Discussion of everything related to the Theory of Evolution.
I am a chemical engineer. I wish to ask some questions from biologists.
3When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image; and he named him Seth. 4After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters. 5Altogether, Adam lived 930 years, and then he died.
Q: Is human body able to survive for 930 years?
Q: Is man so strong to beget at the age of 800 years?
Q: Is it possible that early humans would be of large size or height?
There is no scientific evidence that supports any human surviving for much more than 100 years.
However, if Adam was on a spaceship that was travelling at or very close to the speed of light then an observer on earth... oh forget it.
There is no scientific evidence that supports any human surviving for much more than 100 years. Having failed to overcome the first hurdle, that second hurdle is looking somewhat irrelevant.
The fossil record indicates that the further back you go in human history, the smaller humans were (on average). Where you draw the line as to the beginning of humanity and the end of humanity's ancestor is currently up for debate, but I'd say in the area of between three and a half and four feet is probably the height of the early humans.
People older than 100 years are not scientific evidence?
Cis or trans? That's what matters.
I guess the operative part of the sentence was 'much more'. Yes humans a life of 120 and some is possible as we all know. But 800 ? or even 200 ?
Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without
any proof. (Ashley Montague)
You surely mean that "somewhere in the distant future" people might live for 200 years :)
Because the maximum age humans live today is not any bigger than it was 2000 years ago and more, so I wouldn't hold my breath for anyone living much longer than 120 years before we really find some groundbreaking means to lenghten our lifespans.
And what comes to Adam and guys, well... just a few centuries ago most people were lucky if they managed to hit 30 years of age, so most of the guys in the biblical times probably didn't live much longer than that. Of course now and then some lucky guy managed to reach that 100+ years, but that's about how far we've ever got. There is not any kind of evidence of people living even close to 200 years, not to mention the ages that the bible tries to tell us.
In the context of the question "do you think human body is able to survive 930 years" I'm surprised you conclude by "much more than 100" I'm going to mean something less than 130, but anyway I apologise and let me rephrase to,
There is currently no scientific evidence for any human having lived more than 130 years.
Is that ok? I'll try to be a little more lucid from now on.
Seeing as no one has brought up Medawar yet it seems the right point to elicit peoples views on what he had to say on ageing. Personally I don't see it myself but I guess it could result in a human living a very long time. If he was right then seeing as there are approx 6bn people on the planet today then in my view, one of them should be able to last much more than a couple of hundred years. Whoops there I go again, sorry I meant at least 500. Guess we'll know in a few hundred years whether he was onto something.
I wouldn't be surprised if some groundbreaking means aren't just around the corner. Agreed the last 2000 years haven't seen huge increases (unless you looked at it from a percentage viewpoint) but most of those increases have come in the last 100. If you look at annuity rates offered by pension companies it's an indicator as to where they see average life expectancies heading in the next 30 or so years, and the strange thing is, the rate of increase is predicted to increase !! In other words were expected to live longer, and the difference in life expectancy between one generation and the next is expected to grow. So "somewhere in the distant future" might not be as distant as you may think.
I must disagree a bit here.
There is no doubt that the the average human life span has increased enormously during the last 100 years or so. However, the maximum age for humans hasn't increased at all. Even an ancient Egyptian some 6000 years ago could have lived over 100 years just as you or I may live that long today - with some luck. But neither that Egyptian, or you or I, will make it much further than that. It is pretty much due to the same phenomenon why you do not see 10-year-old mice either: mice don't live 10 years and men don't live 200.
Pension costs and the number of 100-year-olds will surely increase also in the future, but not because anything has happend to the maximum human age, but because more and more humans are able to get close to that maximum, thanks to better health care and better nutrition etc. Of ancient Egyptians perhaps nine out of ten died before the age of forty or fifty, while today practically everybody is expected to go far beyond that. Hence we nowadays have lots of more candidates for hitting that magical 120 or so, but despite that only a tiny portion of people get even close. Just as it has been for thousands of years.
One must not confuse the increasing average lifetime expectancy and the maximum age a man can reach. They are not linked to one another :)
Good advice, it's something that got me through my exams many years ago.
You may believe there's a magic number, a limit say, but personally I'm willing to accept the possibility that there are people walking around who genetically have the potential to live for 200 years or more. As the advances which push the average continue then more and more people will be given the opportunity to live to their potential age.
It would be nice to have a wager, except I fear that neither of us will be around to settle it
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest