(August 3, 2015 at 3:31 pm)Aristocatt Wrote: The World population was estimated to be around 450 million when the black death hit.

Not including Russia, the population of the 8 most populated European countries is greater now than the estimated world population then.

I said Europee, as in the European regions, has never regained its number after the black death. Europe's population not the worlds, both before and after the event. The Black Death killed about 50 million people in the 14th century. Around 60% per cent of Europe's entire population.

Did not included the many Asia and Russia, with the Europeans, that died also from the black death.

Lets do some math to explain why you are wrong.

If Europe lost 50 million people, and that was 60% of its population, then Europe had around 83 Million People.

If the Population of the 8 most populated European countries(not including Russia) is greater than the world population, that means that the total population Growth of Europe since just before the black death is atleast:
450-83

Which means the European population has grown by 367 Million.

367 Million is more than 7x the amount of people that you are claiming died in the black plague.

(August 3, 2015 at 3:34 pm)Aristocatt Wrote: Ace, you have successfully misunderstood my entire argument.

My argument is that this idea of homosexuals being bad because they could cause extinction is dumb.  I am using the basis of extinction from sexual orientation to show that every sexual orientation has the potential to destroy humanity.

HAHA Thank's I was just going to ask you that. I was trying to look for the beginning of the argument to see what was who's position.

Ok, got the point and. . . ? . . . ? . . .?

Hmm. . . I can see were it would be bad unto its self, if it can not produce its self, it is done with. So yea that is fucked.
As a hole, i can see were it dose not add to the numbers of people.
But I am not sure how that has to do with rights no one is saying they have no right.

I don't think Anima was saying that is why they should not have rights. Only their importance in the nature of the human race. The rights part of the argument has disappear in this discussion between you two because of each of you trying to define social or natures importance of its presents.
At lest that is what I got from the reading.

(August 3, 2015 at 3:25 pm)Ace Wrote: Yes it is a large world issue. And I also hate to tell you that Europe alone has not ever gotten back to its population since the Black Death. Just about 3 or 4 months ago it was stated that the Jews population is almost achieved their numbers before the Holocaust. Both India and China are starting to have an disproportion of the male to female ratio were they are liking numbers in girls.

Those numbers can only grow be hetero fucking. Sorry.

You will of course provide sources for your first statement.

It's all good. I have been responding sporadically for about 40+ pages now so it is hard to keep up!

The topic of this thread is "Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argument". Anima's point is largely related to why as a society we should not want to encourage homosexuality.

(August 3, 2015 at 3:55 pm)Iroscato Wrote: You will of course provide sources for your first statement.

HAHA Trust me I have!

I don't know how much you want because there is a large amount of, books, magazines,  journals, news papers that talk  about this

CNN’s own Fareed Zakaria show, I think it is called GPS, did a segment on this issue.

I was able to only find the transcripts. It is about mid, to a little over, page
[url=http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1506/14/fzgps.01.html]

http://us.wow.com/searchs_pt=source2&s_i...%20decline

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/29/magazi...d=all&_r=0#

Sorry not to sure how to link the link in. Copy and past should work just fine.

Let me know if you want more.

(August 3, 2015 at 4:04 pm)Aristocatt Wrote: It's all good.  I have been responding sporadically for about 40+ pages now so it is hard to keep up!

The topic of this thread is "Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argument".  Anima's point is largely related to why as a society we should not want to encourage homosexuality.

Hmm ok got you.

Personally my position is that this whole extinction debate is silly, even if the argument itself was not incoherent.  We are not likely at risk of going extinct anytime soon, and pondering about the possibilities only distracts us from building a stronger society today.  Building a stronger society today will help us prevent any of the billions of ways that extinction could come to us.  Acting aggressive toward any group of people because of the minute possibility that they could contribute to the extinction of the world only makes them less interested in participating in our society.  The more people that are happily participating in our society, the stronger a society we can build.  And as such, we will be less likely to go extinct in the future.


Beyond the extinction issue, I wish I was pansexual to be honest.  Love and marriage can help provide both financial security, and domestication.  People who have something to live for are more likely to take care of themselves, and leading a healthy life/an educated life seems like the best formula for building a better society.  Broadening the pool of people that you can be intimate with just means that you have a higher probability of finding one you can be intimate with.

(August 3, 2015 at 3:45 pm)Aristocatt Wrote: Lets do some math to explain why you are wrong.

If Europe lost 50 million people, and that was 60% of its population, then Europe had around 83 Million People.

If the Population of the 8 most populated European countries(not including Russia) is greater than the world population, that means that the total population Growth of Europe since just before the black death is atleast:
450-83

Which means the European population has grown by 367 Million.

367 Million is more than 7x the amount of people that you are claiming died in the black plague.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consequenc...lack_Death

Europe Alone:
"Figures for the death toll vary widely by area and from source to source as new research and discoveries come to light. It killed an estimated 75–430 million people in the 14th century.[4][5][6] According to medieval historian Philip Daileader in 2007:

" The trend of recent research is pointing to a figure more like 45% to 50% of the European population dying during a four-year period. There is a fair amount of geographic variation. In Mediterranean Europe and Italy, the South of France and Spain, where plague ran for about four years consecutively, it was probably closer to 75% to 80% of the population. In Germany and England it was probably closer to 20%.[7]"

China Alone:
Estimates of the demographic impact of the plague in Asia are based on both population figures during this time and estimates of the disease's toll on population centers. The initial outbreak of plague in the Chinese province of Hubei in 1334 claimed up to ninety percent of the population.[citation needed] China had several epidemics and famines from 1200 to the 1350s and its population decreased from an estimated 125 million to 65 million in the late 14th century.

Middle East alone:
Surviving records in some cities reveal a devastating number of deaths. The 1348 outbreak in Gaza left an estimated 10,000 people dead, while Aleppo recorded a death rate of 500 a day during the same year. In Damascus, at the disease's peak in September and October 1348, a thousand deaths were recorded every day, with overall mortality estimated at between 25 and 38 percent. Syria lost a total of 400,000 people by the time the epidemic subsided in March 1349. In contrast to some higher mortality estimates in Asia and Europe, scholars such as John Fields of Trinity College in Dublin believe the mortality rate in the Middle East was less than one-third of the total population, with higher rates in selected areas.



I would point out two facts. These statistics are only covering the second out break and are not covering the first and third. (Note the third was rather mild, the first is estimated at approximately 50M) Now let us do the math.

Europe+China+Middle(365) = 430M+125M+10000+(500+1000)*365 = 430M + 125M + 0.01M + 5.5M = 560.5M

Now if we wish to focus on europe alone you are talking 430M So if we take the current population of the 8 largest cities in Western Europe we get:

Nation Pop (12/2014)
 Germany - 80,716,000
 France - 66,030,000
 Italy - 60,782,668
 Spain - 46,704,314
Netherlands - 16,856,620
 Belgium - 11,198,638
 Greece - 10,816,286
Portugal - 10,427,301
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographi...by_country

Summing all of this up we get for the 8 most populated countries in Western Europe

81M+66M+61M+47M+17M+11M+11M+10M = 304M

304M < 430M Thus europe has not gotten back to the population levels it had before the plague.

Try being honest with your statistics, and I will be able to take them seriously.

The wiki page claims that the total death count across the world was between 75-430 million.  Not in Europe alone.
You also seem to be so interested in being right about something that you fail to understand why 430 million is listed as a possibility.
Let's check the citations!
Oh wait, the citation that is supposed to list 430 million deaths is being cited from a fucking article that doesn't exist anymore.
Maybe a quick google search will help.  Second result = information about ebola.

I understand the discrepancy we are having between the total population of the 8 biggest European countries.  
I was adding turkey into mine, which actually is not reasonable in hindsight, for that I am sorry, I didn't realize I had done that.  But You also removed Ukraine and Romania which is not reasonable.
Either way since you wanted to use wikipedia as a source, of the 3 citations for the scope of the black plague, 200 million is the highest estimate used.
Even with your slightly dishonest representation of European countries we have 304 > 200(world deaths, not European deaths)  
So from this perspective not only has Europe bounced back, but it has made enough babies on it's own to account for the whole worlds loss of life.

If we are going to cherry pick random wikipedia quotes without reference to how likely they are we can do that to.

"It is estimated that between one-quarter and one-third of the European population (20 million people) died from the outbreak between 1348 and 1350."

"Contemporary observers, such as Jean Froissart, estimated the toll to be one-third—less an accurate assessment than an allusion to the Book of Revelation meant to suggest the scope of the plague.[13] Many rural villages were depopulated, mostly the smaller communities, as the few survivors fled to larger towns and cities leaving behind abandoned villages."