Homosexuality and evolution

[nebula]

For example, we crave sweets and salts. Those were in short supply on the African Savanna and thus those cravings were beneficial. However, they are not beneficial at all to us since we transitioned to a agricultural society around 10,000 years ago.

Not to derail my own thread, but I have a disagreement with this example.

I used to be a massive over-eater (aka: I'm a food addict). Since I have learned to force myself to eat less, and since I have learned to pay attention to my body's cravings and eat accordingly, I find that sweets ans salt are a natural craving that signal to me I need some salt or elevate my sugar level. I have also learned there is a difference between a true craving (body needs it) versus desire (wanting just becauses). The problem we have in our society is over-indulence. Cravings for sweets and salts are a sign of being out of touch with our body's needs and with having such an abundance of food we can pick and shoose what we prefer . . . and salts and sweets are so much more tantilizing to the tongue that - oh yes - we'll take the chocolate in a heartbeat! If you've ever had a sugar crash, you would understand the difference between a longing for sweets and a true craving.

[Gauntlet]

Thank-you Forrest.

If I may divulge further....

Scientifically, does homosexuality have any benefit to the species

It helps straight men dress better.

[Hunterpoet]

Thank-you Forrest.

If I may divulge further....

Scientifically, does homosexuality have any benefit to the species

Doubtful, unless the species is overpopulated. However, assuming there is a genetic predisposition for it, its not the only trait present in man that is not beneficial to us. For example, we crave sweets and salts. Those were in short supply on the African Savanna and thus those cravings were beneficial. However, they are not beneficial at all to us since we transitioned to a agricultural society around 10,000 years ago. Our feet, in fact, our entire muscular skeletal system is designed for running, much more so than most species. Thats a trait that was very beneficial to humans while we were hunter gatherers on the Savanna, yet is not nearly as beneficial today (it doesn't hurt, its just under utilized).

Basically, we spent around 200,000 years as hunter gatherers, and only 10,000 years or so growing our food rather than always having to hunt for it. We have yet to evolve sufficiently to this change in lifestyle, and are still largely programed genetically to be hunter gatherers. Thus our food cravings, how our body repairs itself, our activity needs and so on are not from an evolution standpoint adapted to our current habitat, diet, and lifestyle. This puts us at a disadvantage currently. One only has to look at the propensity of diabetes, obesity, and muscular / skeletal problems that we as a species are plagued with to see that.

A couple questions.

Based on your current understanding, what changes do you see in human physiology and anatomy once we have properly evolved to our current environment.

Specifically, what musculoskeletal problems do you feel are a result of our hunter gatherer anatomy in our present environment.

[forrestkc]

Thank-you Forrest.

If I may divulge further....

Scientifically, does homosexuality have any benefit to the species

Doubtful, unless the species is overpopulated. However, assuming there is a genetic predisposition for it, its not the only trait present in man that is not beneficial to us. For example, we crave sweets and salts. Those were in short supply on the African Savanna and thus those cravings were beneficial. However, they are not beneficial at all to us since we transitioned to a agricultural society around 10,000 years ago. Our feet, in fact, our entire muscular skeletal system is designed for running, much more so than most species. Thats a trait that was very beneficial to humans while we were hunter gatherers on the Savanna, yet is not nearly as beneficial today (it doesn't hurt, its just under utilized).

Basically, we spent around 200,000 years as hunter gatherers, and only 10,000 years or so growing our food rather than always having to hunt for it. We have yet to evolve sufficiently to this change in lifestyle, and are still largely programed genetically to be hunter gatherers. Thus our food cravings, how our body repairs itself, our activity needs and so on are not from an evolution standpoint adapted to our current habitat, diet, and lifestyle. This puts us at a disadvantage currently. One only has to look at the propensity of diabetes, obesity, and muscular / skeletal problems that we as a species are plagued with to see that.

A couple questions.

Based on your current understanding, what changes do you see in human physiology and anatomy once we have properly evolved to our current environment.

Specifically, what musculoskeletal problems do you feel are a result of our hunter gatherer anatomy in our present environment.

Those are questions better posed to a biologist or geneticist. However, given enough time as in tens of thousands of years or so, our bodies would probably adapt to our more sedentary lifestyle. The human body is fairly exceptional in the animal world in our capacity to run long distances. Our muscular / skeletal system is a just built for it. When you run in a natural motion, impacts hit the balls of your feet and are ultimately absorbed by your calves rather than your hips and knees as is the case for apes and many other animals. We are also able to cool ourselves far better than most warm blooded animals. For example, I can take my springer spaniel out with me on a 90 degree evening for a run, and after a couple of miles he is overheated while I am capable of continuing on for several more miles. We are capable of feats that few other animals are capable of. A couple of years ago 3 ultra-runners ran over 4300 miles across the Sahara averaging over 40 miles a day. That is longer than any migration for any large terrestrial mammal on earth.

Something else that is kind of interesting is that a study was done a few years ago where people were asked to describe what they would consider to be the perfect home place for them if they could build anywhere they wanted. By far the most common answer was a home on a hill, with a larger hill or mountain behind them, a close source of water, and overlooking a broad plane that was neither completely forested or grassland, but rather was a combination of grassland and widely spaced trees. Basically, what they were describing without knowing it was the African Savanna, and the choice dwelling locations for our ancestors.

There is also a theory that people with ADD are simply retaining more of the sensory / perception traits humans had while still primarily hunters. Its called the Hunter / Farmer theory.

[Axxman]

One person in particular showed tendencies as a toddler of being very effeminate.... this isn't isolated and a lot of "good" and Godly 2 parent homes have raised children who are gay.

IMO this type of thinking is one of the leading precursors for homosexuality...and when I hear people repeating that a child who acts one way or another might be a homosexual...well its plain insensitive, unscientific, and wrong....and worst of all it causes the child to doubt himself.

First of all...what EXACTLY is effiiminate or masculine? They are such a broad and generic terms. Does a boy or girl have to fit into a neat psycological package in order to not have adults wonder if they are gay now? Or...is this all just a nifty excuse for parents who don't want to be blamed for how their children grew up to be sexual deviants? "Its not my fault...they always acted gay."

Also...just because children from Godly homes have become homosexuals doesn't mean anything. Lots of children from Christian homes grow up to make all kinds of bad CHOICES. Homosexuality is a tool of Satan. He attempts to craft those sexual desires into people even while they are still children. It is our job as Christians to raise our children to make choices that are pleasing to God, regardless of their so-called effeminate or masculine traits. Giving in to the notion that a childs behavior is a possible precursor to their sexual orientation is nothing more than playing into the enemies hand, and re-enforces that sinful lifestyle when they are old enough to make those decisions.

[Murse32]

I could be way off base here and I don't believe to have the answers on this topic, but I hear some saying that people can be "born" homosexual? Do people really believe this or have they been deluded into the mind-trap that the liberal society would like us to believe. Of course if one is born a certain way, they can not be held responsible for their actions. But with that same logic...If someone can be "born" with a sexual preference...does that INCLUDE people who have a sexual preference toward children? If someones genetic make-up can determine this, we should not rule out these people. Yet what would we tell someone if they had these urges? Fight them!! your urges are illegal. Yet with homosexuals, we say, well, they are consenting adults...but that doesn't make it right. Likewise, they should fight those urges. If it is possible that people can be born homosexual...maybe they have a greater calling in Gods family. If they turn from God, they have sinned just like anybody else and need to be looked on as such. Maybe their calling could be to remain single and do missionary work. But because they have no attraction to the opposite sex, they mingle in same-sex affairs...maybe just for that contact and affection.

As I said, I have no idea. I can't imagine being with anyone of the same sex and have no idea what goes on in the mind or the heart of these people just as I can't imagine commiting physical murder.

[Lesta]

I didn't read all 8 pages, so I don't think anyone has mentioned this.

I read about a study (this was at least a few years ago) about sexuality in animals. The study basically stated that in a species is in threat of over population or is overpopulated the percentage of homosexuality rises, and once the population reduces, so does homosexuality.

I'd try to find this article again, but I'm on a government computer and a lot of news websites and such are blocked to me.

[Ovedya]

I didn't read all 8 pages, so I don't think anyone has mentioned this.

I read about a study (this was at least a few years ago) about sexuality in animals. The study basically stated that in a species is in threat of over population or is overpopulated the percentage of homosexuality rises, and once the population reduces, so does homosexuality.

I'd try to find this article again, but I'm on a government computer and a lot of news websites and such are blocked to me.

That makes no sense to me. the more the population the more chance there is for procreation.

....Unless boredom sets in.

[Believer1997]

I didn't read all 8 pages, so I don't think anyone has mentioned this.

I read about a study (this was at least a few years ago) about sexuality in animals. The study basically stated that in a species is in threat of over population or is overpopulated the percentage of homosexuality rises, and once the population reduces, so does homosexuality.

I'd try to find this article again, but I'm on a government computer and a lot of news websites and such are blocked to me.

That makes no sense to me. the more the population the more chance there is for procreation.

....Unless boredom sets in.

Uh.... huh? Boredom? well...how - I mean... what would

Nevermind...

[Murse32]

I didn't read all 8 pages, so I don't think anyone has mentioned this.

I read about a study (this was at least a few years ago) about sexuality in animals. The study basically stated that in a species is in threat of over population or is overpopulated the percentage of homosexuality rises, and once the population reduces, so does homosexuality.

I'd try to find this article again, but I'm on a government computer and a lot of news websites and such are blocked to me.

That makes no sense to me. the more the population the more chance there is for procreation.

....Unless boredom sets in.

Uh.... huh? Boredom? well...how - I mean... what would

Nevermind...

Never been that bored.