Evolution to Create Upper and Under Genetic ClassesAn Angry Rant by Morbid MisanthropeRecently, a theoretical evolutionist, probably from Europe, predicted that in the next 100,000 years or so, humanity will be divided into two sub-species. In the year 3000 (or 3001, to be more ironic in a sci-fi kind of way), the human race will reach its peak before declining due to high-definition television and extremely intelligent TIVO units. At this point, people will be much more careful when deciding who they breed with, or in the evolutionary theorist’s words, '...knock sloppy genetic boots with'.
This, in turn, will eventually lead to the creation of upper and under genetic classes. The upper genetic class will be buff, intelligent, tall, healthy, and creative, and have totally suave British accents, while the under genetic class will be ugly, dumb, short, squat, goblin-like creatures who will regularly appear on the future’s equivalent of The Maury Povich Show.
This is a complicated and potentially bleak picture of humanity's future to be sure, and already differing views are circulating throughout the worldwide scientific community.
Dr. Theodore Terwilliger, another respected and probably European scientist, sees many flaws in the upper and under genetic class system of evolutionary futurity.
'It is quite obvious to me, yes, that due to the great amount of indiscriminate breeding going on currently, the advent of a so-called
upper genetic class is quite unlikely. In fact, you see, it is much more likely that evolution will eventually bring about an entire, planet-wide population of identical hermaphrodites with genitals for hands. Bloody hell, everybody's screwing everybody, anyway...'
As can be expected, professional scientists and evolutionary theorists aren't the only people ready to contest this prediction of human evolution. The Pope's personal court jester/scientific advisor believes that in the future 'everyone will look like the blonde-haired, blue-eyed Jesus of the Catholic Bible', so long as 'sexually transmitted diseases don't kill everyone first'.
Commander Voltnar Zirconium, current leader of the Unarius Academy of Science, says that this evolutionary split will never occur 'because when humans have collectively reached the perfect level on the evolutionary ladder, our space brothers will come to earth in their ships and take us across the universe, time, and space, enlightening us mentally, physically, and spiritually. So, as you can see', Zirconium continues, 'the idea that there will be an upper and lower class is absolutely preposterous'.
And. of course, when asked for a comment, Muslims worldwide began rioting.
While most experts are content to guess what will happen to humans in the approaching future, others are more interested in preserving the rights and dignity of the two emerging genetic classes. Gloria S. Bingham from the ACLU and Fight for Human Rights Regardless (FHRR) is already calling 'foul' on the 'inappropriate' title for the lesser of the two emerging human species.
'Calling the shorter of the two species
under genetic class is offensive and dangerous. To refer to that particular group this way assumes that they have less to offer society as a whole than their taller and healthier counterparts. I propose a better, less-offensive name for both species. Initially, I proposed Humanity A and Humanity B, but some of my colleagues felt that Humanity B would feel slightly less important than Humanity A. We had the same problems with Class 1 and Class 2. Anyway, we haven't been able to come up with anything satisfactory because all the politically correct terms imaginable have already been used. That's okay, though. We have at least one thousand years to come up with something'.
To get the perspective from the public,
Time Magazine conducted a survey to determine current attitudes and human sexual attraction criteria that might reveal humans' current evolutionary path. The survey involved people of all ages, ethnicities, social standings, political affiliations, and body types. Some of the results were astounding.
75% of the males surveyed said they would never bang any 'ugly chicks', unless they were 'totally wasted'. 20% of males said they would 'take whatever they could get', and the remaining 5% of males surveyed answered 'Pamela Anderson', whatever that means. It should be noted that one male who never finished the survey just scrawled 'Bros before hos!' on the survey conductor's clipboard.
99% of the women surveyed said they would breed with anyone, so long as they were 'funny', 'smart', 'wealthy', 'nice', 'had pretty eyes', and/or 'reminded me of my daddy'. The remaining 1% checked the 'I don't know' box.
Since its results were published, many experts have claimed the survey's results were either inconclusive or useless. Yesterday, a blogger who claims he still does his taxes with an abacus wrote the following:
'I fail to see how Time's questions were relevant to the issue at hand. Can a poorly worded and poorly filled-out survey really have any effect on the evolutionary process? And what’s the deal with the women who answered this survey? If what they said were actually true, I'd have mated at least once by now. OMG! WTF?'
Even though what the future holds for humanity is anything but predictable, at least we know that midgets, in some form or another, will still exist in the future. And for all of us normal types, that is indeed something to be thankful for.
The views expressed here reflect the limitations of the writer and not his hosts. Do not construe any statement made on this blog as an advice on how to view the world; if you require assistance on how to interpret your surroundings, contact a school in your area and enroll. - The Management (aka BD)
