@[email protected]M to Science [email protected]English • 1 month agomoms rulemander.xyzimagemessage-square85fedilinkarrow-up1948arrow-down114
arrow-up1934arrow-down1imagemoms rulemander.xyz@[email protected]M to Science [email protected]English • 1 month agomessage-square85fedilink
minus-squareIllecorslinkfedilinkEnglish1•1 month agoThis assumes a single child per set of parents, doesn’t it?
minus-square@SkunkWorkzlinkEnglish4•edit-21 month agoNo I’m talking about the amount of ancestors in the 80th generation back not the total amount of ancestors. It doesn’t matter how many children each set of parents had for that number.
This assumes a single child per set of parents, doesn’t it?
No I’m talking about the amount of ancestors in the 80th generation back not the total amount of ancestors. It doesn’t matter how many children each set of parents had for that number.