🗑️ 🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 20:15:00 UTC No. 16435111
if selective breeding is so successfull in making new breeds of animals why is it thought that it wouldn't work on humans (eugenics)?
Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 20:21:02 UTC No. 16435122
>>16435111
Its not that it "wouldn't work" its that you can't really predict outcomes and have to do a lot of trial and error, lots of culling genetic flaws every generation and if you don't preserve things, you might not be able to return back to wolf and are just left with a bunch of pugs and other weird novel shit.
Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 20:43:36 UTC No. 16435155
>>16435122
Good answer, very scientific.
Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 20:43:47 UTC No. 16435156
Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 20:45:28 UTC No. 16435159
>>16435156
eugenics at work. problem is they selected for retard habsburg genes together with inbreeding (something breeders avoid)
Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 22:18:39 UTC No. 16435327
>>16435122
Partly true as it's impossible to keep a back log of genetic material as you could for say corn or wheat. But the facts are more complex than this simple dimension of the answer. It also doesn't work.
>>16435156
Yeap
>>16435159
Hubris, another false utopia dreamer
>>16435169
I'll rebut you all here as you all make the same basic argument, it works but is 'muh wrong'. No it does not work for cows, sheeps, pigs, dogs, and chickens. All these things breed unnaturally have unhealthy off spring that over many generations fall apart. Many dog breeds have imploded like the Dalmatian, a majority are born deaf or partly deaf. Every pure breed dog has known health issues that go along with it and the more the try to fix one part it ruins the health somewhere else. Commercial meat animals are even worse health wise.
Like communism, eugenics is a utopia pipe dream
>But you don't understand, REAL EUGENICS HAS NEVER BEEN TRIED! If it had, it would have worked!
It's the same old utopia scam song & dance with a new title. The mutt dog is the true champion genetically speaking. All dogs revert to mutt in a handful of generations, as do swine. The chaos of random mating also keeps the gene pool healthy and always trying new things. adaptable. Eugenics is domestication of a human with all the poor health coding errors.
You can't breed a single form for a changing world, you'll get left behind.
Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 22:20:06 UTC No. 16435332
>>16435327
>communism
>utopia
this alone is enough to entirely disregard your post
Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 22:24:35 UTC No. 16435336
>>16435111
>why is it thought that it wouldn't work on humans (eugenics)?
It works. You are told not to think about it for political reasons.
Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 22:29:21 UTC No. 16435350
>>16435327
>You can't breed a single form for a changing world, you'll get left behind.
Fascinating strawman. There is no need to breed for a single form. Selective breeding is a continuous improvement program.
Of course it works, and if you select for retarded arbitrary traits without caring about health like making "cute" miniature dogs then you get the result you bred for.
Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 22:33:50 UTC No. 16435358
>>16435111
It does work on humans and we've been selectively breeding ourselves for millenia. Some ancient cultures were also absolutely obsessed with these matters, and understood the principles behind breeding extremely well. Ancient Greeks in particular were notable for a unique cultural obsession with quality and good breeding, and were noted across the mediterranean for producing the most beautiful and intelligent people. If you read Nietzsche, he makes a very interesting case regarding the history of crime and punishment, and how the brutality of early Human societies ironically served to breed people with the capacity to independently intuit things like right conduct and of obligations and debts. I truthfully don't think that the capacity to reason with regards to future consequence or hypotheticals are universal human qualities, and different Human populations show this to a lesser or greater degree.
Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 22:56:23 UTC No. 16435399
>>16435336
This is the 100% correct answer.
Anonymous at Thu, 17 Oct 2024 00:01:24 UTC No. 16435506
>>16435156
This is what happens when your eugenics program selects for a specific surname.
Anonymous at Thu, 17 Oct 2024 03:47:22 UTC No. 16435702
>>16435111
it would make new combinations of humans but not anything that doesn’t already exist.
Anonymous at Thu, 17 Oct 2024 06:37:56 UTC No. 16435863
>>16435111
sexy American dogs
Anonymous at Thu, 17 Oct 2024 07:50:30 UTC No. 16435932
>>16435111
because humans are not animals retard
Anonymous at Thu, 17 Oct 2024 07:56:49 UTC No. 16435937
>>16435156
false argument, charles's wider family improved generationally.
Anonymous at Thu, 17 Oct 2024 08:06:11 UTC No. 16435950
>>16435111
It does work, that's why there are so many retarded people, morons who complain about eugenics don't realize it's already been employed for decades to create a population of docile, mentally handicapped consumers who follow orders without question, even if the outcome is a net negative for everyone except for the corrupt ""leaders"" who benefit from your suffering.
Anonymous at Thu, 17 Oct 2024 08:11:34 UTC No. 16435955
>>16435950
We have state backed dysegenics that promote the worst to breed and punish the best.
the scene in I think 1984 describing how the smartest wore jamming devices, the most beautiful wore ugly masks and the athletic wore weights to make everyone equal
Anonymous at Thu, 17 Oct 2024 09:12:09 UTC No. 16435998
>>16435111
>eugenics
I would define eugenics as an intervention (by means other than natural, kin, or sexual selection) with the purpose of binging about a genetic change at the population level such that the prevalence of undesirable traits decreases, or the prevalence of desirable traits increases. Note that ‘undesirable’ and ‘desirable’ are inherently ideologically defined, since we are talking about selection that does not involve typical evolutionary selection mechanisms. An example of this is dog breeding like in the image you posted, or selective breeding of livestock to increase milk yield.
In humans, as opposed to narrowly circumscribed populations of livestock / pets, this would not practically work for several reasons.
Humans are exposed to very different environments across individuals, so most of trait variation is not due to genetic factors but to differences in environment. One consequence is that it makes it hard to identify subjects who have desirable genetic characteristics, especially when considering polygenic traits that people would tend to think are desirable based on ideological reasons.
It is possible to measure genetic potential directly from genetic markers and what we know from this is that these genetic predictors perform poorly. We can also tell that there are many important, very rare genetic variants relevant for phenotype which we will never be able to identify. We thus have an absolute ceiling on our ability to assess an individual’s genetic fitness from either their current performance or from their genome and we know that the potential ability to do this is extremely low, far too low to be useful for selective breeding.
(comment too long)
Anonymous at Thu, 17 Oct 2024 09:14:02 UTC No. 16436002
>>16435998
Animals are bred in controlled environments and have short generational times with large numbers of offspring. In these circumstances selective breeding can produce desired changes in a small number of specific traits. Humans on the other hand have relatively long generational times, low numbers of offspring, and massive genetic flow between populations (low rates of inbreeding). Selective breeding in humans would thus be extremely slow compared to other species.
Removal of undesirable traits assumes that: a) these traits arise directly from the genome b) that genetic variants responsible for those traits are present in the population and will disappear upon removal. Both assumptions are wrong because a) phenotype is a product of both genome and environment, b) many traits that are detrimental to fitness arise because of de-novo mutations that cannot be selected out, and c) recessive genes cannot be selected out when considering phenotype alone.
These are only some of the reasons that came to mind, but there are many more. Aside from all of this: selective breeding of humans in a tightly circumscribed population, besides being decidedly unethical (in my opinion), impractical to the point of impossible (for above reasons), will always come with deleterious and unintended trait selection. Yes we can select for traits in animals, but the species where we have done so are typically quite unhealthy too (dogs that look cute can’t breathe well; cows that produce a lot of milk develop chronic joint problems and produce milk with low protein content, etc). So its potential for trait selection is limited, and its potential to do damage to the population or individuals is vast.
Anonymous at Thu, 17 Oct 2024 09:55:00 UTC No. 16436023
>>16435111
>why is it thought that it wouldn't work
Everyone knows it would work, even if they refuse to admit it, but the last time we tried it we ended up with African Americans.
Anonymous at Thu, 17 Oct 2024 10:30:37 UTC No. 16436055
>>16435111
Many domesticated species aren't fitter than their wild counterpart
Wheat and rice wouldn't survive without our care. There are many unhealthy species of Dogs, cats, cattle, horse. Even strong dogs like German shepherds have dysgenic hips
Anonymous at Thu, 17 Oct 2024 16:58:17 UTC No. 16436549
>>16435955
Youre thinking of harrison Bergeron
Captcha DAMN G
Anonymous at Thu, 17 Oct 2024 16:59:21 UTC No. 16436551
Anonymous at Thu, 17 Oct 2024 17:04:27 UTC No. 16436557
>>16435111
It works in theory but it doesn't work in practice for the same reason communism doesn't work in practice.
https://www.unz.com/isteve/what-can
Anonymous at Thu, 17 Oct 2024 17:35:53 UTC No. 16436614
>>16436023
>African Americans
>Selective breeding
Kinda true, but more on the reckless side of the selective breeding. Primarily because it was focus on economic utility with no strategic plan for an "endgame" like proper social cohesion/ assimilation into the new population or reintroduction back to the source population.
Hence you get the aftermath which is society constantly creating hard and soft barriers to the greater American population for them. Because they didn't originally desire it and now have to jerryrig them into it. Then the inability to properly bring them back to Africa because no one bothered to catalog where they actually came from geographically, culturally, religiously or by language. So now you have to make oddball attempts to give them someplace that's """"like"""" where they're from but truly isn't. Hence the Liberia situation which degrades into a civil war with the natives or homecoming programs in Ghana or other countries that eventually goes south because parts of the native population feel it's intrusive or they get too much attention.
Yeah, probably not a good idea to selective breed another group of humans if they're just ultimately going to be stuck in limbo.
Anonymous at Thu, 17 Oct 2024 17:42:59 UTC No. 16436623
>>16436549
possily, I read it like 20 years ago.
I remember the weird two way screens and the speakers
Anonymous at Thu, 17 Oct 2024 19:23:50 UTC No. 16436834
>>16435327
"Ruined breeds" are a thing that has mainly come out of people trying to breed show dogs purely for looks with no regard for their health.
It doesn't prove anything about the efficacy of selective breeding as a whole.
Horses for example were once unsuitable for riding because they were too frail. That was the case until selectively crossbreeding horses produced modern breeds of horse that are larger and stronger than their predecessors.
Trying to claim that selective breeding "doesn't work" is fucking moronic.
Anonymous at Thu, 17 Oct 2024 21:13:17 UTC No. 16436967
>>16435111
Successful is a subjective Language. Pit bulls are borderline retarded and a menance. Chihuahuas would get eaten in nature couldn't survive.
This thread is dumb.