Actually, the whole theory of selection is that some things are selected.
63 comments
Ugly is a matter of perspective. In other cultures plump women are considered to be attractive because they've grown up to think that it's a symbol of good health. So, if natural selection was capable of breeding out ugly (which would in reality prove that there is a higher power) then nobody would exist.
Sexual selection is being studied by evolutionists. The problem with selection for beauty is that yes, it happens, but the remaining population will still have a range of less beautiful and more beautiful, just a different range than 10 million years ago. Also, beauty is not the only attributed being selected for. Neither, apparently is intelligence.
It is difficult to imagine anyone being as stupid to the bone like JohnR7 appears to be. Keep grasping at straws there, Johnny, but sooner or later, you'll come crashing down to reality.
Hey, John, why don't you use yourself as an argument against evolution and the theory of selection? Sure, it still wouldn't work, but it'd at least be a whole lot more convincing than your current drivel!
Those organisms that are selected against (though I hate phrasing it that way, because it sounds too directed) are selected against based on their ability to survive in a particular niche, John. Ugliness is not a detrimental state (though, granted, some species have developed exterior physiology based on attractiveness because that lends them an ecological advantage). Besides, organisms that are ugly to you may not be perceived that way by other members of their species.
Now that could be true if not for the fact both sexes have ugly people. As it so happens ugly people tend to not mind other ugly people nearly as much as everyone else. Of course, once in a rare while you can find someone interested in more than looks (Sex I suppose), or so I've been told.
Aesthetics are not absolutes, bub. Beauty is relativistic, not only culturally but individually.
Ugliness is an utterly subjective concept. Nature speaks about who´s stronger, who´s faster and who´s more intelligent. For some people, ugliness is one thing and for others is other. Nature is not a chunky old woman with flowers in the head, so it doesn´t count.
So if evolution were true then ugly would have been eliminated by now because it would have been rejected for selection.
Ah, still having problems with that objectivity/subjectivity thing I see, Johnny-boy.image image image
To a male baboon nothing is more beautiful that a swollen, red, veiny ass. some animals do have a concept of "ugly" and "beautiful" but it's completely different from our.
Are you talking about all species here? Or just ugly women? You really are a prat.
"Ugly" cannot be eliminated because of wildly differing ideas about beauty. Plus ugliness can be compensated by strength, good health, intelligence, etc. It is not the sole criterion for selecting mates.
Yeah, and this is like, totally true, since I heard the Human Genome project like totally isolated the Ugly Gene just last year. And we all know that ugly people never have kids. Therefore Darwinism is a lie! USA! USA! USA!
What if the ugly have been eliminated and all we have left is very pretty and mostly pretty, but lacking a better word we call the mostly pretty people ugly, because they are the ugliest people remaining?
Or it would, if not for people who look past skin.
Or people like me who actively find attractive things that society calls ugly.
"Actually, the whole theory of selection is that some things are selected."
That's quite astounding logic!
What is ugly today might not be ugly to the next generation. Evolution takes many, many generations before there are visible changes.
Oh, and please stop this "if evolution were true". It is true, damn it!
"So if evolution were true then ugly would have been eliminated by now because it would have been rejected for selection."
Therefore on the basis of your Creationist logic ('we are made in God's image', and all that jazz):
image
Then your 'God' is an unimaginably ugly cunt. So hideous, he'd make even Cthulhu vomit himself inside out in insane disgust. Certainly a 'God' not worthy of respect, never mind belief. Compared to, say, Angelina Jolie:
image
On the other hand, if she is made in God's image, then (check one):
[ ] God is a woman . Thus your entire patriarchal belief system is destroyed.
[ ] Angelina Jolie is an Atheist. Thus God made her an Atheist. Who are you to question his will?
Choose wisely. Either way, JohnR7, you're fucked.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
