I guess what I'm about to say may be cringe and making a mountain out of a molehill to some, this is theory-crafting reality itself and if you dislike that quit now.
It just dawned on me that there is something many evolutionists failed to have noticed to explain something we never understood about the history of macroevolution.
There were only 3 types of predatory animals that could thrive:
- Those genetically predisposed to be shy/weary enough of the apex species.
- Those intelligent enough to be trainable (even if they were genetically predisposed to be not so weary).
- Those either via intelligence or sheer way of life that could operate aggressively and yet not conflict with the interests of the species or be too much hassle to properly make a bloodline go extinct.
Yes, this even applies to human beings.
Ultimately, what happened over time to explain the 'gaps' and many other things that make very little apparent sense, we notice that the only wild wolves left are either weary, trainable or sneaky (this isn't the same as weary, they'd rip you apart if they could they just fear groups of humans at once or don't mind a useful one that rewards them with food for company now and again but can't be truly domesticated).
This is a twofold rant/post.
I am saying that in all species other than humans, what happened was that brutally over time, it grew either very 'away' from us, steering clear or it grew domesticate to some degree. There is no third option other than the type that is simply operating sneakily and is that extremely smart it doesn't mess with us until our guard is down.
The third type is a significant minority of wild creatures now but 'back then' must have been the most thriving of any predatory species. What happened was we literally destroyed the apexes of other species, their entire bloodlines got thwarted. We know the 'scariest' like the dire wolf or the ancestor of the Alaskan bear AKA kodak bear. What we don't know is much about there side/cousin species at the times. This is because I predict the others were more ruthless and terrifying and humans instantly ganged up on them fast, eradicating them. The only species humans started becoming gentler and gentler and gentler to are those such as ourselves, cats so on and so forth.
Right now, there's not really anything in place for our species and hasn't been for longer than people say it (it's not a modern dumbing down and weakening phenomenon at all, it's ancient). The reason is that we are one of the only species where we separate the kind of traumatised military/intelligence types that can't form real bonds and are feral yet 'on a chain' all at once from the rest of the civilian population. We obviously separate the prison population from the general population.
What I wonder is if this is actually a slow but inevitable snowball, over time will intelligent 'overlord' human types keep reproducing with each other and the less intelligent humans reproduce making a larger and larger divide?
See, I have noticed that over time the difference between someone who is 'smart' or 'intelligent' and someone who is a 'fool' (think of a ruder synonym) has grown. People think we are in a more varied times but it's leading to the opposite effect. Take the rap industry, the world of science or just plain old Netflix series (not just originals). I have noticed that in the past, for instance, it was a miracle to see something near a 100/100 in showbusiness or any of those fields, if you did they probably were extreme niche experts like Einstein, Mozart or Hitchcock. Over time even in the last 200 years let along from Ancient Egypt and even the Ice age to now, you will find that there was less difference between what it meant to be 'god tier' and 'trash'. That's not because trash is lower but because actually medium existed far more.
Maybe I'm wrong but I am thinking about this from the perspective that if over time the most intelligent, creative and sexy people keep reproducing with each other, it will of course push the less intelligent, creative and sexy people to reproduce with each other. The invention of an entire system like Tinder and even the 'concept' of meeting your lover online means proximity and other factors will never enable someone lacking in several departments to reproduce with an apex intelligent or whatever being unless in a pure sugardaddy/sugamomma type arrangement.
As generations go along we are actually at a stage now where the poor, unattractive, uncreative and/or unintelligent will be pushed more than ever before to only reproduce with others of those traits. You may think 'that was always the case' but never to this scale due to proximity and pressure to have kids before it's too late being factors.
Eventually, not even through genetics but the sheer capacity for social networking to enable 'apex value' people to reproduce with each other, the 'elite' will actually have unironically become 'elite' by around the year 2560 based on the projection I see. As in there will be literally 2 'worlds' of humans. The intelligent, attractive, creative and yet sociable world and the ones still very simpleminded but they won't be non-connected until AI has totally replaced the 'simpler' ones in the world of the intelligent, attractive etc (can call them elite but I don't really mean specifically in a financial sense).
I actually do think that there is a 'progressive' lean to the elite but that's only because the most intelligent and creative will want to, not the most sexy and wealthy nor productive necessarily.
You may think 'but it used to be only rich married rich' etc. Yes, exactly... So if one elite was less sexy, intelligent, creative or pleasant to be around (take your pick) you eventually had no real 'apex' mixes. Perhaps I'm talking shit but I just realised the reason why humans can be so utterly stupid and it's because within our species only very few are outside the 3 types because even an asshole or bitch knows how to get by either via being productive, cunning or 'weary/tame' in selective ways.
If you really think the average wild beast in any forest or jungle today is that dangerous, you haven't understood danger. That's why the sea is extremely dangerous still. Even with all our seafood poaching and such, there's an untouched world down there. They had no equivalent to 'humans' not even dolphins did to the ocean ecosystem what humans did. Humans literally kill off the aggressive, dumb and/or too severely obnoxious members of ALL other species. Even insects today are far tamer than the ones people in the year 20 AD let alone BC had to deal with.
Idk what the point of what I'm saying is and nobody will really care but it occured to me that this isn't as simple as saying 'natural selection has stopped for our species, that's why'. It is still happening and now exists as the dating world.
