![]() |
|
There really should have been no surprise. As we move
to ever more lower levels of existence, we find that humans and all
other life on the planet are really the same at their most basic. And,
why wouldn't they be? All life on Earth is ultimately composed of, and
has arisen from, the same chemicals found on the same planet. Life is
really just a reorganization of chemicals. What would have been surprising
would have been a discovery that humans and the worms were really very
different at the genetic level, not that they were much alike. |
Single celled animals to worms to humans and then beyond is the way of nature; which is to build upon what already exists through constantly modifying things via very small incremental changes. These very small incremental changes add up and cause very major differences in living things as they are finally expressed as fully formed life forms. Look at humans and worms for an example of this. To repeat: On a basic level, humans are very much like worms, but as we move beyond the basic level, we find that the millions of small incremental changes have resulted in a creature that really is very different than worms. With this basic understanding of nature and life we can then look at closer relatives of humans than worms, and perhaps start formulating some thoughts on the nature of man and existence, and in doing so, perhaps we can throw off the yoke of ignorance that so characterizes our present Dark Age, and the hateful race-deniers. Here are a few odds and ends, many of which you probably
already know, along with a little speculation. Perhaps, connecting up
some of these odds and ends will lead to a greater understanding as
we cogitate on man, life, God, and destiny. |
3. Gibbons, just to cite one of thousands of similar
examples, have a world population of just around 200,000 individuals.
These 200,000 individuals are spread into 4 species and 15 subspecies.
Man has a population of around 5 billion individuals and we are told
by the most zealous race-deniers that not only are all 5 billion humans
lumped into one species, but that we are all of one race. Contrary to
what the race-deniers want you to believe, the races of man are actually
sub-species (because, that's what "race" is), and they would
be developing into separate species given proper isolation from one
another. |
|
5. Many people are aware that humans have been on the
Earth for millions of years and that for most of that time, they were
relatively unchanged brutish creatures who weren't much more than monkeys.
Then, all of a sudden, there was what has been called The Great Leap
Forward. Almost overnight, a new improved model of man suddenly appeared
in Europe, and at the same time, the world moved forward. So sudden
was the change, that it has led to countless speculation as to where
these new people came from. Some have speculated that these new people
landed in space ships. Others say that they were the group created by
God as the "Adam." Arthur C. Clarke in his book 2001, gave
us a |
6. In the U.S. we have a myth of a Melting Pot. In fact,
as I have written elsewhere, the term "Melting Pot" actually
referred to the fact that at the turn of the century, various European
peoples were coming to this nation and were intermarrying and losing
their specific national differences. These people were all pretty much
identical genetically since they were all Europeans. What was |
One of the main ways scientists separate animals into different species is by the ability or inability of animals to mate and procreate. Thus, in our paragraph concerning Gibbons (number 3, above), members of any one of the four species of Gibbons, apparently can't mate and procreate with members of any of the other four species of Gibbons. The problem with this method of categorizing species is that its basic mate/can't mate premise is often proved wrong, and the literature abounds with examples of Tiger/Lion type matings. It may also be, if we wish to speculate, that humans are actually of several different species, even though they can mate between the different groups. "Race," as you may know is just a fancy term for sub-species in humans, and sub-species are groups that have diverged from the main species and are on their way to separate species status, provided, usually, that they are isolated in a breeding population away from the rest of the original species. Might it not be reasonable to believe from the above, that white people--a small 10% of humans on the Earth--were once on their way to separate specieshood, but that intermingling with others of the main species stopped the full differentiation that might eventually have led to an inability of the "races" to cross breed?
|
Looked at this way and with some knowledge of the spirit of the age in which we live, we might say that people can be divided into two philosophical camps. In the first camp are the race-deniers (or Blenders). These are those who believe that all humans are basically the same and that we should eradicate any "minor" differences so that we truly are all One People, One Planet. I have called the human sought by this camp The Tan Everyman. The belief in this camp is that such a creation will lead to less conflict in the world. Of course it may also lead to a bland conformity of the human type that is unable to resist any new environmental changes that may occur in the years ahead. In the other camp are those who believe that diversity
is important for evolution and that it is important to actually increase
differences in genetic types, not decrease them. It seems likely, however,
that such differences must inevitably lead to even greater conflict
as the genes of one type battle the genes of other types for dominance. |
Which camp is correct? It depends on how we view man, life, God and destiny. As might be expected, we're right back where we started. One expects that the two camps will each try to show that their views are the correct ones, because as humans we do have the power to influence evolution if we can convince enough other people to make choices in their lives that will take them into one or the other camp. Will the Earth of the future be peopled by a one size fits all docile TAN EVERYMAN, or will there be a vast variety of human types competing and struggling with each other and thus improving the species? It may come down to a question of peaceful blandness versus tumultuous improvement. One thing seems certain. Man, of all animals that we know of, is the only one that can consciously direct his own evolution through the use of his higher thinking abilities, and by making choices based on what he knows about existence. On one of the simplest levels, a human can decide, for example, that he doesn't want his family to be, say, members of the white race, and through the simple process of mating and procreating with non-whites he can ensure that his genetic line will become non-white. Some would probably say that such an act seems to incorporate elements of abortion, suicide and genocide all in one. Such mating choices are often forced upon whites when
they find themselves in circumstances where the only mating choices
are with non-whites. And, as the birth rate of whites falls, and as
non-white immigration to formerly white nations increases, such circumstances
are becoming ever more common. |
Is the Jamaica example the future of the Earth? Will whites be completely wiped out? Does extinction lie ahead for whites? Working against white survival on Earth, are the race-deniers and their bigoted pals who have created a culture of white death in the modern world, and modern mass transportation. ![]()
|
# # # |
![]() Non-conformist and alienated, Buck wanders alone through a post-American America seeking meaning and the authentic. H. Millard's iconoclastic, sacred-cow toppling essays and fiction on post-American America have appeared in everything from the high I.Q. society Mensa's publications to newspapers and magazines. Now also available from amazon.com and from Barnes & Noble. |
|