@[email protected]M to Science [email protected]English • 3 months agomoms rulemander.xyzimagemessage-square91fedilinkarrow-up1994arrow-down114
arrow-up1980arrow-down1imagemoms rulemander.xyz@[email protected]M to Science [email protected]English • 3 months agomessage-square91fedilink
minus-squareIllecorslinkfedilinkEnglish1•3 months agoThis assumes a single child per set of parents, doesn’t it?
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish5•edit-23 months 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.