Why don't we clone people like Einstein and Perelman?

You know that Phelps loses sometimes, right?

He lost to an Asian kid just the other day

Because the people in power want to stay in power and if we allow people to pursue things they can do, they will rise up to the power of rich people.

What's your point? There's something separating him from the average person and it's clearly not only the amount of time he spent in the pool.

Same with von Neumann or einstein.

It is the amount of time he spent in the pool though

Kek

I seriously HOPE you don't believe that

>Einstein and Von Neumann studied therefore intelligence is completely environmental
Wat

That's not evidence. You are showing one example where michael Phelps was not the best swimmer in the world. Eventually, someone is going to have better genes than him or more practice, but it points to people having better genes because people would try to be better than phelps, and they have only beaten him in his age. You didn't prove anything.

If it's genetic, then explain why didn't he win anything in 2004?

>he didn't win in 2004 therefore it's proof his height and massively long limbs played no role in his other victories
Nigga what do you hear yourself now?

>Protip: even if you spent 100000 hours swimming he'd still swim wayyy better than you!
Prove it

Swimming makes you taller if you do it since child, so does basketball

If we're going that far, we would never bother making humans as flawed as Einstein.

What room does a manufactured population have for imperfections?

Well he competes with other people who already spent tens of thousands of hours swimming just like him and still btfos them. So there's that.

top kek the only thing that makes you tall is your genes and your nutrition gtfo

he spent more hours, thus he wins

'no'

yup

that's why despite his "superior genes" (according to you) he didn't win anything in 2004

Youre wrong
You're very detached from reality if you think all the average person has to do to break Olympic fucking records is out in the same amount of time training for them.

Also phelps won plenty of gold in 2004 idk wtf you're talking about honestly

> there's seriously a nature vs nurture thread on Veeky Forums
> its full of black and white fallacies

Then 2000

Whatever his first Olympics were, he didn't win anything despite his superior genes, because he had to compete with people who trained much more than him

He was 15 at his first olympics and placed 5th. 9 months later he was setting world records.

Also still holds many age group records that stand from when he was young.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Phelps

this thread is fucking gay as shit, it's literally highschoolers and undergrads arguing. wouldn't be surprised if there was a grad student or two.

Because they're not chickens or flowers.

He was 17

>intelligence has been show to be 60% to 80% heritable.

Try 10%.

nature.com/mp/journal/v20/n1/full/mp2014105a.html

this
My parents are extremely dumb but I'm smart.

Phelps was 15 at his first Olympics in 2000

And how do you know that they're dumb? Respect your parents kid.

>100%
sure, honey

>le 10000 hours meme.

>10,000 hours meme.

>Hard work won't make me succeed!
heh
Are you afraid of failure, little boy?

You can't even be in good shape and you are trying to be a greek in the modern ages. Pitiful.

That really depends on how you define intelligence. IQ seems to have a degree of heritability, but that amount has been debated for some time.

As for why we don't clone these people, what would be the point? Even if IQ is heritable, becoming a scientists is 100% environmental. There is no guarantee that these clones would do anything with their lives other than what average people do.

Because we're not very good at cloning currently.

Because 'ethics' fags.

Because funding.

Because roody-poos.