Natural Selection

[NuclearSilo]

lol dom
How is asking 3 genders an insult? Having 2 genders give more diversity to genes, so doesn't 3 genders?
If you know nothing about Ouija board, better shut up.

[Hostage]

How could a third gender, that is asexual, possibly add anything to the gene pool? It's cut off from the other genders reliant on it's self and eventually doomed to collapse, right? Correct me if I'm wrong here people.

EDIT:

**** it. I don't want to know....I feel a nose bleed coming on just trying to understand where the hell Silo is thinking from. -.-

[dom]

lol dom
How is asking 3 genders an insult? Having 2 genders give more diversity to genes, so doesn't 3 genders?
If you know nothing about Ouija board, better shut up.

Do you not know how natural selection and evolution work?

Do you know what finding an extra parent entails? It's already difficult for most species with two, but it is necessary because of genetic diversity. Can you imagine animals, like pandas, that already have a difficult time finding a mate to have to find a third one?

Not only that but your question is intrinsically retarded. If it were beneficial to have three genders then it would be that way, or eventually reach that. Having two genders is not a universal truth. A lot of organisms reproduce asexually or are hermaphrodites. Some species of fish can even switch genders.

With that said, there are plenty examples in the world of species that are not traditionally male-female. So the question you're asking already has an answer, unless you're too ignorant to know about it.


And I know how about Ouija boards, I just don't associate them with magic or spirits.

[Maniac]

lol dom
Having 2 genders give more diversity to genes, so doesn't 3 genders?

Why not have 1,000,000 people of different gender to have sex to make a baby. That'd way we'd have an ub3rly genetically diverse baby?

[NuclearSilo]

Because dom doesn't want to have sex with any human which is not female.

[.curve]

IMO, Nuclear trolls this topic for the sake of trolling.

[TheDrop]

Reproduction by single sexed organisms limits the amount of genetic variation and genetic mutations in the offspring. Less variations and mutations lead to less adaptations. Adaptation and evolution happen because of genetic mutations, the mutations that help are bred into the population while the mutations that don't, die out eventually. Think of it this way, single sexed reproduction is like a long line of inbreeding, with very little new genetic material.

This

[Barotix]

Natural Selection.
^The basics. For more information read (a) book(s), take (a) course(s), or open google. Your choice.

[evilpeta]

dude, imagine a 3 gender orgy!
how would that work? lol

[NuclearSilo]

dude, imagine a 3 gender orgy!
how would that work? lol

A produce with B
B produce with C
C produce with A

[Jaapii]

1 gender is not enough: u'll get clones and this way u're all the same & ur dead soon cause diseases will affect all of u
when u have 2 genders u can randomize, u don't have clones.
3 genders = same as above.. nothing more.

and by a completely coincidence 2 genders were developed. & becuz it doesn't have more disadvantages than 3 or more, it was kept this way.

[evilpeta]

dude, imagine a 3 gender orgy!
how would that work? lol

A produce with B
B produce with C
C produce with A

with humans, penises and vaginas and...? wtf?

[XemnasXD]

dude, imagine a 3 gender orgy!
how would that work? lol

A produce with B
B produce with C
C produce with A

with humans, penises and vaginas and...? wtf?

a 3 gender species would probably require 2 kinds of sperm+egg or egg+sperm+organs needed to host the fetus....

[*BlackFox]

OMFG, this thread is hilarious

[Barotix]

dude, imagine a 3 gender orgy!
how would that work? lol

A produce with B
B produce with C
C produce with A

The ****? I'm starting to think you're an idiot, true story.

2 is favorable for Human Beings in their current state and environment. 3 is pointless as it is obviously less efficient and optimal. Let me put it in terms you will understand, k.

Let's say you have two possible builds in SRO. Let's call them A & B. We will assume the cap is 150 and you can max 2 masteries or go all over the board. Every now and then a third random build appears. Let's call it R for random. If R is better than A or B R replaces the one it is better than. If R is not better than A or B it is used less often until it falls out of favor completely. Get it?

A =/= B

• If
  
  • R > A then R becomes the new A and the previous A falls out of favor.
  • R > B then R becomes the new B and the previous B falls out of favor.
• If
  
  • R < A then R is used less often until it falls out of favor.
  • R < B then R is used less often until it falls out of favor.

Do you get it?
That is natural selection in a nutshell. As simplified as it gets. Ask yourself this, silo; why was force ignored (for the most part) until the vital spots received an update. Let players be nature. Let Masteries be genes. Let skills be mutations.

[Squirt]

well, there was the zerg and protoss, but we found females much more attractive.

I don't know, Kerrigan and Zeratul looked sort of sexy....

[evilpeta]

and if R is better than both, A and B cease to exist?
lol nature is cruel

[Maniac]

dude, imagine a 3 gender orgy!
how would that work? lol

A produce with B
B produce with C
C produce with A

with humans, penises and vaginas and...? wtf?

humans, penises, and midichlorians obviously

[Barotix]

and if R is better than both, A and B cease to exist?
lol nature is cruel

Well, there is only 1 hominid AFAIK.

[SM-Count]

It started with 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 genders and so on. The 1 gendered are still among us in reptilian form. 2's got married and had kids. 3s+ couldn't get into the mood all at the same time and never had sex or it was such a chore that they only did it every decade, never reproduced, died out, and now we only have 2 gendered and 1 gendered species.

Basically, what dom said 20 posts ago but stretched over all the questions.

[evilpeta]

i'm happy with my penis, kthnx

[NuclearSilo]

The ****? I'm starting to think you're an idiot, true story.

2 is favorable for Human Beings in their current state and environment. 3 is pointless as it is obviously less efficient and optimal. Let me put it in terms you will understand, k.

Let's say you have two possible builds in SRO. Let's call them A & B. We will assume the cap is 150 and you can max 2 masteries or go all over the board. Every now and then a third random build appears. Let's call it R for random. If R is better than A or B R replaces the one it is better than. If R is not better than A or B it is used less often until it falls out of favor completely. Get it?

A =/= B

• If
  
  • R > A then R becomes the new A and the previous A falls out of favor.
  • R > B then R becomes the new B and the previous B falls out of favor.
• If
  
  • R < A then R is used less often until it falls out of favor.
  • R < B then R is used less often until it falls out of favor.

Do you get it?
That is natural selection in a nutshell. As simplified as it gets. Ask yourself this, silo; why was force ignored (for the most part) until the vital spots received an update. Let players be nature. Let Masteries be genes. Let skills be mutations.

loooooooooooool Baro
Did you just compare biology with sro? First of all, who said that 3 genders or more is less efficiency.
Ok, if you talk about game, let's talk about warcraft. There is 3 builds: str, agi, int
str win int
agi win str
int win agi

[.curve]

The ****? I'm starting to think you're an idiot, true story.

2 is favorable for Human Beings in their current state and environment. 3 is pointless as it is obviously less efficient and optimal. Let me put it in terms you will understand, k.

Let's say you have two possible builds in SRO. Let's call them A & B. We will assume the cap is 150 and you can max 2 masteries or go all over the board. Every now and then a third random build appears. Let's call it R for random. If R is better than A or B R replaces the one it is better than. If R is not better than A or B it is used less often until it falls out of favor completely. Get it?

A =/= B

• If
  
  • R > A then R becomes the new A and the previous A falls out of favor.
  • R > B then R becomes the new B and the previous B falls out of favor.
• If
  
  • R < A then R is used less often until it falls out of favor.
  • R < B then R is used less often until it falls out of favor.

Do you get it?
That is natural selection in a nutshell. As simplified as it gets. Ask yourself this, silo; why was force ignored (for the most part) until the vital spots received an update. Let players be nature. Let Masteries be genes. Let skills be mutations.

loooooooooooool Baro
Did you just compare biology with sro? First of all, who said that 3 genders or more is less efficiency.
Ok, if you talk about game, let's talk about warcraft. There is 3 builds: str, agi, int
str win int
agi win str
int win agi

He used SRO to put it in terms you would understand. In WoW, each build has its purpose in the game.

In life and natural selection, a third sex would not. Which is what he was saying with his SRO example.

[Barotix]

The ****? I'm starting to think you're an idiot, true story.

2 is favorable for Human Beings in their current state and environment. 3 is pointless as it is obviously less efficient and optimal. Let me put it in terms you will understand, k.

Let's say you have two possible builds in SRO. Let's call them A & B. We will assume the cap is 150 and you can max 2 masteries or go all over the board. Every now and then a third random build appears. Let's call it R for random. If R is better than A or B R replaces the one it is better than. If R is not better than A or B it is used less often until it falls out of favor completely. Get it?

A =/= B

• If
  
  • R > A then R becomes the new A and the previous A falls out of favor.
  • R > B then R becomes the new B and the previous B falls out of favor.
• If
  
  • R < A then R is used less often until it falls out of favor.
  • R < B then R is used less often until it falls out of favor.

Do you get it?
That is natural selection in a nutshell. As simplified as it gets. Ask yourself this, silo; why was force ignored (for the most part) until the vital spots received an update. Let players be nature. Let Masteries be genes. Let skills be mutations.

loooooooooooool Baro
who said that 3 genders or more is less efficiency.

.... Strawman moar. It was not a comparison it was an analogy to simplify natural selection enough for you. Nature said damn it. Name one environment where having three genders will increase a species chances of surviving and reproducing. Name such a scenario where two species are less favorable than three. That was the basis of my entire analogy you dumb ****. Yes, I'm Farking flaming you, shit. Someone give me my warning pl0x so I can move on.

[Reise]

lol How did I miss this one?

I haven't laughed like that in a while.

[NuclearSilo]

It seems that you tried to avoid the question why by answering "natural selection", but it doesn't help. You said that 2 genders give more diversity to genes, so why wouldn't 3 or 4?
Math proves the diversity, for ex:
1 Gender : genes A B C
So if they meet each other, the total combination would be 6: AA AB AC BB BC CC
2 Genders : genes 1 2 3 and A B C
total comb.: 9
3 genders : 1 2 3 and a b c and A B C
total comb.: 27

So the more genders, more combination possible.

[SM-Count]

It seems that you tried to avoid the question why by answering "natural selection", but it doesn't help. You said that 2 genders give more diversity to genes, so why wouldn't 3 or 4?
Math proves the diversity, for ex:
1 Gender : genes A B C
So if they meet each other, the total combination would be 6: AA AB AC BB BC CC
2 Genders : genes 1 2 3 and A B C
total comb.: 9
3 genders : 1 2 3 and a b c and A B C
total comb.: 27

So the more genders, more combination possible.

More combination = more chance for cancer

[Maniac]

It seems that you tried to avoid the question why by answering "natural selection", but it doesn't help. You said that 2 genders give more diversity to genes, so why wouldn't 3 or 4?
Math proves the diversity, for ex:
1 Gender : genes A B C
So if they meet each other, the total combination would be 6: AA AB AC BB BC CC
2 Genders : genes 1 2 3 and A B C
total comb.: 9
3 genders : 1 2 3 and a b c and A B C
total comb.: 27

So the more genders, more combination possible.

More combination = more chance for cancer

No . More combination is good for DNA. Do you even know what causes cancer, because I doubt u do.

Less combination = more chance for hemophilia, Tay Sachs disease, infant mortality, genetic disorder. It's a fact. Go look it up in your Biology textbook.

[SM-Count]

It seems that you tried to avoid the question why by answering "natural selection", but it doesn't help. You said that 2 genders give more diversity to genes, so why wouldn't 3 or 4?
Math proves the diversity, for ex:
1 Gender : genes A B C
So if they meet each other, the total combination would be 6: AA AB AC BB BC CC
2 Genders : genes 1 2 3 and A B C
total comb.: 9
3 genders : 1 2 3 and a b c and A B C
total comb.: 27

So the more genders, more combination possible.

More combination = more chance for cancer

No . More combination is good for DNA. Do you even know what causes cancer, because I doubt u do.

Less combination = more chance for hemophilia, Tay Sachs disease, infant mortality, genetic disorder. It's a fact. Go look it up in your Biology textbook.

More combinations means more genes, more genes means more needs to be repaired in cells, more repair means more DNA replication, more DNA replication with more genes means more chance for error during replication, more chance for error means higher chance the cells that are supposed to catch errors in replication miss something, which means more chance for mutation, which means more chance for cancer Please take your pretentious bullshit and shove it up your ass, thank you.

[Maniac]

More combination = more chance for cancer

No . More combination is good for DNA. Do you even know what causes cancer, because I doubt u do.

Less combination = more chance for hemophilia, Tay Sachs disease, infant mortality, genetic disorder. It's a fact. Go look it up in your Biology textbook.

More combinations means more genes, more genes means more repairs needed for cells, more repair means more DNA replication, more DNA replication with more genes means more chance for error during replication, more chance for error means higher chance the cells that are supposed to catch errors in replication miss something, which means more chance for mutation, which means more chance for cancer Please take your pretentious bullshit and shove it up your ass, thank you.

LOL more combination do not give you more genes in your DNA. You are saying that if a mother and father have a baby, then the baby will have more genes. LMAO You are an epic fail. Therefore everything u derived is also false.

Oh btw if a cell's DNA is damaged, the cell's p53 transcription factor initiate apoptosis so they don't under "cell replication". also jsut because a mom have blue eyes, the father has green eye, and their baby has brown eye, doesnt mean the baby's gene is damaged. I hope you learned abour recessive genes because apparently u didnt. recombination != damaged genes != more chance for cancer.

As you said, Please take your pretentious bullshit and shove it up your ass, thank you.