PPRuNe Forums


Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 8th Feb 2017, 06:55   #81 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The Wild West (UK)
Age: 38
Posts: 1,055
A few years ago, some of my ancestors emigrated from the countryside to the big cities. They were the go-getters of their generation. They became mechanics and engineers driving the Victorian industrial revolution. They were well paid by the standards of their day. One owned his own business making boilers on the Tyne. After hours they went to local libraries to study mathematics and engineering and better themselves.

Some of the technical drawings for Newcastle's famous bridges are still in the family. The region was the Silicon Valley of it's day. The white heat of technology warming the rest of the world.

Fast-forward a few generations and the once-prosperous neighbourhood where the boiler factory was located is a no-go area. Some of my distant relatives are now long-term unemployed and have been in trouble with the police. They and their neighbours are the long-term unemployed. 'Chav' bogeymen.

Genes will only take you so far.
abgd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 8th Feb 2017, 07:59   #82 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Scotland
Age: 73
Posts: 427
A prime example of genetic effects is found in the British Muslim community - mainly Pakistani and Bangladeshi. These communities encourage marriage between first cousins - they have been doing this for generations and the result is that they are 3% of the population but are 30% of those in long term care for those with genetic defects.
bcgallacher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th Feb 2017, 10:27   #83 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcgallacher View Post
A prime example of genetic effects is found in the British Muslim community - mainly Pakistani and Bangladeshi. These communities encourage marriage between first cousins - they have been doing this for generations and the result is that they are 3% of the population but are 30% of those in long term care for those with genetic defects.
Oh FFS! You've done it now!
Stand by for sky falling in on your head
Basil is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 8th Feb 2017, 15:41   #84 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: England,East Midlands
Age: 49
Posts: 5
Post removed.

Last edited by RR22; 9th Feb 2017 at 02:15. Reason: To remove the post.
RR22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th Feb 2017, 08:59   #85 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,054
abdg wrote:

Quote:
Fast-forward a few generations and the once-prosperous neighbourhood where the boiler factory was located is a no-go area. Some of my distant relatives are now long-term unemployed and have been in trouble with the police. They and their neighbours are the long-term unemployed. 'Chav' bogeymen.

Genes will only take you so far.
There will always be some family members without a burning fire in their bellies who fall by the wayside.

abdg, now tell us the rest of the story. What about those family members who saw the writing was on the wall, and moved to pastures new, evolved and forged ahead as the world around them did?
Mechta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th Feb 2017, 12:51   #86 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: YMML
Posts: 1,388
Eddie, the irony of someone of indigenous descent discussing eugenics is overwhelming. The Aboriginal "race" was considered degenerate and inevitably headed for extinction in the 19th century and quite probably well into the 20th century in many parts of Australia.
le Pingouin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th Feb 2017, 20:10   #87 (permalink)
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 277
Quote:
Originally Posted by le Pingouin View Post
Eddie, the irony of someone of indigenous descent discussing eugenics is overwhelming. The Aboriginal "race" was considered degenerate and inevitably headed for extinction in the 19th century and quite probably well into the 20th century in many parts of Australia.
its not ironic at all when you consider it
Eddie Dean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th Feb 2017, 21:17   #88 (permalink)
Psychophysiological entity
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Tweet Rob_Benham Famous author. Well, slightly famous.
Age: 77
Posts: 4,272
When I penned The Perfect Code I did not take my main premise seriously. A powerful design code fighting its way back to perfection seemed like fun, but that's all. Now I'm as convinced about an advanced mechanism of evolution as it's possible to be in the real world. Let's say, Sigma 3.

Darwin's science is good but it's nowhere near powerful enough to explain the wondrous designs that seem to come about by urgent necessity. Some of the answers to problems are exquisite and need many more stages of change than we find. I would have it that the designs are there to be called on. There, or somewhere. Nothing to say they haven't evolved before and been hidden away in the same manner. I'm not insisting on a creator despite inner feelings there most probably is. Okay, enough of that, but what about taking advantage of that system, whatever it is?

I for one could not bring myself to dispatch a single soul just because it didn't meet the standards of some bizarre experiment, but I could envisage say, a city, expanding over time, which had a sufficient pool of widely mixed and filtered genes to make it safe to interbreed. I have no idea what numbers would ensure safety.

I'm not sure who would fund such an enterprise, but I'm fairly sure it would produce extraordinary results, though perhaps not always what we wanted.

Quote:
or even the ability to ward off the common cold and the entire population gets wiped out
The above could be the biggest danger to an unhardened community.
Loose rivets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th Feb 2017, 23:17   #89 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Norfolk
Age: 60
Posts: 468
Genetic diversity and wide dispersal seem to be the optimum strategies for survival. Look to the fossil records to see what has survived for a hundred million years to the current era. All of those creatures have achieved either a hugely efficient design that can not be improved, or they have adapted to live anywhere in the world and done so. No event, no matter how cataclysmic has wiped them out.

Humans have certainly achieved world wide distribution and diversity, but the design could do with improvement. Our best bet is taking the opportunity that we uniquely seem to have been granted and head for other planets and eventually other star systems.

We now know that much smaller lifeforms can be lifted from earth into space and survive. Perhaps it is time for much more complex organisms to have a go. Maybe that is the ultimate purpose of all life, to spread throughout the universe.
G0ULI is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10th Feb 2017, 01:17   #90 (permalink)
Psychophysiological entity
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Tweet Rob_Benham Famous author. Well, slightly famous.
Age: 77
Posts: 4,272
Reverse Fred Hoyle territory now. Over several volumes he's protested long and loud about the figures not adding up. Design. Chance. Time. Just doesn't make sense. And remember, Hoyle was a great mathematician and scientist, despite sticking on the Solid State universe for rather a long time.
Loose rivets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th Feb 2017, 06:30   #91 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The Wild West (UK)
Age: 38
Posts: 1,055
Quote:
abdg, now tell us the rest of the story. What about those family members who saw the writing was on the wall, and moved to pastures new, evolved and forged ahead as the world around them did?
He did OK - my father was the only person from his year in primary school to go on to grammar school and I had a nice upbringing in a small university town.

I'm facing some of the same issues: I've missed the boat to Australia with most of my colleagues, because my partner's work is all in Europe. Since the Brexit referendum I'm trying to decide whether I should leave the UK and settle in Europe - but this would inevitably mean a large and probably non-temporary drop in living standards - but perhaps better prospects for my son in the long-term. These decisions are never straightforward.

But it's fairly irrelevant to the point I was trying to make: this whole community went from being a reasonably prosperous, upper working-class / middle-class region to a fairly apocalyptic car-burning chavdom within the course of a generation or two. Car-burners living in quite nice Victorian terraced houses with ornate carvings on the lintels. The community gene pool hasn't changed that fast.
abgd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10th Feb 2017, 07:09   #92 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Fletcher Memorial Home
Age: 52
Posts: 244
I don't know who mentioned it but there was talk some pages back about medical advances etc keeping us alive longer. This is one topic where we differ dramatically from the "animal kingdom", there if you get sick or fall behind there is no health system to help you recover, if you get old there is no retirement home for senior members of the pack / hive / troop.

While health care and old aged care are wonderful things that show our compassion to our fellow humans, they are not "natural". Therefore we have deviated from the original premise Darwin made by skewing the survival rate.
Ogre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th Feb 2017, 09:19   #93 (permalink)

I'd rather be floating

 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England
Posts: 3,169
Quote:
While health care and old aged care are wonderful things that show our compassion to our fellow humans, they are not "natural". Therefore we have deviated from the original premise Darwin made by skewing the survival rate.
Er, no. We are simply using the abilities we have evolved, entirely within the laws of nature. Whether or not we are using them in such a way as to benefit the species in the long term will become apparent in due course, but there's no difference in kind between how we use our intelligence and how a slug uses its slime - both are subject to the laws of nature.
Gertrude the Wombat is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10th Feb 2017, 09:48   #94 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: Mesopotamos
Posts: 915
I still cannot fathom eugenics other than to say it's an ideal philosophy for people with an inferiority complex.

I know this person who was born with severe thalassemia, his wife has a mental illness, and his son was born with cerebral palsy. He has defied all the odds and made it to over 50 years of age yet still lives a full happy life - maybe that's the hint for those with the inferiority complex.

Now with global warming on the horizon, then according to eugenics, shouldn't we be breeding with Indians an Pakistanis to ensure the gene pool survives all that excessive heat?

Load of bollocks.
cattletruck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th Feb 2017, 11:42   #95 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,054
Whilst the basic concept of eugenics is laudable, i.e. to evolve the 'good' genes and avoid the 'bad' genes; the fundamental problem is that the people making the selection may have some strange ideas of what is desirable. As in the way perfectly acceptable people get plastic surgery which makes turns them into freaks, so wiht eugenics they will do it with their, or someone else's children. Instead of taking in the full picture, and focusing on the important stuff (resistance to illness, enough common sense to avoid stupid accidents, intelligence balanced with wisdom), they are more likely to focus on whatever seems important to them, be it looks, strength, IQ or whatever.

Marie Stopes was a major proponent of eugenics in the early 20th century. The upbringing her son received as a result of her beliefs isn't one many would wish for:

Harry Stopes-Roe - obituary - Telegraph
Mechta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th Feb 2017, 16:49   #96 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Darkest Surrey
Posts: 4,690
Listened to a proponent of Eugenics discuss this, he being of a mature age was quite happy to push his arguement.

That was until one guy just asked, so if we agree with Eugenics can we set 60 as the cut off age where anybody over that should be eliminated.
His arguement was after 60 people less productive, women can no longer give birth and they cost more money to look after.

Guy pushing Eugenics started to try and debate as he was backed into a corner, young guy came back at him and said well as he so in support of it could he then sign an agreement that he happy to be the first test subject as he could arrange his demise soon as the discussion ended.

Funny as F*** to watch this.
racedo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10th Feb 2017, 19:16   #97 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The Wild West (UK)
Age: 38
Posts: 1,055
Arguably, tongue in cheek, only men over 70 should be allowed to father children - as they have proved that they have no genes likely to cause early-onset dementia or degenerative diseases. In fact, in the ultimate productive society you might argue that a 20 year old's place should be in the mill, and not impregnating girls. When he turns 70, has proved his genes, and is no longer quite so good at lifting sacks of flour, he should turn his attention to reproduction.

There was a survey in the 1970s where elderly ladies were asked whether, if a girl had once slept with a black man, she might give birth to a mixed race child many years later. Apparently the majority of them believed this was the case. Reading Victorian self-help manuals about how to conceive beautiful children, you run into tips such as encouraging the wife to thinking of beautiful thoughts during the conception, or hanging fine paintings on the ceiling. There was quite a lot of debate at one point as to whether episodic memories could be inherited subliminally and other such codswallop.

Gregor Mendel died in 1884, but his work remained obscure for some time. The nature of DNA wasn't known until the 1950s. There are still lots of 'gotchas' such as epigenetics that aren't well understood. So perhaps it's not surprising that Harry Stopes-Roe's mother had such odd ideas. It's never struck me before, but if inheritance was so poorly understood perhaps the distinction between nature and nurture, which seems so natural to modern-day concepts of Eugenics, wouldn't have been nearly so obvious to someone in the 1930s.

Anyway, what a fascinating obituary. Thanks.
abgd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10th Feb 2017, 23:02   #98 (permalink)
jtt
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechta View Post
Whilst the basic concept of eugenics is laudable, i.e. to evolve the 'good' genes and avoid the 'bad' genes; the fundamental problem is that the people making the selection may have some strange ideas of what is desirable.
There's a much more fundamental problem and that is that there are no "good" and "bad" genes. The idea that there would be turns the whole Darwinian theory onto its head. With natural selection at work you can, if you're inclined to, say that some genes were bad once a species went extinct, but there's no other possible criterium before this has happened. Actually, genes that may seem to be detrimental may prove their worth in situations of environmental change, where having kept a card up your sleeve can be the saving feature. Species that adapt too well to a single ecological niche, loosing all genes that allow for diversity, are the first to vanish when things change.

If you read just a bit of what evolutionary biologist are working on, a recurrent theme is them wondering why some traits are not breeded out by natural selection even though they seem, at first (and second and third) glance, to be a liability to the further existence of a species. It often takes quite a lot of work before someone figures out why some trait, despite its "obvious" disadvantages, hasn't disappeared. And there are still lots and lots of such mysteries to keep many generations busy. I don't think you will find a biologist that wil dare to make predictions about which genes will be of an advantage to a species in a completely uncertain future.

The proponents of "good" or "bad" genes simply don't know what they're talking about: they don't grasp what evolutionary theory is, their ideas of what's good and bad (which are not anything that can be derived from that theory) are typically only based on simplistic misconceptions on the role of genes, and are mixed up with prejudices on what would be good or bad (and, of course, they themselves always have the "good" genes - have you ever heard a proponent of eugenics say that his genes are bad and thus he and, of course, his whole extended family should be exterminated for the advancement of humankind?).
jtt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th Feb 2017, 00:22   #99 (permalink)
jtt
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogre View Post
While health care and old aged care are wonderful things that show our compassion to our fellow humans, they are not "natural". Therefore we have deviated from the original premise Darwin made by skewing the survival rate.
Sorry, but I have to disagree strongly. From back to the times when our ancestors still lived in caves skeletons have been excavated of people that had been bady injured, to the extent that they definitely couldn't contribute a lot anymore to the group they belonged to. But despite of this the healing patterns on their bones clearly show that they had survived for extended periods of time, possible only because they had been cared for by the other members of their group.

For eons it seems to have been a trait of humans to care for the "weeker" ones in the group. Of course, groups under the direst of circumestances had no alternative but to leave those being an immediate liability to the survival of the whole group behind to die. But the governing pattern seems to be that it's inbred into us to care for them, even if they could be perceived as "burdens". And we didn't go extinct but thrived.

Why? Nobody really knows. Perhaps it's something that improves the cohesion of the group (a lone human is just dinner for predators, he may get some of them but won't survive for long) and it thus was (and maybe still is) an important survival trait of our species. (Some remnants can perhaps be seen in military groupings that proudly claim that none of theirs will be left behind.)

Succesful survival traits often defy simplistic assumptions like "one more mouth that gobbles up scarce resources is a deadly disadvantage". They can be used as a starting point for wondering "WTF is going on here?". But getting stuck with them without further examination is reducing a multi-dimensional, higly non-linear problem to a simple linear one. That fits those that only can count on their fingers and can't read (if they do at all) without moving their lips (but there also must be some reason why they're still around;-)
jtt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th Feb 2017, 01:46   #100 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 73
Posts: 3,830
Quote:
For eons it seems to have been a trait of humans to care for the "weeker" ones in the group.....But the governing pattern seems to be that it's inbred into us to care for them, even if they could be perceived as "burdens"
The Tlingit of the northwest Pacific in days of old had the custom of the elderly taking themselves away from the community and into the forest when times were tough and they were a drain on the community resources. From they way they told the story it was a custom and not something imposed during periods of severe food shortages. A community of impressive customs and rites.
Brian Abraham is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 11:21.


1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1