Is the human race in developed countries diverging into two separate species?

Question

There are the poor uneducated and ugly under class who live in the council estates and projects.

Then there are the attractive educated middle classes.

These are no longer just social differences. People are starting to look physically different.

Answer 1

I thought I told you not to talk about this stuff outside the Klan meetings, Joshua!  You just don' t listen!  How are we going to have a neo-n**i uprising if you keep yapping on yahoo answers?  All these jews, homos an q****s will find us out take our jobs and then what'll we do!

PS, did you hear Cletus is marrying Bubba sue?  Imagine, that's the third generation of bro-sis weddings in that family!

Answer 2

The human race is a single species -- proof: we can interbreed.

It's simply not true that every person who's poor is ugly; or that everyone who's middle class is attractive (or educated, for that matter).

When you have preconceptions about everyone, you fail to notice all the exceptions.

The cure for lack of education is more and better education.

No one is born well-educated.

Answer 3

yes.

I really believe this.

The oddity is that the uglier and poorer and more worthless someone is, the more kids they have and vice versa for the better class of people.

Within a couple hundred years, a Paris Hilton will not be able to breed and conceive with a ghetto thug.  The DNA will be uniquely separate.

Answer 4

What you described is called a Natural Selection. And yes there is a difference in the level of evolution of the humans in Africa and the humans in a develope country.

I wonder is this the next step in Human evolution. First the humans destryed the other hominides and human-like species like Neanderthals and then they neutralized the treat of other animal species. Is it time for internal selection of the human kind?

Answer 5

It's possible. We act like everyone is treated equally but the truth is that poor people are dealing with stresses from birth that are causing actual damage, such is the case with allostatic overload type 2. They're dealing a crappy educational system and no opportunity for anything better, no/crappy healthcare, a media that stigmatizes them and people that eat it up which is apparent from some of these responses. You really have to ask yourself why these differences exist, why the poor get poor and the rich get rich, what keeps these systems in place? Because if this has been going on long enough to even show promise of splitting the race then something is seriously wrong. And some people are being seriously oppressed.

Answer 6

--There are the poor uneducated and ugly under class who live in the council estates and projects.

No, they just dont have any money to look good.

--Then there are the attractive educated middle classes.

They DO have the money to look good.

Question solved ? =]

Answer 7

Are you poor and uneducated? You look very ugly to me, and I can't even see you.

Answer 8

It's called morphological plasticity. Look it up.

Education is not genetic. You are born and then you get educated. Aptitude, ability, and intelligence might be genetic, but the upper and middle classes don't have that market cornered.

As for attractiveness, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, to borrow a phrase. If people don't have access to good health care early in life, or they can't afford nice clothing or makeup or perfume or whatever, they might not be as attractive as the people who can. To say that this is a evolutionary trend is nothing more than blind prejudice.

But the simple fact is that people have been saying what you are saying (exactly what you are saying, actually), for hundreds of years now. You are not the first to come up with this. What you don't seem to realize is that any meaningful change within the human population that might lead to species divergence would happen over the course of thousands of generations. As it stands genetically, poor people and rich people aren't any more different than rich people from other rich people, or poor people from other poor people. Cultural factors can easily account for all the differences you think you're seeing. So when's this great divergence supposed to start?

Are you saying that our culture is going to keep these same class delineations for the next 20,000 years (at least) to keep the same breeding populations separate? Or are you saying that we've had the same breeding populations kept separate for the last 20,000 years? Because that's what it would take for your "observations" to have any validity. And that's a bare minimum.

Oh wait, rich people and poor people routinely get married and breed? What's that, people who end up highly educated routinely get married to uneducated people before they finish their schooling and breed with them? Really, lots of people who are born poor end up going to college and getting jobs that pay well enough for them to own a home and raise a family? Are you kidding, upward mobility exists in our culture? Really? Oops.

h**l, go watch "Trading Places." It's got Eddie Murphy and Dan Akroyd. Go, go now.

Answer 9

People tend to identify and relate to people of their own race and class, and the more bigoted and narrow minded they are the more they tend to do this. So the bourgeois of which I will assume you are a member of, seem attractive to you coz you identify with them. But to people of other races, cultures and classes they may look weird or OMG even ugly! Like really I even find the plastic surgery some middle class middle aged women have done is just plain freaky, but to them and you it is attractive and looks "educated" or neat, or right. To some the look of the middle classes is prim, uptight and unnatural. Why don't you watch the movie (I'll get back to you with the name, but it's a comedy about only studpid people reproducing and dominating the world , ie: USA)

And as for your question The Ry Guy gave you an explanation of how long evolution takes, etc

Answer 10

The Chavs and the Chav nots.

I'd like to point out; in England our free health and dental cares pretty good, and malnutrition isn't a problem with the underclass, judging by the size of them.

Being stupid makes them eat badly, smoke, drink and do drugs that damage their health and appearance. I'm from an underclass family, I know what I'm talking about.

Chainsmoking lardies that don't eat any vitamin C generally aren't good looking.

Answer 11

Definitely yes: humans are clearly diverging into at least two branches -- (1) racists/supremacists and (2) the others.

Answer 12

All rich people from developed nations are beautiful?

Have you ever heard of the Hapsburg's of Austria

see here , http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/co...

http://members.aol.com/mfrankland/philip...

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=h...

and other inbred wealthy families from "developed countries"  have all looked a mess. The Rothschild Family where cousins married cousins and uncles wed nieces. I imagine that many of these rich people had horrible looking offspring because of all the inbreeding.

Poor inbreeders are  the  Anti bellum  Southern hill billies of today, and folks who are plain nasty and trifling.

Money doesn't make a person pretty. It just means you can afford more things, but it cannot change your gene pool.

For the record, there are many beautiful people in 3rd world countries and just poverty stricken places in general. Most people who came to the USA, of their own volition, were poor and underprivileged. So does that make the ancestors of almost everyone in the States wretched looking? Did those wretched looks pass on to every single present generation ?And many people who continue to come to the USA, and developed countries are underprivileged, and many children adopted abroad are from poor countries. But many of those children are very beautiful.

So what is your point?

Answer 13

The same thing was proposed in England in the late 1800s. Poor people were smaller, had another bearing, etc. If you see physical differences today, it may have the same explanation as it did in England back then: Malnutrition, especially during childhood, unhealthy living conditions, physically hard work, all combine to change people's looks. But descendants of these English poor live today and look no different from the rest of Her Majesty's subjects. The difference, if any, is due to environment and nutrition, not genes. Evolution doesn't work quite that fast in humans.

Answer 14

Interesting question.

I don't think education (unless you are talking about nutrition, and hygiene)  makes people physically more attractive. I have known some people with IQs over 190 and they were not cute at all. But they were very smart and smart can be attractive (but not on a physical level).

Good hygiene and good nutrition can definitely add to one's appearance. Dirty  green and yellow hill billy teeth are disgusting!  As are scattered Bubba teeth!

Also gross= diamond and gold grills in one's mouth!

And dirty greasy hair is disgusting too! These are features only seen very low class and impoverished places in the US. Typically in parts where inbreeding has happened. Definitely not mainstream, middle class or upper class. I've never seen a Miss America win, who looked like a rockabilly girl.

A bright smile goes along ways, as does combed, neat hair.

Looking clean is appealing too.

As for under developed countries being not good looking, I'd have to say absolutely No.  

There are people all over the planet who are beautiful and not rich. Some of the world's most beautiful people live in the poorest parts of the world.  Yes, their clothes may be rags and they live in the streets, but they have gorgeous features.

Money can buy diamonds, nice cars, and expensive foods. But it cannot by good looks. Look at the celebrities over here, they have to be made up and then airbrushed to look okay.  None of the people, listed below are redrawn or made up.

I'll post some links here.

(Ethiopians)

http://photobucket.com/mediadetail/?medi...

http://photobucket.com/mediadetail/?medi...

http://www.darcynorman.net/images/live8_...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/monologist/...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dew_drop/42...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/devriese/14...

These pics are of people who were able to find adequate nutrition. Ethiopia is a very poor country. But it has a rich history and very beautiful people.

This link shows, shows some beautiful adopted Ethiopian babies!

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=h...

Other link, Brazilian children, https://www.exacttarget.com/members/imag...

http://static.flickr.com/28/67678924_c75...

Here is another link to poor children around the globe,

and none of them are ugly. They are all cute.

http://picasaweb.google.com/dmeyer1usa/A...

Answer 15

no....even though the rich can afford to make themselves look good the poor people are not ugly......

and i mean your family could be poor but you could have all a's in school...

it doesn't completely ring true........

not for everyone.......

Answer 16

rich = makeup, cosmetics, plastic surgery and liposuction

Answer 17

No.

Those differences are actually quite superficial. As long as gene flow is maintained between any two given populations, they will not diverge into different species.  Sorry to burst your bubble, but lower and middle class people still mix and mingle.

There have social differences like this for MILLENIA now, in multiple populations and cultures....and yet we are all very much still the same species. It would take waaay longer for a speciation event to occur than the length of time such social differentiation has been perpetuated in any of these societies.

Also, middle class people ate not always so attractive and educated. In fact I have encountered great ignorance among such individuals (I bet you're middle class for example) despite having greater access to education, which is, by the way, obtained by money, not through genes. And looks as well are a product of having money to buy healthy food, nice hair cuts, clothes, etc., rather than a result of good genes.

(I'm one of those people that has transcended the class boundary, by the way. Very educated and somewhat attractive despite the lack of this middle class background.)

Answer 18

Deprive you of nutritional food, medical care. Make you work long hours and make sure you don't have a lot of the basics of live. No doubt you'll soon look physically different. Does that mean you will have evolved?

This is an echo of the social Darwinism movement of the 1930s. It assumed there were people that shouldn't, for a number of reasons, be allowed to breed. Some were sterilized without their permission and others ended up in the n**i concentration camps.

Oddly, those that ran such programs saw themselves as "super" specimens of humanity. None of them ever considered being sterilized.