Ask Your Question today
Let's say the population reduced to approximately 80 humans: 40 being males and 40 being females). Would you want to replenish our numbers and have kids?
| Yes (At 80, we'd be CRITICALLY ENDANGERED!) | 26 | |
| No (It'd actually do us alot of good) | 14 |
In that situation, it would be your duty to produce several children. That doesn't mean that you would necessarily raise them. With only 80 people left on the planet, your time might be better spent helping the group to survive, gathering food, maintaining the shelters or getting water. In very small, self sufficient communities like that, the children are usually raised by the village collectively. You sure won't be able to come on IIN for advice.
I hate children and no stinkin' lack of people's gonna change that. I'll probably be dead before any of the annoying brats make anything worthwhile anyway.
It would be a sad world, though. All the vast numbers of unique people and what they've created (/especially/ what they've created) would be seriously missed. By me at least.
Apparently the minimum number of humans needed to maintain a diverse gene pool without serious in-breeding is something like 160.
So, nah. I'm good. I don't want kids, anyway.
Depends if I wanted to have kids with any of those people, and if any of them wanted to have kids with me. The extent of human population just doesn't feature in my mind as a factor that would directly influence my decision.
Nope. Not even a critically endangered human race would make me change my mind about not wanting to reproduce.
If humanity is ever that critically endangered a catastrophic event has happened, and I would most likely be concerned with trying to survive rather than to.. put buns in ovens.
If there were only 80 people left in the world I'd have at least 79 days worth of food.