|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1180 days) Posts: 583 From: Roraima Peak Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: What is the lowest multiplication rate for Humans ? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Crazy writes:
The lowest possible rate is negative - i.e. the birth rate less than the death rate. It happens; that's how we get extinctions. I hoped you ever heard of lowest possible rate of multiplication for Humans to grow and multiply.... It's just ludicrous to claim that any species "must" multiply at a certain rate.
Crazy writes:
No it doesn't. Money is all about math.
But you know money speaks louder than Math....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Is anyone of the impression that CD7 is sane?
Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
goldenlightArchangel Member (Idle past 1180 days) Posts: 583 From: Roraima Peak Joined: |
*
Is there a lowest possible rate of multiplication for Humans to grow and multiply ? * Pro/For: Yes * Con/Against: No * Pro/For: The correct answer is Yes because there are samples of lowest possible rate: population x 15 - 80 % per every thousand years. * Con/Against: It really doesn't matter since Evolution is not about that. *
The correct answer implies about whether the Evolutionary explanation ( with regards to the origin of the Human body ) is consistent or not. * Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : The correct answer implies about whether the Evolutionary explanation ( with regards to the origin of the Human body ) is consistent or not. Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : Pro/For: The correct answer is Yes because there are samples of lowest possible rate: population x 15 - 80 % per every thousand years.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0
|
So where is the fire? I ran in here expecting something important!
Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
goldenlightArchangel Member (Idle past 1180 days) Posts: 583 From: Roraima Peak Joined: |
*
Hello Phat, What say you, Is there a lowest possible rate of multiplication for Humans to grow and multiply ? *
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Is there a lowest possible rate of multiplication for Humans to grow and multiply ? That would be zero - no growth, no multiplying. Unless you want to include negatives too? In that case, I suppose the lowest rate would be limited by the population size - you can't loose more people than you have.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Crazy writes:
The correct answer is NO because there are extinctions. Even math doesn't trump reality. The correct answer is Yes because there are samples of lowest possible rate: population x 15 - 80 % per every thousand years. How do you explain extinctions?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
goldenlightArchangel Member (Idle past 1180 days) Posts: 583 From: Roraima Peak Joined: |
*
Hello Cat Sci, I hope all is well, The question is about possibility. It is like asking you, What is the lowest possible rate for Humans to keep on growing and multiplying. Therefore, the answer to the Million Dollar Question is not zero or negative since zero or negative is not growing nor multiplying either. * Have a good job. *
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
goldenlightArchangel Member (Idle past 1180 days) Posts: 583 From: Roraima Peak Joined: |
*
Hello Ringo, Your reply drifts to far away from the subject since the existence of extinctions has nothing to do with growing and multiplying or a lowest possible rate of multiplication. *
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2134 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
Your reply drifts to far away from the subject since the existence of extinctions has nothing to do with growing and multiplying or a lowest possible rate of multiplication. You don't like extinctions? Ok, consider this. The rate for human (or any other) population growth or decline is continually variable. As conditions change, so does the rate of growth or decline. You are trying to apply a fixed rate of growth as if that were real and constant. It isn't. Have you been smitten by religious belief and assumed that such belief substituted for or superceded scientific knowledge?Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1 "Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
goldenlightArchangel Member (Idle past 1180 days) Posts: 583 From: Roraima Peak Joined: |
quote: * That is, Evolutionary theory must and should not omit what is the Evolutionary proposal for consistency which equates to a lowest possible rate of multiplication for Humans to grow and multiply. That is why Evolutionary statements are surrealist; they are without chronological evidence with regards to population growth and real life experiences, but just round and round. And round. * Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : Originally quoted from topix for Spotlight: How to Entangle a Juridical Panthera
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
The question is about possibility. It is like asking you, What is the lowest possible rate for Humans to keep on growing and multiplying. Therefore, the answer to the Million Dollar Question is not zero or negative since zero or negative is not growing nor multiplying either. Ah, then the answer is derived from the minimum amount of growth being n+1/n where n is the population size. Edited by Cat Sci, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
goldenlightArchangel Member (Idle past 1180 days) Posts: 583 From: Roraima Peak Joined: |
*
n + 1 is not a multiplication formula. * Samples of regular multiplication formula for minimum increase. population x 25 - 80 % per every thousand years population x 12 - 85 % per every thousand years *
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
n + 1 is not a multiplication formula. That doesn't matter. The minimum amount that a population can increase over some timeframe is one individual. Constraining the model to your "multiplication formula" is uneccessary.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Crazy writes:
On the contrary, what you subtract from the total has as much to do with the running total as what you add. You can have a birth rate as high as you like but it's the combination of birth rate AND death rate that determines the growth (if any) of the population. Your reply drifts to far away from the subject since the existence of extinctions has nothing to do with growing and multiplying or a lowest possible rate of multiplication. What you're doing is the equivalent of calculating your net worth by adding up your income every year and ignoring your expenditures.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024