Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 108 (8739 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-30-2017 10:44 AM
396 online now:
Coyote, Davidjay, Dawn Bertot, Faith, JonF, Tangle, vimesey (7 members, 389 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jayhawker Soule
Post Volume:
Total: 805,811 Year: 10,417/21,208 Month: 3,504/2,674 Week: 47/873 Day: 47/76 Hour: 10/10

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
891011
12
13Next
Author Topic:   When Earth’s population was 10,000 persons
Percy
Member
Posts: 15563
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.6


Message 166 of 194 (654916)
03-05-2012 3:31 PM
Reply to: Message 165 by celestialGyoud
03-05-2012 2:33 PM


Re: A question to all teachers on Human Origins
Hi CrazyDiamond7,

It almost sounds like you want to substitute a simplistic math equation for estimates that take into account climate, technology, agriculture, migration patterns, etc. A fixed math equation uninformed by what was actually going on in the real world at the time seems doomed to be inaccurate, even wildly so.

You've posted this same request a number of times, I don't think you're going to get a different answer, plus it's getting boring. If you respond to some of the objections you're getting maybe we could address what you think the problems are.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by celestialGyoud, posted 03-05-2012 2:33 PM celestialGyoud has not yet responded

    
frako
Member
Posts: 2687
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 167 of 194 (654939)
03-05-2012 6:27 PM
Reply to: Message 165 by celestialGyoud
03-05-2012 2:33 PM


Re: A question to all teachers on Human Origins
U CANT USE SIMPLE MATH TO COME TO REALISTIC NUMBERS OF THE POPULATION OF HUMANS ANYWHERE IF YOU DO NOT HAVE THE EXASCT BIRTH TO DEATH RATIOS PER YEAR OR PER DECADE

MATH CANT HELP YOU IF YOU DONT HAVE ENOUGH DATA AND SMALL ERRORS IN EXPONENTIAL FUNCTIONS CAUSE A HUGE DIFFERENCE IN RESULTS.

YOU CAN HOWEVER GO AND LOOK FOR STUFF THE PEOPLE OF THAT TIME LEFT BEHIND AND EXTRAPELATE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT LIVED IN THEIR TIME.


Cant find a graph only for Europe's population

As can be seen in Figure 1, the world's population grew very slowly until about 1750. There was a long period of stationary growth (no growth) until 1000 B.C.E. , when the world's population was approximately 300 million; this was followed by a period of slow growth from 1000 B.C.E. to approximately 1750, at which time global population was an estimated 800 million. Until this time, the world's population was kept in check by high death rates, which were due to the combined effects of plagues, famines, unsanitary living conditions, and general poverty. After 1750, the world's population grew substantially; by 1950 it had tripled to around 2.5 billion. In this 200-year period, the doubling time was 122 years. Growth from 1950 to 1985 was even more dramatic; by 1985, the human population was 5 billion. World population had doubled in thirty-five years. By 2000 global population was 6 billion and is projected to be 9 billion in 2050.

Read more: Population Growth - world, body, life, history, cause, rate, time, human, History of Global Population Growth, Population Growth 19502050, Theories of Population Growth http://www.deathreference.com/...n-Growth.html#ixzz1oHvQ0jcA

Edited by frako, : No reason given.


Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by celestialGyoud, posted 03-05-2012 2:33 PM celestialGyoud has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18260
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.5


(1)
Message 168 of 194 (654952)
03-05-2012 9:43 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by celestialGyoud
01-24-2011 1:48 PM


graph of population
Hi CrazyDiamond7,

I've only browsed this thread, and it looks to me like you could use a review of population growth based on the available evidence.

As noted elsewhere on this thread there are a number of factors that inhibit population growth, and there are a number of factors that promote population growth.

In 1972 I wrote a thesis for my Masters Degree at the University of Toronto, Titled "Urban, Social, and Technological Development" and in it I have a graph of world population vs time:

It is a log-log graph as that best shows the overall picture.

This thesis is now 40 years old, so I strongly suspect that some additional data is available now that was not available then, but I don't expect any cause for major revision at this point to the general picture, just to details. This was also before computers were normally used in writing such documents, and the original is all hand typed and drawn. Fortunately it was only 172 pages long (and I only needed three 'original' copies). Total urban population is estimated from known large urban center populations and is approximate.

You will note a repeating pattern of fast initial growth following the development of new methods of feeding the population, followed by a gradual plateau as the limits of resources are reached for each particular method.

There was a population explosion for

  • hunting food, using tools to increase hunting gathering,
  • growing food, the development of agriculture and animal husbandry,
  • the industrialization of food growth, and
  • the globalization of food production

This simple graph shows that Earth's population was ~10,000 (104) near the beginning of this graph, over 1 million years ago.

The real fact is that regardless of disease, natural disasters, wars and famine, human population has never stopped growing. History proves that Humans are able to impede animal growth but never their own.

Indeed, each time they had the opportunity they bred like rabbits and filled their ecology to the point where deaths from starvation, wars, disease, etc matched (or nearly matched) births. We see this trend continuing today with the planet being increasingly covered by people, and the rise in mortality that occurs as systems are maxed out.

Enjoy.

Edited by RAZD, : code


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by celestialGyoud, posted 01-24-2011 1:48 PM celestialGyoud has not yet responded

  
celestialGyoud
Member
Posts: 551
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 169 of 194 (655052)
03-06-2012 3:59 PM


Timeline and the population growth of England
-

Okay, responding to the objections.

-

The agricultural technology, and the alleged need of it, has been a constant objection where truth was synthetized to an excessive and exaggerated dependence on farming activity since it wasn't a foundamental condition for humans to grow and multiply but just one of the options the Humans chose.

-

Timeline can be divided into 7 sections.

-

|________________II____________________IV___________________VI________________
|______I____|__________|____III___|__________|_____V____|__________|____VII_____|

-

|___ 49,000 ____ 42,000 ____ 35,000 ____ 28,000 ____ 21,000 ____ 14,000 ____ 7,000 ____
|_____________________________________________________________________________

-

In the sections I, II and III all families of fishermen do not have to change their fishing activities into farming so that they continued to grow and multiply. The same rule applies to the remaining 4 sections and it doesn't change from 49,000 years ago until now: those who like fishing, hunting, mining or any other activity do not have to become farmers so that they can continue to bring food, fish and meat to their homes.

Therefore there's no truth in the distortion when speaking about farming and agricultural technology as if 55,000 families of European fishermen from section III, II and I:, who never chose to do anything different, would depend so much on changing their fishing into agricultural activities so that they could survive, grow and multiply. They always stored their fish. Nothing really changes from a section to another.

55,000 families of European fishermen would always continue to grow their population x 15 - 80 % every thousand years or even 1 to 10 - 80 %, whether in section III, II or I, but many will not see the evidence nor verify for consistency of the population growth model. Much less ascertaining will be seen that the truth has been synthesized (gathered) with lies.

So you know that the seeing of the evidences have been omitted: there's nothing beyond REALISTIC than a termination/annihilation of '- 80 %' per every thousand years.

-

To go from 1,500,000 to 45,000,000 England took just 911 years.

-

43: 1,000,000
410: 1,500,000
865: 1,500,000
1000: 1,500,000
1348: 3,500,000
1350: 2,250,000
1642: 6,000,000
1649: 5,700,000
1801: 10,942,646
1851: 27,368,736
1911: 45,221,615
-

If their population growth was according to the thin red line, 'population x 15 - 80 %', England would have taken OVER and BEYOND THREE THOUSAND years to reach that 1,500,000.

-
| 1 thousand years | . . . . 2,000 x 15 = 30,000 - 80 % = 6,000 persons
| 2 thousand years | . . . . 6,000 x 15 = 90,000 - 80 % = 18,000 persons
| 3 thousand years | . . . .18,000 x 15 = 270,000 - 80 % = 54,000 persons
| 4 thousand years | . . . .54,000 x 15 = 810,000 - 80 % = 162,000 persons
| 5 thousand years | . . . 162,000 x 15 = 2,430,000 - 80 % = 486,000 persons
| 6 thousand years | . . . 486,000 x 15 = 7,290,000 - 80 % = 1,458,000 persons
| 7 thousand years | . . 1,458,000 x 15 = 21,870,000 - 80 % = 4,374,000 persons
|
| 8 thousand years | . . 4,374,000 x 15 = 65,610,000 - 80 % = 13,122,000 persons
| 9 thousand years | . .13,122,000 x 15 = 196,830,000 - 80 % = 39,366,000 persons
|10 thousand years | . .39,366,000 x 15 = 590,490,000 - 80 % = 118,098,000 persons
|11 thousand years | . 118,098,000 x 15 = 1,771,470,000 - 80 % = 354,294,000 persons
|12 thousand years | . 354,294,000 x 15 = 5,314,410,000 - 80 % = 1,062,882,000 persons
|13 thousand years | 1,062,882,000 x 15 = 15,943,230,000 - 80 % = 3,188,646,000 persons
|14 thousand years | 3,188,646,000 x 15 = 47,829,690,000 - 80 % = 9,565,938,000 persons

-

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : synthesized (gathered) with lies

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : for consistency


Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by frako, posted 03-06-2012 4:27 PM celestialGyoud has responded
 Message 173 by RAZD, posted 03-06-2012 8:21 PM celestialGyoud has responded

    
frako
Member
Posts: 2687
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 170 of 194 (655056)
03-06-2012 4:27 PM
Reply to: Message 169 by celestialGyoud
03-06-2012 3:59 PM


Re: Timeline and the population growth of England
So you know that the seeing of the evidences have been omitted: there's nothing beyond REALISTIC than a termination/annihilation of '- 80 %' per every thousand years.

how about something that killed off 80% of yearly growth of the population every year


Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand

This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by celestialGyoud, posted 03-06-2012 3:59 PM celestialGyoud has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by celestialGyoud, posted 03-06-2012 4:59 PM frako has not yet responded

    
celestialGyoud
Member
Posts: 551
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 171 of 194 (655059)
03-06-2012 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 170 by frako
03-06-2012 4:27 PM


Re: Timeline and the population growth of England
-

frako writes:

how about something that killed off 80% of yearly growth of the population every year

-

Frako, no need to make a storm in a cup of water, nor search for a horn in a mare's head, otherwise you will be poking a sleeping leopard with a short stick

-


This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by frako, posted 03-06-2012 4:27 PM frako has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by Panda, posted 03-06-2012 7:34 PM celestialGyoud has not yet responded

    
Panda
Member (Idle past 1098 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 172 of 194 (655071)
03-06-2012 7:34 PM
Reply to: Message 171 by celestialGyoud
03-06-2012 4:59 PM


Re: Timeline and the population growth of England
CD7 writes:

no need to make a storm in a cup of water, nor search for a horn in a mare's head, otherwise you will be poking a sleeping leopard with a short stick


Maybe you should stick to Portuguese.

If I were you
And I wish that I were you
All the things I'd do
To make myself turn blue

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by celestialGyoud, posted 03-06-2012 4:59 PM celestialGyoud has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18260
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.5


Message 173 of 194 (655074)
03-06-2012 8:21 PM
Reply to: Message 169 by celestialGyoud
03-06-2012 3:59 PM


Timeline and the population growth of Reality
Hi CrazyDiamond7,

... all families of fishermen do not have to change their fishing activities into farming so that they continued to grow and multiply.
... those who like fishing, hunting, mining or any other activity do not have to become farmers so that they can continue to bring food, fish and meat to their homes.

Mining does not produce food that I am aware of.

Essentially correct, but their ability to grow and multiply will be limited by their ability to find food. Areas can be overhunted with the resulting catastrophic plunging in the populations of the fish and animals that provide the most product for the effort, meaning that return on the investment of time and labor will decrease, and food production will drop.

However, should some choose to embark on agriculture and animal husbandry to supplement the fishing\hunting diet then they are more able to grow and multiply. One industry does not need to stop when the other begins, but can supplement it.

We see this happening on a world level today. It is not a fairytale.

The concept is simple, take the area where fishing or hunting occurs, divide by the population to produce the square feet of resources to feed each person. Double the population and do it again. You now need to produce the same food from 1/2 the area than previously. Do this a second time and you need to produce the same food from 1/4 the area than originally. A point is soon reached where the area per person is not adequate to provide food for the all the people, so some have to die from starvation, or from diseases and infant deaths from malnutrition (unless you have a means to supplement food production).

We see this happening on a world level today. It is not a fairytale.

55,000 families of European fishermen would always continue to grow their population x 15 - 80 % every thousand years or even 1 to 10 - 80 %, whether in section III, II or I, but many will not see the evidence nor verify for consistency of the population growth model.

No they won't. You run out of fishable area, and you run out of the original fish populations. If you don't understand the concept of resource limits on growth, this discussion is pointless.

-
| 1 thousand years | . . . . 2,000 x 15 = 30,000 - 80 % = 6,000 persons
| 2 thousand years | . . . . 6,000 x 15 = 90,000 - 80 % = 18,000 persons
| 3 thousand years | . . . .18,000 x 15 = 270,000 - 80 % = 54,000 persons
| 4 thousand years | . . . .54,000 x 15 = 810,000 - 80 % = 162,000 persons
| 5 thousand years | . . . 162,000 x 15 = 2,430,000 - 80 % = 486,000 persons
| 6 thousand years | . . . 486,000 x 15 = 7,290,000 - 80 % = 1,458,000 persons
| 7 thousand years | . . 1,458,000 x 15 = 21,870,000 - 80 % = 4,374,000 persons
|
| 8 thousand years | . . 4,374,000 x 15 = 65,610,000 - 80 % = 13,122,000 persons
| 9 thousand years | . .13,122,000 x 15 = 196,830,000 - 80 % = 39,366,000 persons
|10 thousand years | . .39,366,000 x 15 = 590,490,000 - 80 % = 118,098,000 persons
|11 thousand years | . 118,098,000 x 15 = 1,771,470,000 - 80 % = 354,294,000 persons
|12 thousand years | . 354,294,000 x 15 = 5,314,410,000 - 80 % = 1,062,882,000 persons
|13 thousand years | 1,062,882,000 x 15 = 15,943,230,000 - 80 % = 3,188,646,000 persons
|14 thousand years | 3,188,646,000 x 15 = 47,829,690,000 - 80 % = 9,565,938,000 persons

And without any matching to reality and data available this is just a mathematical fairytale.

When a mathematical model fails to match reality, it is the mathematical model that is in error, not reality.

See Message 168 for a graph that shows actual human populations:

These curves show that a population explosion occurred each time a new method was developed that added to the overall ability to produce food.

When your "families of fishermen" have some people that diversify into agriculture then the production of food is increased without increasing the effort of fishing.

When your mathematical model can reproduce those curves we can talk.

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by celestialGyoud, posted 03-06-2012 3:59 PM celestialGyoud has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by celestialGyoud, posted 03-07-2012 5:03 PM RAZD has responded

  
celestialGyoud
Member
Posts: 551
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 174 of 194 (655129)
03-07-2012 5:03 PM
Reply to: Message 173 by RAZD
03-06-2012 8:21 PM


Population Growth Realm
-

Was there ever four seasons in the year without a good time for fishing ?

Fishermen know that during the seasons of every year there is a good time for fishing and those great times of the year have always been present from 50 thousand years ago.

Therefore, for a thousand families of fishermen to become 10,000 persons it has never been a question of WHEN they lived, whether 50 thousand or 35 thousand years ago, but WHERE their fishing activities are done.

That's why many graphics made to be presented as (evidence of) accurancy of the evolution theory (for the origin of the Human body) does not show an increase of fishing as they do with the farmer activity.

-

The fishermen final production can be changed every season of the year

but their population increase can't be stopped every thousand years

One ascertains the above truth from seeing that from the many graphics made to be presented as (evidence of) accurancy of the evolution theory (for the origin of the Human body),

Not one of them indicates that the population of a thousand families of fishermen in Europe could not increase from a thousand to 10,000 persons every thousand years, IF indeed there were families of Humans multiplying on the Earth from 70 thousand years ago.

-

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : graphics made to be presented as (evidence of) accurancy of the evolution theory

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : from a thousand to 10,000 persons

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update


This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by RAZD, posted 03-06-2012 8:21 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 175 by RAZD, posted 03-07-2012 5:44 PM celestialGyoud has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18260
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.5


Message 175 of 194 (655132)
03-07-2012 5:44 PM
Reply to: Message 174 by celestialGyoud
03-07-2012 5:03 PM


Population Growth Realm vs limiting factors
Hi again CrazyDiamond7, thanks.

Fishermen know that during the seasons of every year there is a good time for fishing and those great times of the year have always been present from 50 thousand years ago.

Fishermen also know that there are some areas that are more productive that others, and they have seen where total catch amount for all fishermen have declined (increasing the number of fishermen does not mean an increase in total catch), and that they have been forced to travel further and further to catch fish, meaning lower productivity per fisherman.

That's why many graphics made to be presented as (evidence of) accurancy of the evolution theory (for the origin of the Human body) does not show an increase of fishing as they do with the farmer activity.

That's because fishing is a form of hunting, and is included under hunting.

Recently we see efforts to apply the methodology of animal husbandry (which is classified under agricuilture rather than hunting due to the comparable process of raising crops) being applied to fishing (fish farms). This has been done in a smaller scale in some ancient societies (asian for example).

And now we see the methodology of factories (industrial revolution) to the production of food (including fish, animals and crops).

BUT THEIR POPULATION INCREASE CAN'T BE STOPPED EVERY THOUSAND YEARS

Asserting this in capital letters doesn't make it any more valid.

If you have fishermen trying to fish in an area where there is no fish worth catching, then no amount of fishermen will be able to catch any fish worth catching.

This is known as looking at the weakest link for food production in order to analyze feeding potential.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by celestialGyoud, posted 03-07-2012 5:03 PM celestialGyoud has not yet responded

  
celestialGyoud
Member
Posts: 551
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 176 of 194 (655205)
03-08-2012 4:22 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by caffeine
03-05-2012 11:09 AM


THE FINALS CAN BE CHANGED – and they still indicate global termination
-

This population growth Model p x 10 - 80 % is uniquely a measurement line that clears up what the multiplication rate is. It's not an equation taken from real documents since there are no real documents from 50 thousand years ago.

The multiplication rate p x 15 - 80 % is not presented as a product of research brought from official rates but solely a Model that proofreads the multiplication rates proposed by a theory that places the Humans to multiply on the Earth for more than 70 thousand years ago.

When a multiplication rate is omitted then the Evolution theory does not publish their numbers in the form of a population growth Model. However, that doesn't mean the Evolution model for population increase can't be gathered into one place.

The following multiplication rates are based on numbers that were brought up (message 157) and would be matching with the Evolution theory for the origin of the Human body:

-

_______________ [ 5,000 people between the time from 50,000 to 25,000 years ago ]

-

| 70 thousand years ago: 200 x 10 = 2,000 - 90 % = 200 persons
|
| 65 thousand years ago: 500 x 10 = 5,000 - 90 % = 500 persons
|
| 60 thousand years ago: 1,000 x 10 = 10,000 - 90 % = 1,000 persons
|
| 55 thousand years ago: 2,000 x 10 = 20,000 - 90 % = 2,000 persons

-
_______________ [ their 95% confidence interval puts the population between 1,700 and 37,700 people ]

-
| 50 thousand years ago: 1,700 x 10 = 17,000 - 90 % = 1,700 persons
|
| 45 thousand years ago: 2,500 x 10 = 25,000 - 90 % = 2,500 persons
|
| 40 thousand years ago: 3,500 x 10 = 35,000- 90 % = 3,500 persons
|
| 35 thousand years ago: 5,000 x 10 = 50,000 - 90 % = 5,000 persons
|
| 30 thousand years ago: 10,000 x 10 = 100,000 - 90 % = 10,000 persons
|
| 25 thousand years ago: 37,700 x 10 = 377,000 - 90 % = 37,700 persons

-
_______________ [ After this, the population would have decreased ]

_______________ [ they estimate it grew to between 11,300 and 72,600 people ]

-
| 20 thousand years ago: 11,300 x 10 = 113,000 - 50 % = 56,500 persons
|
| 15 thousand years ago: 72,600 x 10 = 726,000 - 10 % = 653,400 persons
|
| 10 thousand years ago: 1,000,000 x 10 = 10,000,000 - 90 % = 1,000,000 persons

-

caffeine writes:

demography is done, by looking at the evidence of the real world

-

Sample of Official demographic numbers and solely one of the real evidences on how the Human populations increase:


| 43: 1,000,000
| 410: 1,500,000
| 865: 1,500,000
| 1000: 1,500,000
| 1348: 3,500,000
| 1350: 2,250,000
| 1642: 6,000,000
| 1649: 5,700,000
| 1801: 10,942,646
| 1851: 27,368,736
| 1911: 45,221,615

Source: Institute of Historical Research, of the University of London.

-

When you look at the evidences of the real world – that is, specifically the demographic documents with completeness and fullness of reality: documents legitimated by the official demographic institutes from any European country, – the result is that it's not possible for one to find anything that comes close to the multiplication rate population x 10 - 90 % per every thousand years with a short 150 years interval for multiplication.

Much less with a constant intermittency, global termination occuring with regularity every 5,000 years interval along a timeline of 55,000 thousand years.

The fact that the multiplication rate, population x 10 - 90 % per every thousand years, equates to a short 150 years interval for multiplication, neither fits into the reality of the Earth's consistency nor expresses the Human nature and behavior in regards to their children since it equates to annihilation on a global scale happening incessantly.

-

| 55 thousand years ago: 2,000 x 10 = 20,000 - 90 % = 2,000 persons
|
| 50 thousand years ago: 1,700 x 10 = 17,000 - 90 % = 1,700 persons
|
| 45 thousand years ago: 2,500 x 10 = 25,000 - 90 % = 2,500 persons
|
| 40 thousand years ago: 3,500 x 10 = 35,000- 90 % = 3,500 persons
|
| 35 thousand years ago: 5,000 x 10 = 50,000 - 90 % = 5,000 persons

-

The finals (the totals) can be changed and they still indicate global termination occurring from a thousand years to another.

-

♯ ♯ ♯ – Anomaly has been found – The number of children would always be the same from the beginning to the end of every 3,000 year interval which equates to the time that the families would not multiply. The time that the families would multiply on a regular basis equates to a timeline of 150 years, and corresponds to a second interval. Both timeline intervals can be seen every 5,000 years along a timeframe of 55,000 years.

See through this point of view: 3,000 years interval + 150 years, in every 5,000 years, still leaves a third interval of 1,850 years.

-

_____p x 10 - 90 % interval______________multiplication rate__________remaining interval____
|_________3,000 years____________|_regular basis: 150 years___|______1,850 years________|

-

________________________ 5,000 years Timeline _____________________________________________
|_______________________________________________________________________________________|

-

______________ Average of years without multiplying: 4,850 years per every 5,000 years

-

That's why the problem is not a question of a constant decrease caused by a variety of factors.

The problem is that the difference between these three intervals: 3,000 years, 150 and 1,850 years, occurring simultaneously, every 5,000 years timeline, \[b\]is a difference which is indicating that their multiplication timeline (which corresponds to 150 years in a regular basis) is not enough time for them to increase so that their population could have a decrease in that same measure.

The anomaly is the impossibility of decreasing more than the measure that their population would have increased.

When seeing from the three intervals a difference that equates to an average of 4,850 years without multiplying to increase, observation shows that the remaining timeline of 150 years which equates to the time of their multiplication on a regular basis, would never be enough time for them to increase a population growth that could be compatible with the 4,850 years interval in which they would not multiply (on a regular basis) and their population would decrease.

On this, when verifying for consistency of the natural selection theory (for the origin of the Human body) the results are known and ascertained from seeing a lack of consistency in the multiplication rate.

Therefore these results can only be disproved by the presentation of new results that can show that their multiplication rate was consistent and that no disconnection is found between the regular basis that the Humans do multiply and the time that the Evolution theory has proposed for their multiplication.

'THE FINALS CAN BE CHANGED' means that the order of the totals does not change the Time average that equates to their multiplicaton rate: 150 years per every 5,000 years, based on the numbers proposed for their multiplication by the Evolution theory for the origin of the Human body,

The totals can be changed and it would still not avoid the anomaly of decreasing always more than increasing.

One might verify and know, from the multiplication rate of the population growth model presented by the Evolution theory, that they could never have increased enough so that their population decreases could have happened in the compatible measure that corresponds to a 4,850 years interval per every 5,000 years.

Because Humans do multiply according to a regular basis of intensity which was not taken into consideration when the time proposed for their multiplication had been given by the Evolution theory. The diagnosis was completed and the anomaly can't be reversed.

-

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : NOTE - For a better comprehension of message 167 the related informations might be gathered into one place.
And for that reason message 176 might be often re-edited.

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : The anomaly is the impossibility of decreasing more than the measure that their population would have increased.

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update


Brief Summarized Signature

This Laconic unusual inscription might change the ritualistical monotonous way that the signatures have been summarized in these days.
As the official master of non–ceremonious solemnity I’d like to thank you, beforehand, for your possible acceptance of the highly recommended anti-religion procedures of not taking as true what so ever it is believed that the truth is supposed to be, – since the term ‘take as (alike; as if it was)’ means that a comparison is made to a truth that is not known by believing --,as well as renouncing the fides quae creditur (faiths that are credited by the spirits of men, believers and potentates from down). Also I would like to thank for your patience and perseverance on reading and I hope these explanations will not sound too ceremonious to you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by caffeine, posted 03-05-2012 11:09 AM caffeine has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by RAZD, posted 03-08-2012 7:17 PM celestialGyoud has responded
 Message 178 by Percy, posted 03-09-2012 8:13 AM celestialGyoud has responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18260
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.5


Message 177 of 194 (655220)
03-08-2012 7:17 PM
Reply to: Message 176 by celestialGyoud
03-08-2012 4:22 PM


Re: THE FINALS CAN BE CHANGED – and they still indicate global termination
Hi CrazyDiamond7,

If you aren't willing to pay attention to what everybody else is saying, there is no point in us saying anything.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by celestialGyoud, posted 03-08-2012 4:22 PM celestialGyoud has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by celestialGyoud, posted 03-09-2012 4:59 PM RAZD has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 15563
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.6


Message 178 of 194 (655295)
03-09-2012 8:13 AM
Reply to: Message 176 by celestialGyoud
03-08-2012 4:22 PM


Re: THE FINALS CAN BE CHANGED – and they still indicate global termination
Hi CrazyDiamond,

You say one of your sources is Evolution theory for the origin of the Human body, but the Internet has never heard of it. Can you provide a reference?

You say your other source is the Institute of Historical Research. Can you provide a link to where at their site you're getting this information?

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by celestialGyoud, posted 03-08-2012 4:22 PM celestialGyoud has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 179 by caffeine, posted 03-09-2012 8:25 AM Percy has responded
 Message 182 by celestialGyoud, posted 03-09-2012 5:16 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
caffeine
Member
Posts: 1252
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008
Member Rating: 4.2


Message 179 of 194 (655296)
03-09-2012 8:25 AM
Reply to: Message 178 by Percy
03-09-2012 8:13 AM


Re: THE FINALS CAN BE CHANGED – and they still indicate global termination
You say your other source is the Institute of Historical Research. Can you provide a link to where at their site you're getting this information?

The figures from the Institute for Historical Research were the ones I quoted before. I believe I found them in a BBC feature on population change in Britain, but now I can't find the same page again. The figures for 1801 onwards are from the census.

I'm unclear from CrazyDiamond7's latest response if this means he's accepting these estimates, since the purpose of presenting them was to demonstrate that population growth doesn't proceed in any definite fashion, being limited by resources and affected by contingent events. One of the key points was supposed to be that the population didn't change a great deal for about 1,000 years, then increased about 40-fold over the next thousand years.

ABE: Some of the figures based on the "Evolution theory for the origin of the Human body" also appear to be from one of my posts, which were taking from this article abstract on an anthropology blog. It's an attempt to estimate the pre-agricultural population of Europe.

The figures have been misinterpreted though.1,700 - 37,700 people is the error margin for the population over the whole period from 50,000 years ago to the Last Glacial Maximum. It is not supposed to represent a beginning and end point.

I've no idea where the pre-50,000 BC figures are supposed to come from.

Edited by caffeine, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by Percy, posted 03-09-2012 8:13 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 180 by Percy, posted 03-09-2012 8:36 AM caffeine has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 15563
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.6


Message 180 of 194 (655302)
03-09-2012 8:36 AM
Reply to: Message 179 by caffeine
03-09-2012 8:25 AM


Re: THE FINALS CAN BE CHANGED – and they still indicate global termination
Is it possible that CrazyDiamond is combining bits and pieces of your information with his math-derived figures?

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 179 by caffeine, posted 03-09-2012 8:25 AM caffeine has not yet responded

    
RewPrev1
...
891011
12
13Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017