It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cities: Demons... or Saviors?

page: 4
11
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 23 2014 @ 06:43 PM
link   
one person per 1600 sq foot home instead of four people living in one farm home?
one person?
one per home?

so my proverbial newborn, my three year old, my six year old and my 12 year old and husband each get their own 1600 sq foot home?

I think not. NO family will want to have their members separated into their own homes.

It's preposterous first off.
Dangerous secondly.
Waste of space IMMENSELY.
and furthermore:
why divide a family?
why divide a marriage?

one person per 1600 s/f home IS dividing families.

I just noped right out of that idea. who would think that's great?




posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by crazyewok
 


Well, I am planing to do something a long those lines. I wont smash my PC I will give it to someone.

Wish me luck little ewok.




posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 05:58 AM
link   
reply to post by sarra1833
 



one person per 1600 sq foot home instead of four people living in one farm home?
one person?
one per home?

so my proverbial newborn, my three year old, my six year old and my 12 year old and husband each get their own 1600 sq foot home?

I think not. NO family will want to have their members separated into their own homes.

It's preposterous first off.
Dangerous secondly.
Waste of space IMMENSELY.
and furthermore:
why divide a family?
why divide a marriage?

one person per 1600 s/f home IS dividing families.


No, no. You misunderstood my statement. I am absolutely NOT suggesting that only 1 person lives per home. I am absolutely sorry if it sounded like that.

Please, allow me to elaborate:

I said 1 person per home, because it was to display the maximum spread of human population, regardless of age and family groups. It was to show that even under this worst case scenario (aka, an unrealistic world where each individuals would inhabit a whole home alone, which is thankfully not the case in the real world), all of humanity would still cover only 1.6% of Earth. If, indeed, one considers the concepts of family groups, and that say three people would live together in the same house (a husband, a wife and their kid), then mankind would indeed take even less space on Earth - here 0.53 %.
Whereas, the same families, on a 20 acres farm per families of 4, will take 10 Earths.

I am very sorry if it sounded as if I was suggesting that everyone lives seperately. It wasn't the case; it was only to display the extreme difference in numbers between living in farms vs vertical homes.


P.S.: I love your signature!



 
11
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join