A skeleton walks into a bar. He goes up to the bartender and says, “I’d like a beer and a mop.”
0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.
You'll never self-actualize the subconscious canopy of stardust with that attitude.
Welp, at some point- maybe sooner than later- we'll have a last generation. And boy won't that screw the data for all these theories up.(Sorry if that part already got said- I did try to read through the thread but it's kinda laborious.)
A last generation? As in the extinction of the human race?
it is well known that PMS Elle is evil.
I think you'd fit in a 12" or at least a 16" firework mortar
You win this thread because that's most unsettling to even think about.
Quote from: Pyraxis on November 24, 2017, 10:52:04 PMA last generation? As in the extinction of the human race?Yeah.
I took "generation" to be when a child was born up to the time they were likely to have children of their own. Accounting for historical and cultural changes and getting rid of outliers this 16-29 seems about right
Quote from: Al Swearengen on November 20, 2017, 08:22:49 PMI took "generation" to be when a child was born up to the time they were likely to have children of their own. Accounting for historical and cultural changes and getting rid of outliers this 16-29 seems about righto_O
Quote from: Minister of silly walks on November 29, 2017, 05:33:38 AMQuote from: Al Swearengen on November 20, 2017, 08:22:49 PMI took "generation" to be when a child was born up to the time they were likely to have children of their own. Accounting for historical and cultural changes and getting rid of outliers this 16-29 seems about righto_ODo you need finger puppets to explain the concept?
Quote from: Al Swearengen on November 29, 2017, 05:51:41 AMQuote from: Minister of silly walks on November 29, 2017, 05:33:38 AMQuote from: Al Swearengen on November 20, 2017, 08:22:49 PMI took "generation" to be when a child was born up to the time they were likely to have children of their own. Accounting for historical and cultural changes and getting rid of outliers this 16-29 seems about righto_OOkay. The of 16-29 years for a generation was claimed to be a too ill-defined. I, however, believe that though generation is assessed as being from the time of people in a community being born to when they become parents themselves, it is a difficult science to make a hard and fast determination as to exactly what that age is. Do you need finger puppets to explain the concept? If you cut out the real outliers of precocious puberty and pregnancies and such and likewise the freakish 50yr old+ mothers and geriatric fathers then look at various cultures in a community in recent history, I think that 16-29 is a reasonable assessment and will capture most of the age of birth to parenthood. In future they will likely stretch this even further. It's not exactly rocket science, but it is starting to look like I'm gonna need some kind of prop.
Quote from: Minister of silly walks on November 29, 2017, 05:33:38 AMQuote from: Al Swearengen on November 20, 2017, 08:22:49 PMI took "generation" to be when a child was born up to the time they were likely to have children of their own. Accounting for historical and cultural changes and getting rid of outliers this 16-29 seems about righto_OOkay. The of 16-29 years for a generation was claimed to be a too ill-defined. I, however, believe that though generation is assessed as being from the time of people in a community being born to when they become parents themselves, it is a difficult science to make a hard and fast determination as to exactly what that age is. Do you need finger puppets to explain the concept? If you cut out the real outliers of precocious puberty and pregnancies and such and likewise the freakish 50yr old+ mothers and geriatric fathers then look at various cultures in a community in recent history, I think that 16-29 is a reasonable assessment and will capture most of the age of birth to parenthood. In future they will likely stretch this even further.
Quote from: Minister of silly walks on November 29, 2017, 06:02:12 AMQuote from: Al Swearengen on November 29, 2017, 05:51:41 AMQuote from: Minister of silly walks on November 29, 2017, 05:33:38 AMQuote from: Al Swearengen on November 20, 2017, 08:22:49 PMI took "generation" to be when a child was born up to the time they were likely to have children of their own. Accounting for historical and cultural changes and getting rid of outliers this 16-29 seems about righto_OOkay. The of 16-29 years for a generation was claimed to be a too ill-defined. I, however, believe that though generation is assessed as being from the time of people in a community being born to when they become parents themselves, it is a difficult science to make a hard and fast determination as to exactly what that age is. Do you need finger puppets to explain the concept? If you cut out the real outliers of precocious puberty and pregnancies and such and likewise the freakish 50yr old+ mothers and geriatric fathers then look at various cultures in a community in recent history, I think that 16-29 is a reasonable assessment and will capture most of the age of birth to parenthood. In future they will likely stretch this even further. It's not exactly rocket science, but it is starting to look like I'm gonna need some kind of prop.
