Secretly Space Jesus 670 Report post Posted January 9, 2010 Saying "we still have diseases killing millions of people" ignores population. A disease that strikes down 100 million people today has killed 1.7% of the human population. A REAL disease that struck down an estimated 100 million people in the Dark Ages, the Black Plague, reduced the total human population by a third, and the outbreaks of related diseases killed another 10%. The two things are not remotely comparable. AT ALL. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darthmagic 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2010 quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery:Saying "we still have diseases killing millions of people" ignores population. A disease that strikes down 100 million people today has killed 1.7% of the human population. A REAL disease that struck down an estimated 100 million people in the Dark Ages, the Black Plague, reduced the total human population by a third, and the outbreaks of related diseases killed another 10%. The two things are not remotely comparable. AT ALL. So the only thing that makes the difference is that there are more people now? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BMP 424 Report post Posted January 9, 2010 The difference is that the degree of it is much smaller than back then. It's like saying in 1920, you lost 1 dollar. Were you to lose that same amount today, it wouldn't be nearly as much valuable (or significant...). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Secretly Space Jesus 670 Report post Posted January 9, 2010 quote: Originally posted by Darthmagic: quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery:Saying "we still have diseases killing millions of people" ignores population. A disease that strikes down 100 million people today has killed 1.7% of the human population. A REAL disease that struck down an estimated 100 million people in the Dark Ages, the Black Plague, reduced the total human population by a third, and the outbreaks of related diseases killed another 10%. The two things are not remotely comparable. AT ALL. So the only thing that makes the difference is that there are more people now? Are you being intentionally ignorant? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darthmagic 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2010 quote: Originally posted by ButterMilkPancakes:The difference is that the degree of it is much smaller than back then. It's like saying in 1920, you lost 1 dollar. Were you to lose that same amount today, it wouldn't be nearly as much valuable (or significant...). What? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GhostAnime 50 Report post Posted January 9, 2010 he's saying losing a dollar back then was much worse than losing a dollar today. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheREALBrooksThompson 157 Report post Posted January 9, 2010 One thing that is extremely fascinating about this discussion is the sharp difference in worldviews of the participants. By that I mean that my perception of what the world around me actually is only loosely resembles that of Darthmagic. I don't mean that in a disparaging way; to each his own. I just find it very interesting that different people can take in essentially the same information, and their brains process that information in completely different ways, with completely different results. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Secretly Space Jesus 670 Report post Posted January 10, 2010 Here's a pretty good video that explains the basics of evolutionary theory: http://www.youtube.com/user/qu...=4#p/u/4/vss1VKN2rf8 In my original post, I unintentionally stole several of his examples. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darthmagic 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2010 quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery:Here's a pretty good video that explains the basics of evolutionary theory: http://www.youtube.com/user/qu...=4#p/u/4/vss1VKN2rf8 In my original post, I unintentionally stole several of his examples. I'm gonna check it out. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darthmagic 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2010 DOM do you know of any reports on the issue of having a safer world tody? I have been searching and i can't find any. would really appreciate it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Secretly Space Jesus 670 Report post Posted January 10, 2010 quote: Originally posted by Darthmagic:DOM do you know of any reports on the issue of having a safer world tody? I have been searching and i can't find any. would really appreciate it. Well, in the Middle Ages: nearly a third of women died before they were 5, and more than 3/4 died before they were 25: http://www.hyw.com/Books/History/Fertilit.htm Finding more comprehensive data is trickier because the Middle Ages suffered a worse infant mortality rate than any modern Third World Country, and so some people believe that infant deaths should be discarded. The fact is that nearly 40% of all children born in Middle Ages Europe would die before they were 10. However, based on most studies, an aristocrat who survived to age 21 would, on average, live into his early 60s, whereas a peasant who survived to 21 would live to his mid 50s. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darthmagic 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2010 quote: Originally posted by Drunk on Mystery: quote: Originally posted by Darthmagic:DOM do you know of any reports on the issue of having a safer world tody? I have been searching and i can't find any. would really appreciate it. Well, in the Middle Ages: nearly a third of women died before they were 5, and more than 3/4 died before they were 25: http://www.hyw.com/Books/History/Fertilit.htm Finding more comprehensive data is trickier because the Middle Ages suffered a worse infant mortality rate than any modern Third World Country, and so some people believe that infant deaths should be discarded. The fact is that nearly 40% of all children born in Middle Ages Europe would die before they were 10. However, based on most studies, an aristocrat who survived to age 21 would, on average, live into his early 60s, whereas a peasant who survived to 21 would live to his mid 50s. Thanks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites