anyway, what is the purpose of this exercise? is it like Booze Cruise, where Michael asks "the ship is sinking.. who do you save?" "you save the sales department!"
Very interesting topic! I think even if all 15 people can survive it will still not be enough to repopulate the earth. There are just too many problems they can't solve. There will be no hospitals, they'll probably die from lack of medical care. No power plants, no running water, no automobile manufactures, no computers, no more internet, no universities... I've always wondered: in case of a global catastrophe, what is the minimum size of human population that must be preserved in order to not only repopulate the planet, but also maintain most of our culture, science and technology? My guess is we'll need at least a few million, and they have to be some of the healthiest and most educated bunch!
I have to find 5 articles that relate to the exercise, state reasons I chose the 6, put it all on PowerPoint, and present it to the class. Don't worry, when I put my name I'll put (ClutchFans) right next to it Pugs
I heard Sumiyo has 42 DD's Unfortunately she's a big fan of keeping Rafer at PG and making other changes.... Pugs
So you want to be the only man left alive on earth,living with 5 women,3 of them probably pregnant at a time? with you doing all the hard work all the time? What's the use......
How is it possible that a meteor kills literally everyone on earth, but leaves it inhabitable again a mere 6 months later? Max can't come. After a meteor cloud covers the earth and blots out the sun for 6 months, his allergies will be too problematic. Good thing this isn't a critical reading exercise. The twins are 17 years old, not 17 months old. And, they aren't on the ship.
Humans are not as disconnected with nature as you think, we are very capable of diminishing back to our primitive ways. As far as choosing the 6 most likely candidates, don't go with anything other than 1:5 male:female ratio. there is no reason why generation Z cannot reproduce with generation Y... thus increase the prevention of inbreeding.
My survivors... Natasha (female) - She's 27 and although she had a miscarriage, she has a high likelihood of fertility. Computer expertise is a huge plus. Addrienne (female) - 34 years old and the mother of 2 young boys points to fertility. Botany will be very important in reviving plant life. Caroline (female) - At the age of 31, with no children, there is no guarantee that she is fertile. However, she is the only other woman of prime child bearing age who does not have a serious health issue, or family history of serious health issues. I feel a 3rd woman is a must, in the case that one or both of the others are infertile or die. Alexandra would be an alternative here, but if she cannot bear children (at 51 it could be the case) then her main strength (being a pilot/navigator) is redundant when you have Rahim (see below). Sergei (male) - He's a little older at 44 years old and has no proof of fertility (no kids) but he has by far the most impressive physical attributes among the men. His mother going strong at 74 is a good sign. To me, he's worth keeping. Rahim (male) - 38 year old father of five. Most likely fertile, in good health, and possibly most importantly he's a decorated pilot. Jorge (male) - Age 29 and father of 2 year old daughter, which supports a high probability for fertility. I think it's irrelevant that he doesn't like exercise, as that's a personality trait. He's in good health and is a brilliant astronomer, which could come in handy in many ways. Summary I feel that you need a good balance of the healthiest men and women who have the highest likelihood to bear children. I definitely disagree with whoever suggested 1 man and 5 women, because the death or infertility of 1 man brings the entire human race to and end. Same goes with any scenario where you would only choose 1 woman. So you need at least 2 of each sex, and because you need 1 fertile member of each group, I think 3 and 3 is the best choice.
I disagree. Initially you need volume. Also, your math would seem to make sense, but in reality it doesn't work out that way. With four women and two men, if you do genetic control, each woman's child can mate with a child from two other women (without mixing fathers.) If you take 3x3, you get the same number. Each woman's child can only mate with two other lines. Using the 4x2 scenario maximizes your breeding potential.
To my way of thinking, only Kerry and Addrienne are definite have-to-haves. Kerry is a little older, but he has proven his ability to father children, has leadership skills, is a gardener and carpenter. Addrienne isn't terribly old at 34, has proven her ability to have children and is a botanist. All the others would have to be chosen for their ability or likelihood to have children given that none of the others have any essential skills, unless piloting is a concern, and i'm not sure kerry as an experience astronaut wouldn't have this training. Probably go with the 3/3 split to improve odds and limit the risk of all the men or all the women dying/being infertile after returning to earth.
Natasha, even at age 27, would be over 40 by the time a child born from the other survivors could breed with her, at the earliest.
What's your point? She'd be 41 or 42 years old breeding with a 14 year old. If you're lucky, she's been having babies for 14 straight years (lol yeah right) at this point, but more than likely she's given you 5-7 children. Biologically, it's time for her to retire the baby factory at that point, if she's managed to survive. The re-population of the Earth from 6 people will take a very, very long time. The best strategy to maximize yourself long term is to create 2 completely distinct bloodlines, with two variants each. Control the breeding for as many generations as you can to where you have A1/A2 breeding exclusively with B1/B2 offspring. The third male brings you no breeding advantages aside from a protection against the other men dying.
I hadn't even thought about mating with parents, Royal. That certainly opens up even more options, but I'm trying to understand your logic, justxyank. (Math was never something I prided myself on.) .....1......2.....3 a...1a....2a....3a b...1b....2b....3b c...1c....2c....3c vs ....1...2....3...4 a..1a..2a..3a..4a b..1b..2b..3b..4b first option allows 3c offspring to mate with 2a, 2b, 1a, and 1b lines with no incest. second option allows 4b offspring to mate with 3a, 2a, and 1a lines with no incest. (this is excluding parents)
I think people are making too much of the chance for mutation. There was an article posted here not too long ago that downplayed the problem of first cousin incest, saying defects are not that likely. I still wouldn't go 1:5, for purposes of risk management, but I wouldn't worry too much about birth defects.
Well that's pretty damn important, don't you think? If you don't have at least one fertile male, you don't get any babies, mutated or not.
