Evolution does not have a purpose or a direction. It does not deliberately "loose" things like athleticism you theoretically wouldn't need as much of. In certain conditions, it may ALLOW the non-athletic to reproduce in equal numbers with the athletic. However, the genes of the White (dare I say it?) savages we are all descended from are still floating about, to the extent that we are still the strongest people on Earth for instance. With a little effort, such genes could be intensified.
"now as for evolution, how many time do you have to run fast or long for your survival?"
-I don't. That's why we civilized people have experienced a certain amount of devolution. Frankly, I don't believe you have to be as witty as say, the Iceman was, to get by and have lots of kids today, either.
We are setting records because the genes for strength and speed, as I said, don't disapear, just the genes for the opposite become relatively more common. And because we have better training methods, enough to eat, and performance-enhancing drugs.
Getting back to primeval times, however, you would sometimes have to run fast or long for your survival. Especially long. Discovery recently printed a story about the fact that while nearly every large mammal can outrun a human, a human can outlast and chase down nearly every animal over a long distance. This is probably an important factor in why humans evolved as they did. Comparing the West African to the Nordic, the West African evolved in an enviroment with edible material practically everywhere...if you are not too picky. You wouldn't nessecarily have to be as clever a hunter, fisherman, or trapper. A woman wouldn't nessecarily need a provisioning male. You might not have to doggedly run down that ungulate, kill it, and then lug the meat back to your women and children on your back, because you might spot some fish, or a large snake, or some big fat grubss...whatever, theres alot of biomass. Meanwhile, your woman has probably gathered enough fruit for herself and the offspring to survive while you were away. So you have no evolutionary pressure to replace your sprinting ability (which remember, is feeble in man compared to almost any animal) with as much endurance as other people, or the pressure to develop as much I.Q., or the same general social and sexual tendencies.
While primeval Eurasia had a good amount of rich biomass, alot of it was comparitively hard to come by. Vast herds of steaks-on-the-hoof, yes, but mean, far-ranging, difficult to hunt. Like I say, you had to run it down, figure out a good way to kill it without being killed (using the latest weapon technologies like the atlatle, and coordinating with your fellow man), etc. Then you had to carry it back, otherwise your family probably dies an icy death, not being able to gather too much in the Winter. Did I mention you have to do all of this in the snow, and probably do a huge amount of heavy lifting and carrying to get adequate shelter and firewood?
It's funny, I've read White Nationalists more than once opine something along the lines of "Blacks evolved just to hunt." Well, if you know anything about hunting, you realize the mental and physical attributes of Whites (the intelligence, the stoicism, the patience, the endurance, the spacial cognition) are alot better suited to hunting than that of the average Black. Even formerly civilized Whites who became savvy to their new enviroments often became as good or better woodsmen than the natives, like the Mountain Men of the American West. Even today, I think Whites are about the only people with a hunting instinct so strong that vast numbers of them still endure all of hunting's discomforts and trials for the sheer enjoyment of the chase.Edited by: White_Savage
