Viewing Thread:
"If we could shrink the earth's population to a village of precisely 100......."

Found this today,


If we could shrink the earth's population to a village of precisely 100
people, with all the existing human ratios remaining the same, it would

look something like the following. There would be:



57 Asians

21 Europeans

14 from the Western Hemisphere, both north and south

8 would be Africans

52 would be female

48 would be male

70 would be non-white

30 would be white

70 would be non-Christian

30 would be Christian

6 people would possess 59% of the entire world's wealth and all 6 would

be from the United States.

80 would live in substandard housing

70 would be unable to read

50 would suffer from malnutrition

ONE would be near death; ONE would be near birth

ONE would have a college education

ONE would own computer.





When one considers our world from such a compressed perspective, the need for acceptance, understanding and education become glaringly

apparent.



And, therefore . . . If you have food in the refrigerator, clothes on your back, a roof overhead and a place to sleep, you are richer than 75% of this world.



If you have money in the bank, in your wallet, and spare change in a dish someplace, you are among the top 8% of the worlds wealthy.



If you woke up this morning with more health than illness, you are more blessed than the million who will not survive this week.



If you have never experienced the danger of battle, the loneliness of imprisonment, the agony of torture, or the pangs of starvation…you are ahead of 500 million people in the world.



If you can attend a church meeting without fear of harassment, arrest, torture, or death, you are more blessed than three billion people in the world.



If your parents are still alive and still married, you are very rare, even in the United States. If you hold up your head with a smile on your face and are truly thankful, you are blessed because the majority can, but most do not.



If you can hold someone's hand, hug them or even touch them on the shoulder...you are blessed because you can offer God's healing touch.

If you can read this message, you just received a double blessing in that someone was thinking of you, and furthermore, you are more blessed than

over two billion people in the world that cannot read at all.

Have a good day

Paradox: wrote:
> My 4 month old sister forwarded me the same email today.

Emailing at 4 months eh? Never too young to start.

My 4 month old sister forwarded me the same email today.

That's complete rubbish.

i'munn wrote:
> Reefer wrote:
> i'munn wrote:
> China has a population of about 1.3 billion, India about 1.1
> billion,
> so they make up 40% of the population of the world between them.
>
> Apparantly if Chinas "one child policy" hadn't been
> introduced, by 2050, the population would have exceeded 6 billion.
> Scary.
> And it's gonna happen to India.
>
> Do you mean exceed 6,000,000,000 in JUST China? If so, HOLY HELL,
> but
> if you mean the entire world, well, "meh", we've hit
> 6,000,000,000 already.
>
> Well think about it, the population was near a billion then (possibly
> more), if people continued to have 7+ children in a family, it'd
> easily have exceeded 6 billion. Mind, we're talking by 2050.
>
> That's just saying though, chances are, people would realise with
> that many children, there's notenough food, and they'd stop having
> children, eventually, but that's just an example of how it would have
> ended up with no change.

Well, it wouldn't surprise me if they didn't realise this. The world is full of some absolute plebs.

Reefer wrote:
> i'munn wrote:
> China has a population of about 1.3 billion, India about 1.1
> billion,
> so they make up 40% of the population of the world between them.
>
> Apparantly if Chinas "one child policy" hadn't been
> introduced, by 2050, the population would have exceeded 6 billion.
> Scary.
> And it's gonna happen to India.
>
> Do you mean exceed 6,000,000,000 in JUST China? If so, HOLY HELL, but
> if you mean the entire world, well, "meh", we've hit
> 6,000,000,000 already.

Well think about it, the population was near a billion then (possibly more), if people continued to have 7+ children in a family, it'd easily have exceeded 6 billion. Mind, we're talking by 2050.

That's just saying though, chances are, people would realise with that many children, there's notenough food, and they'd stop having children, eventually, but that's just an example of how it would have ended up with no change.

i'munn wrote:
> China has a population of about 1.3 billion, India about 1.1 billion,
> so they make up 40% of the population of the world between them.
>
> Apparantly if Chinas "one child policy" hadn't been
> introduced, by 2050, the population would have exceeded 6 billion.
> Scary.
> And it's gonna happen to India.

Do you mean exceed 6,000,000,000 in JUST China? If so, HOLY HELL, but if you mean the entire world, well, "meh", we've hit 6,000,000,000 already.

witch-king wrote:
> Reefer wrote:
> So, 57% of the world's population are Asian? Christ!
>
> Hang on, that can't be right, surely? China alone has like 1-2
> billion...
>
> China is in Asia
>
> *slaps forehead*

*slaps self repeatedly*

Man, I feel st000pid.

China has a population of about 1.3 billion, India about 1.1 billion, so they make up 40% of the population of the world between them.

Apparantly if Chinas "one child policy" hadn't been introduced, by 2050, the population would have exceeded 6 billion.
Scary.
And it's gonna happen to India.

witch-king wrote:
> Heard it in assembly.

Yeah. So did I... And it's not like it was something similar... It was exactly the same.

Reefer wrote:
> So, 57% of the world's population are Asian? Christ!
>
> Hang on, that can't be right, surely? China alone has like 1-2
> billion...

China is in Asia

*slaps forehead*