Archive for the ‘Evolution’ Tag

Short And Stocky, A Fashion World Icon?

female-body-shapesNo sooner have the lardies called for discrimination against fat people to be made illegal when we are told women are going to get shorter, plumper and more fertile in the future. So it would seem the need for a new law will be unnecessary as there will not be any tall slim women for men to lust after to the disdain of the motherly shaped majority. Apparently its to do with the fact we have stopped evolving, the survival of the fittest has been replaced by our caring sharing society.

I think there may be just a small failure in the logic proffered by Stephen Stearns, an evolutionary biologist at Yale University. We may have lost the traditional evolutionary reason for the survival of the fittest, the need to hunt and fight but there is still the male desire to mate with the most desirable and sexiest woman around, its the survival of the fittest in the colloquial terms of looks and body shape. Now, is that shape the short plump type epitomised  by most of our women MPs or the Vogue cover model version, all legs, bust and red pouting lips?

I don’t think we need a major research project to find the answer to that one. If it were the former the fashion industry would not be constantly pilloried for using thin, waif like models, to sell their clothes and cosmetics. They would be extolling the virtues of love handles, bingo wings and thunder thighs. If men do have any influence in the matter then we face a future where all women will look like Elle Macpherson¬†and her coterie of super models. But then we would probably face extinction as they would lust after all the good looking men and they all tend to be gay.

A Darwinian Dilemma

The hundredth anniversary of Charles Darwin’s birth has brought the debate on evolution verses creation to the fore. Several programmes and features have rerun the arguments raised at the time the Origin of the Species was published. The TV series ‘The History of Christianity’ dedicated a whole programme to the relationship between science and Christianity and raised some interesting points and modern thinking on the subject.

At one extreme is the biologist Richard Dawkins who’s book The God Delusion sets out to prove the non existence of a divine creator. At the other extreme are the creationists who believe explicitly in the Bible and state the world is barely 6,000 years old. Between the two are a whole range of views, many well argued and reasoned. There are scientists and members of the religious community who see no incompatibility between the bible creation and evolution and believe both are true. They seem to achieve this act of faith by saying each subject is either independent of the other or one is just an alternative way of describing the other.

However, one suggestion did catch my imagination as it reflected a view I have considered in the past. Over time we have developed the ability to intellectualise the world around us. This has allowed us to develop a deep understanding of how much of the world and universe works. Clearly there is more to learn but progress is surprisingly fast and scientific discoveries are pushing back the boundaries all the time. I believe the factor limiting progress is the limitations of our own ability to understand the emerging world of subjects such as quantum mechanics. Until we have evolved a greater mental capacity the answers to many fundamental questions, including the issue of a divine being, will elude us. Give it a thousand years or more and we might just find out which view of the spiritual world was correct.