This group

"Opus" wrote

It's called natural selection.


I've seen "natural selection" used many times over the last few years to
help describe/explain how some people manage to stick around here, i.e. some
'evolve' to tolerate it.

I think it's probably a reasonably accurate model, just like some creatures
can 'evolve' to tolerate polluted waters that would quickly kill a Brook
Trout, some people can tolerate more ROFF than others. But any attempt to
make either 'evolved' creature, the polution tolerant scum dweller or the
ROFFian, somehow seem "better" than the "non-evolved" Brook Trout or human
creature that demands more a more pristine environment is, imho, simply
silly ...

Larry L wrote:
"Opus" wrote

It's called natural selection.


I've seen "natural selection" used many times over the last few years to
help describe/explain how some people manage to stick around here, i.e. some
'evolve' to tolerate it.

I think it's probably a reasonably accurate model, just like some creatures
can 'evolve' to tolerate polluted waters that would quickly kill a Brook
Trout, some people can tolerate more ROFF than others.

Wrong! It's not a model at all. It's what ya call yer hackneyed
"metaphor". Individual organisms don't evolve at all in the Darwinian
sense. Species do.....individuals don't. They live long enough to
breed.....or they don't. Unfortunately, not enough of them don't. Oh
well, that's life.

But any attempt to
make either 'evolved' creature, the polution tolerant scum dweller or the
ROFFian, somehow seem "better" than the "non-evolved" Brook Trout or human
creature that demands more a more pristine environment is, imho, simply
silly ...

Unlike this extended exercise in.....what?.....self-congratulatory
mindless rambling which we should all take seriously while nodding
sagely in the vain hope that someone who matters will be watching?

Yeah, that's gonna happen.

Wolfgang