Are we in fact, half breeds?

Post Reply New Topic

But this is the problem, you see: Based on fairly recent calculations, I'm assured that this planet is designed only to support around 100 million humans - or indeed, 100 million of most other mammals - other taxonomic groups have different numbers attached. There are over sixty times that many currently. That Aspies won't breed often, if at all, IS evolution, because there are too many humans for the planet to sustain, and the only way to solve that problem is to evolve creatures who breed far less often, and don't necessarily replace themselves. To complete the cycle, those that do breed are the strongest of the aspie/autie kind, and as neurotypicalism dies out through over consumption and inability to live in the wild, they become the fathers and mothers of the soon to be MORE modern humans.

Concurrently, the NT's, with their overdeveolped social skills, keep breeding, and breeding, and breeding, until no matter how many of them there are to scavenge resources, they'll all die through overcrowding. The irony of it is, that their social skills will be their downfall. Because they're able to produce children so quickly, and fly through often meaningless relationships producing babies on the way, eventually they'll all die of starvation. It's our job to see that at least some of us survive, when the numbers are equal, and then they'll see who's strongest

Or that's the theory anyway - I've not a shred of solid evidence to back it up, but it's a nice thought.

I see myself as a Half Breed in the sense that I'm part Alien.

Silentbedlam.....Go over to the "writing thread"...I suggested a story based on a "halfbreed theory",its about aliens trapped on earth....perhaps you will like it?.....Also,you might want to rethiink your statistics about the amount of humans that the earth can sustain....The recent cesus in US is 300million,I believe Japan has 100mil.I am pretty sure that there is more then 200mil in the rest of the worlds population.

I honestly don't think so.

Way off. There are only 30+ million Canadians, and in Canada alone, if you spread them out evenly, it would be less than 3 people per square Kilometer. Thats 7.5 people per square mile.

If you had to play Hide and seek with 8 people in a square mile, unless that was (very)flat (very)open land, you'd never find them all. Put it this way. if you put two of each of those people in each if the four corners of a square mile, you would have to walk 4 miles to get them all, if they were not allowed to move.

The whole world has 148.94 million square kilometers of land...
if I take 100 million and spread them out..

148,939,063.133 km²
100,000,000 people

thats 1.48 or 1.49 people per square km. If you were seeking a mate in that kind of population, you would be sharing only half your "territory" with one other person, and there would be a 50/50 chance that they were not the sex you were looking for, besides the fact that they might not be the right age, might already be taken, or a host of other factors. In short, your search for love might require you to travel 10s or 100s of kilometers... on foot, because there would not be enough people to maintain modern transportation.

Now I know they wouldnt be spread thin like that, but imagine how territorial people would be about eligable mates in a world like that. Why do you think people evolved to be so social?

It wouldnt be an aspie friendly place at all.

So you're saying that there might have been a group of humans in the past that might have had Asperger's that we might have evolved from?

I feel simulare to this. the idea is interesting.

I've always believed that we're the next step in human evolution.

Last edited by One-Winged-Angel on 20 Oct 2006, 9:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I just have one question though, not that I am doubting, but, why does the next step in human evelution have a social dificulty that may make it difficult to find a mate? wouldent that be an important part of evolving? its just a thought I had... again not saying I am doubting, just wondering what others thought about that.

I dont Think autism is a next step, or a previous one. I think autism is ancient, and continues to manifest because it is of outmost importance to human society.

I am certainly a half-breed. Half human and half something else. Not sure what exactly. I have yet to do more research on the possibilities and perform a full analysis on my results.

THe true cause of aspergers is really radical. WE ARE NOT WHOLE HUMAN beings, homo sapien that is. we actually are neandertal atavists. it seems when thousands of years ago cro magnon moved into europe and displaced neandertal they interbred. The neadertal genes were submerged.
All it takes is some irritant say mercury or fluride to cause it to remerge. the problems we encounter are because its not a perfect fit.

Personally, this makes the most sense to me, especially when considering just how new the diagnosis of AS is as well as increased acceptance and understanding of mental issues within the general culture.

People with autism are not a seperate species from NTs. I don't care how much you'd like to think so or how much it would validate your own personal mythology about being from another planet or being another species because you just don't feel like you fit in. Get over it. The most common dividing line between species is this: "Can they interbreed and produce fertile offspring?" In the case of NTs, Aspies, and people with autism, the answer is an obvious yes; ergo, people with autism are the same species as NTs. Moreover, even if this were not so, those of us with AS would not be half-breeds because AS can and often does show up amongst the offspring of two NT parents (I am, for example). A hybrid is the offspring of two different species; you do not get throwback mules showing up from donkey parents or horse parent.

acutally fertile hybrids are possible as in the case water and river buffallo or the occasional liger

acutally fertile hybrids are possible as in the case water and river buffallo or the occasional liger

Yes, and I'm aware that the occasional female mule is fertile as well, but that is an occasional thing. Unless the vast majority of the offspring are fertile, the crossing is considered infertile.