What is the lowest multiplication rate for Humans ?

You missed the news about Planxit...

celestialGyoud writes: . bring up your list of problems that evolutionary theory has failed to solve . .

Problems that a theory can not solve YET are not a reason to call a theory obsolete.

There are four different reasons why your theory becomes obsolete,

and one of those reasons is that if there were Humans multiplying on this Earth 34,000 years ago then it would have taken several global exterminations of Humans occuring every five thousand years interval, because that is the only way the Human population would have reached 10 to 15 million people (10 thousand years ago) rather than 5,5 billion people.

Actually the reason why Evolutionary theory in regards to Human origins is not declared obsolete is because money speaks louder than Math.

Edited by celestialGyoud, : update

Actually the reason why Evolutionary theory in regards to Human origins is not declared obsolete is because money speaks louder than Math.

Yep, every time they tried to declare it obsolete I ponied up $25 to keep it afloat.

and one of those reasons is that if there were Humans multiplying on this Earth 34,000 years ago then it would have taken several global exterminations of Humans occuring every five thousand years interval, because that is the only way the Human population would have reached 10 to 15 million people (10 thousand years ago) rather than 5,5 billion people.

What growth rate are you falsely assuming for the human population over that period, and why are you ignoring the fact that it's known to be wrong?

celestialGyoud writes: There are four different reasons why your theory becomes obsolete, and one of those reasons is that if there were Humans multiplying on this Earth 34,000 years ago then it would have taken several global exterminations of Humans occuring every five thousand years interval, because that is the only way the Human population would have reached 10 to 15 million people (10 thousand years ago) rather than 5,5 billion people.

The theory of evolution is not obsolete because it figured out a long time ago that birth rates and infant mortality for humans were quite different in the past.

and one of those reasons is that if there were Humans multiplying on this Earth 34,000 years ago then it would have taken several global exterminations of Humans occuring every five thousand years interval, because that is the only way the Human population would have reached 10 to 15 million people (10 thousand years ago) rather than 5,5 billion people.

As I've told you before CrazyDiamond7 (see Message 35), math cannot change reality, so if your math calculations result in something that doesn't match reality it is your math that is at fault. Usually a missed assumption.

Curiously it was the fact that animal populations did not increase to massive numbers (Malthusian formulas apply to all living species) is what gave both Darwin and Wallace the inspiration for natural selection eliminating those less adapted to their ecologies.

And, humans seem particularly well adapted to culling their own populations with on going wars ...

So you argument is invalid, because it ain't real. It was invalid 4 years ago, and time has not changed that.

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : .

celestialGyoud writes: ... if there were Humans multiplying on this Earth 34,000 years ago then it would have taken several global exterminations of Humans occuring every five thousand years interval, because that is the only way the Human population would have reached 10 to 15 million people (10 thousand years ago) rather than 5,5 billion people.

You don't need global exterminations to limit population growth. All you need is a death rate near the birth rate. Unless you know what the birth and death rates were on a day-to-day basis in the past, your calculation is just garbage in, garbage out.

.
.

What is the lowest possible rate that the Humans could keep on growing and multiplying?

With regards specifically to the origin of the Human body, the evolutionary theory is mathematically proven wrong. Because it is not possible that 2,000 people in Europe would have taken more than 25 thousand years to reach 1 million.

Also, it is impossible that evolutionary theory can explain the origin or appearance of 42 different languages and ethnic groups in Europe.

.

quote:

---

What is the lowest possible rate that the Humans could keep on growing and multiplying?

---

-100%. Yes, I do mean a negative growth rate. Extinction is a possibility, and that IS extinction.

quote:

---

With regards specifically to the origin of the Human body, the evolutionary theory is mathematically proven wrong. Because it is not possible that 2,000 people in Europe would have taken more than 25 thousand years to reach 1 million.

---

I look forward to seeing your proof. I hope that you will provide documented figures on carrying capacity of the land given the lifestyles of the people.

quote:

---

Also, it is impossible that evolutionary theory can explain the origin or appearance of 42 different languages and ethnic groups in Europe.

---

Since biology does not deal much with language formation or cultural divisions I would not expect it to. You would have to go beyond biology for that.

With regards specifically to the origin of the Human body, the evolutionary theory is mathematically proven wrong. Because it is not possible that 2,000 people in Europe would have taken more than 25 thousand years to reach 1 million.

In Northern British Columbia there is a pine forest.
In the middle of that pine forest there is a pine tree.
That pine tree has 100 branches.
Each of those branches has 100 pine cones.
Each of those pine cones has 100 seeds.
Every few years the scales of those cones open and release their 1,000,000 seeds into the wind.
The population of pine trees is stable. It does not grow by a factor of 1,000,000 every few years.

Also, it is impossible that evolutionary theory can explain the origin or appearance of 42 different languages and ethnic groups in Europe.

It is impossible that evolutionary theory can explain why planets move in elliptical orbits (but they do).
It is impossible that evolutionary theory can explain how an electrical charge difference can cause lightning (but it does).
It is impossible that evolutionary theory can prove that goldelightArchangel was home schooled (but he obviously was).

.

The fact is that evolutionary theory named human origins is entitled to explain the origin or appearance of 42 different languages and ethnic groups in Europe.

.

No it isn't you idiot.

42 different languages and ethnic groups in Europe.

You do know that all languages are related.

Afrikaans: “Moeder” or “Ma
Albanian: “Nene” or “Meme”
Arabic: “Ahm”
Belarusan: “Matka”
Bosnian: “Majka”
Brazilian: “Mae”
Bulgarian: “Majka
Catalan: “Mare”
Croatian: “Mati” or “Majka”
Czech: “Maminka”
Danish: “Mor”
Dutch: “Moeder” or “Moer”
Estonian: “Ema”
Filipino: “Ina”
Finnish: “Aiti”
French: “Mere” or “Maman”
German: “Mutter”
Greek: “Mana” or “Mitera”
Haitian Creole: “Manman”
Hawaiian: “Makuahine”
Hindi: “Ma” or “Maji”
Hungarian: “Anya” or “Fu”
Icelandic: “Mamma”
Indonesian: “Induk,” “Ibu,” “Biang” or “Nyokap”
Irish: “Mathair”
Italian: “Madre” or “Mamma”
Japanese: “Okaasan” or “Haha”
Latin: “Mater”
Latvian: “Mamma”
Lithuanian: “Motina”
Malay: “Ibu”
Norwegian: “Mamma” or “Mor”
Persian: “Madr” or “Maman”
Polish: “Matka” or “Mama”
Portuguese: “Mae”
Punjabi: “Mai,” “Mataji” or “Pabbo”
Romanian: “Mama” or “Maica”
Russian: “Mama”
Samoan: “Tina”
Serbian: “Majka”
Slovak: “Mama” or “Matka”
Spanish: “Madre,” “Mama” or “Mami”
Swahili: “Mama,” “Mzazi” or “Mzaa”
Swedish: “Mamma,” “Mor” or “Morsa”
Turkish: “Anne,” “Ana” or “Valide”
Ukrainian: “Mati”
Urdu: “Ammee”
Vietnamese: “Me”
Welsh: “Mam”
Yiddish: “Muter”

What is the lowest possible rate that the Humans could keep on growing and multiplying?

why do they need to keep on growing. Couldn't the number stay relatively the same because do to their lack of technology and knowledge they couldn't grow enough food for more. Or the lack of sanitation would just kill them off via illness if a settlement got to big?

Edited by frako, : No reason given.