Skip to main content
8 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jan 28, 2017 at 16:35 comment added SRM @bebrw exactly.
Jan 28, 2017 at 13:18 comment added BenRW @SRM I think I see what you're saying, allow me to paraphrase to see if I have a compatible understanding: "Extinction: Unlikely" instead of "Extinction: No"?
Jan 24, 2017 at 23:26 comment added SRM You provided evidence that at least one (lots more, but at least one) would not go extinct. That's not the same as providing evidence that NONE will go extinct. Does the logic make sense? I'm not sure how else to communicate my point.
Jan 24, 2017 at 22:24 comment added BenRW @SRM I provided 195 counter examples, not one.
Jan 24, 2017 at 20:02 comment added SRM exactly my point. Any country also could not do that.
Jan 24, 2017 at 18:38 comment added BenRW @SRM Every nation can do this. China is just the most extreme case of people choosing to gender-bias their offspring, but we all have the capability of doing so.
Jan 24, 2017 at 16:58 comment added SRM "Evidence: We can actually do this, and we're not extinct." Weak evidence. It shouldn't be "No." It should be "Not necessarily." You have provided one counterexample, thus demonstrating that extinction isn't guaranteed -- good. But that doesn't mean it wouldn't occur given different social conditions (see other answer about One Child Policy in China, for example). If there were some extreme pressure to produce an heir of one sex or the other, you have a Prisoners' Dilemma of who volunteers to raise the other sex.
Jan 24, 2017 at 16:23 history answered BenRW CC BY-SA 3.0