Famous Indians

[Born Hunter 17,751]

Even in humans who can make conscious decisions? Surely if the worlds popultaion ended up mixed like mexico for example there would be no diversity and that wouldn't be for the betterment of humankind.

 

If only one sub species (a result of heavy hybridisation) remains then the diversity is still there for successful evolution. It's not like a species needs subspecies and hybridisation for evolution to occur, there's enough diversity within a subspecies (now the species) for that to happen.

 

I get what you're saying, I'm just not sure we can draw the conclusion that a species having clearly defined subspecies is strictly a benefit to the survival of the species. If a broadly homogeneous subspecies has evolved in an environment as a result of hybridisation, then that would suggest that that is best suited to it's environment. New subspecies may develop if subjected to two different environments..... and the process goes on.

 

But we hardly follow the simple rules of natural selection anymore to be worried about subspecies purity, to me at least. The rules still apply, just not in the simple way they used to, making this discussion difficult. All I'm saying is that hybridisation is natural, genetic pureity on the species scale isn't, pureity is the enemy of adaptation, hybridisation is part of evolution and to simply say it's bad for the species is just wrong....... in my opinion.

[CO CHISE 329]

ha