Note how in both cases the person using the theory will always describe themselves as the superior variant within that theory and invoke the respectability of "scientific theory" to back up his feeling of superiority and justify his desire to control (or worse) the inferior people.
Hang on, which do you feel is the superiour alternative again? And why?Every single person I've come across using r/K selection theory to describe human affairs has been defining themselves as a "K". This is an observation, not a value judgement on my part. I believe it is a value judgement on the part of the users, though.
I don't think a website called "anonymousconservative" is where I want to get my etymological and scientific definitions from 
Right, you get it from his books. If the books are wrong then explain how. They are free so you can't even use money as an excuse.I am not saying the books are "wrong", or that the scientific theory is flawed. I am saying people keep misappropriating the theory to serve their ideological needs. Anonymous conservative? Just reading through the synopsis of the book reveals its conservative bias. This is all I have to say about this at the moment. I won't try to argue people out of their dogmas, especially when they serve as a backbone to their identity as a superior human being.
