ickplant@lemmy.world to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 1 年前Ancestral mathi.postimg.ccimagemessage-square38fedilinkarrow-up1521arrow-down110
arrow-up1511arrow-down1imageAncestral mathi.postimg.ccickplant@lemmy.world to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 1 年前message-square38fedilink
minus-squarefinally debunked@slrpnk.netlinkfedilinkarrow-up5·1 年前this is fucked up calculations, for 100th generation we would need more humans than have ever lived
minus-squareTemple Square@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up21·1 年前Your flaw is assuming that a couple only produces one child. Many humans can share the same ancestor.
minus-squareIgotz80HDnImWinning@kbin.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up9arrow-down1·1 年前Don’t forget the recurrent loops of inbreeding. Reality is definitely less than 2^generation
minus-squareMxM111@kbin.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up3arrow-down1·edit-21 年前That’s not his flaw, but OP’s.
this is fucked up calculations, for 100th generation we would need more humans than have ever lived
Your flaw is assuming that a couple only produces one child. Many humans can share the same ancestor.
Don’t forget the recurrent loops of inbreeding. Reality is definitely less than 2^generation
That’s not his flaw, but OP’s.