Live people outnumber all dead people

[Vivisectus]

Originally Posted by livius drusus

You finks hounded me for years until I made and now you don't even trouble yourselves to search for it? I AM HIGHLY DISPLEASED.

What a fool I was to doubt !

[Doctor X]

Now if we can only get her to make a "lolpoland"

--J.D.

[Stormlight]

:kickdoctorxintheballs:

[Dragar]

Poor Jerome. Calculus fail.

[Doctor X]

Originally Posted by Stormlight

:kickdoctorxintheballs:

--J.D.

[Doctor X]

Originally Posted by Dragar

Poor Jerome. Calculus fail.

I always suspected he was against integration. . . .

--J.D.

[erimir]

Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME

He is an idiot, population is exponential.

Do you not know how to compare the area under the graphs?

Even just going from when that graph starts at 7000 BC, the area under the graph before the boom in population is roughly equal. And that population boom starts significantly before the present day, so a lot of that tall part takes place in 1900 or earlier, which is being rather conservative, given that most of the people alive in the earlier parts of the 1900s are dead today. And it even includes population estimates for the future, so the right part of the graph would include population from 2011-2025. And that dotted line on the left before it cuts over to 2.5 mya is highly relevant given that it cuts out, oh, just a few years that would significantly contribute to the population that died before present. And STILL the area under the graph that includes only dead people easily exceeds the area under the graph including people who are alive today.

So that graph doesn't prove what you seem to think it proves, in any way. In fact, it's quite the opposite. That graph actually shows how ludicrous it would be to claim that the majority of all humans who have ever lived are alive today.

Originally Posted by Dragar

Poor Jerome. Calculus fail.

Or I could say that, but I'm afraid Jerome wouldn't understand what I was talking about.

[Angakuk]

Originally Posted by erimir

So that graph doesn't prove what you seem to think it proves, in any way. In fact, it's quite the opposite. That graph actually shows how ludicrous it would be to claim that the majority of all humans who have ever lived are alive today.

This becomes immediately apparent if you rotate the whole graph 90° to the right.

[Jerome]

World population estimates - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Rickoshay75]

Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME

World population estimates - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Too much educated guesses to be convincing.

[The Lone Ranger]

So ... you think they're off by orders of magnitude?


Also, you claimed that Scientific American had said that the number of people now living exceeds the number who have lived previously. They didn't. They said exactly the opposite.

[Rickoshay75]

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

So ... you think they're off by orders of magnitude?


Also, you claimed that Scientific American had said that the number of people now living exceeds the number who have lived previously. They didn't. They said exactly the opposite.

Whatever I said is right on. I don't make misteaks.

[Pan Narrans]

Just the occasional FOBAR

[mickthinks]

Originally Posted by Rickoshay75

Too much educated guesses to be convincing.

You find uneducated guesses more convincing?

[Rickoshay75]

Originally Posted by mickthinks

You find uneducated guesses more convincing?

Not convincing, distracting.

Since there is no evidence either way and gathering all the dead next to the live 7 billion for comparison is beyond imagination, our only recourse is gut feeling. And I feel now is more than then by a 100 thousand, give or take a thousand.

[SR71]

Originally Posted by Rickoshay75

Not convincing, distracting.

How else ya gonna do it, right?

[seebs]

The argument "I am unwilling to expend effort beyond that usually put in by a house cat, or learn more about the world than we expect a toddler to know, therefore stupid thing which is obviously false" is less persuasive than you might think.

[Doctor X]

Caught the new Beevis and Butthead on evolution where they agree, "we don't understand it! It must be wrong!" last night.

Serendipity.

--J.D.

[seebs]

Part of the problem, Rick, is that there is a ton of evidence; you're just unwilling to consider it, because considering it would require you to think a little tiny bit.

We have pretty good evidence of the population of the world going back a very long time. We also know that the people who were alive in 1900 are, for the most part, dead. Combined, these turn out to make it very easy to establish that this popular factoid can't possibly be true.

[Jerome]

Anyone do the maths yet, I gave you all the guessestimates.

[MonCapitan2002]

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

Do you read your own links?

Anatomically modern humans are at least 195,000 years old, according to the fossil record. Our species (Homo sapiens) is considerably older (at least 200,000 years old and more likely close to 400,000 years old), as is indicated by both fossil evidence of "archaic" Homo sapiens and genetic evidence.

What exactly is the difference between archaic homo sapiens and modern homo sapiens? If one of each were standing in a room would the average person be able to tell the difference?

[Jerome]

Originally Posted by MonCapitan2002

What exactly is the difference between archaic homo sapiens and modern homo sapiens? If one of each were standing in a room would the average person be able to tell the difference?

How close is the cut is the question.

[Jerome]

100 years ago we were making that cut between current living humans.

New finds are the news, finding new cuts between the living became uncomfortable for those on each side of the cut.

Now new news is only older, there is an incentive to date your find older.

[mickthinks]

Originally Posted by Rickoshay75

Not convincing, distracting.

Since there is no evidence either way and gathering all the dead next to the live 7 billion for comparison is beyond imagination, our only recourse is gut feeling. And I feel now is more than then by a 100 thousand, give or take a thousand.

So you are distracted by uneducated guesswork, unconvinced by educated estimates, and prefer to go by your own gut feelings? lol

Thanks for sharing the product of your gut with us, Ricky.

[Angakuk]

Fecal Transplants, again?