Subject:
|
Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 31 May 2001 20:27:34 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
257 times
|
| |
|
|
Well, Chris mentioned the 90% number. As to what the percentage would really be
in order to curtail our population explosion, who knows? I'm sure it could be
calculated using the averages for twins, etc.
But yeah, it's obviously only a thought experiment, not a suggestion for a
solution. I hope we'd never get to the point where something like that would be
considered (but the way we're going now, who knows?).
Dave Schuler wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tom Stangl writes:
> > I would rather have a plague that wiped half the planet's population (or left
> > 90% of the women infertile) than a catastrophe that might wipe us ALL out, or
> > take us below the sustainable population level.
>
> Tom, let me see if I understand your reasoning for suggesting the 90%
> female infertility rate. What you're suggesting seems to be:
> Given 100 fertile women and 100 fertile men, the effective maximum
> (barring twins and/or technological intervention) number of children brought
> forth in a 9-month period is 100.
> Given 100 fertile women and 100 men--90 of whom are sterile--the effective
> maximum number of children brought forth in a 9-month period is also 100.
> However, given 100 women--90 of whom are sterile--and 100 fertile men (or
> a billion, for that matter), the effective maximum number of children
> brought forth in a nine-month period is 10. Am I reading you right?
> At first glance I was a little put off by your suggestion (and it still
> doesn't thrill me to think of it in anything but theoretical terms), but
> upon consideration I realized that your math-reasoning seems sound. I
> mention this because others might read your 90% figure and react with the
> same knee-jerk outrage that I felt (however, I read your post while I was at
> home and wasn't able to post a reply until I got to work--when a cooler head
> had prevailed).
> Again, I'm squeamish about the 90% figure as a real-world solution, but in
> a thought-experiment it's not completely far-fetched.
>
> Dave!
--
| Tom Stangl, iPlanet Web Server Technical Support
| Netscape Communications Corp
| A division of AOL Time Warner
| iPlanet Support - http://www.iplanet.com/support/
| Please do not associate my personal views with my employer
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
29 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
