From: Zero Powers (zero_powers@hotmail.com)
Date: Sun Jul 02 2000 - 14:08:06 MDT
>From: Timothy Bates <tbates@karri.bhs.mq.edu.au>
>On 7/2/00 11:08 AM, "Zero Powers" <zero_powers@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Tallness is valuable from a military and aesthetic perspective. Most
> > females are more drawn to tall ("dark and handsome" too) males than they
>are
> > to shorter males. To them it probably just looks better. But
> > evolutionarily speaking a tall man would probably have been a better
> > defender of hearth and home than a short guy. Millions of years of
> > evolutionary training is hard to ignore, even when the lessons it
>teaches
> > have been largely rendered irrelenant.
<snip>
>If the perfect human is tall ("because he gets the girls"), you will
>rapidly
>have half-mile high humans.
Perhaps if "taller" always and unequivocally equalled "better." But
obviously there comes a point (or a height) where taller is not better.
Life would be pretty miserable for a half-mile high person, and there would
be *very* little evolutionary pressure for that line of persons to continue
to grow taller.
>Life is trade offs. We cannot, logically, all be tall. Therefore, we cannot
>be "perfect".
Perhaps relatively speaking we can't all be tall, but we could all avoid
being short which, I believe, is the point.
-Zero
Learn how your computer can earn you money while you sleep!
http://www.ProcessTree.com/?sponsor=38158
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:29:39 MST