Why We Should Rethink Age of Marriage and Relationship

 

In our modern world people marry less and less. People marry less and less; diverse rates are sky high. Number of singles and not looking for relationships are not only record high but already posed to overtake number of married people. And if you count only successful marriages, then these are almost non-existent. Even among those who are married only fraction are actually find happiness in this arrangement.

It's pretty clear, that marriage and relationships between genders are clearly not working in modern world. Current notions of how marriage supposed to work no longer work and a reform is direly needed.

Before I write about solutions, I will look back at history of marriage and relationship. 20th century idea that people should marry at around 18 years old to someone of the same age of themselves is more of an exception than a rule. Parents like the idea of such picture-perfect couple but this arrangement does not work for actual people in question.

Historically people married younger and there was often a significant age difference between man and woman. People like to bash Quran and Prophet Muhammad for marrying a 9-year-old girl, but Bible has plenty of similar examples. For modern person this looks like a paedophilia, but in the past, it was considered normal. 

However, it's not that morals or ethics have changed, but rather we as people have changed. Over the course of last 2000 years that passed since Bible and Quran we as humans have evolved and changed, so we are no longer the same species we once were. Yes, that's as radial as it sounds.

Back in times of Ancient Egypt, average life expectancy was merely 25 something years old, hardly anyone lived longer than 35 years old. Yes, Ramses II lived to 90 but he was an exception. That does not however mean that people died young. That will be extrapolation of modern notions on the times past. Instead, ancient Egyptians lived faster. They grew faster, reached maturity faster, aged faster and died faster. Ancient Egyptians were considered aged at 35, modern humans are at 65 to 70. What takes modern human 70 to 90 years to complete and ancient Egyptian completed in just 30 to 40 years.

One may call ancient Egyptians a fast growing or early maturing, but back in the days, life was simpler and standards of maturity and adulthood were proportionally easier and simpler.

Nonetheless in ancient Egypt a person was considered sexually mature legal adult at 12. They married and had kids at around 15. They lived just long enough to see their kids reach adulthood, marry and have kids of their own before dying.

Other communities such Jews, also observed the same age frames. For example, Bar mitzvah is performed at 13 and signify coming of age. Modern notions see it as merely cultural ceremony that does not confer legal adulthood, but for ancient Jews that was equivalent of reaching age of majority: 18 years old, or 21 years old in the US.

If one is concerned that it was far too long ago, to know for sure, then I can bring a more recent historical data.

For example, during Middle Ages average King lived to 50, maximum 55 years long, but dying at younger age was common too. Commoners probably lived even less than that. Proportionally age of majority at these times was 15 years old and people married around 20, around middle of their age.

Even as recent as 300 years old, 15 was considered old enough to rule country and command a military. Good example is famous Carolus Rex. A recency consul due to his minor age governed until he turned 15. Afterwards he took reigns, ruled his country as executive monarch and gave orders to his military officers. He scored his actual military victories at age that by modern standards considered too young to drink beer. Needless to say, at 15 they will not let to enlist as private, much less give orders to Chiefs of Staff. 

Carolus died in battle at 36 and his Great Northern War counterpart Peter the Great at 52, in his bed at perfectly normal age for a wealthy monarch with all the money for the best doctors there was back then.

In both Ancient Egyptian and Medieval examples short life expectancy meant, you need to marry and have kids earlier. However, people married not when they were adult enough to do it, but when they were close enough to death. Just enough to see them grow before you die. 

Chances that you may die at any time made people think that they should have kids earlier just to make sure there is a posterity. Modern long-life expectancy in contrast make one think you can always do it later. If your parents and people much older than yourself are still around, then surely you will still be alive 30 years later and can always have kids then. Nothing to rush for.

Fundamentally children are there to replace those who died of old age. If they are not dying, then there is no room for children. 

Since modern humans can sometimes live to 90 and even 100, all other milestones of life should proportionally extend further. After all it will not make sense that only retirement gets longer, meanwhile all others life milestones remain the same. Retirement by far the least important part of life so it will make no sense for it to get any longer.

If you take Ancient Egyptian timeframe and multiply it by 2 to 2.5 to match new life expectancy, then you get sexual maturity at 24 to 30, marriage at 40 to 45. However, that does not take into consideration how much time is needed to actually reach objectives of each segment of life. If anything, it's the middle part of life that gets longer and retirement remains roughly the same. Modern life is much more complex than what it was before, so more time is needed for a person to fully grow as adult and be able to have a family.

Parents should be obliged to support their children way into their 20s, 30s and even 40s. I guess social security is currently doing it for those parents who do not do so: pains of transitional arrangements to deal with double standard parents who research complex surgeries that could extend their lives another 5 years but want their kids to mature as early as possible so they have grandchildren. 

Legal age works fine as it is, so we do not need to change it. Marriage however clearly isn't, so it should happen later in life.

When it comes to marriage in particular, Jeffrey Epstein methods work surprisingly well. Yes, he is a convicted sex offender, but as the song sings "new ways come in sin". Certainly, a section of society hates and despises him, but people who were involved with him were very happy, both older men who use his Lolita express to find themselves little girls and little girls themselves. All the so-called victims came to him willingly and knew fully well what they were signing up for, Jeffrey Epstein did not need to promise them candy in an unmarked white van, hit them unconscious and drag them into the van. The only reason he was convicted is because women were of too young age to consent, not that they refuse to go with him.

However here I will not leave it at just trust the Epstein on that one. I will logically explain why Epstein way works and modern equal marriage isn't.

The reason lies in female psychology. Women are meant to be led and controlled by men. Their psychology resists the idea of equal partnership where decisions are shared, their psychology constantly seeks a man who is stronger than her, someone who can lead her, not please her, not care for her, not serve her, but lead her.

Because of that women want a man who is superior to her in every way imaginable. They want someone who is bigger, older, richer, more experienced. That naturally pushes women towards older men. 

Some men dismiss it as gold digging and say things like its only because he is rich, but that ignores the real psychological needs of a women. Even if 18 years old virgin had billions she would still pick 50 years old CEO. Even if 50 years old was poor, she would still go with him rather than with a young block of her age. That is how women are and ignoring this fact will cause even more unhappy marriages, bitter divorces, pain and misery.

It works the same way in reverse too. Men will always prefer young virgin 18 years old girl to an older and more mature women with experience, no matter how these lonely mature women lament this fact and call such men paedophiles. I will write about men later, now back to women.

Because of that she can never accept a man who is of the same age as her. Man, who knows only as much as she is and probably more childish and immature than she is can never command her respect. Because of that she will never be satisfied with him.

Sure, she may marry such a man of her age, but not because she loves him. She will marry him only because her dad or mom will tell her to. She will do it because she can acknowledge authority of her own parent. After all he is just that kind of older more experienced man, her psychology craves so she obliges and obeys his orders and marries a boy, daddy picked for her.

That does not result in a happy marriage however, just in happy dad. The girl in question will never be happy with the boy she married as her psychology demands a daddy, not a boy. A replacement to her actual dad in pretty much every way.

Thus, scandals and all sorts of marital drama ensure. She complains, throws fits, yells, cheats and goes completely hysterical all because she was paired with a someone who is not capable of being her husband all to please her parents who see them as picture perfect couple.

Other cultures, like Indians or Muslims do not do this to their daughters, they marry them up to men who are much older than themselves. As a result, their marriages are much more stable and fulfilled. Even with modern no-fault divorce available, they do not split up. Yet modern leftists persist with notion of marriage of the equals, despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Now on man side of thing. An average 18-year-old guy is completely unprepared to be a husband for several important reasons.

To begin with, unlike woman whose role is to marry and have children, a man's role was to be a provider. A provider means being someone in a community, having a job. Man's status in a society determined not by who he is married to but rather by his job, education and circle of friends. Learning a profession, cultivating friends and getting ahead in society is a complex and difficult task that takes a lot of time. Nonetheless men cannot bypass it as it is a path to success in life. 

Alternative to it is a transient existence at the bottom of society with no money, status or connections. A typical dysfunctional family or alcoholic or drug addict dad and a prostitute mom. Most of them do not live long and those who do live do so with one leg in the grave.

Thus, an average 18-year-old man from a functional normal family is mentally geared not towards running a family but towards studying, socialising with friends and carving themselves a place in a society. Saddling them with a wife family will do them no good and will distract them from the objective that will actually determine their future success and failure.

Needless to say, a young man like that have neither time, nor the ability to actual be a husband. He has career to make, social ladders to climb, wealth to make and more. He has no time for a wife. Women instinctively feel it and repealed from them.

To make matters worse, an average 18-year-old does not even know what he even wants from woman. Sure, parents taught them something, but these things are fundamentally useless when it comes to real thing. Typical family raises boys to not be husbands and masters of the home, but footmen and servants to higher ups. Parents like image of a guy bending a knee to a "princess" and offering her "hand and heart" together with a wedding ring. However, this is but a silly and dangerous fiction that does not lay proper foundation for a successful marriage: remember that women are looking for a master, not a servant and men are never happy in a servant role.

Thus, young man has to spend quite some time in his adulthood to unlearn these things, his parents instilled in him, and reconnect with the actual role they were meant to play in a relationships and bedroom. All these things drive age, at which he is ready for marriage further and further away.

To make matters worse, bad economy, stagnant wages and stuck career progression only further push age of marriage for men. 

By the time a man fully matures, gets clear idea what he wants from a marriage and a woman, reaches a boss stage in his career and makes enough money to buy a home and is finally ready for the family state of his life, he will be long in his 50s or even 60s.

Women cannot have children after menopause that happen when they are 46-year-old. However, this is not the only issue here. Just as much as women prefer older men, men prefer younger women. More mature women lament it as much as young guys lament their "gold digging" female peers who prefer 50 years old billionaires, but male psychology is just a strong of a factor as a female one, and it's geared towards younger = better.  It's like brand new good are much more desired than secondhand ones and some used goods are too used to be desired at all.

Younger woman is fresher, more fertile and healthier compared to an old one. Each extra year of age and even each extra sexual intercourse takes away from her beauty, fertility, health and ability to nurture babies. A human body has limited lifespan and health. A baby in a young healthy women can drain more nutrients from her and thus grow bigger, stronger and better in every way. A baby, in an exhausted used and battered 40-year-old could not get nearly as many nutrients and thus will not be as healthy and successful. Thus, the younger the better is how men see and choose it. A simple biology. 

Women can complain that it's unfair that men do not have that problem and only get more desirable as they age, but each gender is different and lives by its own logic and rules. Men too find it unfair that a fresh healthy 18-year-old cannot get a girl, who instead goes to some fossil with a wad of cash, but women do not sympathize with us on that.

Fundamentally it's a reality of each gender biology that men grow more desirable with each year they live, while women grow less and less desirable with each year they live.

Because of all of the above we have to stop denying the obvious and face reality. Women want older men and men younger women. Relationships between older man and a younger woman work and every other format does not. Thus, we have to accept that this is the way forward for our species and civilization at our current level of development.

Women should be told to preserve virginity and marry someone much older than herself with money and status, whom she can respect.

Men should be told to not think of marriage until they are much older and spend their youth on hobbies, friendship, career and education. For relationship with a female there are porn, anime, sex dolls or brothels.

That way we can finally leave dysfunctional marriages with its suffering behind and move on to colonise space and build robots.

All Religions Are Forms of Devil Worship and Only Atheism is True to God and His Natural Order

 

That was somewhat inspired by Christian assertion that Devil will try to trick you and take you away from God by tricking you with lies and false promises. With enough critical thinking one can notice that they are the very devil they are talking about, and I can prove it using their own logic.

Even if we assume that there was a God that created life and everything on Earth. Since everything was created by him, it all works based on rules and principles that he created. All feelings all thoughts and so on are this way because God made it this way. If that is the case, then science that studies these rules and laws of nature (rules of God) is the only discipline that gets us closer to God. Meanwhile religion that contradicts many of the scientific laws by contrast takes us away from God.

Not only religion takes one away from God, but it's also actually a creation of Devil. Something in Bible said that devil envied God and rebelled against him because he wanted to be like him. Religion commits this very sin: it invents fake rules that contradict these of nature (of God). Things like 7 sins or 10 commandments perpetrated by established religions go against natural feelings and impulses of men. However, since God created everything than these impulses are will of God and religious rules that contradict them are then work of Devil.

Devil wants to corrupt people and religious rules do just that. They force people to go against their nature, do things that do not make them happy and give them suffering instead. Shrewd priests interpret that as suffering is meaning of life but it its false. Suffering is your body way of telling you that you are doing something wrong and should stop. If religion causes suffering, then it goes against God, not expresses God's will as its adherents claim.

All religions are created to defy natural order of things, that is defy God's will and creation. If you think about it, every religion bans various things that people normally do. That is because devils who created them did not like natural order that God created in one way or another and wanted to change it. That is why they created rules that are contrary to natural order of things and contrary to human nature. In order to compel people to follow these rules they invented religion, hell and other scary things to bully people into following their false rules. However, the real hell is in following the religious rules and quietly suffering as a result of doing so.

Christianity warns that Devil will be attractive and appealing, but it's also Christianity that promises people afterlife in Heaven in exchange for following its wicked rules. Sure, heaven is more attractive than uncertainly of life and dumb chance, but heaven is a lie and uncertainty is rule of life no matter whether you like it or not. 

Religion often promises various nefarious virtues to people. They claim that their rules and moral create better people or something. An appealing proposition to someone dissatisfied with people around them. However, these "virtues" religion promises are no virtues at all. Humans are greedy and selfish because these traits allow them to survive and function in the world better. Trying to remove these traits cripples people and condemns them to life of misery, life where other get ahead as they suffer, mislead by devilish priests and other religious figures. Religion never led anyone to success or prosperity. Only truth did.

One can verify all scientific rules and laws with experiments. This confirms that these scientific observations are indeed rules of our life, regardless of whether it is God that created it or it came together through chance, casual correlation and long series of cause-and-effect events started from a Big Bang. This proves that these things are real and relevant to our lives.

In contrast religion cannot prove anything, it always requires faith. The very fact that it cannot prove anything is a prove that all of it is false and none of it is truth.

And just like that Christian own logic allows us to arrive to a conclusion that any religion is, but a trick of a devil designed to lead people away from truth of this world and actual God.

I like Quiet People and Quiet Women

 

Somehow in modern world a lot of people try to be as noisy as possible. I do not like that. I like quiet people, quiet places, quiet women. 

To paraphrase a famous saying: "Women must be seen, not heard."

In fact, when it comes to women if she is not able to talk at all it might even be for the good. Though obviously its better if she can talk but does not talk unless really necessary, especially if her voice is not that pleasant. 

Quiet girls are the best.

Also enjoy the silence:

Why Modern Women Cannot Sound Cute?

 

I was thinking recently that most modern female voices are completely unattractive. They are too terse, rough, cold, angsty and mechanic. They completely lack softness, gentleness and femininity. One of the reasons why anime dubs do not work most of the time is the fact that western female voices are not as attractive as Japanese ones.

At a drop of a hat, I cannot think of a good female voice actor, whose voice I really like, but I will think about it and will update this article when I find one.

Modern women should really work on their voices to sound better and more pleasant.

Update 1: Take for example this song, female voice here sound very cute and angelic. Why IRL women cannot speak with similar voice.

What Each Generation Currently Looks Like

Currently there are a lot of both outdated and outright incorrect information about each generation. For example, Millennials are portrayed as young, colourful and weird people, while in reality these traits are those of Gen Z. To fix this and many other misconceptions about generations I decided to write a short description on what average member of each generation currently looks like.

Silent Generation (aged 80 and older) - Few of them left and most of them are not just old but also very frail, they struggle to walk and such. At this age their bodies are typically deformed and either very skinny or very short. Typical age traits such as wrinkles and white/grey hair are also present.

Boomers (aged 61 to 80) - Your typical retiree or soon to be retiree. There are plenty of them. All have white or gray hair. They often hide their age behind thick sunglasses to appear younger than what they really are. Generally, sunglasses are unusually popular among this generation. Nonetheless behind these sunglasses one can find wrinkled face. Unlike Silent generation these guys have normal size bodies and visible signs of age are not as apparent. However, if you pay close attention, you may notice that they are weaker and frailer than initially apparent. They walk slow and have hard time with stairs. These traits are certainly more pronounced in older boomers who are older than 70, but one can notice them in those who are still in their 60s.

Gen W (early Gen X) (aged 61 to 52) - They often have white/grey hair but otherwise do not show any signs of ageing and are full of energy. They are rich and all over bars, restaurants and sport games. They have confident attitude, act like they own the game and are either on the prowl for young women or going out with their families. They have conservative dad vibe about them and often sprout conservative views. They and boomers are the reason things are shit now.

Xennilas (late Gen X) (aged 51 to 42) - Older version of adult: still no white hair but some wrinkles and facial features but face generally does not look old. You can find these guys in shopping malls and such, some have spouses/gfs but typically no children or very young ones. They typically wear smart casual or simple but fancy clothes. They look much classier than Gen W. They typically have their shit together but not as much money to splurge as Gen W so they are doing it modest. Some possibly share interest in video games and anime with Millennials below.

Millennials (Gen Y) (aged 41 to 30) - Younger version of adult that gives much older look and feel than what they biologically are. As hard to find as ninjas, typically dressed casually without the smart part and blend with the environment. They are typically loners with rather angsty look, jaded and defiant. Most stay home and chronically online but sometimes you can see them in the wild for one or another reason. Half of them took their lives after financial crisis and the other half plot revenge on boomers and society for that betrayal. Most are into anime and video games but do not show that openly. They play so called boomer shooters and other old games they grew up with. Few younger Millennials are like Gen Z below.

Gen Z (aged 30 to 18~13) - Current young people. Some are tattooed gym monsters with ugly wifes and children. Some colourful but equally ugly lefties. Some are more normal looking. Some do drugs or such. Most visible generations since boomers, they are all over the place no matter where you go. They are loud and stand out. Most Millennial stereotypes are about them. 

Gen Alpha (aged younger than 18~13) - Current kids and young teens. Wild bunch that just break shit for no reason, will probably end up in prisons.

And that is what different generations are currently like.

Career, Worthy of Me

 

I was thinking the other day, that while I do advocate work abolition and have plenty of issues with current job market, work-life balance, stagnant salaries and more, I am not completely opposed to being paid for work. I anything I like money and in theory work can provide plenty of money, if it's a well-paid one of course. Sure, there are plenty of work I either cannot or will not do, but there could be something that will work for me after all.

Since I generally better understand what I do not like rather than what I like, I will begin with things I will not do.

To begin with we have to rule out any physical work. I can handle my own belongings even if they are heavy, but I do not have stamina for sustained physical effort, I will get tired in less than an hour and will not be able to continue.

That has to be followed by any work that involves customers. I have no patience to listen to some Karen. Generally, I get tired from talking or especially listening to people too much. In fact, listening to people is much worse than talking. Even half of the music I listen is without lyrics.

That will also rule out any kind of assistant work or apprenticeship. I do not want to be told what to do by some superior. Interactions with bosses or other authority figures should also be minimal. I can work with colleagues who are my equals, but not with superiors or customers.

Also, I will not do any cleaning work. I may not look like it, but I actually like clean things and dislike dirty stuff. Since I do not like cleaning, a lot of stuff around me is rather mess as I refuse to touch this mess with my clean hands.

Finally, I do not like to care for anyone, be that plants, animals, children, sick or old people. All of the abovementioned being are slow and messy and require attention, I do not like to deal with that.

With these '5 no' there sure is little else left that does not fall in any of the above categories. However, I will try to think of something.

Now for the things I actually like.

Back when I was a kid, I wanted to be a country president or head of the company. My dad was head of the company back then. I wanted the same authority and the perks and privileges that come with it. I think I am suitable for that kind of work as I can make well thought and balanced decisions and take many different things into consideration. I like strategy games precisely because they allow me to feel being an authority that controls a lot of things.

I have good ability to see bigger picture and make plans that take that into account. I can be a planner for infrastructure or such. I got Architect role in MBTI sorter which proves my planning abilities. 

I guess it does not have to be the visible role. Being one of directors on the board or an expert on some issue who advice on best practices (rather than assists with everyday tasks) the management will suit me as well. Being an MP or councilor might also work for me.

Aside from that I like technology. That is why I studied IT in uni. I enjoy computer technology and build several rigs for my own use. The biggest issue with this field is that most software developer work is likely located in the US or something and there is little relevant work where I live. Most of tech work here is IT helpdesk type for which I am overqualified, and it does not pay as much as I want to be paid. The second issue is that this work is rather hard, stressful and energy consuming. At the same time, it is far underappreciated, people just want their tech to work and ignore the fact that it takes a lot of effort to get it work.

With my tech education I can be a weapon designer for a military or something like that. I think military will likely pay well and I have no objection to designing things that kill, far from it, I will more likely enjoy designing and developing a weapon then something more trivial.

Speaking of military, I might enjoy being an officer in military. Being a soldier or NCO is not really for me, but in a more senior and abstract role might suit me better. I am not sure if one can be a lieutenant or higher with just a bachelor's degree.

There are also science and research. I write a lot of blogs, so I guess I can write research papers as well. Some of my articles of blog posts can be considered research in nature. With that said I am not sure how academic career works and if I will enjoy something like that. I am not sure if I can enjoy teaching students if that is required.

I actually can read a lecture or speak to public; unlike many other introverts I would much rather do public speaking than talk to someone face to face. I have no fear of crowd; public speaking does not require me to listen to anyone and will allow me to focus on topic I am talking about.

I also have great interest in history. Dad dissuades me from doing history, claiming there is no work for historians, but I am not sure how true it is? That said this also likely means an academic career.

Aside from that, I like travel. Not to see various cultures or meet new people but rather travel in itself. I like airplanes, various watercraft like yachts, trains, buses, airports and the like. I like being surrounded by sleek and clean man-made objects much more than nature or people. Travel has plenty of just such objects. Looking in the window on ever changing scenery has its appeal to me as well. However, even looking at how road is disappearing under the train or bus also has certain charm. I once had a nice view on a major motorway from my once home and I liked it a lot, especially at night. This golden illuminated road looked really awesome. It was a high floor, so no noise, just an awesome view. 

Problem with travel is why travel or why. Certain destinations are unsafe so I would not want to go there. Also is done for work some sort of work has to be mixed with all the travel, I am not sure if I will like the work part. Finally, I do not like crowds and sometimes travel can involve crowds.

I like staying in hotels, particularly luxurious ones. Some of my best memories of the childhood are connected to such resort hotels. That said hotel work is unlikely to suit me as most roles likely involve customer service in one or another form. Stays in hotels can be part of work that involves a lot of travel, but then the abovementioned problems will apply here as well. Also, not all hotels are equally good, some likely will not appeal to me for one or another reason, due to being too cheap or old or design will not be to my aesthetic taste or location will be difficult or I will have some personality issues with personnel.

Finally, I may like operating various machinery. I am not sure if I can be a pilot though, but there are probably some other machineries I can drive. I do not have open driving licence though so ordinary cars or buses will likely not do.

I guess I will leave it at that. Turns out there are number of things that may work for me, but all of these are rather complex to get into, so I am not sure if it's possible for me. Also, some of it might not work due to certain work duties that I am not aware of. Overall, I think this article represent my career aspirations well enough.

Metaphysical Analysis of Theory of Evolution

 

Theory of Evolution is a comprehensive body of knowledge that explains how all life has originated from a single source. How it branched out into myriads of different lifeforms we have now as well as how each of these lifeforms have evolved to better adapt to their chosen environment. 

The example in the picture is how giraffes gradually evolved to have longer and longer necks. Why longer neck is an advantage, a simple fact that it allows giraffe to eat leaves that grow higher and higher on trees, leaves that are inaccessible to other shorter animals. The fact that these leaves are inaccessible to shorter animals gives giraffe a clear competitive advantage, instead of competing with smaller animals for the scarce vegetation that grows on the ground level, giraffes figured how to get taller and access leaves that are too high for others to reach. Thanks to that giraffes have access to more food than others and could just chill as they munch on high crone leaves as their shorter brethren like zebras and buffalos are roaming around in herds in search for grass that was not eaten yet.

This is but one facet of evolution, but it does a great job illustrating not only how it happened but also why it happened. Not every change and branch of evolution was conditioned by attempt to gain advantage over other species, but most influential ones certainly did. Including the one branch that leads us to us, humans. We top by far the most shrewd and industrious branch that never failed to explore new ways of doing things to gain an advantage over competitors (other species).

It begun already in the ocean, or much rather river, when we were still fully aquatic species, known as fish. 

I want to clarify that we did not branch out of cod, tuna or sardine. These species of fish choose an evolutionary strategy that is polar opposite of ours. They chose to constantly adapt to existing environment and survive. That gradually made them smaller and dumber but nimbler, more slippery and hard to catch. They now live their lives in large herds (schools of fish) because if predators attack them, there are greater chance they will eat a few and the rest will escape. You might say they constantly sacrificing a few members of their species so that the rest may live.

This evolutionary strategy gradually shaped them into distinctive oval fishy shape. Early fish were all sorts of shapes, but generations of evolution perfected this typical for fish shape and coalescented them into species we know today and use for making fish and chips. 

That is not something that happened to our ancestors, they either retained or perhaps gained a rather distinct rather non-fishy look and shape. Catfish or Sturgeon are good example of that. Look at them carefully, they are soft of middle ground between, fish, lizard and a snake. Something that could gradually become either of these species. Wider head allows for a bigger brain and a more quadruplectic shape allows for forays onto the surface.

Thanks to their bigger brains, our ancestors figured out how to hide from predators in places they will either not look or not be able to fit, the rivers. Ocean is big and there are plenty of space for sharks, orcas and other predatorial fish. In contrast river is narrow, a shark will have a hard time fitting in and navigating something like that. Hunting in such environment will be too hard to an aquatic predator. 

That was a defence advantage for our ancestors. Slow and easy to catch due to suboptimal shape, they would be easy prey in open ocean. In the river however they were safe. Here they were not a prey for bigger fish but a big fish in a small pound instead. A clear advantage that their fish brains managed to figure out and take advantage of. Something their oceanic brethren could not. In rivers they were safe. food was more plentiful and they could chill, take it slow, eat plenty grow bigger and smarter and think of the next move that will take them even greater.

New environment also changed what our ancestral fish looked like. It was not an endless space of water, like in the ocean but a limited space between surface and riverbed. To live in this area our ancestors had to adapt to handle these diverse conditions. Every so often they might even accidently get pushed either to surface or shallow banks of the river. Being able to get back to water would be essential in such situation. Moon cycles also mean water level changes based on time of day. What was submerged can become exposed and later resubmerge again.

Navigating this new environment meant our ancestors bodies has to be not specialised to one environment like for pelagic fish but be flexible and be able to not only swim but also crawl and more. We already originated from demersal fish that lives on the bottom of the ocean and traits that distinguish demersal fish from pelagic one only further exacerbated in rivers. Unlike heavily specialised pelagic fish, our ancestors became true jacks of all trades. All these traits allowed them to make "one small step for a fish, a gigantic step for Fishkind", advance onto the surface. Later on, Neil Armstrong did the same for humanity. 

Rivers were all good and dandy, but gradually they have become overcrowded too. Food was no longer enough to feed everyone; Barracudas preyed on smaller fish and particularly on newly hatched baby fishes who still have not grown to defend themselves.

As the same time solution all our ancestors' problems lie right above the water line, the surface. There was plenty of food, no predators and plenty of space. If only they could just live on the surface, they would be kings.

The problem was the same as for humans in space: breathing. Fish could not breathe on the surface. Was that a dead end then? Now we of course know it was not, but for our ancestors it was quite a problem.

However, if one could nor breath on the surface, what if you hold your breath, briefly jump out to grab a bite and then swiftly get back before you run out of oxygen. I am pretty much certain that our ancestors lived like that for quite some time. Those who could stay on surface longer could therefore eat more, get bigger and stronger and have better chances to breed and pass on these traits to next generation.

Eventually however a fortunate mutation evolves one of them a lung and allowed them to actually breathe on surface without getting back. Australian and several other species of lungfish still live out there.

First fish with lungs certainly ate plenty during its unlimited stay on the surface and return to river to breed as a ginormous by fish standards giga Chad who definitely, put lungless fish out of dating market. Soon there were many more lungfishes roaming around the surface and eating completely helpless and defenceless insects and more.

Gradually even surface around rivers and lakes became overcrowded. Further evolution gradually changed these lungfish into myriads of different amphibians, like frogs or newts. Eventually we managed to break our dependence on rivers, but early surface species could not. Adult species could live on the surface for prolonged periods of time, but their infants could not. Thus, to breed, they had to go back to water. 

Amphibians like frogs look anything like fish from which they originated, yet they have a clear connection to them. Frogs lay their eggs in water and tadpoles that hatch out of them look much like infant fish of any other species of fish, they do not have limbs and cannot live on the surface like their parents. Only as they grow older, tadpoles gradually develop limbs together with ability to live on the surface. Eventually they leave their ancestral home and live on the surface in adulthood.

Reptiles that evolve out of amphibians do not have this problem. They can lay eggs on the surface and juveniles that hatch out of eggs are surface ready. Formative years, that amphibians spend in water, are spent inside egg instead. 

In humans and other mammals this instead happen inside womb of a woman. Early human embryos look much like a tadpole with no arms and legs, before they gradually develop limbs and other human like features.

This is but one example, but in every other stage of evolution we always took the smartest and most ingenious solutions to our problems. When surface became too crowded, we evolved into living on trees, like lemurs and monkeys still do nowadays. When trees became too crowded, we learned to hunt mammoth and other such huge animals. When we ran out of mammoth to hunt, we learned to grow crops, husband animals, build things and now we have power, an average fish could not even dream of. By now most of our former brethren are but helpless primitive beasts for us to hunt or breed for food or sport.

Thus, our destiny is not in adapting to survive on this ever-shrinking overcrowded planet, but to go beyond and reach the stars. Space is ours for the taking. We do not need this planet or even staying human. Why be human when we can be something much greater. Lungfish did not think of staying fish when it managed to reach the surface, it thought of opportunities the surface life brings. If we fail to do the same, all the lungfish in the world and all the monkeys in the world will laugh at as. 

Religions such as Christianity is the way of the sardine; science is the way of lungfish. The latter will make as an Ubermench, a human beyond humans, a being that will transcend humans, the former will make us a future canned food for the latter. I do not think it's a hard choice to make.