Anonymous
6/20/2025, 6:55:07 PM
No.81554441
>>81554328
It's purely a scientific basis, but technically speaking that result is the best for genetic diversity. You may not like the results but it does lead to greater genetic diversity not less, and in nature, survival is all about genetic diversity. Otherwise something can come along and wipe everyone out, as almost happened to us several times in our past.
Is it better for everyone to be like ubermensch Chads and Stacies, from the same limited stock with limited genetic diversity? Or if the population is generally "average" with good and bad alike, from a diverse and wide stock with large genetic diversity? If survival is your primary desire, then the second is the more survivable population.
It's purely a scientific basis, but technically speaking that result is the best for genetic diversity. You may not like the results but it does lead to greater genetic diversity not less, and in nature, survival is all about genetic diversity. Otherwise something can come along and wipe everyone out, as almost happened to us several times in our past.
Is it better for everyone to be like ubermensch Chads and Stacies, from the same limited stock with limited genetic diversity? Or if the population is generally "average" with good and bad alike, from a diverse and wide stock with large genetic diversity? If survival is your primary desire, then the second is the more survivable population.