If we're able to breed animals of different species but

File: ppap.jpg (181KB, 1200x818px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 1200x818px

>>8758340
It would be a very lengthy experiment because of the time it takes for the offspring to reach adulthood. Secondly, there's the problem with availability of volunteers. If we need to pick a human that's closest to an ape, we'll need black people but they might not be willing to participate in such an experiment.

>>8758340
We do already. If you in on it, you know. If you don't know, probably you are a test subject

>>8758340
They would need to evolve into humans to reach our level of intelligence. Humans already exist so there would be no point of doing this.

>What's stopping us from creating another intelligent species?

I dunno probably the beastiality laws...

File: spider-mirror.png (700KB, 966x640px) Image search: [Google]

700KB, 966x640px

>>8758347
We should be breeding smaller species for intelligence.

>>8758340
The fuck kinda stupid ass question is this? Why would we create a human-chimp hybrid when there are already humans around? This isn't Dragonball Z where hybrids are more powerful.

>>8759167
If the goal of each species evolution is to become intelligent, we'd be speeding up that process for atleast one of them. What's wrong with increasing the pace of progress?

>>8758934
>breed very fast life cycle creatures for intelligence
It would be interesting to see how smart they would get, but I think the general size of the brain would be an issue.

>>8759841
>If the goal of each species evolution is to become intelligent
The goal of a species is to survive. Humans as a whole aren't becoming more intelligent by white people giving a bunch of food to Africa. Larger brains take more resources to grow, so for a lot of animals and insects it would be worse to have more brain mass.

>>8759841
>If the goal of each species evolution is to become intelligent
Except it isn't. Goals are relative to a perceptive, they are contrived and non-existent on any scale beyond the local perspective or collective perspective. The universe has no reason or goal, nor does evolution, not even short-term goals. It just occurs and sometimes things manage to propagate, that's it.

>>8759854
>The goal of a species is to survive

The goal of a species is to reach perfection. Humans have already done that, which is why we aren't becoming more intelligent.

>>8759876
>The goal of a species is to reach perfection.
The goal of a species is to reach perfection in the environment it's in. That doesn't include becoming smarter or sentient.

>>8759875
not perceptive, *perspective

You're both wrong. There is no goal or purpose or "perfection".

>>8759879
You don't need the optimal species for it to propagate and thrive in a given environment. It's not even possible to produce any kind of species that is optimised to any degree, with evolution. Much less "perfect". If something works out and events align to it's continued existence, then it propagates, that's it. If one was designing a specific natural process to refine DNA and creating optimal species, they would not come up with such a messy, random and slow-moving process that evolution is.

>>8759876
Now you're just being blatantly retarded. There is no such thing as perfection because you have multiple views and multiple ways of doing things. You're being humanistic and narrow-minded. Everything you said is wrong, so innately and blatantly that I can't even begin to dissect it.
>The goal of a species is to reach perfection.
No it is not, this is wrong.

>Humans have already done that
No we have not, "perfection" is a human and limiting concept, nor are we perfect by the general meaning anyway.

>which is why we aren't becoming more intelligent
Evolution doesn't stop. We have become more logically-aligned cognitively-speaking, in the past 30-50 thousand years. You need to strictly define "intelligent" to be able to measure it's change. With the influx of information and widespread education, it more looks like we are becoming more intelligent. Certainly the average person is far more intelligent than they were 200 years ago, though this is not for genetic reasons.

>>8759929
I don't agree. Evolution makes a species better and better over time, so it doesn't take much of an imaginative leap to realize it ultimately reaches perfection over time. Whether humans at this time are perfect or not is debatable, I'll admit. Because we're the most evolved species that exist right now, we're most likely to become perfect.

>Evolution doesn't stop
You don't know that. Once all the possible physical features and highest intelligence is achieved, there would be no more room for further evolution.

>>8758340
>why can't we do the same with humans and Chimpanzees

But we already have niggers?

Humans have 46 chromosomes where as all other apes (chimps, gorillas orangutanges, blacks) have 48. This is why we can't interbreed with great ape species.

>>8760028
Can't we just add 2 more to the sperm?

>>8760058
No. There are too many chromosomal inversions. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromosomal_inversion ) AKA incompatible genetic material.