How To Stop Fairy Martins Breeding

What would happen if humans stopped reproducing for 30 years?

Obviously, population would stop increasing. At current death rates, global population would decrease over those 30 years by about 1.6 billion - down to around 5.8 billion, from today's 7.4 billion.[1] Standards of living would likely improve and environmental effects of overpopulation would be alleviated, at least to some extent. That population would be much skewed much older. Today, our current median age globally is 29 (higher in developed countries, lower in less developed countries.)[2]  In this scenario, the median age would be in the high 50s. This population effects would happen gradually, but would still have major economic and social effects. Look at what is happening in Japan's demographics now, and imagine much more dramatic changes.[3] If no one knew why it was occurring or if reproduction would be possible again after thirty years, there would be massive despair and social disruption. The scenario in the dystopian movie Children of Men (2006) is not so far-fetched. It's quite possible that human cloning research would be advanced to preserve the species, and taboos against it would be removed.We'd be skipping an entire generation, and its hard to predict the psychological and sociological  effects on those who could never be parents.There would be a massive "baby boom" after 30 years. It's likely that genetic selection and manipulation would be used to reduce birth defects. This generation would have an astounding amount of pressure put on them to care for their much older relatives. Footnotes[1] Birth & Death Rates | Ecology Global Network[2] List of countries by median age[3] Impact of Japan's shrinking population 'already palpable' | Asia | DW.COM | 06.01.2015

Is it true that some borrowers in Denmark and Sweden receive interest on their mortgages?

It sounds like a fairy tale. Being paid to borrow is the hapless consumers ultimate fantasy. It is true that interest rates are below zero, but Danish banks are not that stupid. A mortgage loan in Denmark has added costs. A fee for getting the loan (government stamp of approval)Loan administration fee (mortgage companies golden nugget, there are no restrictions (yet) on how much they can charge, and it can be raised whenever they want it to). Bidragssatser  Interest rate.   By adjusting the second variable the mortgage companies makes sure no one gets paid to borrow. Overall Danish mortgage companies charged 15 bill kr on this administration fee in 2015. The largest creditor has announced this rate is being increased by July Nykredit owner to grant $90 mln to customers to sweeten IPO plan  By law any credit lender in Denmark is required to show ÅOP (yearly cost in percent), and I have yet to see a - attached to this figure  Annual costs for a loan is low though. realkredit, realkreditlån og boliglån  A variable 1 year interest loan, (means that in one year you will need to pay for a new replacement loan without knowing what the rate is going to be),  is currently priced at a negative rate of -0.24%. But you still have to pay the loan administration and the government stamp. A 10 year or longer fix rate  loan at 1 or 2% is more secure and because of saving on the government fee and  a lower loan administration fee many choose such loans.So yes. Technically you can get paid to borrow,    as long as you pay for the privilegeEdit: New development Nu skal boligejere betale for at have penge stående   In three mortgage companies you know have to pay for the privilege of depositing money. If you cancel a loan to make a remortgaging you can end up paying for two loans until the new mortgage is approved by the government. In them olden days you would get interest on the cancelled mortgage as a normal bank deposit, but now you can end up paying for both loans. The difference is about 2000 kr on a loan to 1000000 kr  Negative Rates Around the World: How One Danish Couple Gets Paid Interest on Their Mortgage  Remember he paid both the government stamp and administration fees so he is not earning on this loan.

Why do some atheists ask demeaning questions of theists? For example, I’ve heard people call a child who doesn't believe in a god smarter than his parents who do believe or people calling religious stories fairy tales.

I would be happy to just "be", but my mother insists on crying over my slide into "hell".As for calling them fairy tales, what do you call stories about Zeus, Mercury, Diana, Ra?  Were they myths and fairy tales or did those "Gods" really exist?  This is the way it looks to us. It's not about being insulting.  Santa is a wonderful myth, the spirit of giving, etc., but it's still a myth.Why wouldn't a child lump Jesus or God right in there too, especially when there is as little "proof" to back up the claims of divinity.  I don't doubt someone named Jesus died, but how can you prove his divinity without using the bible, whose sources have been deemed "unreliable"?For example: 500 witnesses to the resurrection, not one name, not one gospel written by any of theses witnesses, no scribe for the ruling leaders record any such event, there was no census taken at the time of Christ birth and when it was taken it was undertaken by another ruler not named in the bible.  There is no record of the slaughter of the innocents, only "belief".That is fine for you, but not for me and really, I could care less about your viewpoint, but then there's my mother, crying real tears, going through sleepless nights.   From my perspective, it's the Christians who won't let us "be".  Take an honest look at the number of rude questions directed at atheist here compared to the number of rude questions directed at theist.  When was the last (or first) time an atheist stood on a street corner and said, "Have you heard the goods news? There is no hell! No God! No Devil! No Hell!" Has an atheist ever done a door to door session trying to pass the word, one person at a time?Has an atheist ever signed a note with "Science Bless You!" at the end of it? Actually there might be 1 or 2, but really wouldn't you think that was strange?If you pay attention, 99% of the time, the theist brings up God first, the atheist just responds and even then, not every time.Of course, that's just my observation.

Is the Adam and Eve story a myth?

No.The story of Adam and Eve is a beautiful piece of poetry written to explain humanity and the Fall. It is obviously not a science textbook. That does not mean, however, that it is not really true.Let’s examine the story closer.Nowhere does the Bible say Adam and Eve were the first humans. It says there is no MAN, no human being, to work the ground. This puts us at about 10,000 B.C., when farming was discovered. There could have already been humans who hadn’t discovered farming.“God made….all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds.” This means that the common ancestors of apes and humans were around already, having been created before.Notice that God breathes the breath of life into the man after he creates it. The interval between these two actions is not specified. Look:“the Lord God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.”Do you notice “man became a living being”? This implies that there is a difference between a human/man and a human being, or living man.Further evidence for this is supported by “Let us make man in our image, in our likeness.” Surely this is talking more about the spiritual nature of humans than the physical appearance.Cain’s wife and his fear of harm by other men. Surely this implies that there were already men around- the Hebrews would not have missed this and/or been that stupid.Final Verdict: Thousands of years ago, God breathed the breath of life, or Soul, into already existing humans, although when they received souls, they were able to know God for the first time and became truly living beings.P.S. This does not affect the theory of evolution in any way, it is purely a spiritual change that took place.