What is Digg?28 Comments
- acidicpiss, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19.9 percent of people in China has the surname Wang. There are 1,306,313,812 people in China as of July 2005 est. That's 129,325,067.3 people in China with surname Wang. not including me, in US. The army of WANGs will destroy you.
- karras, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1cheese06,
I'm in no way condoning his tone and reply, but just to let everyone know,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongoloid
Racial classification and even the existence of race is controversial. See (Race). The -oid racial terms are now sometimes controversial in both technical and nontechnical contexts, and may be considered offensive by some.[1] Mongoloid is considered "an archaic term" by a modern anthropological textbook, The Human Species, copyrighted in 2003 (page 126). Nonetheless, Mongoloid, Caucasoid, and Negroid are still used regularly in scientific discussion.
So please don't think that everyone using the words Mongoloid, Caucasoid, and Negroid (if you did) are using them as a derogatory term.
It's not the word, it's the tone and content. - jeffhung, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Losershoes: The story said the current population of China is 1.3 billion. 1.5 million out of 1.3 billion is about 1.2 per 1000. If you use the current US population according to Google (295,734,134), that would be like having 354,881 people in the US being decendents of the same person.
- Mofo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Somebody had a lot of concubines! haha
- yukevster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I plan to leave a similar legacy...wish me luck...YEeHaaaa!
- Metman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0And boy and I tired...
- losershoes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+01.5 Million out of 2 Billion doesn't seem a lot.
- tidal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0wanna know why all the chinese look alike? cuz the all look like me... yeah that's the ticket.
- kymehra, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0mehh... thats nothing. genghis khan has 16 million according to this article http://www.upi.com/inc/view.php?StoryID=20030205-100301-1566r
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Yeah, but they're probably extrapolating for a very small subset who were actually sequenced/measured.
Laws of large numbers begin to apply and the maths involved are not as trivial as the statisticians would have you believe. - Zippo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0That was one horny *****. *rimshot*
- Lynxpro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0
So what? They said back in the mid 90s that there were 2 million descendents of King Charles II living in England (alone). Now, compare the population of England - or of the entire U.K. - to China.
Moral of the story....Charles got down more, or was simply more fertile. - terrya64, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I wonder how many descendants I left in the Philipines from my Navy days.
- nocre, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Khan has 16 million? Last I heard it was '1 out of every 300'. Given a 1.3 billion population, that'd equal roughly 4.3m. Just stating what I saw on the History/Discovery channel. One of those.
- Lynxpro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0
Don't forget about Adam's first wife...Lilith...
She became the Succubus. - Superfluous, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0i wonder what % of americans are descendents of old ben franklin.... they called him the father of our country for a reason :P
- nads, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Top stuff to wot trunkster said.
- trunkster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0How racist is that, they don't all look a like. It's just that Caucasians look at different features to tell people apart. If you spend a week in an Asian country you would know how to tell them apart.
- xt0ph3r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"The theory of evolution provides no way for a species to have more than one progenitor. So the story is kind of silly, and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the theory of evolution, which is sadly typical..."
Yes, the theory of Common Descent. However it's commonly accepted idea among biologists that the last living common ancestor was around 3.5 billion years ago.
The article talks about 1.5 million people being descended from a single man who lived less than 500 years ago. 1 to 1.5m in 500 years seems a little more impressive than 1 to 6.5b in 3.5 billion years, at least on the surface. - jburchel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0New flash... the entire human species (and all species) are genetically descended from a single organism (read "person"). This is true whether you believe the Biblical creation story of Adam and Eve, or whether you are an atheist who believes only in blind evolution. The theory of evolution provides no way for a species to have more than one progenitor. So the story is kind of silly, and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the theory of evolution, which is sadly typical...
- Brak710101, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Thats kinda actually kinda cool!
What type of gene was it? Did I miss that in the reading? - kevin999, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0All Men are Direct Descendants of God......
- Rkstar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0How come the article just talks about men who are descendants of this guy? Wouldn't women also be considered descendants? I'm guessing maybe the trait can only be passed on through the male, which would be part of it... but the word "descendant" does mean both male and female offspring. Just an observation.
- fugitivALiEN, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Adam, and lest ye forget Eve... He has them all beat ;)
- cheese06, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1"No wonder they're Mongoloid and all look the same"
twdldee is ***** racist. go ***** urself. - treelovinhippie, on 10/19/2007, -1/+0Damn that guy must've been busy :D
So does this mean Chinese are imbred? - FallDownUA, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Is that why they all look alike?
- twdldee, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0No wonder they're Mongoloid and all look the same
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is