The Bible book of Genesis speaks of seven men who lived more than 900 years, all of them being born prior to the Flood of Noah’s day. They were Adam, Seth, Enosh, Kenan, Jared, Methuselah, and Noah. (Genesis 5:5-27; 9:29)

The Bible mentions at least another 25 individuals who also reached ages beyond what is common today. Some of them lived 300, 400, even 700 or more years. (Genesis 5:28-31; 11:10-25)

~

These claims are not specific to the bible. Here is another account of a Chinese herbalist who lived for over 200 years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Ching-Yuen

~

I think this is all very interesting and it got me thinking. Is it truly possible to live that long?

Personally, I believe the majority of our physical lives are determined by our thinking. The axiom "Mind over matter" holds true in modern science. The use of placebo's or the effect of stress on the human body. These are peer reviewed and scientifically verified instances where the power of thought takes precedent over the physical body. The most simple example of this is someone breaking out with hives when they are nervous, or sweating before a speech. Clearly, the body is listening and responding to our minds.

What could have been a key factor in extended life in early human beings?

I believe our perception of time is the culprit in a shorter life. When you investigate the lives of early human beings, they did not use alarm clocks, or stop watches, or hold meetings at a specific time during the day. Their application of time was a lot simpler: Sunrise, Noon, Sunset, Night.

Is it possible that by conforming to societies ideas about time and the length of our lives, that we are essentially determining the length of our lives with our thinking?

Imagine if you were an early human being whom was keeping time with the sun alone. You had no alarm clocks, no important "dates" to remember such as a birthdays or anniversary's, there was no new years celebration, and there was nothing to track the amount of time you spent alive in a rigid and specific manner. Essentially, you had no perception of time beyond the sun itself and the changing of the seasons. Would time pass differently to you?

Consider for a moment when you are asleep. You close your eyes, and you lose complete perception of time that you immediately conform to upon waking up. 8 hours can pass in the blink of an eye while you are asleep and you are completely oblivious to it. So, does time even exist at all?

Would it be possible then to live for a much longer because you did not convince yourself that you would die at a specific period in your life? ie. "People generally live to 85 years old before they pass from old age." We hold this as self evident and true, but, is it profoundly dangerous to adopt and belief this statement as a certainty?

Is it possible that by keeping track of time in such a rigid manner, and accepting that you will die at a certain age that your body listens to your thoughts and makes it so? in the same sense that stress effects your body, or in the sense that placebo's cure an ailment?

stories told, but never to be confirmed.

albeit, maybe not the point you were trying to make, but:

"info was slow"

It seems that the pace of life was much slower overall. There were no "deadlines" beyond the harvest. There were no persistent time markers that followed you around on a daily basis.

ie. Gotta get to work by 9am, only have an hour for lunch, better drive fast to make the bank and the appointment, to make it back for work, etc etc etc.

Why are we rushing everywhere? Why are we racing? Where is the finish line?

Our lives in the west are riddled with the perception that we "don't have time", and yet, our construct of time is arbitrary and based on ideology. Nature does not work from 9am to 5pm. Our day construct is a hyper reality, an illusion that we subscribe to.

Is it possible that by constant rushing and "speeding up" in every phase of life, we literally work ourselves into early graves? and for what?

What is the point of working your balls off so much? Why do we conform to this nonsense and defend it? Why do we give a shit about quota's that are based around completely arbitrary and illusory products and time slots? That literally have nothing to do with nature, and yet have hazardous and deadly effects on our bodies?

up/

there was plenty shit to do.

for everyone.

nah. it wasn't the same work stress you find in america, but today and back then? aint nobody living more than two hundred years. TOPS.

to a place where people lived off the land?

The pace of life is MUCH slower and dramatically less stressful.

A capitalist society is not conducive to a long happy life. Just look around, everyone struggling with substance abuse problems, anxiety, obesity, or something else.

back in the day-day.

bottom line, wasn't nobody living no 900 years. chilling or not.

Maybe they did. Maybe they didn't. There are records of them, and not specific to one ideology or region or time period.

on such a mass and long-lasting scale.

It's completely insane to me. We use each other as disposable means to a materialistic end. We judge each other by how much we have amassed, or by how much we have taken/stolen/misrepresented. There is no doubt in my mind we are exploited by the 1% and that it is killing us and robbing us of life.

propping dead bodies up for the town square.

...

after a while they masked the face.

...

THEN ruler assistants took turns putting on the 'rulers' outfit and told themselves, i'm doing it because the ruler is too sick to do little things like wave to the people.

Folks could disappear and take over someone else identity back in those days with no problem.

and not just one culture? Cultures all over the world have dragons.

Most ancient symbolism has been taken literally, when it is in fact symbolism. The reason why symbolism was created was to protect the information it embodied from ruling powers that wished to wipe it out. At one point the church governed human consciousness and people lived with the threat of death if they entertained ideas which the church seemed counter productive to their agenda, so, allegory became a prevalent part of sharing information.

For example: The story of the princess locked up in the "dragon's" tower, which was saved by the knight in shining armor.

This is an allegory for the Crusades. The "dragons" were Muslim princes who had vast castles, where they had multiple wives in separate rooms/towers. The knight that attempted to "save" her was obviously a European crusader.

Another good example of this are the gods on mount Olympus. People live with the misconception that the gods were literal beings, but in fact, they were used as symbols for the super physical forces of nature.

Its virtually impossible that anybody has lived past 200 years.
And to live 200 years is an amazing feat.

Bible time starts out very fuzzy and metaphorical for the early parts that predate written history.

Ps there are still a few isolated places in the world where they live at a biblical pace and don't work 9 to 5 or pay taxes. Their life span is not double ours as one might expect.

There are many ancient accounts of "super human" strength, ability, and age. Look at the Pyramids for example, to this day, we have no idea how they were built, and the mainstream explanation has been debunked. We are clearly capable of a lot more than we know or give credit to. Aren't you interested or excited by the possibility that in your body, is the formula for super strength, long life, and limitless opportunity?

>Its virtually impossible that anybody has lived past 200
>years.
>And to live 200 years is an amazing feat.

I do not believe its impossible. I truly believe anything is possible, and that "possibility" or "impossibility" are mere arbitrary constructs. I believe everything we choose to believe or disbelieve has a physical consequence on our bodies.
>
>Bible time starts out very fuzzy and metaphorical for the
>early parts that predate written history.
>
>Ps there are still a few isolated places in the world where
>they live at a biblical pace and don't work 9 to 5 or pay
>taxes. Their life span is not double ours as one might
>expect.

A lot has changed on our planet. Our early ancestors did not eat as much meat as we did. They spent a lot more time outside, in tune with the rhythms of the planet itself. They ate much less overall, spent much less time sitting down, etc. Indigenous people were free from many common illnesses settlers introduced, etc. Much of the planet has been contaminated by pollution and industrial expansion. All of this has to be taken into account.

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson


"One of the most important things in life is what Judge Learned Hand described as 'that ever-gnawing inner doubt as to whether you're

their year wasn't necessarily 365 days.

and yes, they also lying.

"Seasons may come and your luck just may run out, and all that you'll have is some memories..."

They had an awareness of the cycles of the sun, but not of minutes and seconds, meetings, appointments, etc.

"Seasons may come and your luck just may run out, and all that you'll have is some memories..."

Stressing about getting back to work after lunch is much different to thinking about the pattern of the sun. Stressing about appointments, meetings, getting up when you're exhausted to do the same mechanized shit every day, etc. We have sped everything up to a boiling point. Everyone is always rushing, hurrying, and there is never enough time to live, etc. Everything is "GO GO GO GO GO" and if you don't get it done in a New York minute, you are a "loser" and will pay the price.

Seriously, wtf. How did we let this happen, and why do we accept it as the norm? It is a good way to kill yourself quickly, imo.

"Seasons may come and your luck just may run out, and all that you'll have is some memories..."

you don't need money to enjoy life, you need money to buy all the shit they tell you is necessary to enjoy life, and it is all a farce. nice shoes, nice clothes, stunting with this or that, it's all meaningless. even King Solomon, one of the richest men to ever live said that it is all meaningless and that we shouldn't waste our time pursuing it. why are so many rich people riddled with psychological and physical health issues fam? think about it.

spend some time in nature, removed from capitalism or the western perception of a "good life" and you will very quickly get in touch with a peaceful and happy part of yourself that wasn't driven to total neuroticism over money.

i have spent a lot of time volunteering in very "poor" countries and at first I was very surprised to find a lot of very happy "poor" people, especially after growing up in the west and i arrived at a pretty solid conclusion:

the less shit you have means that you spend a lot less time stressing over it, or worrying about getting more. in the end i learned that the greatest joy i ever felt was when i lived with the basic necessities in a place that is thriving with nature, and which hasn't been infected with capitalism.

you want to learn who you really are and what you really feel? remove yourself from the wasteland capitalism has produced. all crime can be traced back to the idea of possession and profit.

life has given us a pretty major clue when we came into this world stark naked. you come in with nothing, and you leave with nothing, except the currency of your soul, which is experience. you can spend the rest of your time amassing material things, and you will never be able to take them with you, or get any closure from any of it, you will always feel that you want more, and that it was never enough, because we are going after the wrong things.

society simply to survive and remain healthy.
That's an indisputable fact.

>you don't need money to enjoy life, you need money to buy all
>the shit they tell you is necessary to enjoy life, and it is
>all a farce. nice shoes, nice clothes, stunting with this or
>that, it's all meaningless. even King Solomon, one of the
>richest men to ever live said that it is all meaningless and
>that we shouldn't waste our time pursuing it. why are so many
>rich people riddled with psychological and physical health
>issues fam? think about it.

I put ZERO stock in what a wealthy person believes about money being meaningless. ZERO. Anyone rich enough to not care about money has an invalid perspective.

>spend some time in nature, removed from capitalism or the
>western perception of a "good life" and you will very quickly
>get in touch with a peaceful and happy part of yourself that
>wasn't driven to total neuroticism over money.

How does one go about doing this without the necessary financial backing to proceed?? An irresponsible person maybe can...or a person that simply has very limited responsibilities yes....

>i have spent a lot of time volunteering in very "poor"
>countries and at first I was very surprised to find a lot of
>very happy "poor" people, especially after growing up in the
>west and i arrived at a pretty solid conclusion:

Happiness is perhaps relative maybe? I can concede that.

>the less shit you have means that you spend a lot less time
>stressing over it, or worrying about getting more. in the end
>i learned that the greatest joy i ever felt was when i lived
>with the basic necessities in a place that is thriving with
>nature, and which hasn't been infected with capitalism.

What prevented you from remaining in that condition?

>you want to learn who you really are and what you really feel?
>remove yourself from the wasteland capitalism has produced.
>all crime can be traced back to the idea of possession and
>profit.

I don't dispute that. Removing oneself still requires $ or some sort of capital to obtain the basic life necessities.

>life has given us a pretty major clue when we came into this
>world stark naked. you come in with nothing, and you leave
>with nothing, except the currency of your soul, which is
>experience. you can spend the rest of your time amassing
>material things, and you will never be able to take them with
>you, or get any closure from any of it, you will always feel
>that you want more, and that it was never enough, because we
>are going after the wrong things.


The things that money buys could indeed be the wrong things....but $ is also a means of obtaining basic necessities and tools for one to reach their desired level of happiness.

"Seasons may come and your luck just may run out, and all that you'll have is some memories..."

>>spend some time in nature, removed from capitalism or the
>>western perception of a "good life" and you will very
>quickly
>>get in touch with a peaceful and happy part of yourself that
>>wasn't driven to total neuroticism over money.
>
>How does one go about doing this without the necessary
>financial backing to proceed?? An irresponsible person maybe
>can...or a person that simply has very limited
>responsibilities yes....
>

I suppose it's about how you set yourself up. I am currently in the process of transitioning into this permanently. I am working on a business plan that only requires an internet connection. I am almost at the point where I can live anywhere and make great income remotely.

>>i have spent a lot of time volunteering in very "poor"
>>countries and at first I was very surprised to find a lot of
>>very happy "poor" people, especially after growing up in the
>>west and i arrived at a pretty solid conclusion:
>
>Happiness is perhaps relative maybe? I can concede that.

Definitely.

>
>>the less shit you have means that you spend a lot less time
>>stressing over it, or worrying about getting more. in the
>end
>>i learned that the greatest joy i ever felt was when i lived
>>with the basic necessities in a place that is thriving with
>>nature, and which hasn't been infected with capitalism.
>
>What prevented you from remaining in that condition?

I always went to visit and volunteer but not to stay permanently, however, I am old enough and able enough to make the transition permanently. For example, a fully furnished 1 bedroom apartment in Costa Rica costs $500/month. If you are a web or graphic designer, a couple of contracts per month is enough to handle all financial necessities and you can work from anywhere you like so long as you have an internet connection.


>
>>you want to learn who you really are and what you really
>feel?
>>remove yourself from the wasteland capitalism has produced.
>>all crime can be traced back to the idea of possession and
>>profit.
>
>I don't dispute that. Removing oneself still requires $ or
>some sort of capital to obtain the basic life necessities.

Right, however, there are places where you can learn to fish and feed yourself, or maintain a garden, etc. There are many things that can be done when you DIY. There are also communities of people already doing this that you can seek out and join.


>
>"Seasons may come and your luck just may run out, and all that
>you'll have is some memories..."


That's all I want. My perspective changed from wanting to buy a house and a nice car to maintaining a modest way of life in a place where I can ingrain myself in nature as opposed the machine that is western society. I don't see any life or hope in this society, I truly only see people working themselves into an early grave, all while being stressed out, self medicated, and unhappy.

good luck!!

so long as you take steps towards it, etc etc.

Fiction is fiction.

1000 year old accounts. SMH.



**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson


"One of the most important things in life is what Judge Learned Hand described as 'that ever-gnawing inner doubt as to whether you're

Exactly...

I know dudes who are skeptical about any damn thing, but question the story of Jonah and the whale and they'll get mad defensive!!

HAHHAA.. aww hell.. that is some funny shit!! Bravo!!

>I think this is all very interesting and it got me thinking.
>Is it truly possible to live that long?

no.

---------------------------------------
it's true what they say...people are strange, when you're strangers.

not compassionate....only polite.

I am not like you at all and i cannot pretend.

Maybe the Sphinx and Pyramids pre-date the flood. Maybe dinosaurs and humans did walk the earth together as seemingly suggested by certain temple carvings in Asia. Maybe the scientific community knows this and keeps it from the public? Maybe it doesn't. Maybe it's all hogwash.

>Maybe the Sphinx and Pyramids pre-date the flood.

The Sphinx and Pyramids were set on the Nile. They traced the path of the Nile back thousands of years in order to establish this, and also determined that they predated the Egyptian culture by thousands of years. The ancient Egyptians built their culture around the relics they themselves discovered.


Maybe
>dinosaurs and humans did walk the earth together as seemingly
>suggested by certain temple carvings in Asia.

Anything is possible. I can't speak on this topic but I would like to see some of those temple carvings if you have links readily available.


Maybe the
>scientific community knows this and keeps it from the public?
>Maybe it doesn't. Maybe it's all hogwash.
>

I believe there is a lot we are not being told, however, I do not think that has to stop us from realizing our full potential and beyond.

>>Maybe the Sphinx and Pyramids pre-date the flood.
>
>The Sphinx and Pyramids were set on the Nile. They traced the
>path of the Nile back thousands of years in order to establish
>this, and also determined that they predated the Egyptian
>culture by thousands of years. The ancient Egyptians built
>their culture around the relics they themselves discovered.

Now what if in their prime they could be hermetically sealed? They have never found corpses in the pyramids but they were obviously built to hold something. Also, if people really did live for centuries and were perhaps larger on average-- something like the pyramids may not be so difficult to achieve.


>
>Maybe
>>dinosaurs and humans did walk the earth together as
>seemingly
>>suggested by certain temple carvings in Asia.
>
>Anything is possible. I can't speak on this topic but I would
>like to see some of those temple carvings if you have links
>readily available.

http://paleo.cc/paluxy/stegosaur-claim.htm

Now is it a dinosaur? I don't know for certain, but it looks like one.


>Maybe the
>>scientific community knows this and keeps it from the
>public?
>>Maybe it doesn't. Maybe it's all hogwash.
>>
>
>I believe there is a lot we are not being told, however, I do
>not think that has to stop us from realizing our full
>potential and beyond.
>
Of course it shouldn't .

>Maybe the Sphinx and Pyramids pre-date the flood.

Then they would have clear signs of water erosion, which they don't.

Maybe
>dinosaurs and humans did walk the earth together as seemingly
>suggested by certain temple carvings in Asia.

They didn't.

Maybe the
>scientific community knows this and keeps it from the public?

That's not how it works.

>Maybe it doesn't. Maybe it's all hogwash.

I think you're on to something here.

ppl lived 900 years cuz the bible and a chinese weed head wrote it in a book


even got a wiki page to bring it all home


lol i got some magic beans for the low too

....to where it could block out the harmful sun rays that we have to deal with in today's climate. The air was more pure and with pangea, the weather would've been a lot more milder. With those factors, it would have been easier for folks to age slower and thus live longer. There are creationists that go further into depth than what I'm typing regarding this theory.



Since 1976

that is highly plausible, thanks for sharing

>that is highly plausible

an atmosphere that is ripe with oxygen would support a larger physical being, such as dinosaurs.

Dinosaurs were wiped out by an asteroid, which would change the atmospheric makeup of the planet, and diminish the amount of oxygen, thus shrinking all living beings in the future. Fungus(mushrooms) were the only thing to survive on the planet after the asteroid hit, because they don't need light, everything else died, and here is the really interesting part, human being origins are rooted in fungi.

I think, the reason why human beings are searching for a way off this planet, and are obsessed with colonizing other planets is due to the fact that the last dominant life form on this planet was wiped out by an asteroid, which tends to support the idea that we are not living in a predetermined reality, but a completely spontaneous sequence of events which could yield total extinction via an asteroid, it would only seem logical for life to seek a way to preserve itself as basic sexual reproduction proves is the case. Life's clear purpose is to prolong itself to infinitude, and so, after the dinosaurs, human beings emerged as the dominant, with a clear and obsessive goal to spread across the entire universe, and preserve life.

That is flat out not true.
Lots of things survived the ele.
Namely mammals.

http://www.ted.com/talks/paul_stamets_on_6_ways_mushrooms_can_save_the_world?language=en#t-44474

Plenty of things survived the extinction of the dinosaurs.
The end.

Fungus, for a start, breeds in a totally different way (spores, in effect cloning) to almost every other form of life form on Earth (sex). It's a "kingdom" of its own.

Mammals co-existed with dinosaurs for more than 150 million years.

Some dinosaurs and avian reptiles survived whatever the catastrophe was and continued their evolution into modern birds.

Crocodiles made it through the whole thing.

Cockroaches and plenty of other insects made it through the whole thing.

I don't know where you've got this information, but you should burn it.

More detail here:

http://www.ted.com/talks/paul_stamets_on_6_ways_mushrooms_can_save_the_world?language=en#t-44474

Fungi definitely play a big role in our modern defense systems (though saying we're "rooted in fungi" naturally reads like your suggesting we evolved from fungi since evolution is normally discussed in terms of roots, branches and stems. Perhaps just a language issue.

You specifically said "everything else died", though, which isn't at all ambiguous, but is entirely and clearly untrue.

Crocodiles are in largely the same shape now as they were before the asteroid. Lots of other organisms survived and continued evolving according to the prevailing conditions (which were largely a fungi-rich habitat, so yes, evolved to use fungi to their advantage... just like we also use bacteria and otherwise parasitic lifeforms to our advantage (think eyelash mites keeping you clean and the bacteria in your digestive system).

Symbiosis is a very normal part of evolution... Dinosaurs will have had symbiotic partners too.

Check out the video when you can, its very interesting.

Show that it is!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Smh)

if that was the case then why come no other animals lived that long



u people are gullible as fuck lol

How am I gullible when I clearly stated that it's a theory? Something that implies that I am not treating it as strictly fact. How about you get your reading comprehension up before you start trying to clown?



Since 1976

ALL of that is fairy tale


THAT is what makes you gullable, and just as simple as the OP


by your astute logic Jonah in the whale, angels, & feeding the whole hood with a couple hook fish is theory


score another one for the bible beaters and their satellites

Nowhere in my original statement did I even declare that I believed it to be true. Also, claiming it to be a theory is stating that no one has solid proof. Scientists have been known to theorize things they believe COULD be true but can't outright say that it is true due to not having concrete evidence. Please, stop being a moron.


Since 1976

I once read about a 500-year-old clam. Check out the way jellyfish age in certain conditions. You look at living organisms like trees and sponges (which I guess are technically animals), there are some that are hundreds and even thousands of years old.

Now, I don't think there were any 900-year-old humans, that just isn't the reason why.

This is why it could support giant organisms such as dinosaurs. After the ele the level of oxygen dramatically diminished.

The Blue Whale would like a brief word with you about these theories on Megafauna.

But anyway... largest mammal ever only went extinct 30 odd million years ago. (The asteroid was around 30 million years before that)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraceratherium

Waaaaaaaay after the asteroid/dinosaurs. Some Dinosaurs got bigger than that (tip of the hat to that one they named Dreadnoughtus or something the other year), but not many - it was twice to three times the size of Tyrannosaurus Rex (15-20 tonnes compared to T-Rex's 6-7)

Other Megafauna (Woolly Mammoths etc) stuck around until a few centuries ago, quite likely hunted to extinction by humans rather than environmental changes.

Sure oxygen levels will play a part on all sorts of levels and it's certainly linked with some huge bursts of evolution (the Cambrian period for example), but it's one of many factors. The Blue Whale manages to live with today's oxygen levels but grows so large in largest part because it has to deal with less gravity than the rest of us, but also because it has very few natural predators and an almost endless food supply.

Think about why animal life, including the crocodile have shrunk significantly over the course of planetary history.

Something as significant as an asteroid would drastically change the climate and reduce the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere.

Here is a modern day example of animal shrinkage due to climate change.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/climatechange/8830023/Animals-shrinking-due-to-climate-change.html

Did you not read it?

30 million years after the asteroid event there were mammals 3 times the size of Tyrannosaurus Rex roaming the land.

All sorts of factors go into animal sizes. Oxygen will be one of them.

Contrary to your OP, land based mammals grew significantly for millions of years following the asteroid event because suddenly they weren't competing for food and space with as many other creatures.

http://phys.org/news/2010-11-size-mammals-dinosaur-extinction.html

Oxygen levels also affect sea life though - just because there's a beach in between us doesn't mean they live in a different ecosystem. Their oxygen still comes from photosynthesis. It still needs sunshine. If oxygen levels have led to shrinkage on land, it should have followed in the sea - but actually, oxygen doesn't seem to have such a huge effect as gravity or competition for food.

Isolation can also play a part, see examples of Island Gigantism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_gigantism - likely due to decreased predation) but also Insular Dwarfism leading to the opposite effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insular_dwarfism - likely due to increased competition for food and space).

There are so many factors that go into 'deciding' a species' size that it's never just one thing.

You can provide 1 or 2 examples of animal species that remained relatively large after the ele, even though they are extinct now anyway, and I can provide you with thousands upon thousands that shrunk. The scale is leaning in the favor of my argument concerning climate change. I also provided a recent example of animal shrinkage due to climate change, the argument was over at that point.

Today, there are no more gigantic animals left save for a few species of marine life and they are still much smaller than what they used to be.

Or are you getting over-excited and making up numbers again?

Because the article I just posted explained there was a general trend of increase in size for mammals to around ONE THOUSAND TIMES THE SIZE following the dinosaur extinction which continued for the best part of 30 million years. A general trend is not one or two species.

I've never once denied environmental factors play a part. They do. But they're not the only factor and often, they're not the most important one. Isolation, competition for food, available space, levels of predation... they all have at least equal effects as oxygen levels.

Feel free to make any conclusion you wish.

>Feel free to make any conclusion you wish.

This is just noble savage dribble.

Life wasn't easy before modern society. The OP should go visit Pioneer's village (in Toronto) to remind him that life was ALWAYS extremely regimented and rigid. We have more free time now than ever before.

to be 900 years old? So their seventh or eighth generation should be around today.

Makes sense.

creationists claim the earth is only 6,000 years old due to the literal interpretation of the bible timeline. Clearly, millions of years have passed on this planet, and something as bizarre as human cannibalism goes back 1.2 million years. i do not doubt that human beings whom lived in a healthier atmosphere, with a healthier crop, were capable of longer life. seems to me like we are on the decline, at least according to some of the ancient texts that exist. everything has become diluted with ignorance and much less accessible with the heart, and thus, a lot of real wisdom and truth is missed, because a commercially fabricated ego has taken precedent.

so we shouldn't 'literally' take the bible for it's creationism timeline....yet we should take the bible 'literally' when it talks about 900 year old people.

but yeah, how are you going to cite the same book as the source of your inquiry then dismiss another part of that book? lol, c'mon son.

nothing in the bible says we have had 6,000 years on the planet, its what people took from it based on the timeline they calculated/interpreted from it.

place...creationists get the 4000 year old age of earth from the Bible verses listing the generations of Adam down through Noah, Abraham, David, all the way through Jesus at the beginning of the New Testament. Those specific passages listing "so and so begat so and so, and lived 900 years on the earth" are where creationists get BOTH the age of the Earth and the lifespans of people in the Bible.

So how can one be literal and the other be allegorical?


>but yeah, how are you going to cite the same book as the
>source of your inquiry then dismiss another part of that book?
>lol, c'mon son.

Creationists have their own interpretation of the age of the world based on the numbers they themselves calculated from the bible.

That has nothing to do with accounts of people living X amount of years.

Creationists invented their number, the bible did not explicitly provide it in any way, but it did explicitly provide accounts of long life.

Anything prior to that could easily take place over millions of years. Time as far as the Bible is concerned doesn't really exist until death enters the picture. There's several or so chapters before that event.

give him a break

You started here...

>The Bible book of Genesis speaks of seven men who lived more
>than 900 years



Then you said....


>These claims are not specific to the bible. Here is another
>account of a Chinese herbalist who lived for over 200 years.
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Ching-Yuen



First off 200 is VERY far from 900 in this context.
Second, and most importantly, that's the ONLY place you've heard of this other than the bible?

With more sources citing 900 yr old people, you may have had a point.
Otherwise, the bible is the only place that's been recorded... same book that said
a mufucka lived in the belly of a living whale for 9 days or so... same book where
a nigga talked to a burning bush... same book where... you get my point.

You needed better supporting references.

By this idiots logic, amazonian tribes would live far longer than people in western cultures.

I am not trying to present anything as fact. It's for fun, for the sake of conversation, however, there are records of long life all across the ancient world, in India, as well as Sumer.

Same reason that people believe(d) in Dragons, worshiped Gods, deferred to Royalty, carried out blood-lettings, danced around Maypoles, burnt witches, feared comets and believed that there was a race of one-legged people who lived their lives on their backs sheltering from the sun under their massive feet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopod_%28creature%29)

Seriously. The olden days were whacked out as fuck. For every "That's just so crazy it might be true" story in the Bible or otherwise 'respected' ancient texts there's a thousand "Ok, no, that's just fucking crazy" story. No significance is to be derived. These things are not and were never true.

They had a pretty good excuse though - they didn't have easy access to the ridiculous amount of amassed knowledge we all know have access to. It's easy to call them stupid, but in reality most of us probably would "go along" with whatever was believed by most people at the time... however if you believe it now? Yeah, you ARE stupid.

Structures such as the Pyramids prove ancient human beings were not ignorant. There are other structures/examples of architecture that exemplify an advanced knowledge of astronomy and architecture, such as temples in Sri Lanka which are aligned to stars. There are many others.

>Same reason that people believe(d) in Dragons, worshiped
>Gods, deferred to Royalty, carried out blood-lettings, danced
>around Maypoles, burnt witches, feared comets and believed
>that there was a race of one-legged people who lived their
>lives on their backs sheltering from the sun under their
>massive feet
>(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopod_%28creature%29)


Not sure how you can lump all those things into one pile and call it "ancient ignorance", furthermore, I already explained that gods and dragons were born of allegory, not literal fact. Also, most of your examples came from the dark ages, which only accounts for approximately 600 years of European history.

>
>Seriously. The olden days were whacked out as fuck. For every
>"That's just so crazy it might be true" story in the Bible or
>otherwise 'respected' ancient texts there's a thousand "Ok,
>no, that's just fucking crazy" story. No significance is to be
>derived. These things are not and were never true.

The entire bible cannot be taken as face value, much of it is allegory, and I already said that the accounts of long life may be metaphorical, however, claims of long life are not bible specific.

>
>They had a pretty good excuse though - they didn't have easy
>access to the ridiculous amount of amassed knowledge we all
>know have access to. It's easy to call them stupid, but in
>reality most of us probably would "go along" with whatever was
>believed by most people at the time... however if you believe
>it now? Yeah, you ARE stupid.
>

Another misconception. The library in Alexandria had records spanning over 10,000 years. Ancient peoples had access to vast amounts of knowledge before the Mongolian empire destroyed all the great libraries of the world, as they were an oral culture and did not believe in recording anything.

Humans have always been as intelligent as they are today, but knowledge grows over the generations. Every generation is less ignorant than the last. The Egyptians were a vastly successful people who changed the world for all of us... but they were babies playing with Legos compared to today's engineers.

You think the person whoever designed the Pyramids of Giza would have any idea where to start building the Burj Khalifa or to get a Saturn 5 to the Moon without a couple of thousand generations of discovery inbetween?

Sorry, I know it's not romantic. The truth isn't often romantic.

but they were
>babies playing with Legos compared to today's engineers.

We still do not know how the Pyramids were constructed or by whom. Engineers today are unable to build a structure of this magnitude and precision.

>
>You think the person whoever designed the Pyramids of Giza
>would have any idea where to start building the Burj Khalifa
>or to get a Saturn 5 to the Moon without a couple of thousand
>generations of discovery inbetween?
>
>Sorry, I know it's not romantic. The truth isn't often
>romantic.


You're assuming far too much and setting your example in a hypothetical situation. It's pointless to debate the Pyramid vs. Saturn rocket. Both are equally impressive and interesting. We know approximately 3 to 5% of Egyptian antiquity and to this day cannot solve the mystery of some of their most pronounced accomplishments.

There are statues which have been measured with lasers and are astonishingly and perfectly symmetrical.

There are giant blocks of granite polished down into mirrors facing one another creating infinite reflection, if any of these blocks were to be off by a minuscule amount the reflection would not be evident. Polishing and setting these stones into the perfect angle today would require computer and laser precision.

There are tablets made from molten emerald requiring 10,000+ degree temperature that date to 38,000 years ago.

There are countless examples of advanced engineering and craftsmanship that we cannot reproduce with our best technology.

It is foolish to underestimate the genius and ingenuity of ancient peoples when their landmarks have survived countless earth quakes and over 30 to 50,000 years, if not more.

>but they were
>>babies playing with Legos compared to today's engineers.
>
>We still do not know how the Pyramids were constructed or by
>whom. Engineers today are unable to build a structure of this
>magnitude and precision.

LOL

Magnitude? The Burj Khalifa is EIGHT TIMES TALLER than the largest pyramid and doesn't need a massive base and tapered shape to do it. As a feat of engineering they are night and day. You might as well compare flint axes to M-16s.

We could build a pyramid tomorrow if we wanted to, but it'd considered deeply unimpressive and unimaginative by most architects. Babies figure out the big base, slim top thing by themselves when you give them building blocks - I've never seen one spontaneously develop a system to keep an 800m tall tower standing during an earthquake though. That takes centuries of discovery, recording and teaching.

Don't make the easy mistake of over-romanticising the past for the sake of it. The pyramids, the henges, the collossi, the roads and all the achievements of antiquity were just as impressive as today's as feats of intelligence, but if you put an Ancient Egyptian through a modern architecture course, he would make something far bigger and more beautiful.

He'd probably still put a cat next to it though.

There are countless documentaries featuring some of the world's most successful and influential architects stating that we would not be capable of building the pyramids today. All you have to do is research and learn. You also forget the Pyramids have survived thousands of years of Earthquakes and the stones are perfectly in place, you cannot slide a piece of paper between 2 million 2 ton blocks. There are also internal chambers which have been preserved with perfect mathematical relationships. You really should try to learn more about the Pyramids because clearly you have no clue. None of our modern buildings could withstand the same amount of time or tension/pressure.

You're dreaming.

A documentary does not the truth make.

A pyramid is the most basic tall structure known to man. That's why almost wherever you go in the world, the most ancient civilisation built and left behind some sort of pyramid. They're on almost every continent.

Nobody's ever found ancient ruins of something the size of the CN Tower though.

Because they don't exist.

Sorry the game got too difficult for you.

However there are actually plenty of ruins of megalithic, mathematically, precise structures that even with today's machines we could not reproduce.

Just because our buildings are tall does not mean that they will or can outlast structures like the pyramids.

precision of the Pyramids not to mention their architectural and artistic magnificence-- I would say yes, whoever conceptualized and built the pyramids probably could develop a satellite given today's materials and knowledge.

Meaning give that same person a book and however many years and you'd likely see positive results.

Funny to think they've created working gliders from enlarged versions of certain Egyptian artifacts.

Ancient Egyptians are just as intelligent as modern Americans, Romans, Greeks and Mayans... but without the intervening millennia of generations learning and passing it down they're stuck making pyramids.

If the Ancients hadn't worked out pyramids and henges, medieval castle builders wouldn't have worked out motte and baile, renaissance cathedral and mosque builders wouldn't have worked out vaulted ceilings and without steeplejacks reaching ever closer to God all over Europe there'd be no Empire State Building.

I'm definitely not doing the Egyptians down - my point is the ancients were ignorant compared to their modern counterparts which made it easier for stories of 900 year old men and assorted mystical visions and healings to take root and be believed... I certainly do not think that they were any less intelligent or inventive.

We will be ignorant compared to humans in another few millennia.

And maybe not all of our buildings will last (and let's be honest, few of Egypt and Rome's did either), but Voyager will probably outlast the Great Wall of China.

occam's razor would suggest that dubious record keeping is to be blamed for such nonsense.

a more oxygen/nutrient dense atmosphere would provide longer life spans.

You might be right. I don't have much medical knowledge.. shrug

I believe that I will live long because my mind develops slow. However I recently started to subscribe to the fact that I'm getting older. Something I never did before.

My heart is still young. But prior to this mental change my life and physical persona were young. After the change which came from me saying I'm getting old I need to do this or that, I started noticing stress changing my personal view and then physical persona.

I'm not all the way there....mentally old. But something has changed.


Fresh beginnings have always kept me "young"

Being stagnant and the change on my personal outlook have caused me to age.


So yes, I believe it is possible to live to a really old age. But I don't believe people want to. Our will is powerful. We may not want to die because of fear but we also may be scared to live. And when we don't grow we become stagnant. When we loose our will to grow we die mentally and our bodies eventually follow suit.

People who are always growing and always feeding their minds and bodies live longer. Most of us reach a point where we think, is this it...and start to settle...so we are surviving because we are scared to die but dying because we are scared to live. Early death can occur from that. Then there are unexpected deaths which we can't control.

Long story short. I believe that we can help the youth live longer if we teach them early to value health. Dibble and dabble in vices if you may but don't let the negative times longer or you life will be shortened, even if its just mentally. Because mental health contributes to your heart pump.

the whole point of this was to toy with the idea of time perception, the actual account of long life, whether fiction or not is irrelevant. I am interested in investigating the potential of the will that is separate to societal norms on just about anything. if there is power in the mind to control the body than why should i accept anything i am told about the body or mind by a system that is clearly corrupt? the effect of placebo's or physical anxiety produced with thought would suggest that we can operate beyond the confines of the physical. isn't that worth exploring or poking at? wouldn't that be the spirit that most religious attempt to deal with?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=v7-oHtfEjFo