firstly, that has already happened

    humans are like dogs, the same species but many different breeds

    we have the well breed and the poorly breed. we have the smart and the dumb, the wealthy and the welfare

    secondly, i was thinking about this quite intensely yesterday and i came to a similar conclusion

    - we are going to break off into 2 different sub species as there is evidence of this forseeable change already.

    when finding a partner, a person must connect with a partner on there level or the relationship is doomed to early failure. these levels are becoming more apparently, obvious, and the gap between levels is getting further and further appart

    if these trend continue, which they will, the path will spit into 2 definates rather than 2 -4 subtles

    cheers :cool:
  7. London school of economics also has a very strong philosophical side that doesn't get a lot of press.

    As for predictions, the OP's prediction is as good as any other. :)
  8. Philosophically you might be right, but practically you're way off. No-one's talking about relationships here; we're already up to our ears with bogan women who've mated briefly with bogan men and produced bogan children who are going to grow up and do the same. When one women has six children to six different dead-beat men who's only interest is casual sex and avoiding any responsibility, the process is already well advanced.
  9. But Paul, the motor trade relies on a steady stream of young blokes in old Conformadores, to keep the economy running.
  10. paul wrote

    they are one and the same paul

    i did think of the casual sex with no responsibility as i wrote paul but considered that to be part of the lower level as you also do. they're still going to break off down the low level path. not only because that what they are but because there are so many kids that they will live in crappy burbs and mix with only more of the same, grow up and develop without whatever potentual they would have had if they were to grow up in a better environment with better self preservation examples, responsibility and respect

    the genes of the 'decent wealthy, healthy, smart man' who knocked up a scrag in night club dunny to be brought up with the other kids in mc fields will go to lower level

    and the genes of the smart, wealthy, healthy woman who was raped. if she brings that child up in the right environment the child has more of a chance for higher level.

    it depends on the adult choice of that child when breeding and/or finding a partner because their genes are only a percentage of what they produce

    so these ^ examples as you mentioned exist, and they're variations but will still find their way into one of the catagories by way of percentage and future breeding choices by association, as will the rest of our genes will

    so im not way off :grin:

    cheers :cool:
  11. ok fair enough, but how are the two even remotely similar? evolutionary theory is based around a series of scientific studies; and although most of the deductions made appear valid, it is still only a theory. economics from my understanding of it is based around the "model" individual reactions with the market, aswell as the various market dynamics. although perhaps im way off with my understanding of real economics, as my study of it is from a planning and development perspective. i still fail to see how you can relate econ and evo?
  12. The sorts of maths/modelling (and assumptions) that economics involves can be pretty much directly transposed to modelling behaviour, population dynamics, growth, and that sort of thing. I don't really know the specifics, but a lot of the theoretical papers seem to come from economics schools rather than biology departments.
  13. why does it matter so much that it came from ecconomics rather than just judging for yourselves on what has been said?

    the material it self is what matters, not where it came from.

    you can decide for yourselves based on the material can't you?

    if it came from the king and queen of evolution LAW or some kid in primary school, it's still the same words
  14. Stump, don't argue with Creationists. They'll kidnap you, baptise you then burn you at the stake as a heretic.
  15. While ever smart, rich and ugly blokes continue to fcuk dumb, financially insecure but very beautiful women, I don't see the kids necessarily edging closer toward a distinct "species" as outlined. (And the counter is also true, so don't get all Germaine Greer on my ass :p ).

    But then I'm sure they've done a little more thinking than us retards here who start typing before the cogs have even started turning.
  16. attributed to George Bernard Shaw

    Luckily for us Fat Bastards that don't have Shaws' brains there are Harleys, so we can look cool and get laid too. :LOL:

    Thus continuing the viability of our genetic material.
  17. feverpitched wrote

    ha ha! so funny cause it's


    :LOL: :LOL: :LOL: :LOL: :LOL: :LOL: