The Human Race - Becoming Physically Weaker?

[kola]

Steroids ====> I just solved the problem

 

[Brambleclaw]

Steroids are bad. And its dependant. Generally steriods are just adding to you more of your natural body hormones. Such as Anebolic and testorone. This is generally extremly dangerous as an overdose on such hormones can cause some very genuine bad effects in your system.

You should not take steroids unles prescribed

 

[kola]

Steroids are bad. And its dependant. Generally steriods are just adding to you more of your natural body hormones. Such as Anebolic and testorone. This is generally extremly dangerous as an overdose on such hormones can cause some very genuine bad effects in your system.

You should not take steroids unles prescribed

Oh lol i wasn't that serious

 

[Crayons]

I find this a fairly interesting topic to discuss, and I hope I posted it in the right section.
It has been said that the modern human would pale before his ancestors in regards to physical strength and capability. Has the Industrial Revolution and Information Age transformed us into half-pints of what our forefathers were? Anthropologist Peter McAllister seems to think so.

According to the anthropologist, a Neanderthal woman - whose remains were discovered in a cave in France and have been dubbed 'La Ferrassie II' - boasted ten percent more muscle mass than the average European man, and had enough upper arm strength to "slam him to the table without a problem.” ^(ref)

Many prehistoric Australian aboriginals could have outrun world 100 and 200 metres record holder Usain Bolt in modern conditions. These same aborigines could also hurl a hardwood spear 110 metres or more.^(ref)

In Ancient Sparta, military training for men began at the tender age of seven, where they were sent off to military schools. One of the feats they had to achieve was enduring what could be considered "pain-proofing" - that is, beating and intense physical hardship.

During the reign of the Roman Empire in the first millennium A.D, a typical Roman legionary was expected to march, on average, one-and-a-half marathons (roughly 63km, or 40 miles) every day, carrying heavy gear which could weigh up to 20kg (44lbs).

In the middle ages, knights were expected to be able to ride, charge, fight, run and crawl in plate and chainmail armour, which could weigh anywhere from 27 - 32kg (60 - 70lbs), excluding their weapons and other armaments, such as swords and shields.

Almost twenty years ago, there were reports of Rwandan Tsutsi men being capable of leaping or springing higher than the world-class milestone of 2.45m.

And what about today, in our enlightened Information Age?

While men such as those in the special forces branches of many military institutions - such as the British Special Air Service, the Russian Spetsnaz, or the U.S Navy S.E.A.Ls - do us proud with the almost superhuman feats they achieve, it cannot be denied that, on average, the human race has deteriorated physically to a very worrisome extent. What do the statistics say?

In America, about one-third of adults (33.8%) are obese, and approximately 17% (or 12.5 million) of children and adolescents aged 2—19 years are obese. ^(ref)

Also in the U.S (not being nationally biased - all the statistics I've dug up seem to center around this country), alligators in Florida have killed 18 humans in the last 60 years, and around one human is killed by mountain lions every year. ^(ref) This is significantly less than what older generations of humans had to put up with. In fact, about two hundred years ago, warriors of the Zulu kingdom - the Impi - in Southern Africa were expected to prove their worth by killing a dangerous wild predator such as a lion as evidence they were men. This means aggressive encounters between man and beast were more than triple the statistics of what they are today.

So, can anthropologist McAllister's statement that "as a class we are in fact the sorriest cohort of masculine Homo sapiens to ever walk the planet," be justified? The scientist attempts to do so himself by explaining, "We are so inactive these days and have been since the industrial revolution really kicked into gear. These people were much more robust than we [are]."

What do you think? Is modern man really, as a whole, physically incompetent?
Be right back - doing a few push-ups.



PLEASE NOTE: THIS IS NOT REGARDING THE MENTAL OR INTELLECTUAL CAPACITY OF MODERN HUMANS. I'm well aware of how modern man is, collectively, extremely intelligent as opposed to his ancestors. This is about the aspect of physical strength and capability.

yes. modern humans suck. Modernity brought comfort. That will bring weakness and corruption.

Destruction of nature also started some kind of evolution to adapt to the new environment.


didn't see other posts because they are tl;dr

 

[The Reborn Devil]

As the above poster said, the thread is tl;dr. Anyway, I don't think what I'm going to say has been said.

I just wanted to poke at this:

During the reign of the Roman Empire in the first millennium A.D, a typical Roman legionary was expected to march, on average, one-and-a-half marathons (roughly 63km, or 40 miles) every day, carrying heavy gear which could weigh up to 20kg (44lbs).

In the middle ages, knights were expected to be able to ride, charge, fight, run and crawl in plate and chainmail armour, which could weigh anywhere from 27 - 32kg (60 - 70lbs), excluding their weapons and other armaments, such as swords and shields.

20kg and 27-32kg is nothing. The Norwegian military today has to walk around with up to 60kg on their back. I don't know how long they have to walk, but they have to walk really far. They also have to run and swim (not far though. These guys aren't Chuck Norris) with this gear without getting their weapons wet.

 

[The_wand_mirror]

By future, you mean billions of years right?
If the ape-human transition took millions of years and barely changed anything
(other than maybe 3% of the DNA, more brain potential, etc..), then I'm guessing
that a major change like that should take a shitload of time

No, there are already people that are 2 meters high right. I think that through genetic engineering and biomechanical technology a lot of things can be made possible in the future. More extreme things than you think.

I'm talking about 1000-2000 years into the future. Don't forget things like quantum computers.

 

[Crazed_seal2]

No, there are already people that are 2 meters high right. I think that through genetic engineering and biomechanical technology a lot of things can be made possible in the future. More extreme things than you think.

I'm talking about 1000-2000 years into the future. Don't forget things like quantum computers.

If we manage to survive till then...

 

[RiotZ]

No, there are already people that are 2 meters high right. I think that through genetic engineering and biomechanical technology a lot of things can be made possible in the future. More extreme things than you think.

I'm talking about 1000-2000 years into the future. Don't forget things like quantum computers.

Biological Engineering is something I'm not a big fan of, they have already started doing it to food, which in a lot of cases breeds, and provides nutrients for Cancer and other serious ails. MSG has already been proven to cause brain-cell death. Hopefully we will know what the fuck we are doing in 1000-2000 years, (I think bio engineering will take off long before that), that is the world doesn't end on December 26th 2012.

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

That's where cattle mutilations go, to weird experiments mixtures of animals, sometimes involving human.. You'd think they could come up with some hybridizng to make future humans more healthy..

 

[RiotZ]

That's where cattle mutilations go, to weird experiments mixtures of animals, sometimes involving human.. You'd think they could come up with some hybridizng to make future humans more healthy..

Yeah, it ends up making us unhealthier.

 

[The Reborn Devil]

One of the reasons we aren't altering humans in some way to make us better is because someone *cough*religious people*cough* don't want us to play *cough*god*cough*.

 

[Brambleclaw]

The_Reborn_Devil, actually before you start having a go at religious people> They are simply a minority who don't want testing on humans. There is a vast majority who believe due to ethical issues testing on humans is wrong. I.E Dolly=hundreds of dead malformed creatures. A human clone would be the same.

Or when testing on humans you would create hideous creatures. Especially with the genes in a human which give it intelligence. They don't have a clue what they could end up with. There is a desired result. And 1000 other different possible results.

Testing on humans will never be acceptable in a free society due to these reasons.

Although they may be conducted anyway in secret. I do not know.

For now the last time there was any widespread genetic selection, was around 1930-1950. When not only Hitler but so Did america start questioning Darwins theories and how far they could go with humans. Hitler started things like the Aryan race, and tesing on people. While america tested also on humans like HItler, But without the Aryan race segreation part or advocation against jewish people.

(Please cough* Racist* Cough* Feell free to push other peoples religion into the dirt. And blame them for issues not everyone agree's with)

I am not religious, but i believe blaming them for something they are not a major part of is wrong.


And we have already played god many times Reborn. So i doubt religious people give a f anymore. Most religious people do not preach to other people about believe this believe that. This is subject just to the fair few.

 

[Direfury]

Or we could just test on that small minority of religious nutcases. Then they're not a factor in the advancement of whatever sinful things we're developing.

You know the ones I mean, that would call cheese a sinful devil food.

 

[Brambleclaw]

I will just comtemplate your agressiveness towards people of other religions and reply with 4 words.

Science is a religion!

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

^
Traditional Science is a religion!

Fixed to be true. In the past if you thought and suggested differently than religion, like that the world is not flat, that the world is not in the center of the universe, you would be laughed at and sent at the stake.

Today science is just a replacement of the old program called religion and now is like insisting on their own theories like about the human origin, about space, about dinosaur extinction, the bermuda triangle, etc. It just has this program called GLOBAL ACCEPTANCE and if you make an alternative theory or explanation when there is proof to suggest other explanations, you are mocked at, it is a religion in that meaning called 'agenda' or 'program'.

 

[Brambleclaw]

No i mean science is a religion not traditional all science. Science is based of imperical observation and reasoning.

The way we observe things comes from a 3d matrix which we create in our mind for a true feel of depth perception. This is created from the stimulation of certain things in our eyes/effectively messages sent from our eyes to our brain to create an image. But our mind is what creates the image not our eyes. Our eyes simply react to light.

That is why they have invented a blind age which uses a camera and sends the image through your tongue. Its a learning curve but works quite efficiantly.

So due to the fact everything we see, is an altered perception of the truth and we can never prove that something is or not there Or in that form. Even if we were blind, again our audio receptors send "messages" to our brain to tell us something about the information its collected from whichi our brain then works out the sound. Or say with our Hands and the sense of feeling is pressure receptors.

So to this point all our senses are based of our CNS, Central nervous system. And our Brain helps create an image for everything, or a sound or etc. Which we can replay in our mind, through certain messages/chemicals or electrostatic stimulai. Through our mind. Although some times not as strong as direct we can still replay these feelings.

This is why we can remember a tune because we stored the information. This perception of a song was then stored from the creation from the information sent from audioreceptors. Then our brain formed a sound. We can create a sound using speakers, but we have to recreate everything in our brain to hear/see it.

We figure things out and logical and spatial problems with our brain.

Everything we do is affected by our perception. Since we were the ones who discovered physics and biology and science etc in general we are the ones which gave a percieved reallity. Anyone who did not shrae our perception of the world in this logical way, was either classed as MAD having a medical condition or Hallucinating. Drugs can cause this and induce hallucinations by affecting this transfer of information and recreation in our mind.


This is why i say All science is a religion, because we can never know what is true and what is not. For we percieve things at a single level, when there are actually hundreds of levels where a piece of data could be percieved. The only way of knowing truth is the collectivity of multiple levels of sight and sense, or a form of PURE DATA> this could never be collected in a concious such as ours, and i cannot fathom how you would do this anyway. Although we can record pure data to a certain quallity of sound with say a microphone, which had multi level senses(Would have to be designed by a number of creatures at a number of levels of perceptions), but then again since we designed it, it may only replicate the sounds which we can use to recreate an image.

So that there is less of the mind rebuilding an image as it is sent in a more readable language for our brain. Who knows? I sure don't? No one can know? Is there any point in this?

Anyway this theory is named Variable Logic. And i believe that although it inuendoes on itself in a cruel irony that it will always be there without definitive proof we see the truth.

This is why is broaden it to a general all science all knowledge scope.

However i also agree with the Global acceptance problems which we have. One of the bigger problems being that Physics has become a joke in todays world.

It began with Sensible as humans percieved it arguments and predictions and theories and proof behind them. Now it has migrated into stupid physics. Such as Quantum physics (And the copehagan view of theory). It was all stupid complicated math and no mechanics. They explained floor in there already wacky theories, with more far out explanations, including such things DECOHERANCE, from which there are literally an infinitie amount of universes, and humans by observing something causes a collapse of one of the universes into ours, knocking at a random change an electron into existance at a point in this universe.

Which is pretty much like saying, Hey look God made us all, but where we are gods, because obviously since we observed something we also therefore caused an event.

But this wall dissproved with Schoendingers cat theory (Advocatly rejected for uknown reasons and replied too with stupid arguments which still didnt prove how the cat would die since quantum physics stated that wether it would exist or not, not wether it would contain life)

And 2ndly, the simple idea put forward by einstein to do with 2 particles, i forge the name of them and the theory name. But basically there are 2 particles which exist with opposite charge which burst out in random direction. And can go on at high speeds, after a certain reaction i forget of, the two particles are opposite charge we know this to always be true. So by observing particle A we know the outcome of particle B. So therefore we have proven a Physical prediction without a observation.

With this Einstein also put forward the first proper defintion of a Physical prediction.



But we have delved to far from the topic, so maybe we should go back to the actual topic. If anyone wants to dicuss this further create a thread or message me. I am allways open for ideas.

 

[Elite Slayer]

The_Reborn_Devil, actually before you start having a go at religious people...

Error Report

The_Reborn_Devil.exe has encountered an unknown error, and needs to restart.

 

[The Reborn Devil]

Error Report

The_Reborn_Devil.exe has encountered an unknown error, and needs to restart.

Uz zo funneh man, u shud dafinitely join Merikaz got talontz.


Also, those who do support testing are the minority, not the other way around, and do I really have to mention the Dark Ages?

By the way, you're kinda contradicting yourself too with your long post. You say we can't entirely trust our observation, but you also say science is based on empirical observation as well as reasoning. Also, science doesn't rely entirely on us anyway, there's a reason for why we have advanced equipment to measure things instead of just "eyeballing it".

Lastly, science isn't a religion. A religion is a collection of belief systems. Science is the systematic acquisition and application of knowledge about the structure and behaviour of the physical universe, gained via empirical evidence through observation, measurement and experimentation.

 

[trolman]

2 months ago scientist tought light was the fastest thing,turns out it wasnt.

Where is your Einstein now?

 

[Brambleclaw]

There is no proof that the neutrino went faster. They believe it may have been a miscalculation or calibration of equipment. Or a field affecting it. All of these are highly likely.


I'm not contradicting myself in that way. I'm putting a point forward. We cannot trust our observations, and Science is based of our Empircal observations. They are based of what we observe.

We create equipment which views things in ones own eye. If it shows something different to what we expect or out of focus on a test run where we know the answer from previous test runs in our view which have given certain results then equipment will be calibrated to our perception and is therefore wrong.

We invent high tech equipment to measure things. We invent them in our perception. So therefore we invent them so that we can percieve data which given from them that is the idea of recording equipment. so thus in this form we have therefore recieved data in our perception recorded in our perception with equpiment created in our perception. So what do we have> A more accurate perception of a human....


I would argue that a belief is simply something that is believed to be true but is not proven to be true.

Science is believed to be true, we put our faith in science, but there is no evidence that is reliable to say that Science is the truth. Therefore you can treat it as a religion. The way it is gained is simply for checks for human error/systematic error so that an average can be obtained for a more accurate human view.

I would also like to highlight in my last post

If you want to continue this interesteing discussion please, message me or start another thread. This is the wrong thread for this sort of dicussion and is offtopic.

I would not like to continue such things. If you continue to reply ill just message you next time ^^

And sorry for the walls of text. I don't know how else to word it

 

[Crazed_seal2]

Chuck Norris can go faster than the speed of light...

Ontopic: Please don't turn this into another religion debates

 

[Brambleclaw]

Bruce lee>Chuck norris

Ipman was taught by Bruce lee. (both who learnt Wing chung)
Bruce lee originally studied Wing chung, before creating his own martial art Jeet kune do.

 

[The Reborn Devil]

@Brambleclaw, responded with 5 VMs (damn character limit).

By the way, the reason the scientists doubt the results they got with the neutrinos is not due to miscalculation or wrongly calibrated equipment. It has to do with time, because time is a real bitch. To do the test they need to know the distance the neutrino travelled and the time it took. Now, when they need to measure time accurately they use atom clocks. 3 of them, in fact. One stationed at the "finish line", another at the start and the third is used to synchronize the clocks. Now, here comes the problem: To do that they had to move the third clock from the first clock to the second, and whenever something moves a bitch called time dilation shows up and ruins your day. The scientists are certain that this time dilation was enough to give them the results they received (because they forgot to compensate for the time dilation, which can in fact be calculated. The GPS does this all the time).

@Below, TRD*

 

[RiotZ]

Bruce lee>Chuck norris

Ipman was taught by Bruce lee. (both who learnt Wing chung)
Bruce lee originally studied Wing chung, before creating his own martial art Jeet kune do.

I learned Wang Chung. Umad? Jk jk.

@TRB: I don't think religion can stop the eventualities anymore, more and more people are seeing it for what it is. The next two generations hopefully, will no longer be scorned by their shortsight.

 

[Switch33]

This article is funny. It talks about spartans and then knights. But even in the ages of spartans not everyone was a spartan. And not everyone was a knight in the ages of knights. The article is mixing general public with the elite as far as physical sports go. I mean honestly I think it'd make more sense if you compared olympic athletes, states qualifying athletes, and bodybuilding/weight lifting champions compared to older generations of athletes. Also it's rediculous to compare people out of their forte. Like I'm sure Usain Bolt is good at running, but that doesn't mean hes good at extreme heavy power lifting(Although he could be-- his main event is running).

Also not everyone is these statistical figures of 33% obese etc. That holds no real value. To be honest it's funny that people say stuff like that. Fat is more easily converted into muscle than anything else so to say that 33% is obese is more of a statement that we are more resourcefully abundant with our resources than before. Lazier/slower we might be but we are definitely more powerful at least economically and socially.

Also not everyone who plays video games is hugely obese or underweight. I used to be a gym rat day in and day out of the gym all the time. Your interests don't determine how fit your going to be they only appear to is my general understanding of it all. For example you could be really into eating healthy and because of it gain muscle at a quicker rate than someone who constantly just hits the gym a lot but has no real regiment. At least in this day and age we have some more solid conclusive information for the people that want to work out.

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

@Brambleclaw this could be true about some more uncertain things - the origin of humans, the extinction of dinosaurs, the alleged existence of wormholes, etc this is where science says - It is only evolution, it is only a meteor wiping out the planet, it is all a joke, every other theory is madness. While there is absolute proof that what science claims about such things, it does NOT show the full picture of any of these 'sensitive' questions. For example, there is proof of evolution but there is also no proof of all the phases that humanity has went into in order to become modern human.

Some people who are also studying such questions just as thoroughly argue the traditional explanations because for example there has never been explanation about 'the missing link' there has never been as solid proof of how dinosaurs became extinct, we just know that large objects have crashed into the Earth and so we ASSUME so happened with the dinosaurs. This is PURE assumption, nothing suggests it as a solid proof and because it became commonly ACCEPTED, there we go, all got to believe in this version.

However, you cannot really say that everything is just a belief.. Science has this 'agenda' or simply brainwashing about some of these creationism questions only to give a rational explanation about it. Yet, all other things, all that we know thanks to science is a FACT, are you saying all that we do, all that we know as facts are just beliefs and not real?

 

[Brambleclaw]

Oh good point the above above makes a very good point


We are already 100* stronger than the poor weaklings of the past. We have steroids, so yeh they can go die now. So i change my argument.

Our race will never be weak as long as we have Gym junkies

Imtor

To the above you do not understand my argument either. I see i have worded it badly i guess.

Its not micro or macro or dissproving the little things or the big things (Also i did say just VM me to stop offtopic

I mean instead that Everything We know about is flawed. Due to the things we think we know about are simply just perceptions. I am saying that Logic is a variable and percieved it is a relative term, to one concious it may be logical for there to be reasoning behind a levatating object, without anything affecting it. but it levatates because it wants to levatate, by sheer will. While what we common sense and logic to them may be there magic.

Ever imagined what the world would be like if instead we had magic, instead of physics?

Basically that. Or etc etc. So again thats my point.


So yes i am saying all that we know as facts are just beliefs and not real. There is no evidence supporting either side, so you can niether say its Right or Wrong.

For we will never know the truth.



Also Evolution has tons of proof and it is proven and it exists so i think what you mean is

Darwins theory of evolution is not proven. But have evidences supporting it. For there are multiple theories for evolution but Darwins is the only one we have which agree's with Human logic, and modern data aquired from Human logic

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

Like I said, evolution has happened but there are things that show, the early astralopitecus were rather different species. It should be fitting here since it;s about humans.

 

[Kazzo]

The Human evolution,No need strength wen we have Massive tanks,Guns,and Bombs.
"Now, a lesser person might want that kind of overwhelming force on their side, but you know - where's the challenge in that?"

 

[The Reborn Devil]

Actually, we know we originated from the monkeys. We share tons of genes with them. We even share most of our chromosomes with them. Our chromosome #2 is actually a merged version of two of the Chimpanzee's chromosomes (and the look of this chromosome was predicted by the evolutionary theory. That's how they found it).

Feeling tired so I won't make it longer.

 

[RiotZ]

The more we evolve, the smarter we will become, and hopefully the less violent.

A much superior (intelligent) race to ours, say existing for millions/billions of years longer than us, would probably be just as or more frail than us. The advancement of technology will always, always be superior.

The Gladius, the Phalanx, Gunpowder, Tanks, Longbows, all technological advancements that made their users so far superior to their ancestors and opponents, physical strength no longer became relevant.

The only reason Neanderthals were so buff, is because they were unintelligent and their only directive was survival of the fittest among their counterpart animals. If any species of animal evolved to be as intelligent as us, they would experience the same phenomenon.

 

[HFR]

Longbows

To be fair, you need a lot of strength to use a Longbow.

 

[RiotZ]

To be fair, you need a lot of strength to use a Longbow.

Not necessarily, just extensive training. If you want to get technical, guns don't require much muscle, in fact I recently had to tote my Remington 870 through the house because of what I believed to be a robbery attempt out of pure paranoia, and it was relatively light, though I'm substandard in the area of physique.

 

[-Derp-]

Uh... just some random medieval knowledge... the average longbow length was 4 feet or more (1.2m+) and had an estimated draw force of around 100-130 pounds. Today's "Longbows" require around a draw force of 60 pounds and are only around 2 and a half feet in length.

Yeah, they had some physical requirements, but some major benefits, like piercing heavy armor.

 

[takakenji]

once our space marine suits r releaseid humann can excirsie beter with Big sUit vry Heavy

 

[RiotZ]

once our space marine suits r releaseid humann can excirsie beter with Big sUit vry Heavy

Yarly.

 

[Crayons]

One of the reasons we aren't altering humans in some way to make us better is because someone *cough*religious people*cough* don't want us to play *cough*god*cough*.

I remembar dat non-modern peopel are religious.

Knights are christian. Pray = some kind of empowarmant
Spartans are Polytheists. At least they were in most of their kingdom's life.
Vikings fight til death for Valhalla.
The Cossacks were jews(please correct me if i'm wrong)

I think religion has something to do with it.


waiting for this

 

[HFR]

Yeah religion is bad and all. Now excuse me, I must go out and sacrifice kids because the gods demand it.

 

[Crayons]

Yeah religion is bad and all. Now excuse me, I must go out and sacrifice kids because the gods demand it.

we were talking about physical strength.

your post is invalid. burn it.

 

[RiotZ]

The Cossacks were jews(please correct me if i'm wrong)

That depended upon the region from where they hailed.

 

[Crayons]

yeah. I was on the process of removing that.

 

[Ilike]

Every human is different, some are stronger than others, some are weaker than others..
It's different.