[geeks] Mr Bill?

[wa2egp at att.net]

> What was its local kill rate?  50%?  And it was mostly limited to
> Western Europe, wasn't it?  I'd be surprised if it even got into
> double-digit percentages planetwide.

Well, on a lot of population graphs, it make a pretty good dent in the J curve.


> > I dunno.  Our social structure is a little wobblely and our bunching
> > up in cities is not very forgiving of massive change.  I fear more
> > would die than necessary.
> 
> "Necessary"?  I'm not sure how fair it is to call any such deaths
> "necessary".

Wrong choice of words.  The number of deaths would be greater than if we were more spread out.

> > And if the number left is below what is necessary to build up the
> > population, we're screwed.
> 
> Yes, but how big is that number?  I'm not convinced that more than one
> breeding pair is actually _necessary_.  Are there any data on isolated
> populations that give any reason to think we know this number?

You need more than a single breeding pair.  Not only do you have very few eggs in one basket, you also limit the gene pool so the population is a little bit more vulnerable to disease.  That number for humans I don't know but I'll see if I can find out.

Bob