Evolution has come to a halt though. Survival of the fittest doesn't apply when the medical system keeps genetically inferior people alive.

 

Yo, whip my *** up some Klingon Blood Wine while you're at it !

 

Well... yeah. We needed a study to show this? I thought this had been established for decades.

 

that would be true if it wasn't for things like cancer, aids, and such.....

 

you dont want to debate me on evolution. cancer, aids, and such have little impact on evolution. why? because you only have to survive long enough to reproduce in order to beat evolution. so only children who die of those diseases can stop the growth of human genetics. if we want to rid the world of certain things, it takes cold hearted actions. ask hitler. im not saying he was right for what he did, but he knew how it worked.

 

true, however, what was the survival rate of aids and cancer at one point? We have beaten it to a point to where it no longer acts as population control, which means more then likely something else will come along.

 

thats true about every plague or disease. until our science learns to stop it, it wrecks havoc. Natural selection never has a chance to run it's course. The world is trying to get rid of us, but we won't let it. Therefore we will never evolve any further.

 

if its killing people I fail to see how it is ineffective............... not to mention other forms of population control are coming into effect, one thought to be smaller families, i.e. the nuclear family that exists in the united states, that is also related to poverty but you get the point.

 

It's not killing enough people, that's why it's ineffective.

 

define enough? aids is ravaging africa and china....... at least aids is.

edit: I see what you guys are saying, but seems to me like not enough people dying won't be a problem.

 

Not killing enough Americans

 

30% of the population.

 

hmmm i can see what you guys are saying.

 

Why do people have to die if we can defeat these viruses in different ways? What difference does it make if 80% of the planet died because of Polio or whatever if humankind is capable of coming of with solutions that don't involve so much death.

 

if a fast spreading disease breaks out, and only people with 6 toes are immune, then humans have evolved to having 6 toes, because the rest are dead. humans have stopped evolving because we create our own immunity to the environment. Aids and cancer are just 2 ways of dying. They have no more impact on the genetic course of humans than someone falling out a window and dying.

 

i understand evolution bro lol you are missing my argument, that being that 1) there are still diseases killing millions and 2) there are still other ways to thin the herd, ie the famine in russia and china that occurred during communism, the one in dafur, wars , etc.
I agree though if your argument is like stitches that its not killing enough.

 

yeah, until a disease erases an entire group of people, its just another thing that people die from.