The Great Evolutionary Race!!

Originally posted by Adam Poe
All along I thought that intellect was the driving force behind the advancement of society. I did not realize that the real driving froce behind the advancement of society is men and women ****ing.

This brilliant quote helped me come up with a brilliant idea.

What if we took 200 homosexual males, 200 homosexual females, and 200 heterosexuals(100 males, 100 females) and put each group on seperate bodies of land throughout the world.

Each group must build a society, which will bring "mankind" into the next great stage of evolution. However in order for them to do this, each group is forced to adhere to the following guidelines:

*Exclusion from using modern technology of any kind to build the civilization. Only primitive tools and materials can be used. This includes primitive hammers, pulleys, wood, rocks, etc,etc, etc. For those who are a bit slow on the uptake, this excludes cars, airplanes, modern medicine, etc, etc, etc.

*The groups are not able to leave the continent in which they reside nor are they able to have any form of contact with the other groups.

The groups consist of healthy individuals who are 21 years of age, and are of average height/build/intelligence.

Over a 50 year period, which group would have the greater chance of bringing mankind into the next stage of evolution?

Seeing as how there's an overabundance of Modern Evolutionary Theory supporters within this forum, I'll be expecting a lot of responses on this topic.

The race has begun!!!

The floor is now yours. I'll respond once this thread gets to 100 posts. And please let's try to make sure that our opinions are presented in a civil manner.

note* For those who are a bit slow on the uptake, "no contact" means no contact what so ever. Be it physical, verbal, through writing, etc, etc, etc. This means that the gay males/females can't go and say "hey let's visit the guys/girls..so we can make some babies." Nor can a homosexual male ejaculate in a bottle, and send it to the lesbians via boat, pigeon, etc..etc. Repeat: The groups can't have any form of contact with one another.

In 50 years? Nobody will really prosper faster then the other. The Heterosexual groups has the disadvantages of pregnancy's children and overpopulation though

But of course what you want to hear is that both homosexual groups will die out and that that heterosexual group will live on. Thats what your aiming at isn't it? Saying that homosexuals are inferior to heterosexuals because they will die out?

Hurray for topics made specifically to troll.

Originally posted by Fishy
In 50 years? Nobody will really prosper faster then the other. The Heterosexual groups has the disadvantages of pregnancy's children and overpopulation though

But of course what you want to hear is that both homosexual groups will die out and that that heterosexual group will live on. Thats what your aiming at isn't it? Saying that homosexuals are inferior to heterosexuals because they will die out?

This scenario also fails to consider that most organisms adapt to better suit their environment, whereas human beings have learned to manipulate the environment to better suit them, making human evolution a much slower process.

Originally posted by Lana
Hurray for topics made specifically to troll.

anyway, its always been a suspicion of mine that perhaps homosexuality is a product of human adaption to overpopulation. of coarse this is based on nothing, but neither is any of the excrement whob spews.

Originally posted by Fishy
In 50 years? Nobody will really prosper faster then the other. The Heterosexual groups has the disadvantages of pregnancy's children and overpopulation though

But of course what you want to hear is that both homosexual groups will die out and that that heterosexual group will live on. Thats what your aiming at isn't it? Saying that homosexuals are inferior to heterosexuals because they will die out?

The reality of the situation in my opinoin is that homosexuals will die but what we don't realize in this is that homosexuals might be born and add to the homosexual group and we are also limiting activity to heterosexuals.

Meaning Homosexuals can choose to have sex with a female and reproduce. The larger society gets we need to understand there will be change and not push that to the side. Homo, gay, *** whatever will be a part of our society even if you choose to "breed" them out.

Originally posted by whobdamandog
This brilliant quote helped me come up with a brilliant idea.

What if we took 200 homosexual males, 200 homosexual females, and 200 heterosexuals(100 males, 100 females) and put each group on seperate bodies of land throughout the world.

Nah, that's not fair, let's make four groups 200 homosexual males, 200 homosexual females, 200 heterosexual males and 200 heterosexual females....lets see how that'll work out.

or we can just throw 200 bible thumpers on an island, isolated in every way from the outside world. no tv, no radio...nothing.

come back in a decade and see that half of them were burned at the stake by their peers for being unchristian and the rest at constant war with eachother because one side views the other as unchristian. just a gigantic persecution-fest.

Originally posted by PVS
or we can just throw 200 bible thumpers on an island, isolated in every way from the outside world. no tv, no radio...nothing.

come back in a decade and see that half of them were burned at the stake by their peers for being unchristian and the rest at constant war with eachother because one side views the other as unchristian. just a gigantic persecution-fest.

Hmm yeah....sounds like a sound experiment to me...make the 200 a 2.000.000 and the world will be just fine....

Whob you got some radical shit to expose

This thread is valid because a 50 year period with a predetermined bias is a sound comparison to the actual evolution of the world which has taken million of years.

Whob, you never cease to amazing me at how you can always come up with new ways of failing to make whatever point you are attempting to make, no matter how stupid.

Youbdamannot.

Originally posted by Fishy
In 50 years? Nobody will really prosper faster then the other. The Heterosexual groups has the disadvantages of pregnancy's children and overpopulation though

But of course what you want to hear is that both homosexual groups will die out and that that heterosexual group will live on. Thats what your aiming at isn't it? Saying that homosexuals are inferior to heterosexuals because they will die out?

I think that exactly what he's trying to point out.

I got a better idea though. How about we put dog on an isolated island, for an undisclosed amount of time, full of homosexual men, and see how long it takes for him to lose his mind. I give him 2 days...

Two major things wrong with this scenario.

First of all, by banning access to technology and modern society you are not testing the original hypothesis that intellect is the driving force because you are denying the fruits of intellect. The next stage can only be achieved if you are actually in the stage directly below it, obviously enough.

Secondly, the test is only valid if you give the homosexuals the same chances as the rest- i.e. the opportunity to re-produce (and so therefore the presence of the oppsoite gender). You may then be of the opinion that they would choose not to but then die out, but that's a different argument; the opportunity still has to be there.

The second point could be solved by making it one island of two hundred heterosexuals and one island of two hundred homosexuals, both with an even gender split.

The first point can't really be solved- the test is simply useless.

Originally posted by Ushgarak

The second point could be solved by making it one island of two hundred heterosexuals and one island of two hundred homosexuals, both with an even gender split.

Well..seeing as how you all are a bit slow to the uptake in replying, I guess I'm going to have to break the 100 post limit rule and give my response.

Let me first address the argument which relates to the distribution of the sexes on the respective bodies of land.

The argument being presented does not pertain to whether or not men/women can procreate with the opposite gender, despite their "sexual orientation and sexual activities." In actuality, the argument centers around various sexual "orientations and activities" that are necessary in the evolution of a species. Or to clarify things..as Adam so beautifully put it in simple terminology..we're trying to determine if..

Originally posted by Adam Poe

...the real driving froce behind the advancement of society is men and women f***ing.

With that being stated, it is not necessary to put 100 homosexual men, and 100 homosexual women on an island together, since it is their sexual "activity and orientation" which is being subjected to and tested by the evolutionary process, not their ability to procreate with the opposite sex.

The second argument that many have put forward is one relating to the "time" needed in order to begin the evolution. Unfortunately, what they are neglecting to take into account is that time is irrelevant in this particular scenario, due to the fact that only one group of individuals is able to procreate while engaging in sexual activities.

The amount of time we give the homosexuals won't compensate for their inability to "procreate" within a 50 year period. Procreation is essential for those attempting to build a society, particularly since the average human lifespan is roughly 70ish, and most average human beings start to show signs of health deterioration which accompany age around 35ish.

The degenerative effect of aging will be of little consequence to the progression of the society of heterosexuals, since they will undoubtedly have their offspring perform the physical/mental tasks they are no longer able to fully perform themselves.

The final argument, and the only somewhat reasonable one that has been presented is the one regarding intellect, which I seemed to have inadvertently overlooked upon posting this topic. With that being stated, let's now assume that only the heterosexuals are of average intelligence, and the homosexuals(both males and females) are of gifted intelligence. Gifted not meaning Steven Hawking, or Albert Einstein, but rather..slightly above average. All other mentioned rules still apply in this scenario. Remember that this includes the groups not being able to have contact with one another.

The floor is once again yours my friends. Thrill me with your responses. I can't wait to see what "rational" rebuttals you'll come up with to go against the "useless" arguments I've presented..😉

still with only 200 straights it won't be long before inbreading starts to take place...

"With that being stated, it is not necessary to put 100 homosexual men, and 100 homosexual women on an island together, since it is their sexual "activity and orientation" which is being subjected to and tested by the evolutionary process, not their ability to procreate with the opposite sex."

Then your test is still entirely invalid because without the opportunity to create a new generation there IS no evolutionary process. Evolution is a generational phenomenon.

Come up with a valid and intelligent test and people will play. Else you are simply wasting time. Each group MUST have equal opportunity to procreate.

And meanwhile, with your technology ban, you are still not testing the intellectual side. I'll repeat again, if you don't have the fruits of intellect available, then you are not testing whteher we can reach the 'next stage'. You are testing if the groups can reach a statge that was already reached millennia ago.

Any test such as this to see if humans can evolve now via intellectual means must have access to all modern technology, else the answer is clearly no.

The question should be whether Humans can evolve intellectually NOW, not whether they could in a half-assed attempt to re-create a situation of millions of years ago that does not even bear any resemblance to any form of realistic situation in which homosexuality might be present.

Not that I care a great deal anyway. I am a believer in Mark Renton's words- "We are heterosexual by default, not by design." This kind of test assumes that sexuality is an digital status, on or off, one or the other. It's not, it is a spectrum, a very wide spectrum that people exist at varying points along, from fully heterosexual at one end to fully homosexual on the other. This kind of test becomes completel irrelevant once you see things like this; your position on the sexual orientation scale is one of many complex factors in a person's make up and cannot be analysed for validity with a schoolboy test like this.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
..without the opportunity to create a new generation there IS no evolutionary process. Evolution is a generational phenomenon.

Come up with a valid and intelligent test and people will play. Else you are simply wasting time. Each group MUST have equal opportunity to procreate.

You're still missing the ball on this one Ush, the argument presented is not trying to test a man or women's "ability" to procreate, as stated before.

It has to do with how one's "sexual behavior" relates to the evolutionary process. But thank you for proving my point, homosexuality is not conducive to the evolution of a society, due to the inability of homosexuals to produce offspring during sexual intercourse.

So case in point, as you/others have alluded to...the real driving force behind the advancement of a society is indeed "men and women f*cking." Despite how intelligent a society might be, if it does not allow for procreation, then it is not going to evolve.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
And meanwhile, with your technology ban, you are still not testing the intellectual side. I'll repeat again, if you don't have the fruits of intellect available, then you are not testing whteher we can reach the 'next stage'. You are testing if the groups can reach a statge that was already reached millennia ago.

Any test such as this to see if humans can evolve now via intellectual means must have access to all modern technology, else the answer is clearly no.

Not true at all. As I stated in the previous post, the homosexuals are of "gifted" intelligence, while the heterosexuals are only of "average" intelligence. Certainly with all of earth's resources at their disposal and an intellectual advantage, the homosexuals should have no problem finding ways to build a more "evolved" society than the heterosexuals.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
The question should be whether Humans can evolve intellectually NOW, not whether they could in a half-assed attempt to re-create a situation of millions of years ago that does not even bear any resemblance to any form of realistic situation in which homosexuality might be present.

Repeat: The question being posed is "what is the true driving force behind the "advancement" of a society? Is it a society's sexual behavior/orientation or the "intellect" of it's members?

But let's say that we were to hypothetically give the homosexuals 100 members of the "opposite sex." How would that take away from the argument any? It would still prove..that the driving force behind the evolution of a society, would be "men and women f*cking."

Even in modern societies, the ability of a doctor to fertilize a women's egg with semen through artificial means, simulates the natural fertilization process that occurs through "heterosexual" intercourse. So quite frankly, even in modern times, "heterosexuality" is still the driving force behind a society's advancement.

So in summary, I'm assuming that we are all in agreement, that the advancement of a society, is indeed dependent upon "heterosexuality" whether it be through natural or artificially induced heterosexual means of procreation.

There that wasn't so hard to admit to, now was it guys..😉

*note* I skipped responding to the last part of your post Ush, because you kind of went of on a tangent, which was unrelated to the topic of the thread.

But wrong...

The evolution and continuing of society does not only depend on the creation of new humans but also on the death of those that are already here. To prevent overpopulation. China has a law that allows people to only have one child, because of overpopulation. If the world would become overpopulated we would need to do something to stop it. This is strange however because until this very moment Nature has always given us the answer. And it probably has again: homosexuality.

Homosexuality is just the next step in the evolutionary chain to make the human species survive, homosexuality does not want to create more humans it wants to stop it. By your own theory's of survival homosexuality is very important to the human race, its a natural way to limit the population growth. So if anything homosexuals are the antidote for heterosexual reproduction habits.

Of course if you would create isolated groups of small people then yes you theory is correct, but thats not how it works in the real world.