I've seen in my time, that certain social-econ groups are getting smarter and taller and prettier and the opposite, where certain social-econ groups are getting dumber and shorter and uglier .
for example, Would anyone want to kiss the precursors of Kermit or Miss Piggy? vs the decendents of Kermit's or Miss Piggy's?
-- Edited by longprime on Friday 6th of July 2012 11:05:42 AM
This video touches on taboo topics and what can happen to the people who talk about them anyway. They guy on the right, David Sloan Wilson, was one of those people. The good news for him is that he is a member of the scientific community so eventually, after only about twenty years, his views (that natural selection happened not only at the individual level, but also at the group level) are pretty much accepted as having been vindicated.
-- Edited by winchester on Friday 6th of July 2012 09:01:55 AM
__________________
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” – Mark Twain
In my opinion, it has nothing to do with slavery (or less to do with slavery than he believes)... just being from certain parts of the world give you a more athletic build naturally. I seriously doubt personally that "selective breeding" or survival of the fittest on plantations led to MUCH more athletic descendants. The thousands of years of natural "selective breeding" had far more to do with it in my opinion. However, I don't see anything wrong with acknowledging that there are physical, genetic differences in "races". It shouldn't be taboo. Heck, if there weren't, anthropologists would have a MUCH harder job.
and the opposite, where certain social-econ groups are getting dumber and shorter and uglier 
. 