Women are getting “hotter” as more beautiful women reproduce at a higher rate and have a higher proportion of girls to boys? We post, you decide:
Follow DISCOVER on Twitter!
DISCOVER Blogs: Bad Astronomy- DISCOVER Blogs: Cosmic Variance
- DISCOVER Blogs: The Loom
- DISCOVER Blogs: 80beats
- DNA Scanner Proves That NYC Sushi Contains Endangered Bluefin Tuna
- Are Politics Skin-Deep? Liberal Voters See Obama as Lighter Skinned
- Ravenous, Leaping Asian Carp Poised to Invade Great Lakes
- New Take on Titan Hints at More Fuel for Potential Life
- LHC Flings Protons Once Again; Scientists Celebrate With Caution
- DISCOVER Blogs: Intersection
July 28th, 2009 at 6:53 pm
worst science article? – well consider which news network ran the piece, i say yes
p.s. hey Melissa, what happened to your blog reality base
July 29th, 2009 at 1:09 am
Well, I don’t know the explanation as to why women are so much more attractive than men, part of it would by my orientation I guess. But looking around it seems hard to deny there is a more objective component of that too.
Could it be that men select women on their looks exclusively (oh yeah and they have to be nice and longlegg.. I mean smart and blon.. I mean smart too) and men are selected on the basis on which they are able to provide: preferably the evolutionary model, the symmetrical muscular type, for creating the offspring (which by the way is why women, like bosons always like to occupy the same space at the same time) and then a stable (don’t need to worry about competition) working jackass to raise them with. Because women have been playing this game over evolutionairy time scales they are so much better at multitasking and infinitely smarter than men too. I suspect one day we will find this is why the male X chromosome shrunk to Y proportions and I expect to be informed about this by Fox, otherwise I wouldn’t trust it.
July 29th, 2009 at 10:46 am
Was this article co-authored by Herbert Spencer? Just wondering.
July 29th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
It is so obvious that FOX has a cloning operation producing beautiful AND smart women news anchors. They are so amazing that one even became the governor of our largest state and may be our next President. The only logical, not liberal emotional, conclusion is that evolution is refining our species to produce beautiful AND smart women!
The best of this species are articulate, convincing, attractive, and Conservative.
July 29th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
Mr. Adams I concur with your findings and your conclusions can not be underscore enough!
July 30th, 2009 at 7:52 am
I believe evolution requires the inability of less fit individuals to reproduce. The speed of evolution could be influenced by the percentage of a species that reproduces over time. Humans have a very high likelihood of reproducing. Despite the high variances of physical characteristics humans have and the extent from which ours can stray from our parents’, I don’t believe we are evolving quickly enough – if at all – to actually observe a change happening. Also, the length of time between generations has lengthened significantly since the neolithic revolution slowing the process even more.
We have gotten noticeably taller and heavier in the last couple of centuries, but I don’t think this is due to a change in our genes. More likely an increase in the availability of nutrition.
Hotter? If I judged purely from watching TV, sure.
July 30th, 2009 at 9:41 am
Women are not getting hotter! It just appears that they are because only the most beautiful and talented are shown on TV etc. From what I have seen a lot of not necessarily attractive women are reproducing just fine.
August 2nd, 2009 at 1:09 pm
Sexual selection acts on males much more than females. Almost all females have the option of reproducing whereas males must compete amongst each other for access to females.