Sunday, November 1. 2009
TRICK OR TREAT
Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
I think "Guest" needs to check their own spelling... 
"You're" instead of "Your"
"You're" instead of "Your"
Talk of numbers of children amongst humans our side of the gap are not really helpful, our situation is extremely different from that applicable your side.
First, we are unique over here, there are no other technologically savvy species, probably no sapients other than ourselves (and that may be stretching the definition of sapient a bit).
Secondly, we have no predators to speak of. One thing we have been very successful at is wiping out any species that represents a physical threat to us (which raises some interesting questions about life form the other side of the gap. Like, are there any mammoths there? Aurochs? Dodoes? But I digress.). Essentially we do not have anything limiting our numbers except our enviroment and ourselves,
Thirdly, medical advances mean that more of our children are surviving to adulthood (well over 99% in "First World" countries). One side effect of this is that we are choosing not to have as many children as our ancestors did.
For comparison, I was born 1954, and am the oldest of two. My brother has only one son (though his current wife - his third - has four by her previous marriage). My nephew has a daughter, and though he may have more children, that is looking increasingly unlikely. One, two (or sometimes three) is a fairly typical number of children in a modern family in Britain (where I live, and where my father's family comes from).
In contrast, my father (born 1918) was the youngest of five. His father (born c 1884) was the youngest of twelve, as was his father. A couple of centuries ago here the number of children being born per couple was probably about six or seven, most of whom would have died of disease in childhood.
The modern situation in England is NOT typical of our Earth yet, though it is getting there as medical technology spreads.
One other point, on the idea of letting Francis and any daughter you have marry and have kids. Frankly, unless you are willing to see several thousand more humans move across to your world, I would strongly recommend against. Whatever the various religions may say, the odds of a population of humans with only two ancestors in one generation surviving any significant length of time is small. For a start their own children would have to commit incest to have children. And it would be several generations after that before anyoine was distantly enough related for any marriage not to be incestuous by most legal systems over here. The only way round this woiuld be to create a large population of humans, and that means large scale migration.
There is a good reason why many species our side of the gap (NOT just humans) have behaviours that prevent inbreeding.
It would be far kinder to leave Francis a unique specimen, and allow the human species to die out there than to inflict the horrors that could be the fate of his descendants if they inherited such a limited gene-pool.
First, we are unique over here, there are no other technologically savvy species, probably no sapients other than ourselves (and that may be stretching the definition of sapient a bit).
Secondly, we have no predators to speak of. One thing we have been very successful at is wiping out any species that represents a physical threat to us (which raises some interesting questions about life form the other side of the gap. Like, are there any mammoths there? Aurochs? Dodoes? But I digress.). Essentially we do not have anything limiting our numbers except our enviroment and ourselves,
Thirdly, medical advances mean that more of our children are surviving to adulthood (well over 99% in "First World" countries). One side effect of this is that we are choosing not to have as many children as our ancestors did.
For comparison, I was born 1954, and am the oldest of two. My brother has only one son (though his current wife - his third - has four by her previous marriage). My nephew has a daughter, and though he may have more children, that is looking increasingly unlikely. One, two (or sometimes three) is a fairly typical number of children in a modern family in Britain (where I live, and where my father's family comes from).
In contrast, my father (born 1918) was the youngest of five. His father (born c 1884) was the youngest of twelve, as was his father. A couple of centuries ago here the number of children being born per couple was probably about six or seven, most of whom would have died of disease in childhood.
The modern situation in England is NOT typical of our Earth yet, though it is getting there as medical technology spreads.
One other point, on the idea of letting Francis and any daughter you have marry and have kids. Frankly, unless you are willing to see several thousand more humans move across to your world, I would strongly recommend against. Whatever the various religions may say, the odds of a population of humans with only two ancestors in one generation surviving any significant length of time is small. For a start their own children would have to commit incest to have children. And it would be several generations after that before anyoine was distantly enough related for any marriage not to be incestuous by most legal systems over here. The only way round this woiuld be to create a large population of humans, and that means large scale migration.
There is a good reason why many species our side of the gap (NOT just humans) have behaviours that prevent inbreeding.
It would be far kinder to leave Francis a unique specimen, and allow the human species to die out there than to inflict the horrors that could be the fate of his descendants if they inherited such a limited gene-pool.
as as adoptee in a blended family, one of the things my parents observed was that the sort of trouble that I got in to (piling things up to climb on, or crawl under, anything that involved sloppy, muddy mixtures...) and the trouble my younger sib tended towards (the path to the cookie jar, the contents of other people's pockets) were very different, and based on our natures -
and while I was quickly shamed into sensible behavior by the artfully miserable look on poppa's hound-dog face, it was often needed for my mother to discipline my brother... well, like a terrier shaking a rat, eh?
one thing we both shared was the process of learning about ourselves by pretending to be anything BUT what we were - we were both natural mimics, and practiced the habits and gestures of all who struck our fancy for good or ill - my impersonation of the dour jackass who taught us grammar taught me once and for all that SOME sorts of trouble are well worth the taking
I think that, as Francis explores his world, he will play at being all things, with all creatures, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if Rudy finds out he's not the only member of the family with a costume closet -
and while I was quickly shamed into sensible behavior by the artfully miserable look on poppa's hound-dog face, it was often needed for my mother to discipline my brother... well, like a terrier shaking a rat, eh?
one thing we both shared was the process of learning about ourselves by pretending to be anything BUT what we were - we were both natural mimics, and practiced the habits and gestures of all who struck our fancy for good or ill - my impersonation of the dour jackass who taught us grammar taught me once and for all that SOME sorts of trouble are well worth the taking
I think that, as Francis explores his world, he will play at being all things, with all creatures, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if Rudy finds out he's not the only member of the family with a costume closet -
Calendar
|
February '12 |
|
||||
| Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat | Sun |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | ||||
Quicksearch
Categories
Syndicate This Blog
Blog Administration
Powered by
