Ah, you lost it. That's disappointing. You could have maintained your composure and just discussed things like a normal person.
Just saying: obesity can be increasing everywhere, while probability of a randomly selected person needing more food is simultaneously increasing.
Here's an explanation for you to ignore and double-down over: Humans are discrete, but the time-varying probability of a randomly selected person being hungry is not. The probability of a single person needing more food can increase continuously over time, so of course so can that of a population.
Humans are discrete, but the time-varying probability of a randomly selected person being hungry is not.
hahaha, you disproved yourself and showed you don't understand this conversation in one sentence. Good job. The probability has to be a rational number. It therefore must not be continuous.
Number of humans: discrete Number of hungry humans: discrete Number hungry humans / num humans: rational
That the probability could change over time has no bearing on if the probability is discrete or continuous. It will of course be approximately continuous given the large numbers involved, but approximately only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades.
QED
The probability of a single person needing more food can increase continuously over time, so of course so can that of a population.
Fallacious logic, but irrelevant to the discussion, so we'll ignore what's wrong with it. It is left as an exercise to the reader.
Your big problem here is trying to get pedantic to defend a stupid point from the beginning. That shows motivated reasoning on your part, a thought pattern that rarely leads to discovering truth. As a side note, good job derailing the conversation and forum sliding.
Here's an explanation for you to ignore and double-down over
Yep.
You don't appreciate the effect of time on the calculation. Granted it also depends on your modelling axioms, but there's a stupid way to do things, and a not-so-stupid one, and calculating temporal rates of change while constraining yourself to discrete probabilities is the stupid way to do things.
It's ok, there are some things that we just lack the tools to evaluate.
No it's not because human lives are a discrete count variable and not continuous or differentiable. You took calculus but didn't really grasp it at a deep enough level to understand where limits work and where they don't. This is fairly typical of educated, STEM individuals who then work in a different field. Think about it for a few minutes, go back and restudy calc I, and you'll realize you are incorrect. Or ask somebody who does understand things like this (e.g. Annelise) to explain it to you.
You're pretty smart, but the problem you have in general is your ego exceeds your capabilities. You need to work on that, and you'll be more at peace with yourself and the world.
You're just now bringing up this point as a strawman. Reread this conversation and you'll see that was never the point of the discussion. It was always about the extend of the obesity epidemic.