The alcohol morality of the youth

Ryan Rudolph · Post by **Ryan Rudolph** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 4:21 am

This is an exploration of the alcohol morality of the youth and why it is so fixed and difficult to shake.

First of all, from a genetic point of view, individuals that have had alcoholism in their family for generations upon generations are more likely to crave the drug at early ages of adulthood. This is pretty much a proven fact.

Now the psychological motivations are quite complicated. First of all, men enjoy drinking together because in numbers there chances of scoring a sexual mate and companion are increased while intoxicated because outwardly they appear social, fun, and positive, plus men feel antisocial compared to women and drinking with the guys is a sincere attempt at brotherhood.

So inwardly they really feel frightened to be alone, lustful, antisocial, divided, bored and all the rest of it.

Also man craves chaos and disorder and an alcoholic adventure is one way for him to superficially met that need. The male spirit craves destruction and if he is too weak to get psychological destruction through negation then he will continuously drink himself into a stupor.

Also Men derive pride through storytelling. They want to please themselves by telling crazy stories of their stupid adventures to serve as a source of pride and self esteem. Man will even derive pride through bragging about the intensity of his hangover the next day â€“ very absurd.

The male spirit also likes to create an identity using bad behavior, many men enjoy deluding themselves by constructing a â€œbad imageâ€ of themselves.

So there are many desires operating with the alcohol morality:

Desire for a companion/Fear of being alone
Desire for sexual intercourse
Desire for brotherhood between men
Desire for Destruction/Choas.
Tendency to create an identity using experience.

Not to mention the fear men have of being looked at as antisocial by family, friends etc.. I think all humans have an intense fear of humiliation/fear of being shamed and a fear of being labeled as inferior by a large groupâ€¦

Oh and also the jobs that we are doing these days are so hellish that we need to escape through pleasurable fantasies that will take place on the weekendâ€¦

Very complicated, there are many factors to considerâ€¦

This is why I am silent at work when the people around me are spreading the virus called alcohol morality, I donâ€™t see the point in sharing my values.

Itâ€™s too overwhelming for someone that isnâ€™t interested, the philosopher is interpreted as insane by the masses.

millipodium · Post by **millipodium** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 8:42 am

cosmic_prostitute wrote:This is an exploration of the alcohol morality of the youth and why it is so fixed and difficult to shake.

First of all, from a genetic point of view, individuals that have had alcoholism in their family for generations upon generations are more likely to crave the drug at early ages of adulthood. This is pretty much a proven fact.

Now the psychological motivations are quite complicated. First of all, men enjoy drinking together because in numbers there chances of scoring a sexual mate and companion are increased while intoxicated because outwardly they appear social, fun, and positive, plus men feel antisocial compared to women and drinking with the guys is a sincere attempt at brotherhood.

So inwardly they really feel frightened to be alone, lustful, antisocial, divided, bored and all the rest of it.

Also man craves chaos and disorder and an alcoholic adventure is one way for him to superficially met that need. The male spirit craves destruction and if he is too weak to get psychological destruction through negation then he will continuously drink himself into a stupor.

Also Men derive pride through storytelling. They want to please themselves by telling crazy stories of their stupid adventures to serve as a source of pride and self esteem. Man will even derive pride through bragging about the intensity of his hangover the next day â€“ very absurd.

The male spirit also likes to create an identity using bad behavior, many men enjoy deluding themselves by constructing a â€œbad imageâ€ of themselves.

So there are many desires operating with the alcohol morality:

Desire for a companion/Fear of being alone
Desire for sexual intercourse
Desire for brotherhood between men
Desire for Destruction/Choas.
Tendency to create an identity using experience.

Not to mention the fear men have of being looked at as antisocial by family, friends etc.. I think all humans have an intense fear of humiliation/fear of being shamed and a fear of being labeled as inferior by a large groupâ€¦

Oh and also the jobs that we are doing these days are so hellish that we need to escape through pleasurable fantasies that will take place on the weekendâ€¦

Very complicated, there are many factors to considerâ€¦

This is why I am silent at work when the people around me are spreading the virus called alcohol morality, I donâ€™t see the point in sharing my values.

Itâ€™s too overwhelming for someone that isnâ€™t interested, the philosopher is interpreted as insane by the masses.

Hey this is pretty smart! Unlike your eugenics penchant, which is more evil than smart.

Plus the shit is ADVERTISED like crazy. Alcohol is totally accepted.

What gets me, and maybe this should be a new thread, is how Las Vegas is being marketed as a morality free zone. That's pretty evil.

Cory Duchesne · Post by **Cory Duchesne** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 9:14 am

What I find interesting is the role alcohol has played in natural selection.

For instance, it's my impression that the north american indians (and indigenous peoples in general) were/are probably the most well-behaved, minimal, and sustainable of all cultures. (i'm not saying that this is because they are inherently wise though)

History has written that the culture of white man has consistently invaded the cultures of indigenous/native peoples, introducing them to alcohol, sugar, guns, and alien germs.

White man gradually passed along his habits to and even violently imposed his habits upon the natives he encountered.

However, the natives reaction to alcohol for instance was pretty extreme.

There was quite a big difference between the way alcohol effected natives, and the way alcohol was effecting the white man who gave the alcohol to indians.

Is this because white man had lived with alcohol for 100's of years, and thus, over the course of 100's of years using alcohol, the white men who could hold their liquor better, were the ones who went on to raise more intelligent and balanced children?

Perhaps white man was gradually refined over centuries of alcohol use to be more resistant to the effects of alcohol?

Whereas, the indians had yet to go through such a proccess of selection, and thus the whole culture was much more feeble and crazy in response to the alcohol.

A similar story is told by a man (a dentist) who observed the impact that white refined sugar and refined flour had on groups of primitive/natives that he studied.

He was amazed at how perfect the teeth of natives were before they had been introduced to an alien diet.

He said that, only after 1 generation, the teeth and jaw structure of most of the tribe had been severely, severely disfigured - (I seen pictures, it was freakish) - the race as a whole was much more disfigured in the teeth than anyone in europe.

Perhaps when sugar was first introduced to europeans, there might have been similar freakish widespread mutations - - however, the ones whose mutations were less severe, were the easiest on the eyes, had the greatest self esteem, were most attractive to the opposite sex, and thus they were the ones who most readily reproduced.

Thus, the race/group became refined and more resistant to the negative effects of sugar as a whole.

Ryan Rudolph · Post by **Ryan Rudolph** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 2:22 pm

Cory wrote:

Perhaps white man was gradually refined over centuries of alcohol use to be more resistant to the effects of alcohol?

Yes, Europeans have a long line of alcoholism as do most civilizations...

Alcohol tolerance is connected to a group of enzymes called Acohol Dehydrogenases which are responsible for the breakdown of alcohol in the liver.

If ones genes are encoded in a way to manufacture large amounts of Alcohol dehydrogenase then this results in a fast breakdown of ethanol (alcohol) into Acetaldehyde.

However if you drink large amounts for long amounts of time, slowly the gene will mutate and produce less of the enzyme to break it down, hence alcoholics develop long lasting intoxications.

So alcohol dehydrogenase manufacturing is less frequent in alcoholics than in nonalcoholics.

Some persons of South-East Asian and near-Eastern descent have a mutation in their alcohol dehydrogenase gene, making this enzyme more active thus they do not become intoxicated as easy and the affects are not as pleasurable. Actually many Asians develop skin irritation when alcohol is consumed because such high amounts of the alcohol dehydrogenase is produced.

So in theory, in the future if my friend Steven really wanted to stop drinking, but couldnâ€™t do it through an act of will then he could go see a gene therapist and pay the money to have a mutation in his genome that would cause the enzyme alcohol dehydrogenase to be manufactured in high doses and this would end his enjoyment and dependence on the drug.

Its strange because the natives have a different type of mutation where they naturally produce low levels of alcohol dehydrogenase making them incredibly susceptible to alcoholism.

This makes sense because Steven is part-indian. It is tragic because on both sides of his family he a long line of alcoholics so he didnâ€™t have a prayer. He inherited the genes from both parents to have incredibly low alcohol dehydrogenase production.

For further reading here is a link to an article called â€œThe History of Alcoholâ€:

http://www.drug-rehabs.org/alcoholhistory.php

It is quite good, there are some interesting facts in there.

Cory Duchesne · Post by **Cory Duchesne** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 3:36 pm

Cosmic Prostitute wrote:

Some persons of South-East Asian and near-Eastern descent have a mutation in their alcohol dehydrogenase gene, making this enzyme more active thus they do not become intoxicated as easy and the affects are not as pleasurable. Actually many Asians develop skin irritation when alcohol is consumed because such high amounts of the alcohol dehydrogenase is produced.

I always thought that the origins of alcohol were european, but now that i think about it, alcohol goes pretty far back doesnt it?

Could it be that these easterners have the greatest tolerance for alcohol because they as a gene-pool have been exposed to alcohol for the longest period of time?

If not, then the easterners exceptional defense against alcohol could be regarded as a complete fluke rather than a development born from the friction between two forces. (in this case, between alcohol and the 'alcohol dehydrogenase production facaulties')

You see, I was postulating alcohol resistance to be a development, rather than just a fluke.

Take dark skin for instance. Like most people, I've always postulated that people have dark skin because they, as a constituent of an isolated gene pool, have had more direct exposure to the sun for a longer period of time.

Sun exposure (for reasons I don't completely understand yet) provokes melanoyite cells to become active in the skin, and these cells produce melanin which is a pigment.

Therefore, the darkening of the skin is a development that is not mere fluke, but rather, the result of friction between two forces, in this case, between the skin and the sun.

Another example of how skin becomes strengthened against adversary is the phenomenon of calluses.

If one plays guitar enough, ones fingers become sore. The skin defends itself by somehow knowing to produce higher levels of keratin, which thicken the skin, making it leathery.

But the truth of the matter may not allow us to use the adaptive tendencies of skin to understand alcohol resistance.

It maybe quite different. You see, the skin was an organ that, from the very begining of its existence was exposed to an adversarial force (the sun). And it was the force of the sun that, for the most part, shaped the skin.

The Alcohol dehydrogenase production facaulties (I dont know what else to call it right now) did not develop with alcohol as its adversary.

Only after millions of years of existence, the extreme concentration of alcohol came in contact with the body.

However if you drink large amounts for long amounts of time, slowly the gene will mutate and produce less of the enzyme to break it down, hence alcoholics develop long lasting intoxications.

Unfortunately, people like your alcoholic friend Steve have a higher chance of beggeting children then say someone like yourself CP.

Thus, your apparently superior genes die, and Steves go on.

It appears that humanity thus becomes weakened genetically by your philsophical awakening, yet strengthened memetically.

The children of people like Steve then go on and perhaps live oblivious to the great memes left behind from the people who abstained from breeding.

How tragic.

I wonder if humanity would be better off CP if you heroically started seducing and impregnating all the 18-23 year olds you could get your hands on until you reached the age of 70?

Yeah, sure, the quality of your memes might not end up as good due to all that base arousal..........but somebodies got a play that heroic role buddy.

Come on, do it for the team ;)

Cory Duchesne · Post by **Cory Duchesne** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 5:19 pm

Boy was I ever ignorant of history. How naÃ¯ve of me.
Alcoholic beverages have existed for over 10 000 years.

I never really gave it any thought before though.

I would like to determine whether or not races with strong resistance to alcohol, have such resistances because the body responded and defended itself against the attack of alcohol.

Its confusing, because it seems that in some cases, the pressence of alcohol simply degrades the bodies ability to fight against it.

Kind of like hammering against a brick wall with a pick.

The wall doesnt get stronger.

-------------------------------------------------

Back to the topic of skin.

I've just come up with a pretty good hypothesis of why man has become white.

My previous theory compared to this new one is so ridiculous, I dont know how I could have possibly accepted it.

Here is the new theory.

The very first humans would have been black skinned. The reason their skin was black is because, in order for skin as an organ to establish itself, it need as much of a boost as possible.

In other words, in order for skin to develop safely, excessive melanyte activity(melanin production) was a neccesity.

I don't know if you find this analogy absurd - but the rocket lauchers on a space shuttle might be a helpful analogy.

In order for skin to establish itself, it needed a strong boost......but eventually, once the shuttle is close to orbit, the fuel begins to wane. Soon the shuttle is floating securely in space and fuel is no longer neccesary. Well, except for the odd burst from the minor thrusters in order to navigate around a bit.

As the human race secured it self and began spreading accross the globe, the melanin production waned, due to the superflousness of it.

It's just like the scafolding one uses to build a house. After you get the siding up and the house is secure, you take down the scafolding.

millipodium · Post by **millipodium** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 10:15 pm

Cory Patrick wrote:Boy was I ever ignorant of history. How naÃ¯ve of me.
Alcoholic beverages have existed for over 10 000 years.

I never really gave it any thought before though.

I would like to determine whether or not races with strong resistance to alcohol, have such resistances because the body responded and defended itself against the attack of alcohol.

Its confusing, because it seems that in some cases, the pressence of alcohol simply degrades the bodies ability to fight against it.

Kind of like hammering against a brick wall with a pick.

The wall doesnt get stronger.

-------------------------------------------------

Back to the topic of skin.

I've just come up with a pretty good hypothesis of why man has become white.

My previous theory compared to this new one is so ridiculous, I dont know how I could have possibly accepted it.

Here is the new theory.

The very first humans would have been black skinned. The reason their skin was black is because, in order for skin as an organ to establish itself, it need as much of a boost as possible.

In other words, in order for skin to develop safely, excessive melanyte activity(melanin production) was a neccesity.

I don't know if you find this analogy absurd - but the rocket lauchers on a space shuttle might be a helpful analogy.

In order for skin to establish itself, it needed a strong boost......but eventually, once the shuttle is close to orbit, the fuel begins to wane. Soon the shuttle is floating securely in space and fuel is no longer neccesary. Well, except for the odd burst from the minor thrusters in order to navigate around a bit.

As the human race secured it self and began spreading accross the globe, the melanin production waned, due to the superflousness of it.

It's just like the scafolding one uses to build a house. After you get the siding up and the house is secure, you take down the scafolding.

This sounds mostly right, cory patrick. Did you read that book: Guns, Germs, Steel, and Martinis?

Ryan Rudolph · Post by **Ryan Rudolph** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 10:37 pm

Cory wrote:

I wonder if humanity would be better off CP if you heroically started seducing and impregnating all the 18-23 year olds you could get your hands on until you reached the age of 70?

Yeah, sure, the quality of your memes might not end up as good due to all that base arousal..........but somebodies got a play that heroic role buddy.

Come on, do it for the team ;)

Yeah, After Hugh Huffer retires, I may stop by and see if the position is open. I think I would look good in that bathrobeâ€¦

Cory wrote:

The Alcohol dehydrogenase production facaulties (I dont know what else to call it right now) did not develop with alcohol as its adversary.

that's correct, the body responded as intelligently as it could to the substance. This is how Iâ€™ve come to understand it. Strong genes in terms of alcohol resistence are related to the degree of exposure.

For instance: I can remember drinking with an old comrade named Grant. Now Grant also has a similar mutation in the enzyme producing gene as Steven. Let me illustrate the function this mutation serves.

Grant and I started drinking one night with the intention of consuming enough alcohol to reach intoxication. Keep in mind this was before my philosophical inquiries.

Now I drank three beer, but my buzz wasnâ€™t as strong as Grant who drank only two beer.

This is because my body treated the alcohol as a foreign invader and was producing large amounts of the enzyme to break down the alcohol molecule whereas Grantâ€™s body had adapted to large amounts of the substance being in his body for large periods of time.

For instance at about 7 beer, I was drunk to the point where I could no longer talk or stand and I eventually passed out, but Grant had a light buzz, was talking fine and kept drinking well into the morning and drank a total of 21 beer!

You see, my body produced all the enzymes that it could in a short period of time whereas Grantâ€™s body produced the enzyme much slower over a long period of time.

So in fact it was my destiny not to be an alcoholic because I was unable to keep up with the old boysâ€¦

Not to mention the fun factor is removed fairly quickly when one awakes the next morning to discover that they are almost completely naked next to an open fire with the ashes of their clothes next to them, dog feces smeared onto the bottom of their feet and their sleeping bag tied high above in a treeâ€¦

Ah the beauty of friendship, human nature is such a lovely thing, it brings tears to my eyes to remember the joys of old friends and good times.

So my body probably evolved from ancestors that were light drinkers. This is probably the case with most ancient Asian Cultures. Civilizations such as China have a long history of respecting alcohol and drinking it in small doses with meals whereas Europe has a reputation for excessive drinking to the point of intoxication. And hence we have two totally different mutations based on the degree of exposure to the substance.

The natives are a strange mutation because they had absolutely no contact with the substance and ironically and tragically their mutation was similar to a full blown alcoholic.

Moreover because their body had never seen the substance before the genes were not equipped to produce the enzyme in large doses whereas the Asians had very light exposure over thousands of years resulting in the most superior mutation.

The destiny of gene therapy is to emulate the Asian mutation in any individuals that pay for the service and have the passion to stop drinking.

In other words, in order for skin to develop safely, excessive melanyte activity(melanin production) was a neccesity.

Allow me to expand on what you are saying here. I suspect there is a relationship between degree of melanin production and the degree of solar radiation that the individual is exposed to.

For instance: Near the equator in the tropics is where we find the highest concentrations of solar radiation and as we move north the intensity of solar radiation decreases, this is related to angle at which the solar rays strike the earthâ€™s surface resulting in varying degrees of intensity. Basically near the equator the solar rays hit directly whereas further north they strike the surface at an angle.

Now when I was in Cuba, there were blacks and Spanish mixed together, some were incredibly dark and some were mildly dark. The mildly dark Cubans were of Spanish origins which is at a slightly higher latitude (less solar radiation) than the incredibly dark Cubans who originated from Central Africa (near the equator) - where the solar radiation is received at the highest intensity.

Moreover if the Mildly dark Cubans (Spanish decent) stay and live in Cuba long enough, future generations will be much darker than they are now. This is because the intensity of the solar radiation is much more concentrated in Cuba compared to their origins which is in Spain.

So I donâ€™t believe humanity will ever stop producing melanin because as long as there is some degree of solar radiation coming in contact with the skin, there will be an equal degree of melanin production to counter-act that friction.

Jason · Post by **Jason** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 11:25 pm

cosmic_prostitute wrote: My body probably evolved from ancestors that were light drinkers. This is probably the case with most ancient Asian Cultures. Civilizations such as China have a long history of respecting alcohol and drinking it in small doses with meals whereas Europe has a reputation for excessive drinking to the point of intoxication. And hence we have two totally different mutations based on the degree of exposure to the substance.

The natives are a strange mutation because they had absolutely no contact with the substance and ironically and tragically their mutation was similar to a full blown alcoholic.

Moreover because their body had never seen the substance before the genes were not equipped to produce the enzyme in large doses whereas the Asians had very light exposure over thousands of years resulting in the most superior mutation.

In your opinion, by what mechanism did exposure to alcohol cause these supposed genetic mutations?

So I donâ€™t believe humanity will ever stop producing melanin because as long as there is some degree of solar radiation coming in contact with the skin, there will be an equal degree of melanin production to counter-act that friction.

I'm very pale, do you reckon if I had kids(with an equally pale woman) they'd be a little darker than me, since I and they will live under the harsh Australian sun?

Ryan Rudolph · Post by **Ryan Rudolph** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:00 am

Jason wrote:

In you opinion, by what mechanism did exposure to alcohol cause these supposed genetic mutations?

In the beginning (over 10 000 years ago) the liver was not equipped to deal with alcohol so when it was first introduced it would have killed many humans, but some of them would have developed a mutation in the DNA located in the liver cells to produce alcohol dehydrogenase (enzyme) which is a protein manufactured in the nucleus of the liver cells. This enzymeâ€™s function would be to breakdown ethanol (alcohol) molecule into the Acetaldehyde molecule. This is important because Acetaldehyde is also toxic but the liver is able to dispose of it through the urine whereas ethanol stays in the blood, increases in toxicity and can eventually kill the individual.

The emergence of this mutation in the DNA is related to the introduction of alcohol into the human body.

Jason wrote:

I'm very pale, do you reckon if I had kids(with an equally pale woman) they'd be a little darker than me since I and they will live under the harsh Australian sun?

I think it would take hundreds of years and perhaps dozens of generations to see even a slight change in skin tone. Skin tone is regulated by six different genes so it is fairly complex compared to lets say eye color which is regulated by one gene.

Genetics is funny because suppose you had black genes in your ancestral tree, but you were white, you could pass on those genes and your child could be born black. This is true because you may be a carrier of a gene and pass it on as active even though it is not active in yourself.

There is also the factor of dominance and recessive genes to consider, for instance blue eyes are recessive and brown eyes are dominant meaning that if you have brown eyes and your partner had blue eyes there is a higher probability that the child will be born with brown eyes because the â€˜brownâ€™ allele will take precedence more often.

This is why blue eyes are much rarer than dark eyes, they are recessive. Hiter would have had a difficult time creating a race of blue-eyed blonde haired white people because he is dealing with many recessive alleles.

The only way he would have accomplished such a thing is if he was able to murder 95% of the worldâ€™s population.

And hypothetically he wouldnâ€™t have created a superior race anyway; what he would have created is an excessively vain race of dimwit snobs due to the extreme aesthetic attributes that were retained in the genepool.

Jason · Post by **Jason** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:28 am

Jason wrote:In you opinion, by what mechanism did exposure to alcohol cause these supposed genetic mutations?

cosmic_prostitute wrote:In the beginning (over 10 000 years ago) the liver was not equipped to deal with alcohol so when it was first introduced it would have killed many humans, but some of them would have developed a mutation in the DNA located in the liver cells to produce alcohol dehydrogenase (enzyme) which is a protein manufactured in the nucleus of the liver cells.

What caused the original people to develop this DNA mutation?

Ryan Rudolph · Post by **Ryan Rudolph** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 1:00 am

Jason wrote:

What caused the original people to develop this DNA mutation?

The introduction of alcohol into the body over a long period of time caused the mutation.

The body is an infinitely intelligent instrument that will respond to whatever foolish actions humanity throws at it within reason.

The body is dynamic, ever-changing and not separate from the environment. The body is the environment, they are one undivided intelligent movement.

A simple explanation will not suffice for the question you are asking.

The DNA is flexible enough to respond to a wise range of frictions and stresses.

For instance in smokers, nicotine actually replaces the neurotransmitter acetylcholine.

Neurons communicate by sending electrical signals throughout the body. Between two neurons there is a gap called a synapsis, the neurotransmitter binds to the receptor site on a synapsis and sends information back and forth.

Nicotine replaces this neurotransmitter so the gene responsible for generating it shuts off and the individual is dependent on external nicotine from cigarettes as its source for neurotransmitters.

This is why smoking is so addictive because the gene has been shut off and one will suffer quite intensity if there isnâ€™t any neurotransmitters and this can go on and on before the gene will turn back on.

This is why smokers get twitchy and moody without nicotine, because the neurotransmitter regulates motor activity and is responsible for dopamine releases in the brain which keep people feeling stable, happy, neutral.

Gene therapy may be able to make quitting less painful for addicts because the gene responsible for the production of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine could be turned back on and then when the addict stops smoking there craving would not be as painful/intense.

Jason · Post by **Jason** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 1:40 am

Jason wrote:In your opinion, by what mechanism did exposure to alcohol cause these supposed genetic mutations?

cosmic_prostitute wrote:In the beginning (over 10 000 years ago) the liver was not equipped to deal with alcohol so when it was first introduced it would have killed many humans, but some of them would have developed a mutation in the DNA located in the liver cells to produce alcohol dehydrogenase (enzyme) which is a protein manufactured in the nucleus of the liver cells.

Jason wrote: What caused the original people to develop this DNA mutation?

cosmic_prostitute wrote:The introduction of alcohol into the body over a long period of time caused the mutation.

You're really quite confused about genetics and natural selection.

Ryan Rudolph · Post by **Ryan Rudolph** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 1:58 am

Jason wrote:

You're really quite confused about genetics and natural selection.

You will have to elaborate on this Jason, I cannot read your mind. If you are referring to how in one post I brought in the time component and in another I didnâ€™t then you are missing my point.

Time is irrelevant, I cannot know with absolutely certainty how much time it took by the watch for a mutation for occur after an exposure, but I can have an understanding of how the cellular processes responded to a new substance.

If you believe Iâ€™m confused go into detail what is not making sense to you.

Jason · Post by **Jason** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 2:25 am

cosmic_prostitute wrote:Jason wrote:

You're really quite confused about genetics and natural selection.
You will have to elaborate on this Jason, I cannot read your mind. If you are referring to how in one post I brought in the time component and in another I didnâ€™t then you are missing my point.

Time is irrelevant, I cannot know with absolutely certainty how much time it took by the watch for a mutation for occur after an exposure, but I can have an understanding of how the cellular processes responded to a new substance.

If you believe Iâ€™m confused go into detail what is not making sense to you.

Pinpointing alcohol as the cause of the mutation in DNA, that allowed some people to deal with alcohol better, makes me think that you believe that the DNA mutation was an intelligent response to the alcohol. That's not what happens, DNA mutation is not an intelligent reaction, it is caused by errors in copying, viruses, radiation etc. The orginal DNA mutations that gave superior response to alcohol were just accidental side effects of random mutations.

Ryan Rudolph · Post by **Ryan Rudolph** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 2:53 am

Jason wrote:

Pinpointing alcohol as the cause of the mutation in DNA, that allowed some people to deal with alcohol better, makes me think that you believe that the DNA mutation was an intelligent response to the alcohol. That's not what happens, DNA mutation is not an intelligent reaction, it is caused by errors in copying, viruses, radiation etc. The original DNA mutations that conferred the superior response to alcohol were just accidental side effects of random mutations.

You been reading too much university propaganda, you sound a lot like an old paleontologist professor I used to converse with.

what a dusty old fart he was!

Him and I would get into long discussions on how he thought evolution was random and I said it was intelligent.

Weâ€™d go back and forth and get absolutely no where.

Jason wrote:

it is caused by errors in copying, viruses, radiation.

There are certainly random errors and mutations that happen in the code, but primarily the genome is incredibly intelligent. Most mutations are the intelligent response to a stimulus in the environment.

There are thousands of instructions encoded in the DNA which are responsible for billions of cellular processes, each instruction works in conjunction with the others to ensure the survival of the body.

It doesnâ€™t appear random that the body is able to manufacture an enzyme from scratch by assembling atom by atom until a configuration is reached that is able to dissemble another molecule into lesser components so that it is no longer a threat to the survival of the system as a whole.

That is one complicated array of intelligence and is definitely not a random process. There is order in it, it is not this blind random smashing together of atoms until a philosopher crawls out of the amino acids and whips himself offâ€¦

Jason · Post by **Jason** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 3:21 am

Your views on this strongly disagree with the scientific establishment.

Ryan Rudolph · Post by **Ryan Rudolph** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 3:41 am

Jason wrote:

You're views on this strongly disagree with the scientific establishment.

And this is why I suspect that my views are correct, professors have no scope in their thinking, theyâ€™re unable to see past the end of their own noses.

And their views are very convenient to the lifestyle they live because the professors that hold these views have absolutely no sense of responsibility for the world.

They sit in their lofty chairs on university campuses and justify the exploitation that they are guilty of and they never change because evolution is just a random process you see, thereâ€™s no order, this is the way they think.

My professor tried to tell me that evolution produces billions of organisms randomly and only a small number survive by chance.

And I said to him: â€œwhy did the wolf make the cut sir?â€ â€œwhy the eagle? Or the serpent? â€œâ€œwhy did the beauty of the tiger make it through?â€

He had no answer for me, he was bemused by my question because he has no sense of beauty in his own lifeâ€¦

Cory Duchesne · Post by **Cory Duchesne** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 12:30 am

Milli wrote,

This sounds mostly right, cory patrick. Did you read that book: Guns, Germs, Steel, and Martinis?

I didnt read Jared Diamonds book, but I read about the book, I read a few of Jared's essays online, I watched a televison special which was hosted by Jared and it was titled Guns, Germs, and Steel.

I find his views to support what I had for the most part already intuited and suspected, in part by reading other people who have had lots to say on the significance of indigenous and primitive cultures.

Here Milli, If you havent read this article before, you might like to read it:

http://www.agron.iastate.edu/courses/ag ... stake.html[/quote]

Cory Duchesne · Post by **Cory Duchesne** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 12:47 am

Jason wrote,

I'm very pale, do you reckon if I had kids(with an equally pale woman) they'd be a little darker than me, since I and they will live under the harsh Australian sun?

Jason, do you 'and/or' your girlfriend get tans at all following a sun burn? When the burn peels off, are you just as pale as your were? Or is a bit of melanin production provoked?

Personally, I am very pale - - however, if I get a sunburn, melanin production will happen and my skin will be left a bit darker after the burn peels. If I worked out in the sun constantly, I imagine that my melanin production facaulties would work according to the ammout of strain from the sun.

However, I do know some pale people who dont burn at all.

Their melanin productin facaulies have totally been lost.

I imagine its a lot like any organism. If you keep feeding it, it will keep living. If you stop feeding it, it will get weak, or even totally die.

Once it dies, it can't come back.

What i've been wondering lately is this:

If my melanin production facaulties become modified due to a lack of sun exposure or an excess of sun exposure - is there a corresponding modification in my genome?

As my tan weakens, do certain parts of my genes responsible for melanin production weaken?

Cory Duchesne · Post by **Cory Duchesne** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 1:17 am

Ryan wrote:

You see, my body produced all the enzymes that it could in a short period of time whereas Grantâ€™s body produced the enzyme much slower over a long period of time.

So in fact it was my destiny not to be an alcoholic because I was unable to keep up with the old boysâ€¦

I'm not so sure. I think that anyone who drinks for the first time is not going to be able to drink too much.

I think that if your drinking became quite habitual, you would find that the distribution of enzymes would become more spread out.

When you drank with your friend Grant that night, were you more of a rookie than he was?

Was grant an experienced drinker? I think you'll find he probably was.

I was the same way when I first drank. It took a while for it to kick in, but when it did, I was tanked.

As I drank more and more over the years, I developed a tolerence.

I think everyone has the potential to be an alcoholic, but yes some are perhaps a bit more vulnerable to the effects of alcohol, each person reacts differenty.....however more or less everyone adapts to alcohol.

Alcohol is going to effect you differently the 1st time you use it compared to the 100th consecutive bender.

Yeah, sure your average indian went crazy when he first got his hands on alcohol, but I'm sure a bit of tolerence gradually developed as well.

You also have to keep in mind how confusing it was as a native to have your culture gradually become undermined and taken over. It was probably a rather emotional and confusing experience.

Have you ever drank alcohol when you had personal confusion, despair, anger, negative confused emotions?

Its not a pretty scene!

So, having a feeling of confidence, self-esteem and dominon when you drink can also effect the way you handle the alcohol.

When your typical person tries to understand alcoholism, they automatically think that alcohol and genes are the fundamental problem.

Those are significant factors, but I think it has just as much or more to do with exceptional personal sorrows, the stimulants forming personality in gernal, and overall family/tribe instability.

Living in a competitive, dog-eat dog society is a much more significant factor to consider, than merely blaming genes and alcohol.

If you focus on genes and alcohol while ignoring the irrationality of the society as a whole, then the logic becomes fairly shallow, perhaps even vain.

Ryan Rudolph · Post by **Ryan Rudolph** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 1:53 am

Cory wrote:

If you focus on genes and alcohol while ignoring the irrationality of the society as a whole, then the logic becomes fairly shallow, perhaps even vain.

This is why the psychological aspects of alcohol use were explored in the opening part of the thread.

then there was a heavy focus on the genetic component to better understand what is actually happening in the body...

so if you focus on both components as I have then it is actually quite refreshing and thought-provoking.

millipodium · Post by **millipodium** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 1:59 am

deleted. dupe.

millipodium · Post by **millipodium** » Mon Aug 07, 2006 2:01 am

Bottom line. Chicks dig dudes who are into male bonding, excitement, and harmless mischief. It's also a preparation for war, somthing still crucial in world where people compete for resources. All this "war is wrong" crap was only injected in our society by our enemies.

Everyone who wants world peace, allegedly, always wants everyone else to disarm first. Ain't gonna happen.

Just like the U.N. was supposed to be the end of territorial conquest, they HAD do the jews one last solid. THEN war could end. It's crap.

self destruction through misguided conceptions isn't enlightenment.

GENIUS FORUMS

The alcohol morality of the youth

The alcohol morality of the youth

Re: The alcohol morality of the youth