(bear in mind these g-g-g-g-grandkids would bear only 1/64 of your genes, so you'd need 64 of them just to replace your own genes...)
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I'd love to become the New Genghis Khan
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Definitely more than 500, adopted from all countries in the world
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
So, basically, do you want 1^5, 2^5, 3^5, or 4^5.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It would be unfortunate to have much more than 2 before we can figure out how to live sustainably on earth with larger populations.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
OK My family just procreated at 3 kids per generation we got 729 mouths to feed ... I say to keep the population in balance it should be somewhere in between our figures maybe 4? This was a fun poll
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
clearly as many as financially viable - and with my current plans, 500+ seems reasonable! :D lol would be super interesting to see the trajectories in the families - watch some fall down and some rise to great heights (hopefully).
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
There’s a limit to how many names and faces I can remember, at least until technology provides a built-in memory enhancement.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Doesn’t matter. They still wouldn’t come to visit me.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.