this post was submitted on 13 Oct 2025
88 points (94.0% liked)

Showerthoughts

42176 readers
875 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. No politics
    • If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
    • A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

It's equally possible that there was more than one or even a day where only people were born and no one died.

There was a low point where only about 2,000 humans were estimated to be alive. Certainly you couldn't have had someone dying everyday then

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] arrow74@lemmy.zip 6 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abq7487

It's been significantly lower than 10,000 at least once in history.

Unfortunately there's a paywall to the article but the free abstract gives you the critical information. And this is among some of the most up to date research on the topic

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

There's other recent research that counters this idea. It's still uncertain. Humans have dipped low before, just probably not levels rivals animals like the cheetah, otherwise we'd show the same genetic issues they have due to the inbreeding of the survivors.

I don't have a reference to it at the moment, so it's a "trust me" scenario, but what I found then was through googling (because I used to be convinced of the bottleneck), so it's out there.

[–] arrow74@lemmy.zip 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

From my understanding of the subject the current consensus is the bottleneck did happen. There's been fluctuations in the exact number, but under 5,000 is what is most widely supported by the evidence.

The only debate I'm aware of is the exact timing and cause of the bottle neck. It was widely believed a volcano eruption was responsible, but that has become more discredited. It appears the population decline occurred before the eruption and took a significant amount of time to climb after the eruption.

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 1 points 7 months ago

If I recall right (and it may not be right lol) it was timing as well as how many other populations there were. I think the initial discovery and research made some assumptions that what they found was the only people around and that it was a sudden disaster. Just like now we think that the dinosaurs were already suffering for various reasons and the asteroid was just a final push towards extinction over time.

[–] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I read the full paper and I'm not qualified to evaluate the validity of the model being proposed but I find the idea that the population was

about 1000 individuals, which persisted for about 100,000 years

rather implausible. Implausible things sometimes turn out to be true but models frequently turn out to be wrong so if I were to bet, I would bet on the latter.

Plus, for the purpose of the OP, I think neanderthals and other close relatives of modern humans should count as people even if they have no living descendants.