[ExI] [Bulk] Re: IQ and beauty

[Rafal Smigrodzki]

On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 9:56 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>
>
>
>
> *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On
> Behalf Of *John Clark
>
> *>…* In most animals the male is more flamboyant than the female but in
> the case of the peacock the fashion race seems to have gotten out of control
> …John K Clark
>
>
>
> Evolution is filled with examples of species which sex-selected themselves
> to extinction.  Stephen Jay Gould gives the example of a branch of big
> horned elk.  The last fossils found shows that the antlers were getting
> larger and larger for the males.  Apparently they got so heavy the females
> could no longer bear the weight as they were mounted, all while choosing
> males with the biggest antlers.
>

### I don't believe it. Does Gould give a rigorous mathematical analysis,
with simulations, of how allele frequencies could change to make a
heterogeneous population evolve out of this mortal coil all by itself,
without external influences and without assumptions that strain credulity?

Here are links to three articles right off the top of a google search:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v522/n7557/full/nature14419.html
http://www.kokkonuts.org/p/Sexy2die4.pdf
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1691875/

All three point towards sexual selection as generally increasing the
likelihood of species survival, and interestingly, the one experimental,
controlled study is the most supportive of sexual selection as increasing
survival.

Gould was a very incompetent scientist with a bully pulpit.

Rafał
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20151007/25a6bd5f/attachment.html>