So as not to get extinct .. Why scientists think of intervention to stop human development?

science and technology

In his theory of human evolution Darwin has revealed that evolution is always positive, but the fact that evolution can be harmful is why the medical community is constantly trying to control it and reject the idea of ​​surrendering to nature.

According to the British newspaper The Independent, evolution stems from the organism's ability to transfer and transform its genes over time. When our DNA turns, it moves to natural selection, the process by which mutations in species are "best suited" to the environment, while The "least appropriate" mutations die for the surrounding environment, controlling everything around us, from the length of giraffes' necks to the shape of shark fins.

The risk is that those with less adaptive changes to the environment could be dying from hunger, disease and drought, leaving the average age between 30 and 40 years old.

According to data on human diversity, we have become 600 species only more than 100,000 years ago, and humanity continues to develop to this day. People are still dying from disease and starving because of the deprivation of unequal societies and the lack of food and medicine. We are still at the mercy of natural selection, The least moral way to grow.

Some of us deplore this harsh reality and feel compassion for the weak, and it can be said that this creates a moral obligation to stop the development of the human race strongly.

The only way to do this is to rely on the results of scientific research. The best thing scientists have done is to be free from the constraints of evolution. This means that we need genetically modified foods to avoid hunger and vaccines for disease prevention. We also need some modified supplements to make sure that The food we plant can be consumed safely before it is spoiled and this is an important consideration for increasing the population.

Related topics