inbreeding

Funny that when we think of inbreeding we think of low IQ as one of the common characteristics.

The actual consequences of inbreeding are overblown by most.

Especially the accusation of "inbreeding".One thing that is wrong is the lack of "semantic versioning".

There is no analog of this in humans; inbreeding is unnecessary and does no tiger a favor by continuing it.

The author is not asking for planned execution, but to put an end to the inbreeding programs disguised as "conservation efforts".

One of the cornerstones of selective breeding is systematic inbreeding.

Applying this to humans would mean if we were currently inbreeding slaves with Down syndrome to produce children with the same condition for entertainment purposes, that we should stop doing that.

Given enough time, intellectual inbreeding happens, where the vast majority of participants adhere to a very strict dogma.

Assuming your average descendant has more than one child, and inbreeding is negligible, the number of descendants increases exponentially by generation.

During a bottleneck, inbreeding-related genetic disorders become an issue.

Oddly enough, if they have been isolated for long enough, they will therefore be free of most genetic diseases, since the rare ones will be manifested early on in their isolation due to inbreeding, and then selected against.

Maybe evolution selects for genetic "purging" behaviors during such bottlenecks as a means of ensuring fitness... basically during the bottleneck you'd become Nazis to escape the effects of inbreeding, and these impulses might stay afterwords.

>But the breeding of humans is not so wisely supervised, particularly in a narrow Southern society where the closest kind of inbreeding is not only stylish and acceptable, but far more convenient—to the parents—than setting their offspring free to find their own mates, for their own reasons and their own ways.