When I was at Mississippi State, I repeatedly noted two traits in white women (the majority population on campus): thin to no lips and high hairline. To an individual scientifically inclined, the question was why ugly traits hadn't disappeared in a place so multicultural? In a population of any species, beautiful traits are chosen and ugly traits are rejected. With time, the population is bound to lose ugly traits. But that hadn't happened there. Now, I see that what I was observing wasn't natural selection but artificial selection. Consider some female dating preferences I noticed. I am disregarding male preferences because we all know what they are. The human gene pool is primarily resolved by females and a few males whom most females follow.
1. Girls preferred their own race. Asians, blacks, and whites appeared to date what they considered their own race. They were brainwashed to think that race is real. The word interracial is highly repugnant to those who understand that all humans are one family. If they weren’t, supposedly different races would produce unhealthy sterile offsprings, which is not the case. As a result of this ignorance, they were not driven by beauty or virtue but by race. Thus, they declined in both and inclined in race.
2. Liberal girls preferred liberal guys. No surprise here. But we all know that men really don’t agree to liberal ideas like militant feminism, political correctness, etc. They merely acted liberal because most girls in college were liberals. Acting liberal was a deceptive means to get girls. You can guess that these men are likely to be ugly because good looking masculine guys can get laid without playing the liberal game. Thus, girls who date liberal guys may satisfy their political agenda but are bound to choose sub-par traits for their children.
3. Majority of girls were Churchians who dated Chrurchian guys only. Once again, men of value have no reason to play the Churchian game. Masculine men are inclined to rationality, not to religion. As expected, Churchian guys were less attractive and less masculine than their normal rational counterparts. It makes me think of Sam. He dated girls much above his league. Girls competed for his attention. Why? Because he held powerful positions in Churchian circles. He had to. He didn't even have hair on his head. The girl he married secured a comfortable life for her but cursed her children with an ugly father and potentially bad genes.
Thus, we see evidence for more artificial selection than natural selection. Girls were driven by superficial and futile things, not by beauty or virtue. Of course, female preference is controlled from further up, by people who control culture (not getting into that today). It is true that natural selection is bound to produce beautiful and healthy people. Artificial selection may or may not. It also means that a nation can be made ugly and unhealthy by brainwashing its people to think that they are superior or better in race, religion, culture, or ethnicity. Then, its inhabitant won’t marry anyone they don't consider to be their kind. Meanwhile, those among them who are driven by love, beauty, and virtue will break the code and leave behind beautiful families who are driven hopefully by the same values. Perhaps, artificially selected genes will eventually get replaced by naturally selected genes. Or maybe not.