If all humans older than X years old disappeared, how low could X be to still let humanity survive?

[Maf 32,312]

Well, I mean, you're getting closer - at least that's wat

Damn, I admit - that's not even a typo. I don't think I ever used that word in text form before.

[Viking4s 10,791]

They might be able to survive temporarily, but very, very few of them would even know what a harvest was, let alone how to do so. Also, since electricity would be dead, work would all have to be done manually, and 5 year olds wouldn't have the strength or attention span to do so.

This is all you need. A few good seed to restart Humanity. 

[Maf 32,312]

They might be able to survive temporarily, but very, very few of them would even know what a harvest was, let alone how to do so. Also, since electricity would be dead, work would all have to be done manually, and 5 year olds wouldn't have the strength or attention span to do so.

 

I think you greatly underestimate how much stuff is kept in grocery stores. If the children in urban areas figure out how to find and prepare basic foods, they may be able to live off of them for years, until they get old enough to produce their own.

 

Although I may be greatly overestimating toddlers' intellect and ability to adapt in a stressful post-apocalyptic scenario.

[Viking4s 10,791]

Although I may be greatly overestimating toddlers' intellect and ability to adapt in a stressful post-apocalyptic scenario.

Yes blame the animes and other mangas.... :ph34r:

[kaisdf 3,320]

This is all you need. A few good seed to restart Humanity.

 

By "very few", I mean maybe 5-10 in the entire world, tops. Hardly a good seed.

 

I think you greatly underestimate how much stuff is kept in grocery stores. If the children in urban areas figure out how to find and prepare basic foods, they may be able to live off of them for years, until they get old enough to produce their own.

 

Although I may be greatly overestimating toddlers' intellect and ability to adapt in a stressful post-apocalyptic scenario.

 

Perhaps, but quite a lot would go off while the 5 year olds were still joining sweets and sugar. Even so, (assuming 5 year olds could work a tin opener), even if there's 3-4 years worth of food (which is being kinda generous, imo)(remember than canned food can also go bad), in that time, all current crops would die, and fields would fill with weeds, making harvest even more difficult when it got to it.

 

Also, many between 0-3 would die, as there would be no adults to take care of them.

 

 

 

Damn, I admit - that's not even a typo. I don't think I ever used that word in text form before.

It's fine hehe. In any case, spelling is hardly

critial

 

:p

 

 

[Viking4s 10,791]

By "very few", I mean maybe 5-10 in the entire world, tops. Hardly a good seed.

 

Perhaps, but quite a lot would go off while the 5 year olds were still joining sweets and sugar. Even so, (assuming 5 year olds could work a tin opener), even if there's 3-4 years worth of food (which is being kinda generous, imo)(remember than canned food can also go bad), in that time, all current crops would die, and fields would fill with weeds, making harvest even more difficult when it got to it.

 

Also, many between 0-3 would die, as there would be no adults to take care of them.

There is many area (not in the city or privileged area) where this kids are involve in many things. Plus there are these countries with no season and fruits available all year long. They literally just have to pic up the fruits.

[jelly_beans 35]

Interesting

[Maf 32,312]

By "very few", I mean maybe 5-10 in the entire world, tops. Hardly a good seed.

Come on, there are over 1.5 billion children in the world, of whom probably 500 million are between 0 and 5. Even if we narrow that down to, say, 50 million, I doubt that of all these millions there would be less than a dozen competent farmers' children.

 

Although personally I still stand by my original opinion that 8-9 years old is the critical age.

[CooperO 7,956]

Perhaps, but quite a lot would go off while the 5 year olds were still joining sweets and sugar. Even so, (assuming 5 year olds could work a tin opener), even if there's 3-4 years worth of food (which is being kinda generous, imo)(remember than canned food can also go bad), in that time, all current crops would die, and fields would fill with weeds, making harvest even more difficult when it got to it.

 

I'm not counting on them to maintain anything in the world, I don't think 5 year olds are capable yet of much long term thinking. I'm counting on them to survive, so while they're still this young they will find anything they can eat. In the beginning that might indeed be canned foods and such, but there are incredibly many edible foods found in nature (depending on location in the world), such as apples, pears, blackberries, hazelnuts, mushrooms and eggs.  

[u812ic 1,629]

I'm not counting on them to maintain anything in the world, I don't think 5 year olds are capable yet of much long term thinking. I'm counting on them to survive, so while they're still this young they will find anything they can eat. In the beginning that might indeed be canned foods and such, but there are incredibly many edible foods found in nature (depending on location in the world), such as apples, pears, blackberries, hazelnuts, mushrooms and eggs.  

Do you really think that a child that young would go into a store, see all that free candy, cakes, pies that his parents tried to regulate, would actually turn his/her nose up at it and go out into the woods to gather nuts and berries? Especially when the child realizes that there aren't any adults around to stop them.

[kaisdf 3,320]

Do you really think that a child that young would go into a store, see all that free candy, cakes, pies that his parents tried to regulate, would actually turn his/her nose up at it and go out into the woods to gather nuts and berries? Especially when the child realizes that there aren't any adults around to stop them.

Exactly this ^

 

I'm not counting on them to maintain anything in the world, I don't think 5 year olds are capable yet of much long term thinking. I'm counting on them to survive, so while they're still this young they will find anything they can eat. In the beginning that might indeed be canned foods and such, but there are incredibly many edible foods found in nature (depending on location in the world), such as apples, pears, blackberries, hazelnuts, mushrooms and eggs.  

Yeah, but that is mostly protein and fibre, whereas most energy comes from carbs - you would have to eat a lot of apples - anyway, so many children would die from eating poisonous fruits/berries.

 

Carbs come from crops like wheat, barley, hops - all of which need harvesting, which very few kids would understand, and next to none would have the strength or attention span to do it manually, in lieu of electric harvesting methods.

[Pythor 1,354]

All in all, 5 year olds would not be able to restart civilization. The more I think about it, the more absurd it sounds.

 

I'm sticking with 14-16.

Edited August 27, 2019 by pythor20000

[Guest]

 

 

Check it out

[u812ic 1,629]

:rolleyes: I watched the video, very interesting experiment. There's also one for the girls in the same house, same timeline. They didn't fare much better. Out of the 10, two left. They did much better cooking meals and cleaning. The house was still a mess, though, because they didn't keep it up. A list was made and everyone had an assigned duty (they had a choice) but because there wasn't a rotation of duties they got bored with them and slacked off. 

 

I was surprised that all the girls moved their beds into the small room. I wonder why they didn't gravitate to the larger room. Two girls decided to sleep outside in a tent. As with the boys, one girl was bullied, she was the first to leave. The other one left so she could get some sleep and the house was a mess. A couple girls insisted on staying up all night, playing and making noise in the bedroom so the others had difficulty sleeping. Hardly anyone slept until those two decided they had enough and went to bed. 

 

After seeing both videos, I've come to the conclusion that 10 years old is still too young to organize and learn survival skills. That won't happen until the stores were out of junk food and they were near starvation. One boy woke up in the morning and started eating candy bars because he was "starving." The house was jam packed full of food. 

 

I'm prone to believe that around 14 years old a child leaves childhood and starts entering into adulthood. Before that age, a child is still too wild. They are thinking of the here and now, not about tomorrow, not thinking a week from now. They still need supervision and direction from someone older. 

[Maf 32,312]

I'm prone to believe that around 14 years old a child leaves childhood and starts entering into adulthood. Before that age, a child is still too wild. They are thinking of the here and now, not about tomorrow, not thinking a week from now. They still need supervision and direction from someone older. 

I didn't watch the video yet, but maybe their behaviour would be different if it was an actual life or death situation? Although based on your description I don't have much hope.

[Pythor 1,354]

I didn't watch the video yet, but maybe their behaviour would be different if it was an actual life or death situation? Although based on your description I don't have much hope.

In the words of the venerable master Yoda - "Overestimate the maturity of children you have."

[QuicKK 975]

11yo

[u812ic 1,629]

In the words of the venerable master Yoda - "Overestimate the maturity of children you have."

Yoda lives eons into the future. Perhaps the writers were trying to send a message indicating children mature faster in the future. Or the writers don't know children very well when put to their own devices. 

 

In the video, the boys elected a Leader, but the Leader couldn't lead because they refused to listen to him. He gave up trying to play the role. Another boy lived on cokes and junk food.

 

Before entering the house, the boys went through a cooking course, but only one attempted to make a meal. He was the boy that was being picked on because he was "lazy." (That's a laugh, so were they). He tried to make a niche for himself to gain some respect. He cooked a meal for all 10 kids and they were glad for the food. After supper was over, not one carried a dish to the sink. The all went outside to play, leaving him clean up the kitchen and dining room by himself. It took him over an hour. After all that, they still picked on him, but not quite as much. 

 

It was interesting to note that in the boys group, there wasn't any racial mixture, but in the girl's group, there was a mixture. The Black girl that was very dark complected was the one being picked on and eventually left. No one said anything about race, but I wonder. The other Black girl was lighter complected (her parents were an interracial couple). She was very well accepted. (I don't know if an interracial child is considered Black or White. I guess it depends on the culture they adopt). 

 

By the way, for those who didn't watch the videos, the parents were watching their kids through a live feed. The kids were supervised by adults, but they didn't intervene except for safety concerns. There was, also, a Child Psychiatrist watching and observing. The kids were told they could leave the house at any time to go home. If they needed adult advice there was a door they could knock on to talk to the Child Psychiatrist. 

[21985_the_master 422]

Enjoy your puberty?

 

Think not.

[u812ic 1,629]

I emailed a link to this topic to a friend of mine. With her permission, this is her take on it:

 

It is a very interesting topic. One thought I had immediately was about sanitation. Rural kids, and kids who have gone camping (and I don’t mean in an RV) would have a better understanding of what they need to do, because they know about mucking out stalls, disposing of their own waste, and so on. They would also have more skills re: how to live without electricity (this suddenly makes me realize – groups like the Amish would have a much higher survival rate!) However, city kids (with very rare exceptions) would be clueless, and would probably devolve into doing their business whenever and wherever the need strikes. This would quickly lead to multiple diseases running rampant. Also, I believe the original topic referred to letting humanity survive. One definition of humanity refers to learning, culture, arts & sciences, etc. Most children don’t really have a clue as to what that is until well into their teens, if not later. Yes, human beings might survive if X = 12 or 14 years old, but Humanity (in the broader sense) would die fairly quickly.

 

Another thought I just had, which I don’t remember seeing anyone else comment on, is the emotional impact on these people of suddenly losing most of the people they care about. This would be devastating for far too many of the children, and with no mental health professionals you would need older, more mature individuals to help the younger children survive the trauma.

[Maf 32,312]

Another thought I just had, which I don’t remember seeing anyone else comment on, is the emotional impact on these people of suddenly losing most of the people they care about. This would be devastating for far too many of the children, and with no mental health professionals you would need older, more mature individuals to help the younger children survive the trauma.

That's definitely an important point, and I mentioned it in one of my posts here:

 

 

I think a bigger issue that may affect survival is the psychological effect of this whole situation. If you are 10 years old and you're stuck all alone in the normal world, you will probably be quick to figure out a way to survive in the near future (i.e. for the first few weeks, which are most crucial) until you reunite with your parents or other adults. But if you realise that you are now the oldest person on the planet who now, for the rest of their life, has full responsibility for their own survival and survival of their species, the feeling might get a little bit overwhelming and lower your chances of being reasonable and efficient.

[spiderman1000 737]

I think it mostly depends on the decisions such as if they will be traveling wrong distances or will they be eating meat or not.

If they will be traveling long distances and eating meat and stuff, X should be 17 because 17 yr old people can drive and some of them can prepare meat from living to your plate.

If not then X=14 will make sense cause 14 yr old kids can  care for the young, work on farms, etc. BUT we are forgetting something. labour, plumbing, furniture, masonry. who will do these things? someone will have to repair the electricity lines, generators, etc.

[Michael828 816]

Short answer: none

Long answer: they all die

 

[spiderman1000 737]

2 minutes ago, Michael828 said:

Short answer: none

Long answer: they all die

 

No way! humanity can survive in such conditions. in rural areas, many orphans have to take care of their younger sibling. though they can take care of their sibling while 10 or so, when it comes to all humanity, you need X to be somewhere in 14-17.

[Michael828 816]

2 minutes ago, spiderman1000 said:

No way! humanity can survive in such conditions. in rural areas, many orphans have to take care of their younger sibling. though they can take care of their sibling while 10 or so, when it comes to all humanity, you need X to be somewhere in 14-17.

That's true spiderman, but elsewhere these age groups do not have what it takes to maintain a functioning society, a lot of stuff is gonna collapse with not enough experts to keep them in place. Hope you got the idea.

Perhaps Sub Saharan Africa and south-east asian countries will fare better, but that's not a very large part of humanity.