John X Posted September 5, 2011 Share Posted September 5, 2011 ..you exaggerated on the thread to suit your own agenda Because I'm known to exaggerate on threads on here! Actually as it happened, my 'exaggeration' of 73 was closer to the final figure (60) than your 7! By the way do you know who keeps closing/deleting the anti-EDL/BNP threads on here. Who's your 'man' on the inside? Go on. Give us a clue! John X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted September 5, 2011 Author Share Posted September 5, 2011 I have done the 'math'. If we have 100 men and 100 women and the men can marry as many women as they like but the women can only marry one man, then we could have 1 man with 100 wives which would mean we had 99 bachelors, as there'd be no women left for them to marry. Polygamy only produces more children within that marriage, it doesn't create an enhanced birthrate within the polygamous community as there are roughly equal numbers of men to women-just as there are in monogamous communities-capiche? (to use another crass Americanism) You're missing the point again BF. A muslim man that has 100 wives, and fathers a child with each wife will undoubtedly raise 100 children in accordance to Islamic law. It doesn't matter how many bachelors were remaining as each wife has a muslim child. Do the math again BF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John X Posted September 5, 2011 Share Posted September 5, 2011 Do the math again BF. May I humbly suggest that before you get too carried away, bf is actually right. John X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plekhanov Posted September 5, 2011 Share Posted September 5, 2011 The same number of children that would be produced if those 100 men each had a different wife and each produced a child, is the point. I fear you're wasting your time attempting to explain even something that basic, the Dunning–Kruger effect is strong in this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted September 5, 2011 Author Share Posted September 5, 2011 Anyone interested in some actual useful data on the subject under discussion as opposed to danot's muddled headed conjecture based off far from scientific personal impressions could do worse that check out The Future of the Global Muslim Population a recent Pew Research report. A report drawn up by professional demographers and social scientists using the best evidence they could find, which amazingly enough did not include danot's "personal observation". Actually, I'd say your link supports the assumptions I've made considering your link is basing it's projections on yet more assumptions - "These projections are based both on past demographic trends and on assumptions about how these trends will play out in the future years making these projections inevitably entail a host of uncertainties, including political ones". It goes on to say that Islamic faith is expected to grow by one third in Europe over the next twenty years. Did you bother reading any of it plekanov? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John X Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 It goes on to say that Islamic faith is expected to grow by one third in Europe over the next twenty years. Who cares? John X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted September 6, 2011 Author Share Posted September 6, 2011 May I humbly suggest that before you get too carried away, bf is actually right. John X You may. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John X Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 You may. I'm glad! I hate maths rows on here. Maths is an exact science not a matter of opinion. There is nothing more undignified than a poster refusing to admit that they are wrong when they clearly are. John X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted September 6, 2011 Author Share Posted September 6, 2011 I fear you're wasting your time attempting to explain even something that basic, the Dunning–Kruger effect is strong in this one. What's the likelihood of a muslim couple having no more than one child?.. Now compare your answer to the likelihood of them having four kids or more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted September 6, 2011 Author Share Posted September 6, 2011 Who cares? John X Hey, I didn't post the link that I quoted from, I merely pointed out that the link clearly supports my assumptions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.