Re: The Forebears Paradox
- From: "Jesse F. Hughes" <jesse@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2006 09:49:47 -0400
Jeremy Boden <jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
On Mon, 2006-09-04 at 11:20 +1000, Peter Webb wrote:
"Michael" <michael.greaney@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message...
news:1157284535.177582.121840@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
If your wife is Caucasian (as I assume you are), you can pretty much bet on...
having common ancestors as a certainty. Most Europeans are related to
Europen royalty (which in turn is inter-related), basically because many of
the European Kings had lots of children.
I see.
Whilst the plebs all had only 2.4 children, the Kings had a lot of
children?
How did they do this? It is my understanding that kings are usually
male, whilst it actually requires the presence of a female for child
production.
Right. But a king can have 30 kids while thirty peasant women have
only one kid each. Relatively speaking, that king had lots of kids.
--
Jesse F. Hughes
"Well, I don't claim to be an expert, in fact I am a fry cook with a
national burger chain, but I have solved many differential and partial
differential equations numerically." --C. Bond
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The Forebears Paradox
- From: Jeremy Boden
- Re: The Forebears Paradox
- References:
- The Forebears Paradox
- From: Michael
- Re: The Forebears Paradox
- From: Randy Poe
- Re: The Forebears Paradox
- From: Michael
- Re: The Forebears Paradox
- From: Peter Webb
- Re: The Forebears Paradox
- From: Jeremy Boden
- The Forebears Paradox
- Prev by Date: Re: JSH: The will to lie
- Next by Date: Re: algebra with Z[x]/<(x^2)+1>.
- Previous by thread: Re: The Forebears Paradox
- Next by thread: Re: The Forebears Paradox
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|