• ApeNo1@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 year ago

    Was this simulation just based on population growth or did it also take into account genetic variation which I believe is also critical for certain aspects of a species survival?

    • wahming@monyet.cc
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      1 year ago

      You could have read the article. It’s based on technical skills, social situations. Not long term population growth.

      • ApeNo1@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        1 year ago

        For me it is the terminology. I thought colonisation was the long term goal of staying more permanently vs a mission which is for a finite period such as this simulation. Had not seen the 28 year limit which makes it more a mission than colonisation. Happy to be corrected.

        • 14th_cylon@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          yeah, but then the headline would not be so clickbaity and attracted less clicks than this “new alabama” suggestion. what are you not getting there? it wasn’t mistake 😂

      • Dharma Curious@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Only the purest bloodlines. Bloodlines so pure that they couldn’t find a spec of unpure blood in Uncle Daddy during his last battery of genetic testing to determine why we all have blue skin and an allergy to calcium.

    • roguetrick@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      None of the above. New colonists were randomly generated by the environment for a 28 year simulation.