It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
I bet they will never back track and apologise to say their produce was not complete when they next bit of food science or medical research is revealed about our body and what it needs.
My father in law was pre-diabetic and was advised by his diabetes doctor to swap 2 meals for Huel and go really hard at trying to reverse the condition before it really took hold. He did. 2 Huels and a monster salad every day and at least an hour walking. It does help that he has amazing willpower.
He's no longer pre-diabetic.
He's still sticking with the same diet apart from Sundays as he likes a roast.
His blood work is now in great shape and he says he's feeling far younger than his years. He looks it too.
I’m so bored I might as well be listening to Pink Floyd
They will however only be able to prove their claims based on current knowledge.
Nobody can be expected to predict what might be discovered in another 50 years and it would be more than a little unfair to demand an apology for something like that.
It's why asbestos litigation (and others things) has a an effective cut off date: can't sue if it was old enough (sometime in the 1950s, Can't remember the exact date) as nobody on earth knew there was a problem with it.
I’m so bored I might as well be listening to Pink Floyd
I remember hearing Richard Dawkins boldly stating something along the lines of "the science world will understand everything within about twenty years"...even intelligent people can be incredibly arrogant...and naïve.
Current global population density is 60.31 people per square Kilometre. That would give each person 0.0165 Square Km.
I’m so bored I might as well be listening to Pink Floyd
It's quite amazing how people just repeat that sort of claim without thinking about it - even when it is something very easily verifiable with a calculator.
The "Texas Fact" is even more silly than it first appears.
Texas has a total area of about 268,581 square miles (that includes lakes but I'll leave that as it is) - about 432,241 Square KM.
Today's estimate for population is 8,122,544,580
So 432,241 divided by the number of people on earth gives 0.0000532149741676 Square KM each.
Then convert that to something understandable...
That is 5.3 Square Centimetres each.
Not meters - centimetres.
EDIT - Irony of Ironies. I got my sums wrong slightly as explained by @crunchman below.
Ah well - happy to learn something.
I’m so bored I might as well be listening to Pink Floyd
Do you have a citation.
I'm fairly sure this is not true.
No sane scientist would ever say this, it's basically anti the scientific principle.
That's about 0.16 of a acre per person assuming the whole thing was one solid block of farm land with no roads or other services etc.
I think that's well off.
It might be wrong, but it's a lot less wrong than Mr Marlin's maths.
I’m so bored I might as well be listening to Pink Floyd
To convert km2 to m2 you don't just multiply by 1000, you multiply by 1000 squared i.e. 1,000,000.
0.0000532149741676 Square KM converts to 53.2 square metres.
Confirm it here if you don't believe me
https://www.inchcalculator.com/convert/square-kilometer-to-square-meter/
53.2 m2 still isn't much, but it's a lot bigger than 5.3 cm2.
I've edited my post to direct it at this one.
Thank you.
EDIT: apologies to @TheMarlin for taking the piss.
I'm still unconvinced that the land mass per person is enough once shelter etc is taken into account.
I’m so bored I might as well be listening to Pink Floyd
Soylent Let us take a few things off your plate.
I’m so bored I might as well be listening to Pink Floyd