No problem whatsoever with waivers. Are you worried that too many brain dead slugs will Darwin themselves? Why? Do you foresee some future shortage of morons?
The problem is trying to make everything safe for morons….how are we supposed to cull them if you remove ALL evolutionary pressures.
Idiocracy was a documentary from the near future.

Besides, if they’re dumb enough for all that, they’re dumb enough to know that if they can’t see the danger, the danger can’t see them, so just walk the cliff edge with your towel wrapped around your head, for safety.

If I want to risk my life climbing an active rock slide, that should be my and the recovery team my estate hires’s business. The idea that suicide is against the law is moronic to me….the only crime that is prosecuted only against those who fail at committing it. Suicide by overt stupidity or intentional high risk lifestyles not only doesn’t bother me, I fully support it as long as it doesn’t involuntarily endanger others.

BTW, the skier death doesn’t sound sad one bit to me, she died doing what she loved, and part of that love was undoubtedly of the danger level of skiing out of bounds, the rush of skiing with a 1000ft drop as the punishment for crashing (or stepping too far). I would think she probably really enjoyed 99% of her last day. Definitely the kind of horrific, quick death I hope for. Way better than prolonged disease or decline.

very nicely done summary of earth's history - although some pretty speculative inferences about the evolutionary process detracts from the credibility of the whole.

Possibly trivial, but I'd think doing by hand with no calibration would be tiresome and possibly add in errors. It's still evolutionary if not revolutionary.

Carefully

None of the endothermic reactions in this video have been suggested as methods to regulate global temperature, because even if they could be scaled up enough to make a global difference they don't address the systems which regulate the earth's temperature.

Some things which have affected global temperatures either up or down are:

• Volcanic eruptions can cause global cooling, for example the 1991 Mt. Pinatubo eruption released around 20 million tons of sulphur dioxide causing global cooling of approx 0.5°C over the following three years (ref: https://earthdata.nasa.gov/learn/sensing-our-planet/volcanoes-and-climate-change and https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/1997/fs113-97/ )
  
• Increased rates of erosion of the right type of rocks can increase CO₂ absorption and reduce global temperatures that way, https://earth.stanford.edu/news/how-weathering-rocks-cooled-earth#gs.cmy3h0
  
• Cyanobacteria, https://www.caltech.edu/about/news/evolutionary-accident-probably-caused-worst-snowball-earth-episode-study-shows-1026
  

Know who you take advice from....
Just gonna leave this here....

Wiki-
Dr Michael Klaper-In August 1993 Klaper issued a medical certificate for the insurers of two movies that River Phoenix was working on at the time, Dark Blood and Interview With the Vampire. The certificate was signed by both Klaper and Phoenix and stated that Phoenix had never used "LSD, heroin, cocaine, alcohol in excess, or any other narcotic, depressant, stimulant or psychedelic. At the time Phoenix was deeply into the drug scene and died from a drug overdose two months later on October 31, 1993. Phoenix's death resulted in Dark Blood being scrapped, and his role in Interview with the Vampire being replaced by Christian Slater. A total $US5.7 million was paid out by the insurers of both movies as the result of Phoenix's death. Since Phoenix's death, insurance rates have increased significantly, medical certificates are no longer accepted, and actors are required to undergo more rigorous medical examination prior to being insured. [23]

According to oncologist David Gorski "Klaper subscribes to the all-too-common claim that a vegan diet is better than any other and supplements that claim with a belief that undergoing fasts, in which one consumes only water, is a major part of the path to health and wellness". He supports multiple pseudoscience medical claims such as acupuncture, chiropractic, naturopathy and border-line "germ theory denialism". Klaper also gives "highly dubious advice for cancer patients, even claiming that fasting can shrink malignant tumors. Klaper claims that fasts will clear up inflammation, eczema, arthritis and other issues. "The situation" according to Gorski, is "way more complicated than Dr. Klaper paints it". As a surgeon himself, Gorski is appalled that Klaper claims that fasting encourages "faster wound healing" a statement that Gorski calls "Bullshit!". Magician Penn Jillette reported on multiple podcasts that he has lost over 25 pounds on Klaper's water fast diet, Gorski responded that of course he will lose weight on a water-only diet. In Gorski's opinion as a medical doctor himself, "Jillette has fallen "hook, line, and sinker for a whole lot of dietary pseudoscience and promoting it on his show with a credulous interview with someone like Dr. Klaper". Gorski hopes that Jillette will eventually realize "that Dr. Klaper is peddling highly dubious claims (at best). Basically, the product Dr. Klaper is peddling in terms of science is a massive exaggeration based on dubious science, cherry picked cases, and bad evolutionary analogies. Worse, fasts, even when supervised by a physician, are potentially dangerous"

Upvoting that feels dirty, at least in the direct sense.

I suppose this is inevitable, merely part of a process that has included turning points like ET's Reeses Pieces. But isn't there some point at which people (*enough* people, not just rabid anti-advertising nutters like me) get turned off by this and tune out in numbers high enough to affect the bottom line? Parasites (successful ones) generally avoid killing their hosts, but I suppose there are some mishaps along the evolutionary trail...

Kept wondering why the thumbnail was making me hungry.

Then I noticed I was reading the title as "Why Enchiladas Are Evolutionary Misfits"

Why Echidnas Are Evolutionary Misfits has been added as a related post - related requested by PlayhousePals on that post.

dr peterson is a professor of psychology at university of toronto,and former harvard professor.

i like him but often disagree with some of his criticisms,but he does source all his claims on his website and his books.

though his book "maps of meaning" is a bit of a slog.

one thing i admire about peterson is his careful use of words,which is where the interviewer was getting tripped up.

she was not really listening,and was instead reacting based on assumptions,rather than his actual words.which is why she kept with the "so what you're saying.."

the extreme left has labeled peterson an "alt-right" demagogue and a "transphobe" but both of these allegations are patently ridiculous with even a tertiary examination of what peterson is saying.

you don't have to agree with him,but as this interviewer found out,presume at your own risk.

he will may you pay for your presumptions and arrogance.

i find both dr peterson and dr haidt invaluable in understanding the psychology of human societies.peterson is an evolutionary psychologist while haidt focuses on moral psychology.

but what do i know..i am just a ghetto white trash kid from the burbs.
still interesting.

Devil's advocate:

First up, If we're looking for "something we can't imagine", by definition we are unable to search for it.

Second, there's every possibility that aliens ARE very similar to us. There's a principle known as the Mediocrity Principle that states that if you pick a thing at random from a set, it's more likely to common than unusual. In this case, we are picking from the (hypothetical) set of life-sustaining planets, and using the only example we're aware of: Earth.

It's not unreasonable to assume that Earth is typical of life-sustaining planets. There doesn't appear to be anything particularly special about it.... it's a rocky planet in the "Goldilocks zone" where water is liquid. We've found plenty of those.

So there's actually a good possibility that life on other planets could face the same evolutionary pressures and arrive at the same solutions.

Aliens might not be that different at all.

Oh man, "evolutionary chart in reverse" is a *fantastic* line...

yeah..i didnt really get it either.
had to look it up even.
making me do research to understand a video,fucking kids these days and their new verbiage.

A cuckold is the husband of an adulterous wife. In evolutionary biology, the term is also applied to males who are unwittingly investing parental effort in offspring that are not genetically their own.[1]

i guess the word is applicable,in a severely abstract way.kind of a stretch if you ask me.

I've seen a few of these on the sift at least, and I remember a number of us were sceptical. A lot of the time you don't want to be the party pooper that ruins it for everyone by whinging about something being fake.

I think a lot of the time people call things fake but can't quite explain why they think it is too, and I put that down to a subtle reading of things like:
- how likely is that to have happened?
- were the actors behaving within normal parameters for the context? (people hanging around with cameras or props, bears chasing people when they normally wouldn't)
- was there anything to gain out of a successful video? (associated youtube channel)
- did people hit cues and say things that were too perfect?
- if you can't see a cut, can you see an obvious place for a GOOD cut that you missed?
- how hard is it to fake?

What with humans being sociable animals and our evolutionary success is tied to interacting with other humans, I think by and large we're pretty good at spotting bullshit. It takes a very very good fake to trick the majority.

I have to strongly disagree with the suggestion that animals are killed and tortured for my "taste preferences" and "pleasure".

It gives me no pleasure that an animal has to die for me to eat. My pleasure in the consumption of that animal is a fleeting, automatic chemical reaction triggered in my body. In an evolutionary sense, i only receive this pleasure because it prolongs the survival of my species to feel it.

Most of these arguments reek of over simplification and ignorance to the reality of the society westerners live in.

In ideal conditions, i would eat meat from animals that i tended, who died of natural causes (mostly old age i assume) which i would personally butcher. In reality, it is not possible and even if it were possible for one person, it would not be possible for every person - we have limited space, limited resources, limits placed by law, limits on our time. As well as the cost of the land, I would have to hope enough animals died naturally to sell enough humane meat to pay taxes on the land and maintain my farming equipment, buy grain for the animals and so on. Or maybe i could grow my own grain and use primitive DIY tools, but then i'd probably need help for all the farming i'd have to do every day and now i'd need enough animals to die to feed three, so more land, more grain... Oops, it looks like this is getting complicated doesn't it. Shall we keep going until we reach a society of 70 odd million people, or should we consider that the problem is far more complicated than comments here would care to acknowledge?

Furthermore gluten is often the primary protein source for vegans, but i have a disease that requires me to avoid that protein in entirety. The smug, holier-than-thou field radiating from certain commenters here will i'm sure extend far enough to condescendingly say "ah, but you can be a vegan and avoid gluten, you poor, uneducated, smiling murderer!" Yes, and you could live your life without ever being touched by the sun's rays, or sail a small sailboat without ever getting wet, not even a droplet. And how can we know what effect gluten-free-veganism may have on public health when it is extended to a population of 7 billion? What a dangerous experiment to salivate over - reckless and potentially harmful in a way that a butcher could never hope to be.

It would be wonderful if the world was ideal. I wouldn't have this disease, and all people of the world could enjoy their own 10 acre farm and eat only those animals whose time had come. Unfortunately when i am abroad, away from home, the only source of protein that i can entirely trust might perhaps be a roast chicken. And i will eat it, the only true pleasure from which i take is that i will not spend the next three days doubled up in bed.

There are people worse off than me, but i don't know enough about their situation to use it as a point in this discussion. To people like me, the language used by some people here makes me think of someone dancing around at a diabetics convention shouting "I can't believe you losers have to use insulin! I hope you all realise that drug addicts use needles!"

I reject any notion that these people have a moral advantage over me. Have any of them ever heard of walking a mile in another man's shoes, or does their narrow mind only reach as far as "ME"?

By the way, plants are also alive. Or is this about sentient life? Shall we move on to abortion then, if non-sentient life is ok to end? Shall we have the philosophical discussion about degrees of sentience and types of sentience and whether we can even know if a plant has its own brand of sentience? If yes, let's try to at least do it without you being smug and in return without me being sarcastic.

Worrying about how people treat vegans? How about the language used to describe people who have no choice in the matter, lest that choice be never leave your own house and eat only this very small list of things which you may or may not find too disgusting to stomach? Am i to live in misery and squander my life so that a chicken could have an extra 2 years to run in circles? This issue is not fucking black and white despite the attempts to paint it so.