3 ms·

Simply being tall requires a higher caloric intake, and thus puts tall people at a disadvantage. The genes for tall stature do not express themselves when that

Simply being tall requires a higher caloric intake, and thus puts tall people at a disadvantage. The genes for tall stature do not express themselves when that higher food intake is not present during developmental stages. Tall people are more a phenomena of advanced agriculture than natural selection. They are not necessarily more formitable, but are rather a larger target, or a clumsier hunter. Evolutionarily, being tall means a lifetime of above-average access to food, and while that's desireable in a mate, it's just as much about the environment one lives in as it is the genes one's born with.

jamesrcole 7y ago
> Simply being tall requires a higher caloric intake, and thus puts tall people at a disadvantage This is assuming that food intake is the only factor contributing to fitness. There are other possibilities. E.g. taller (larger) males may have advantages in competing with other males for mates, and thus be better at spreading their genes. Females who preferred such males would thus be better at spreading their genes down the generations. > Evolutionarily, being tall means a lifetime of above-average access to food, and while that's desireable in a mate, it's just as much about the environment one lives in as it is the genes one's born with. Evolution doesn't only concern the genes, as if environmental factors were distinct from evolution. Fitness is always a function of both genes and the environment.
Someone 7y ago
”The genes for tall stature do not express themselves when that higher food intake is not present during developmental stages.” So, it seems tall ⇒ was well-fed in his youth ⇒ must be from a rich family ⇒ will provide for my children well ⇒ attractive. I don’t claim it did, but I do not see a reason evolution couldn’t pick up such an indirect correlation.

jamesrcole 7y ago

> Simply being tall requires a higher caloric intake, and thus puts tall people at a disadvantage This is assuming that food intake is the only factor contributing to fitness. There are other possibilities. E.g. taller (larger) males may have advantages in competing with other males for mates, and thus be better at spreading their genes. Females who preferred such males would thus be better at spreading their genes down the generations. > Evolutionarily, being tall means a lifetime of above-average access to food, and while that's desireable in a mate, it's just as much about the environment one lives in as it is the genes one's born with. Evolution doesn't only concern the genes, as if environmental factors were distinct from evolution. Fitness is always a function of both genes and the environment.

Someone 7y ago

”The genes for tall stature do not express themselves when that higher food intake is not present during developmental stages.” So, it seems tall ⇒ was well-fed in his youth ⇒ must be from a rich family ⇒ will provide for my children well ⇒ attractive. I don’t claim it did, but I do not see a reason evolution couldn’t pick up such an indirect correlation.