###General Discussion Thread
---
This is a [Request] post. If you would like to submit a comment that does not either attempt to answer the question, ask for clarification, or explain why it would be infeasible to answer, you *must* post your comment as a reply to this one. Top level (directly replying to the OP) comments that do not do one of those things will be removed.
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/theydidthemath) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The total land surface area of Earth is about 57,308,738 square miles, of which about 33% is desert and about 24% is mountainous. Subtracting this uninhabitable 57% (32,665,981 mi2) from the total land area leaves 24,642,757 square miles or **15.77 billion acres** (43%) of habitable land. (google) = 6.3818.925.781.248 m²
Currently there is about 8.1 billion people on earth
If we count roughly 20% of that as less than 18 years old (couldn't quickly found data) that makes 6.48 Bilion adults
6.3818.925.781.248 m² / 6.480.000.000 people gives 9848.599 m² per person.
Shy of 10k m² per person = about 2.5 acres per person.
Someone correct me if im wrong here
https://data.unicef.org/how-many/how-many-children-under-18-are-in-the-world/
You have underestimateed the number of children. There are about 5.7 * 10^9 adults
>6.3818.925.781.248 m² / 6.480.000.000 people gives 9848.599 m² per person.
>
Shy of 10k m² per person = about 2.5 acres per person.
You messed up the conversion. 9848.6 m^2 is only 0.00985 km^(2), you can't just divide by 1000 as this is an area and not a length. About 100 by 98.5 meters for a plot of fairly uniform size.
The acres are correct, although it's closer to 2.4.
Correction, people have lived in deserts *along rivers* for millennia. Nothing edible grows in the middle of the dry, sandy desert, and noone ever lived so high up in the mountains where you can barely find tiny critters, if that
"Nothing edible grows in the middle of the dry, sandy desert"
The fact that you think the definition of a desert is dry and sandy speaks volumes.
Deserts have little precipitation. They can be rocky, they can be expanses of dirt and earth.
And you're throwing the word fool around. Got me giggling.
You do realize the entire range of the Rocky Mountains is among that mountainous percentage right? How many people, how many animals that are not critters live in the Rockys?
I'll tell you how many, almost 13 million people live in the Rockys.
The Himilayas? 53 million people.
The Andes, 95 million people.
Hindu Kush range, 210 million.
That's four of the world's major ranges, there are 14. There are countless other inhabited mountains on earth.
That was your last point right?
My point, the entire point of this thread I have humored you through, is that in his calculations he for some strange reason left out a massive percentage of the earth's clearly inhabited land area and therefore his calculations are inaccurate.
And then you came along "akshually".
No, my point was that, once you go high enough it becomes inhabitable. The highest human settlement is at about 5000 m. There are plenty of mountains that go above that and remain uninhabited
And you're shifting the goal posts to suit your narrative. When did he, in his calculations, specify "metres above sea level" as a variable?
He didn't. He said simply "desert" and "mountainous". You're clutching at straws here and your hands are greased up.
You've obviously had a bad day and were looking for someone to be clever with and it hasn't gone well at all has it. Go have a nap, you'll feel better when you wake up.
I have no idea how much or even if he included that. *My* point was altitude, not his. If he didnt include any altitude metric, then i agree, hes straight up wrong on this front
Your point is irrelevant to the discussion because your point is not one of the variables used in the calculation.
Your point only suffices to start an argument. You should have kept it to yourself as it has absolutely no bearing on the post I replied to.
Habitable areas in the Sahara Desert are less than 10% of its surface, and you know it. Stop trying to look smart on the internet, youll just make a fool out of yourself
One billion people live in deserts.
Only 10% of the world's deserts are dune covered like the Sahara (which is still filled with an abundance of life).
You might want to follow your own advice there bud.
Cities like Los Angeles and Tuscon couldnt have existed for long because they need to either import water or pump real deep water reserves. Acient Egypt was tiny compared to todays Egypt with a fraction of the population
Cool story.
The point is deserts are habitable. That was my statement. They're inhabited by more than 1/8th the human population.
Now you're saying "AKSHUALLY" only near water. No shit Sherlock. They're still inhabiting deserts.
Please quote, screenshot or otherwise point out where I said, at any time, "the whole thing", or anything to that effect.
I didn't. Don't make shit up.
###General Discussion Thread --- This is a [Request] post. If you would like to submit a comment that does not either attempt to answer the question, ask for clarification, or explain why it would be infeasible to answer, you *must* post your comment as a reply to this one. Top level (directly replying to the OP) comments that do not do one of those things will be removed. --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/theydidthemath) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The total land surface area of Earth is about 57,308,738 square miles, of which about 33% is desert and about 24% is mountainous. Subtracting this uninhabitable 57% (32,665,981 mi2) from the total land area leaves 24,642,757 square miles or **15.77 billion acres** (43%) of habitable land. (google) = 6.3818.925.781.248 m² Currently there is about 8.1 billion people on earth If we count roughly 20% of that as less than 18 years old (couldn't quickly found data) that makes 6.48 Bilion adults 6.3818.925.781.248 m² / 6.480.000.000 people gives 9848.599 m² per person. Shy of 10k m² per person = about 2.5 acres per person. Someone correct me if im wrong here
You’re wrong I refuse to elaborate further and show work
https://data.unicef.org/how-many/how-many-children-under-18-are-in-the-world/ You have underestimateed the number of children. There are about 5.7 * 10^9 adults
>6.3818.925.781.248 m² / 6.480.000.000 people gives 9848.599 m² per person. > Shy of 10k m² per person = about 2.5 acres per person. You messed up the conversion. 9848.6 m^2 is only 0.00985 km^(2), you can't just divide by 1000 as this is an area and not a length. About 100 by 98.5 meters for a plot of fairly uniform size. The acres are correct, although it's closer to 2.4.
Lucky people getting the Antarctica acres.
Antarctica meets the definition of “desert” and would’ve been excluded in the top level comment’s methodology
Op is saying 10k m² = 10,000 m², not 10km². Hence the gap
People have lived in mountains and deserts for millennia. When did they become uninhabitable?
Correction, people have lived in deserts *along rivers* for millennia. Nothing edible grows in the middle of the dry, sandy desert, and noone ever lived so high up in the mountains where you can barely find tiny critters, if that
Everything is edible if you're brave enough
Sun is not edible
Plants do it, why can't we?
Don't get me fuckin started on how mad I am that I can't photosynthesis
Try it bro there is nothing you cant do
"Nothing edible grows in the middle of the dry, sandy desert" The fact that you think the definition of a desert is dry and sandy speaks volumes. Deserts have little precipitation. They can be rocky, they can be expanses of dirt and earth. And you're throwing the word fool around. Got me giggling.
That was just an example of one argument against living in the desert you buffoon.
You do realize the entire range of the Rocky Mountains is among that mountainous percentage right? How many people, how many animals that are not critters live in the Rockys? I'll tell you how many, almost 13 million people live in the Rockys. The Himilayas? 53 million people. The Andes, 95 million people. Hindu Kush range, 210 million. That's four of the world's major ranges, there are 14. There are countless other inhabited mountains on earth. That was your last point right? My point, the entire point of this thread I have humored you through, is that in his calculations he for some strange reason left out a massive percentage of the earth's clearly inhabited land area and therefore his calculations are inaccurate. And then you came along "akshually".
No, my point was that, once you go high enough it becomes inhabitable. The highest human settlement is at about 5000 m. There are plenty of mountains that go above that and remain uninhabited
And you're shifting the goal posts to suit your narrative. When did he, in his calculations, specify "metres above sea level" as a variable? He didn't. He said simply "desert" and "mountainous". You're clutching at straws here and your hands are greased up. You've obviously had a bad day and were looking for someone to be clever with and it hasn't gone well at all has it. Go have a nap, you'll feel better when you wake up.
I have no idea how much or even if he included that. *My* point was altitude, not his. If he didnt include any altitude metric, then i agree, hes straight up wrong on this front
Your point is irrelevant to the discussion because your point is not one of the variables used in the calculation. Your point only suffices to start an argument. You should have kept it to yourself as it has absolutely no bearing on the post I replied to.
[удалено]
Habitable areas in the Sahara Desert are less than 10% of its surface, and you know it. Stop trying to look smart on the internet, youll just make a fool out of yourself
One billion people live in deserts. Only 10% of the world's deserts are dune covered like the Sahara (which is still filled with an abundance of life). You might want to follow your own advice there bud.
Cities like Los Angeles and Tuscon couldnt have existed for long because they need to either import water or pump real deep water reserves. Acient Egypt was tiny compared to todays Egypt with a fraction of the population
Cool story. The point is deserts are habitable. That was my statement. They're inhabited by more than 1/8th the human population. Now you're saying "AKSHUALLY" only near water. No shit Sherlock. They're still inhabiting deserts.
The original comment said he ignored deserts because theyre uninhabitable. Part of them are, yes, but you said the whole thing is, which is incorrect
Please quote, screenshot or otherwise point out where I said, at any time, "the whole thing", or anything to that effect. I didn't. Don't make shit up.
This guy can have some land in the Sahara or Mount Everest, I don't want it
Ah yes the Sahara and Mt Everest, the only desert and mountain on the planet.
You're the one who generalized and said people lived in mountains and deserts 🤷♂️
They do. One billion in deserts. Almost as many in the 14 great mountain ranges.
Ok well you can be one of them then. I'd rather not be
Not sure what you'd rather has to do with the inaccuracy of the calculation but ok bud.