The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

this method to stimulate human evolution would work to cause speciation

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/18/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 578 times Debate No: 63456
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




this method to stimulate human evolution would work to cause speciation.

and the populations are small and large enough to not cause problems from inbreeding, or too large as to stall evolution.

a new society is created. it consists of new born to 30 year olds. only the best and the brightest 500 people from society are picked. intelligence and physical attributes. they do genetic testing on the people to ensure diseases and problems indicated by genes and family history are rooted out.

eighteen to thirty year olds are permitted to breed.

then the population of five hundred would be permitted to expand to five thousand. then by the time it got to five thousand, five hundred of the best are picked out to breed. this method of expansion and retraction would be put on repeat.

when a parent shows that it later develops a disease, that can disqualify the offspring as well.

eventually, this would lead to speciation.


As the accepter of this debate, I would like to thank the creator. Being new to this website, I have not participated in a debate before and am grateful for this debate. Furthermore, I apologize in advance for any mistakes or inconvenience that may result from my lack of knowledge regarding

I would first like to define the word "species" to prevent confusion.
Species - any of the taxonomic groups into which a genus is divided, the members of which are capable of interbreeding: often containing subspecies, varieties, or races
(Citation: "Species." The Free Dictionary. Farlex, n.d. Web. 18 Oct. 2014. )
Please feel free to disagree with this definition if necessary.

In the method you have previously presented, the best 500 of 5,000 is to be picked - the best being genetically superior in terms of intelligence, physical attributes, and lack of genetic diseases.
However, none of these traits is necessary for survival or reproduction in a way that differs from the rest of the world. While it's true the process will lead to smarter, stronger, and healthier human beings, they are still human beings nonetheless; the group in question is merely made to have the better traits already existent in homo sapiens. Why would this prevent the isolated group from being able to breed with us? Even today, despite the variance in the degree of perfection, we humans are still humans.

Perhaps aggregating 500 elites with a criteria differing from the natural environment will lead to a separate species. But with this method, speciation is impossible.
Debate Round No. 1


con is arguing that humans will still be able to mate with the group. that's true, for a long time. but then speciation will set in. con hasn't argued why this isn't hte case other than to simply say it wont happen.

"Perhaps aggregating 500 elites with a criteria differing from the natural environment will lead to a separate species. But with this method, speciation is impossible."

could you clarify this statement?


I apologize if my argument was lacking in clarity.

I meant the isolated group will be able to mate with other humans forever. The group of 500 elites is chosen by the same criteria that natural selection chooses in the rest of the world. The smartest, strongest, and healthiest are most likely to pass on their genes in both locations. Thus, there is no reason for the isolated group to evolve in a way different from the others; they're evolving to fit the same environment as us.

For the sake of fairness, I will present no new arguments either. I will end this round with this clarification only.

Thank you, and I bid Pro good luck.
Debate Round No. 2


the outside environment in that subset of humans would be things that cause intelligence and lack of disease. the 'environment' is artificial, but there. when we cut out a bunch of humans based on genes like intelligence, it only is going to cause them to be smarter etc.
perhaps con thinks it has to be more drastic? i don't see why it would be, with better genes comes side effects like bigger heads. it might be necessary to get bigger heads to have more intelligence


Sorry for the late response.

As I have stated before, the selection of the 500 people does not differ from how people who are more likely to pass on their genes is chosen in the rest of the world. I said the criteria of the 500 people being chosen from 5,000 would have to be DIFFERENT from the natural environment for speciation to occur. Your method will not lead to the isolated people evolving in a way different from the others.

I have been as clear as possible and will end the debate with no further arguments.
Again, thank you for this opportunity to apply and improve my debating ability.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by cheyennebodie 3 years ago
Then you woke up and the real world is still here.
No votes have been placed for this debate.