At 07:04 AM 2/28/02, John D. Giorgis wrote: >At 09:39 PM 2/2/02 -0600 The Fool wrote: > >Large populations: > > > >http://www.observer.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,644002,00.html > > > >Something jumped out at me from this article: >"For example, the biologist Christopher Wills, of the University of >California, San Diego, argues that ideas are now driving our evolution. >'There is a premium on sharpness of mind and the ability to accumulate >money. Such people tend to have more children and have a better chance of >survival,' he says. In other words, intellect - the defining characteristic >of our species - is still driving our evolution. " > >Actually, I would argue the opposite - very intelligent and rich families >are more likely to use contraception and thus limit their number of births. > For example, anecdotally speaking, it seems to me that childless couples >are almost always fairly wealthy and intelligent couples. Indeed, when >one thinks of a "power couple" one tends to think of the family having one >child or maybe two. Large families - with five or more children, >however, I tend to almost always associate with families working in middle >class and lower middle class professions. > >So, is this "contraception differential" going to affect human evolution?
Anyone recall "The Marching Morons"? -- Ronn! :) God bless America, Land that I love! Stand beside her, and guide her Thru the night with a light from above. From the mountains, to the prairies, To the oceans, white with foam� God bless America! My home, sweet home. -- Irving Berlin (1888-1989)
