1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Human longevity

Discussion in 'General Debates' started by Ark, Dec 27, 2004.

  1. Ark

    Ark Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    29
    Ratings:
    +0
    There are many who think that human longevity is gradually increasing. Science has shown that the human body is designed to last closer to 2,000 years rather than 100 as is the norm of today anyhow.

    The Old Testament of the Bible states specifically that there were those born shortly after the "creation" of Adam and Eve, who lived hundreds of years.

    Genesis 5:5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years:and he died.

    Genesis 5:8 And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years: and he died.

    Genesis 5:11 And all the days of Enos were nine hundred and five years: and he died.

    Genesis 5:14 And all the days of Cainan were nine hundred and ten years: and he died.

    Genesis 5:17 And all the days of Mahalaleel were eight hundred ninety and five years: and he died.

    Etc. etc. etc.....

    The arguement from SOME is that in those days, time was measured in a different way. That a year perhaps meant a month, etc...

    No translation is varying to any degree that does not understand the simplicity of a year, which consists of four seasons, or the easily understood seasonal changes of one planetary orbit around the sun. The arguement that a year constituted less than a year carries little weight. Even if it pertained to seasons, a lifespan of 900 years would be reduced only to 200+ years.

    From "painted wolf"
    Not trying to create any arguement here, but my information comes from good authority. I have a lot of knowledge about genetics, but personally have no written credentials as a geneticist. Neither do you, and the internet is generally a mixed bag of accurate/inaccurate information. People sometimes make scientific non-truths as a measure of their ego that chooses that they be the big "protectors of the sheeple" (so to speak). Or sometimes they feel that THEY or their culture is better protected by one viewpoint as opposed to another. So the arguement is moot here.

    Genetically impossible? Truth is by far stranger than fiction.

    Any evidence consisting of human remains which date back 20,000 years or so would likely be nothing more than dust. Written accounts of much human history is secured by the Universal Hierarchy, but the Bible gives much written account as well. With many of the indigenous of the N. American continent, this matter is a part of the knowledge known as the "Greater Understanding". Some indigenous people have looked at the Bible objectively and some have not. Some have denied it because of its mis-interpretations and mis-use, while others have accepted it to keep the peace. The truth is elsewhere.

    I desire full sovereignty for the indigenous, but I think the Bible (in its true interpretation) is far from being a deterrent to that.

    Hence, the reason I suggested an open-mind. Some things simply reguire a good bit of faith.

    It appears that human nature tends to claim "all-knowingness", yet there still appears to be too many un-answered questions. Someone like myself, who has the ability to legitimately turn grey areas into positive understandings may appear as being insulting to some. But an individual has the choice of accepting it as a completely new learning experience or simply regarding it as an insult. I assure you, that my statements are not made with any intent to insult.
     
  2. Jaymes

    Jaymes The cake is a lie

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    7,759
    Ratings:
    +1,039
    What on earth? When has science proved the human body is supposed to live that long? What have I missed?
     
  3. robtex

    robtex Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    11,771
    Ratings:
    +1,149
    Ark please post the medical souce that says the body is designed to last 2000 years.
     
  4. Ark

    Ark Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    29
    Ratings:
    +0
    There is no specific source regarding this. There have been medical scientists who have stated it.

    There are numerous sources on "Breatharianism" or what is sometimes referred to as "Living on Light" or "Inedia". Many are "con" as well as "pro" on the subject. The fact is that achieving the ultimate breatharian state is so difficult that even most of the most knowledgeable physicians fail at it. Those rare few who DO accomplish it tend to shy from publicity.

    If you are looking to humans for divine answers, you might well forget it. Here are a few that come close however:

    Breatharianism http://www.sabon.org/prana/breath.html

    Dr. Mony Vital http://www.energeticbalancing.us/Mony%20bio.htm

    The Jesus Diet http://www.sabon.org/prana/stop3.html

    The Breatharian Institute http://www.breatharian.com/

    Breatharianism - Living on Light http://www.angelfire.com/stars3/breathe_light/breatharianism.html

    The problem with much of "modern science", is the failure to incorporate biblical realities into its research. Scientists tend to approach the field with the notion that specific bodily intakes or changes in dietary intakes will account for longer or shorter lifespans. But these perspectives also do not go beyond the 0 to 100+ years range. They fail to regard the physical metamorphosis of the "created" or "original" form of the human body as opposed to the metamorphosis of the human body as it has been known to exist in the "worldly" state for thousands of years. The fact is that this deteriorating drug known by many as "food" is an addiction which begins in the womb. Anyone who is born of a mother who is addicted to food is automatically addicted to food. This has been going on for many thousands of years.

    The point of whether this is a natural state with regard to the intellect is in the fact that the potential human mind is seperate from the natural inclinations of animals because humans have the potential to control their own destiny. As an example: humans can potentially go to other planets, but animals cannot do something like this themselves. So whether it was good human intellect to have chosen food addiction (which came natural to animals), or not is the subject of much debate.

    The bottom line is that if one could go to Heaven while addicted to food, there would be no need to have human spirits transported there after death. One could virtually go there without dying.

    Even for the open-minded, there would be questions about the natural state being without food. Like:

    Why would we have a digestive system?

    The fact is that this non-addictive state involves eating a small amount of food every 4 - 5 weeks. The food (an apple for example) is completely/thoroughly digested to the point that it exits the body as a gas. A bowel-movement is an event which occurs no more than a few times a year.

    Where would the body obtain energy/nutrition?

    The body recieves energy from two sources. One is from the natural nutrients in the air. Simple breathing. Hence the term "Breatharianism". Another is from the nutrients contained in water.

    How would this be enough?

    The measure of "enough" is determined by how well the body utilizes these things. Addiction to food causes the body to lose its ability to utilize air and water for energy. In the non-addictive state, the body HAS the ability.

    It should be easy to see that these profound perspectives would allude the reality from much of "todays" science in much of the "western" world.

    One more perspective: It is said that the devastation of existing in a world of constant gravitational pull on life which causes many "temporary insanities" is what would allow human physical developement to enter an addictive form. Some even think that humans exist in a somewhat mentally retarded state with regard to their most ancient ancestors (Angels). This is of course highly debated, but more easily regarded by those who possess other knowledge which supports it. Like having enough pieces of the puzzle to see what the picture is - so to speak.

    The truth is that there are few who understand the realities of religion enough to properly expediate getting the children of this world to the next. One should easily see that educating people in matters of spiritual education is often impossible. The book of Daniel in the Old Testament contains a good account of that. Chapter 10, to be specific. Daniel was the only one of many who got the full impact of the message. The others ran from it.







     
  5. painted wolf

    painted wolf Grey Muzzle

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2004
    Messages:
    15,370
    Ratings:
    +1,652
    just out of curriosity how often do you eat?

    Anyway, thank you for posting a responce.

    I also am a fan of genetics, and while I don't have a degree yet, it is in the works. Please share your evidence of genetic mixing of reptile and human DNA. What physical traits did we inherit from our reptilian forbearers that we wouldn't have gotten from our Ape ancestors?
    Shurely there would be some surprizing results from the Human Genome Prodject, that would have notices something as remarkable as close reptilian affiliation.

    Also medical science has confirmed that we have genetic stops that prevent us from living more than 150 years tops. These are called Telomeres, they are the ends of our Chromosomes and each time we grow new cells they get a little shorter. When the Telomeres are gone the cell can no longer devide to make new cells.... we die. Assuming disease or accident haven't killed us already.

    wa:do
     
  6. retrorich

    retrorich SUPER NOT-A-MOD

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,321
    Ratings:
    +497
    This thread reminds me of the story about a man who had reached his 100th birthday. He was interviewed by a local TV station. It went like this:

    Q: To what do you attribute your long life?

    A: Well, I never drank liquor, smoked tobacco or fooled around with women.

    Q: You mean if I never drink liquor, smoke tobacco or fool around with women, I will live to be a 100?

    A: Maybe not--but it will sure seem like it.

    :biglaugh:
     
  7. Ark

    Ark Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    29
    Ratings:
    +0
    In the Hierarchy, it is considered honorable to eat two meals a day and MOST honorable to eat one. There are a rare few on the planet who have direct lineage to pre-adamite beings and who at various times in their lives, lose their addiction to food. They go through a complete metamorphic change. With others, it is a lengthy practice requiring extensive medical and spiritual education. Either way, unlike a simple withdrawal, a complete metamorphic change would alter at least the function/perception of DNA structure, or Telomeres.

    The traits inherited from an incorporation of reptilian DNA would naturally be lesser body hair for one. Those who study human genetics will find studying the "King Snake" quite fascinating...as well as discovering why the people of India tend to regard them. These things must be examined maturely. Consider the impact upon people by one who taught these things...one known as "Medusa" (snakes growing out of head). Many had come to regard this as cult or evil in nature. But the reality is that humans are warm-blooded, despite whatever amount of reptilian genetics out of a myriad of other species genetics the human body is composed of. The human form is a hybrid.

    I am certainly openning up a completely different and profound perspective in the way "medical science" views the human body. But it is not a new perspective...it is older than the Bible. Whether future science strongly incorporates other perspectives into its basic data of understanding or simply follows the same refined narrow road...that is another matter. There has been far too much missing from the general social understanding of life in this "modern civilization", and it accounts for at least SOME of the social madness and why people cannot see God, or Heaven, or even themselves to some extent. Many of those who DO, are finding people in the "west" (in particular)...very difficult to contend with.
     
  8. Mister Emu

    Mister Emu Emu Extraordinaire
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Messages:
    11,470
    Ratings:
    +1,277
    Religion:
    Christian
    Have you ever teleported or time traveled, or met someone who did these things, preferably in your presence?

    After all the years of people searching, the fountain of youth was in our pants...(The page that this linked to is gone, I wonder what the arguements are for this)
     
  9. painted wolf

    painted wolf Grey Muzzle

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2004
    Messages:
    15,370
    Ratings:
    +1,652
    Ark- I hate to break it to you, but Humans have just as much body hair as any other animal. Ours is simply shorter and more fine. Look closely at your arms, legs and wherever elce. Also Humans are not the only mammals to have this reduction in body hair. Elephants, Naked Mole-rats, Hippos, Rhinos and all Cetacieans just to name a few. This is not an indication of Reptialian mixing.

    Such evidence would be structual changes to the bones from the mammal norm, chages in metabolism, DNA, protiens, cellular stucture, microsopic bone stucture and so on. The only mammals that have any right to clame close Reptilian ancestry are the Monotremes, who still lay eggs and produce milk not from breasts but ooze it out of patches of skin.

    People have been facinated with snakes from the begining. They move without legs, climb trees, some 'fly'. They can swallow things larger than their heads and have to power to kill with a single, small bite or to crush grown men to thier deaths. Why wouldn't we be impressed with them?

    wa:do
     
  10. fromthe heart

    fromthe heart Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2004
    Messages:
    1,755
    Ratings:
    +258
    GOOD grief...first monkeys now reptiles...glad I believe in creation. I think when it said in the Bible that so and so lived this many hundred years they did...as sin increased the years of life on earth decreased...should tell you something.
     
  11. Fluffy

    Fluffy A fool

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2004
    Messages:
    7,572
    Ratings:
    +1,007
    I disagree with you Im afraid Ark. Perhaps some of the human bodies components could, hypothetically last for 2000 years but I feel this is incredibly unlikely.

    Besides the average lifespan of a species is determined by the length of some sort of DNA string within the body (sorry I know this is vague but I am only remembering from a New Scientist article which I cannot find now :(). This string shortens with every generation meaning that the time that a body can actually live for is decreasing even though an increase in standards of living mask this with an increase.
     
  12. Ark

    Ark Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    29
    Ratings:
    +0
    You appear to be speaking in a perspective of how things are in these times. The blending or breeding is something which actually occurred long ago. A process which took millions of years.

    More of a "selective breeding" or initiated breeding was done by those of a higher mental capacity while those of a lower were resigned to more of a "cooperative breeding".

    People have been fascinated with MANY different spedies of animals throughout history. Elephants are not 100% mammal and neither are most other species 100% anything in particular. Bats have wings, but they are still mammals. Even specific characteristics do not place such a thick line between all species.

    The bottom line is that in the earliest processes of "creation", there was not such a distant division of species genetics that retard cross-breeding. The "creation" of the human form is not just a matter of a few thousand years ago...rather perhaps billions. The "creation" of the first "humans" as in "Adam and Eve" was simply the "procreation" by pre-adamite beings which occurred about 20,000 years ago. (Give or take).

    Biological science still has a way to go in regard to determining accurate genetic similarities. Science at this point is beginning to reveal that humans have less genetic commonality with chimpanzees than originally assumed. Humans also have more commonality with the genetics of worms than many would like to believe.

    http://www.harunyahya.com/mediawatch_99_myth_is_dead_sci34.php

    http://www.shef.ac.uk/bioethics-today/archives/files/Humananimalrelationscomm.htm

    Some startling discoveries have been found relating that some humans carry genetics similar to pigs. The also tend to be overweight. (This is not meant to be humorous, but :D just the same).

    http://www.ipic.iastate.edu/reports/02swinereports/asl-1803.pdf

    Scientist HAVE however determined certain similarities between humans and reptiles, such as the "reptilian brain" That part of the human brain which is very similar to the brain of reptiles.

    http://www.nbia.nf.ca/building_a_brain_from_the_bottom_up.htm

    http://www.aea267.k12.ia.us/cia/motivation/brain.html

    But human scientific advancement in these areas is simply not there yet. Scientists would be very reluctant to research the "King Snake" in relation to human genetics because 1) the historical fascination of them by many in India. 2) the impact of such a finding on how humans view themselves.

    I am certainly not opening doors of sheeple science or pillow prophecy.
     
  13. painted wolf

    painted wolf Grey Muzzle

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2004
    Messages:
    15,370
    Ratings:
    +1,652
    If an elephant isn't 100% mammal, please tell me your diffinition of mammal.

    yes, ammong invertibrates the Mud worm is closest to the Vertibrate line than most other Invertibrates are... so what? It is common scientific knowledge that Vertibrates and Invertebrates share a common ancestor.
    Yes, we share some genetic material with Pigs... we are both mammals, we have the same ancestry if you go back far enough.
    97% is still very close when you compair chimps with humans.... Humans are not that close to any other species. We are 60% mouse and 2.5% chicken respectively.
    The 'reptilian brain' or brain stem is not unique to humans... it is found in all fish, reptiles, birds and mammals.... that is not evidence that humans at any time bred with reptiles. It was a clever name given to part of the brains anatomy.
    All human remains from 20,000 years ago show that the human life span was at max 30-40 years. There is no evidence for humans having lived any longer.

    what species is the 'king snake" you may find it is already being reserched.

    wa:do
     
  14. Ark

    Ark Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    29
    Ratings:
    +0
    One can tell by simply looking at the features of a chimp that there is a closer genetic relationship to humans than other animals. The point is that human genetics is closer to reptilian than chimps are. That should be easy to see as well. Sorry...I am a hairy guy, but nothing like an ape.

    20,000 year old human remains? Longevity determined from this dust? Maybe in the future, but I doubt science can determine it at this point. But the study would be inconclusive anyway because I have only made referrence to those humans who once existed in a land which no longer exists, so there are too few remains for science to study. There are, however a couple of skeletal remains in the Smithsonian which are about 15 inches tall. I am sure that if todays science could make a determination of longevity, scientists would discover a whole new outlook of things. In fact, some have.

    Evidence that the Bible's version of human history is a fabrication? Doesn't exist.
     
  15. linwood

    linwood Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,049
    Ratings:
    +861
    The clinical definition of old age.

    Thanks for that Wolf
     
  16. Fluffy

    Fluffy A fool

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2004
    Messages:
    7,572
    Ratings:
    +1,007
    Ahhhh telomeres, those are what are was thinking of. I didnt know they limited our age to 150 years though. According to the New Scientist they get shorter with every generation as well thereby meaning that our age limit is decreasing.

    Ark I dont think that by looking at 2 animals you can tell how close they are related genetically. Just because 2 animals look similar does not mean that this is caused by shared genes. It CAN do sure. But just because this is sometimes the case does not mean you can jump to the conclusion that it is ALWAYS the case. Just because we appear more like reptilians than apes because we have less hair has nothing to do with genetics. Apes are warm blooded whilst reptiles are cold blooded meaning that hair would be essentially useless to them. Humans have adapted to finding ways of keeping warm that do not require this covering of hair and as this happened, we lost this hair because it was no longer necessary. This is completly different to why reptiles do not have hair.
     
  17. Jaymes

    Jaymes The cake is a lie

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    7,759
    Ratings:
    +1,039
    There's a word for that, Fluffy. Looking alike but not being genetically similar. Wish I could remember it.
     
  18. Ark

    Ark Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    29
    Ratings:
    +0
    It is not just based upon looks, but I won't go into that.

    A mammal possessing a certain degree of reptilian genetics is not necessarily going to be cold-blooded. The human body not only cannot be classified as being as hairy as most species of mammals, but is also much more erect/elongated.

    Consider the platypus. A mammal which lays eggs?

    People profoundly shy away from any notion of reptilian genetics. They have always regarded such a thing as taking away all goodness that is "human". Instead of looking at things objectively, and not allowing notions such as "reptile = callousness, aggressiveness, etc. etc.". Still...when one considers it, humans are not quite as docile as most mammals tend to be. Humans would make lousy pets 'eh? Perhaps the very thing that has given us the propensity for our intellectual nature? A mind over emotion thing I suppose.
     
  19. Jaymes

    Jaymes The cake is a lie

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    7,759
    Ratings:
    +1,039
    Analogous structures! That's it.
    "Analogous structures: Structures in different species that look alike or perform similar functions (e.g., the wings of butterflies and the wings of birds) that have evolved convergently but do not develop from similar groups of embryological tissues, and that have not evolved from similar structures known to be shared by common ancestors."
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Fluffy

    Fluffy A fool

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2004
    Messages:
    7,572
    Ratings:
    +1,007
    Cheers Jensa thats really useful... as well as an example of which I was desperately trying to think of but totally failing :)

    I dont disagree with you Ark, in that there must be some cases in which animals display characteristics from a category that they have not been placed into. I just dont think that the lack of hair on a human has anything to do with reptilian genetics. As was pointed out earlier on, we dont have any less hair... its just that our hair is shorter on most of our body. This, to me, shows an adaption that has led to our hair being shortened. Since when has this adaption ever been displayed in a reptilian?

    Also this is not to say that I dont think that humans share any genetic similarities with reptiles. It is just that a shorter hair length is not one of them.
     
Loading...