Do you believe in natural selection

[Kwasaki]

3 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

Darwin was right. The theory of natural selection, means we all have to exhibit certain survival skills, to thrive in this world. Self protection is just one of those skills. Some have it, some do not. It is not a question of whether of not the theory of natural selection is true. It is a question of whether or not you have an inate skill set to thrive in this world. 

 

 

In what way do you define thrive when paths of someone's life can have roundabouts and they have to choose what exit to take. 

 

 

Edited November 10, 2022 by Kwasaki

[Thingamabob]

Not sure if this has anything to do with natural selection as theorised by Charles Darwin which was basically saying that beings who adapt well to changing environments will survive, while those who don't won't.

[NoshowJones]

21 hours ago, London Lowf said:

That intoxicated guy might have had a low alcohol tolerance and some devastating personal circumstances that drove him to over-indulge for the first time in his life - pray that you're never in his shoes.

 

If you lead anything less than a 100% perfectly healthy lifestyle then do you think that your GP or the emergency room should simply send you on your way?

 

A guy lying drunk on the road in the way the post says this guy was then no, I would not be willing to touch him at all, not because it was self inflicted, but because I care about my own health, if being a bit drunk and not full of vomit, I would help to get him out of the road, but that is as far as it goes.

[OneMoreFarang]

It would be nice if natural selection would still work...

 

 

[moogradod]

21 hours ago, Lacessit said:

I used to believe in natural selection. Now I'm not so sure, because the morons seem to be increasing in number every year.

Very well spotted. However the morons do not increase endlessly. To take one of your own favourite topics "Global Warming" ????: the undesired effects might be loosly linked to the increase of morons (who do not know what they are doing). So, once there are enough to spoil the setting strongly enough then a sharp decrease will follow. Thats the time when natural selection strikes. Unfortunately not only for the morons - that might be the flaw in my theory that just strikes me ????, so not strictly "selection". But I was too lazy to delete the post I wrote so far.

[Lacessit]

7 minutes ago, moogradod said:

Very well spotted. However the morons do not increase endlessly. To take one of your own favourite topics "Global Warming" ????: the undesired effects might be loosly linked to the increase of morons (who do not know what they are doing). So, once there are enough to spoil the setting strongly enough then a sharp decrease will follow. Thats the time when natural selection strikes. Unfortunately not only for the morons - that might be the flaw in my theory that just strikes me ????, so not strictly "selection". But I was too lazy to delete the post I wrote so far.

Natural selection is alive and well in politics. Everybody favors the politicians who tell them what they want to hear. A candidate who expresses harsh truths is weeded out in pre-selection even before they get to face the voters.

That is why scientists and engineers are almost invisible in politics, and also why it is dominated by lawyers.

[allanos]

It is difficult, if not impossible, to protect people from their own stupidity.

 

Am I my brother's keeper

[moogradod]

12 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Natural selection is alive and well in politics. Everybody favors the politicians who tell them what they want to hear. A candidate who expresses harsh truths is weeded out in pre-selection even before they get to face the voters.

That is why scientists and engineers are almost invisible in politics, and also why it is dominated by lawyers.

You definitely have a point there. A long time I did not understand why it is possible that unintelligent and people lacking compassion could rise to be the leader of a company or worse - even a country. But this seems to be the norm.

 

I am extremely curious how this plays out in some of the current world-shaping situations we are confronted with.

[Paradise Pete]

"Do not iron clothes while wearing them"

[Sparktrader]

13 minutes ago, moogradod said:

You definitely have a point there. A long time I did not understand why it is possible that unintelligent and people lacking compassion could rise to be the leader of a company or worse - even a country. But this seems to be the norm.

 

I am extremely curious how this plays out in some of the current world-shaping situations we are confronted with.

Politics hasnt really changed in 100 years save the odd person. Only people with big egos go into it. It's 90% spin and self serving nonsense.

 

Sign before an election "fight for families, fight for singles, fight for community, fight for jobs, fight for pensioners, fight for youth, fight for health."

 

That was the political sign of a candidate. Clearly all bs. Just use buzz words and cliches. 

 

Reality - vote for me. I want high politician pension, higher super, freebies and perks. Meanwhile every 3 years I will pretend to fight for you!

 

Politics is just a lying contest.

 

 

[Sparktrader]

15 minutes ago, Paradise Pete said:

"Do not iron clothes while wearing them"

They iron thenselves body warmth

[Myran]

Natural selection isn't something you believe in, it's a fact.

[spidermike007]

5 hours ago, Kwasaki said:

In what way do you define thrive when paths of someone's life can have roundabouts and they have to choose what exit to take. 

 

 

That is a very valid question. Some are good at dancing on their feet, seeing changes coming and adapting, when things get tough, when industry shifts, etc. Some are better than others, at taking calculated risks. Some just don't have any common sense. 

[bbbbooboo]

Hmmm….natural selection can be seen everday in Thailand , particularly on the roads, and other motorised activities. The thai authorities choose to do nothing about this too

[Hummin]

On 11/9/2022 at 5:39 PM, chickenslegs said:

Darwin Awards?

One of the international honours awarded to people who supposedly help to improve the human gene pool by "removing themselves from it in a spectacularly stupid manner."

 

Murphy's Law states: If anything can go wrong, it will.

 

Sod's law, a British culture axiom, states that "if something can go wrong, it will".

Many out there who risk themselves in stupid stunts out of boredom, but still useful resources during difficult times when brave stupid men is needed to do creative dangerous actions for the better. 

 

Anyway nature give and takes, so yes natural selection is still something in progress and will always be as long there is life on this planet.

[Tropposurfer]

Seeing someone laying in the road, paralytic drunk or no, and leaving them there to very possibly be run over. (knowing how folks drive here) Good job mate real good job!

 

[nobodysfriend]

On 11/9/2022 at 9:01 PM, Lacessit said:

I used to believe in natural selection. Now I'm not so sure, because the morons seem to be increasing in number every year.

Natural selection in the sense of Darwin's theory of evolution means that only the best genes will get the chance of reproduction . The survival of the fittest . Like this the gene pool will constantly ameliorate , resulting in further evolution ...

But , for mankind , this is not true .

There is no natural selection for the human species anymore by now , as can be seen in the number of global ... reproductions .

The poorest and less educated people have the most babies , therefore contributing to the decline of the ' human gene pool ' .

Overpopulation is a serious issue , especially in times of a possible dystopian future of mankind .

[Paradise Pete]

49 minutes ago, nobodysfriend said:

There is no natural selection for the human species anymore by now , as can be seen in the number of global ... reproductions .

The poorest and less educated people have the most babies , therefore contributing to the decline of the ' human gene pool ' .

 

Natural selection is always at work. It's just that "fittest" might not be what you want it to be.

 

[Lacessit]

51 minutes ago, nobodysfriend said:

Natural selection in the sense of Darwin's theory of evolution means that only the best genes will get the chance of reproduction . The survival of the fittest . Like this the gene pool will constantly ameliorate , resulting in further evolution ...

But , for mankind , this is not true .

There is no natural selection for the human species anymore by now , as can be seen in the number of global ... reproductions .

The poorest and less educated people have the most babies , therefore contributing to the decline of the ' human gene pool ' .

Overpopulation is a serious issue , especially in times of a possible dystopian future of mankind .

Agree. I remember an article from years ago in The Economist which said the number of babies a woman had was inversely correlated to their education level.

Religions have something to answer for too, given their liking for a high birth rate. Which demonstrates how anachronistic they are.

[Fat is a type of crazy]

13 hours ago, Sparktrader said:

Politics hasnt really changed in 100 years save the odd person. Only people with big egos go into it. It's 90% spin and self serving nonsense.

 

Sign before an election "fight for families, fight for singles, fight for community, fight for jobs, fight for pensioners, fight for youth, fight for health."

 

That was the political sign of a candidate. Clearly all bs. Just use buzz words and cliches. 

 

Reality - vote for me. I want high politician pension, higher super, freebies and perks. Meanwhile every 3 years I will pretend to fight for you!

 

Politics is just a lying contest.

 

 

Look at all the free stuff people get in Australia. I don't get a cracker. That's because there's more of the type of people that get the free stuff than people like me. So the system is working somewhat. Not sure what made you feel that way but the government does spend a lot of money on stuff that benefits a lot of people and, though the rich may get some benefits and concessions we don't hear about, they pay higher taxes and don't get much compared to the many who get the free stuff.  

[Artisi]

On 11/10/2022 at 1:14 AM, BangkokReady said:

Why should you care if someone you don't know gets killed, or why should you help prevent someone you don't know from dying if doing so is reasonably within your power and not a huge inconvenience?

 

The two are quite different.

But bear in mind, some people are a rse holes, and couldn't care less about anyone other than themselves and probably the very first to expect someone else to get them out of trouble if it every arises. 

[BigStar]

Yes. In fact, nothing convinced me more of the validity of Social Darwinism than reading this forum and so observing it in operation. Living in Pattaya I see it firsthand as well.

Edited November 11, 2022 by BigStar

[BritManToo]

1 hour ago, nobodysfriend said:

The poorest and less educated people have the most babies , therefore contributing to the decline of the ' human gene pool ' .

The poorest have always had the most babies throughout history.

Disease, famine and war always took care of the excess.

 

Edited November 11, 2022 by BritManToo

[nobodysfriend]

2 hours ago, Paradise Pete said:

 

Natural selection is always at work. It's just that "fittest" might not be what you want it to be.

 

I remember a TV documentary about a herd of deer ... It was mating season and the 2 most powerful deer of the herd were busy fighting it out ... while a younger deer was busy copulating with the females ...

Not the physically strongest , but more clever ...

[thaibeachlovers]

17 hours ago, Thingamabob said:

Not sure if this has anything to do with natural selection as theorised by Charles Darwin which was basically saying that beings who adapt well to changing environments will survive, while those who don't won't.

These days government takes money off some and gives it to those that can't survive which means they breed and perpetuate those unable to adapt.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, BritManToo said:

The poorest have always had the most babies throughout history.

Disease, famine and war always took care of the excess.

 

till now.

[Lacessit]

2 hours ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

Look at all the free stuff people get in Australia. I don't get a cracker. That's because there's more of the type of people that get the free stuff than people like me. So the system is working somewhat. Not sure what made you feel that way but the government does spend a lot of money on stuff that benefits a lot of people and, though the rich may get some benefits and concessions we don't hear about, they pay higher taxes and don't get much compared to the many who get the free stuff.  

It very much depends on where one sits on the income scale. The quite rich do extremely well with negative gearing, capital gains discounting, and family trusts. Perhaps the biggest tax rort is superannuation.

Maximum income tax rate in Australia is 47% including the Medicare levy. However, if someone earning $400,000 sticks it into super instead, they pay 15% tax, or even less if their fund is invested in shares with fully-franked dividends.

I am not envious of the rich, but anyone who tells me they have it hard in Australia with tax is talking out of their backside.

I have a friend who is a multimillionaire. He is quite proud of the fact his accountant has managed to acquire a Commonwealth Senior's Health Card for him.

[Fat is a type of crazy]

1 hour ago, Lacessit said:

It very much depends on where one sits on the income scale. The quite rich do extremely well with negative gearing, capital gains discounting, and family trusts. Perhaps the biggest tax rort is superannuation.

Maximum income tax rate in Australia is 47% including the Medicare levy. However, if someone earning $400,000 sticks it into super instead, they pay 15% tax, or even less if their fund is invested in shares with fully-franked dividends.

I am not envious of the rich, but anyone who tells me they have it hard in Australia with tax is talking out of their backside.

I have a friend who is a multimillionaire. He is quite proud of the fact his accountant has managed to acquire a Commonwealth Senior's Health Card for him.

Some fair points, and though I am no expert, I do note there are significant limits for superannuation e.g. you can only salary sacrifice at $27500 a year - used to be much higher - they made it even tougher for that for public servants with a defined benefit scheme but that's a different story. There are limits too on post tax contributions. Yes funds in the fund pay the lower rate but you can't access it till you retire of course. 

Centrelink bought in rules to see through family trusts, and companies, to stop access to benefits including health care card, controlled by you or your associates. So you would need to trust the controller of that entity.

There are many tax benefits of family trusts - the only justification is for farmers to pass the farm to the next generation but otherwise dodgy as hell - as you probably know Labour tried to do something in 2019 about that, and refund of franking credits, but the people spoke and Liberals won. 

Edited November 11, 2022 by Fat is a type of crazy

[Lacessit]

1 hour ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

Some fair points, and though I am no expert, I do note there are significant limits for superannuation e.g. you can only salary sacrifice at $27500 a year - used to be much higher - they made it even tougher for that for public servants with a defined benefit scheme but that's a different story. There are limits too on post tax contributions. Yes funds in the fund pay the lower rate but you can't access it till you retire of course. 

Centrelink bought in rules to see through family trusts, and companies, to stop access to benefits including health care card, controlled by you or your associates. So you would need to trust the controller of that entity.

There are many tax benefits of family trusts - the only justification is for farmers to pass the farm to the next generation but otherwise dodgy as hell - as you probably know Labour tried to do something in 2019 about that, and refund of franking credits, but the people spoke and Liberals won. 

IMO negative gearing definitely distorts the housing market in Australia. Some politicians from both sides of the divide are in it up to their eyeballs.

Call me a socialist if you will. However, I fail to see how having $5 - $10 million in superannuation is needed for a comfortable retirement. There used to be something called a Reasonable Benefit Limit, which appears to have petered out in 2007.

Resources tax is screaming for reform. The Minerals Council of Australia paid $10 million for an advertising scare campaign aimed at preventing more taxation of the gas and minerals assets Australians own. Best money they ever spent, it saved the mining companies billions.

Was the election of the teal independents a process of natural selection, from electorates sick of being taken for granted? Josh Frydenberg might not agree.

 

 

[Will B Good]

Do you believe in natural selection..........to a degree yes.

 

I naturally select the prettiest girl in any bar I go into.......and naturally get rejected, but I'm used to that.