Is America losing the brain versus brawn battle?

@sharone74 (4838)
United States
March 20, 2009 1:44pm CST
Americans are the biggest people on the planet. We commonly throw offspring that top six or seven feet. While around the world it seems the other countries of the world are breeding for ever smaller individuals. In addition to the smaller and smaller people they are starting to design and engineer the world for smaller people. Cars with seat tracks that keep you right up on the steering wheel if you are average sized. Automobile pedals have been edging closer and closer together for the use of people with smaller feet and shorter legs. While conversely trucks (America's workhorses) have been adding space and for both the drivers and passengers as well as all their gear for years. It seems that space, the final frontier, which we seem to be eagerly trying to populate with Earth humans, is being designed and built for smaller individuals to work and thrive. The international space station includes passages and private areas so small that they would give a splunker (cave explorer) claustrophobia. America is leading the race to the stars but we're also allowing the new frontier to be populated with tiny spaces that will be at the least inconvenient and constraining for a population that continues to shovel bio engineered meat and vegetables down our throats which all contain growth hormones and as a result each generation of Americans is being grown bigger and badder than ever. America also leads the planet in wastefull spending and throwing both our money and our collective weight around wherever we like. We are also the country with the highest percentage of overweight and obese people. With estimations that by 2049 100% of Americans will be overweight or obese. So what does that predict for the future of our nation when everything is being built smaller and more compact all the time? I mentioned the space program because we spend billions of dollars a year on our part of the international space exploration programs. We have built a large proportion of that muti tentacled metal octopy floating out there in space. As other countries have, we have found better and more efficient ways to reduce the amount of space that things take up that we take up there. Well if we are designing everything but ourselves to fit in smaller spaces then why is it that our space program demands that male candidates top a minimum of 6 ft tall and women at either 5'6" or 5'8". That would seem to be a counterproductive conflict in policy wouldn't it? And finally while we have concentrated of breeding bigger, taller, stronger successive generations in this country, other countries have focused upon breeding the maximum supportable number of ever smaller individuals, and ever smarter. The US has long been underperforming in academics in the international arena for a very long time. So is big and dumb the ultimate goal of our government or did we just choose the wrong fork on the evolutionary decision tree. Is big, strong, and dumb better than small, compact, efficient, and highly intelligent?
No responses