By Joseph F. Doyle
During the week of the 15th of October,
2006, the Times of London published an, article describing a theory
recently arrived at by scientist Oliver Curry of the London School of
Economics. The theory is that there is reason to believe that the rich and famous,
because of their mating habits, could facilitate the separation of the human
race into two subspecies - one genetically favored, the other (read working
class) genetically deprived.
By the year 3000, according to Curry, all races will have blended into a common, caramel-colored tall type of human being. This is the result of intermarriage and current health trends. Then, by the year 100,000, one subspecies will emerge as more tall, beautiful, intelligent, long-lived and symmetrical than the other, who will be, presumably, short, ugly, dumb, short-lived and asymmetrical. To quote Curry, "The future of man will be the story of the good, the bad and the ugly, with the possible emergence of genetic haves and have nots.''
This futuristic projection does not sound
entirely unfamiliar. H. G. Wells speculated on a genetically specialized race
of being (similar to some insect societies) living in the interior of the moon.
He produced other speculative projections about genetics such as The Island of
Dr. Moreau (wherein animals were redesigned to human status and vice-versa),
and the fascinating tale, The Time Machine, in which the constant threat of war
and the need to flee into underground bomb shelters eventually altered the race
into an upper (literally) surface-dwelling caste and a lower, subterranean race
that supplied labor, but took as its wages humans from the surface as its food.
And more recently, Aldous Huxley gave us the genetically engineered (Soma),
drug-vacationing version of specialized, integrated human subspecies that
populated the Brave New World.
But wait; is there something anomalous
about these notions? In the real world, geniuses and heroes and remarkable
human beings in general come from all classes and colors and notably from the
largest class of all - the working stiffs of the world. Benjamin Franklin, Booker T. Washington,
Thomas Edison, Albert Einstein, the four Beatles, Bruce Springsteen, Johnny
Depp, Brad Pitt and the rest of the general pantheon of notables from all walks
of life mostly came from humble genetic beginnings. This seems to point out a
lot of egotistic tendency in projections about race that divide intelligence
and talent into separate classes of races.
Not only that, but the time coefficient is
severely challenging. During these millennia-based periods of history, will the
human race maintain the exact same emphasis and direction that it has right
now, or did it ever? Let's take a look at what the earth is saying about that,
because the earth is speaking to us, rather loudly, whether or not we choose to
listen to it.
A foreboding indicator, released the some
week as the article on Curry's predictions, by the Institute of Medicine in
Washington, DC is interesting. The Institute of Medicine contends that although
there are health risks inherent in eating industrial-age fish (poisoned by
mercury, dioxin, PCBs and other contaminants), the benefits of the Omega 3s
outweigh those risks, if the fish are consumed according to government
schedules. The Institute tells us that we must stop eating certain fish
altogether. This information, also published the same week, is corroborated by
The Journal of the American Medical Association. If you want totally
pure, natural, Omega 3s derived from fish sources, you can purchase them in gel
capsule form. However, since we cannot live on Omega as alone, what is
happening to the human race's food supply?
It is only the year 2006. Is there going
to be enough real, edible food around long enough to keep us going until even
the year 3000, let alone the year 100,000? Environmental pollution is
increasing, and today 1.1 billion people lack access to pure, clean drinking
water. In the next 14 years, there will be another billion people populating
planet Earth, and both poles are melting. Given those circumstances, one would
think that if anyone were writing a futuristic, predictive paper, it would be
that mankind may very well have entered the age of its own extinction. We need
to make some serious behavior modifications to establish a more cordial relationship
with nature, our home.
For this writer, what I desperately need
to know is how can I get grants to write childishly absurd papers about
non-reality? I deal in the real world. Money is not my prime motivation. We can
see the possible end coming reasonably soon. Hopefully, it's not yet written in
stone. However, we are at the edge of the precipice. And, here's a good moment
to recall one very old, very famous saying, "You can't take it with
you."
Joseph F. Doyle
www.news-pirate.com