That is NOT how species replicate. There are many factors where that number comes from. Including food and space to keep them. I read in college the max for humans is something like 10 million. But most scientists think it’s a already slowing down due to the struggles everyone deals with.
Comment on I'd have to hear her argument, but...
Hossenfeffer@feddit.uk 4 weeks ago
Thanos’ plan was unmitigated garbage anyway.
Humanity reached 4M in 1975 and hit 8M in 2022, less than 50 years later. Assuming 50% of humanity died when Thanos snapped his fingers 50 years later we’d be back to 8M people again.
GladiusB@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Building additional supply depots removes the cap
GladiusB@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
That is not the only factor. But yes it would increase food capacity. But species are very aware of their drain on an eco system. We are starting to become more aware. But we know killing off one bug will effect harvests that effect everything including our food’s food.
EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
I think he’s talking about vidya
BallsandBayonets@lemmings.world 4 weeks ago
10 million sounds great, maybe the housing market would finally self correct.
MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 4 weeks ago
You mean 10 billion?
Large cities can have more than 10 million people, so I assume you mean the other thing.
Bluntly, half of the occupants of residences would be gone, and their stuff would be up for grabs. It would take a few years to stabilize afterwards, but it would mostly be business as usual for those who survived the snap (apart from the obvious mental trauma).
Enough homes exist for the number of people who live here now, whether those homes are condos, apartments, detached homes, townhouses, or otherwise. A lot of people would be able to move somewhere more permanent, because the housing market would crash pretty hard.
As we refill the homes the population would naturally return to the same level of growth we have seen previously… So after a few years, maybe a decade, max, humanity would be back on the population train straight to 8B again for sometime between 2050 and 2075.
Humans don’t really follow the same population rules as apply to animals, bacteria, or other organisms in general.
GladiusB@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
I meant 10 billion yes. And this study was specifically for humans. Saying we aren’t animals and we don’t live by nature’s rules just simply isn’t factual. We do things a lot differently but no matter what we still have instincts and those instincts drive us. We can’t just take out the hardwiring.
MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 4 weeks ago
We can’t take it out, but we can over rule it with reason and logic. We can decide to do something that’s not our “natural” choice.
I know plenty of childfree couples, yet our biological drive is to create children to perpetuate our genes in the species.
There’s a lot of exceptions to the natural human drives that most people experience.
Disgracefulone@discuss.online 4 weeks ago
Are… you high? You know that back when I last checked in 2020ish there were 8 billion people, right? Maybe that’s what you meant
f314@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
They might not be a native English speaker. In my language (Norwegian), the word for “billion” is “milliard”. I think that’s also the case in German.
RunawayFixer@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
That’s obviously what they meant. There was probably some translation error. Just cut people some slack, everyone makes small mistakes from time to time. There’s a few (atleast 2) languages where the native word for billion starts with an m and the word for trillion starts with a b.
Disgracefulone@discuss.online 4 weeks ago
Yeah that’s why I added my edit.
Hossenfeffer@feddit.uk 4 weeks ago
Oops. Yup, utter failed to put Bs! Put it down to not having had enough coffee today!