Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
megabyte

my theory why we have such short lifespans

175 posts in this topic

Kmt- uses the argument that Good nutrition and modern medicine explain the reason why people today live longer than people… say in the 1800( or B.C.Eß---)

I would ask: What is more nutritional, modern foods full to overflow with synthetic substances and "additives" or a fresh piece of cooked meat with some pure olive oil and newly threshed wheat flower bread. For desert a freshly picked piece of fruit that has not been touched by another human hand, nor processed, packaged and shipped thousands of miles? Rhetorical.

This argument of supposed "good nutrition" seems to be less than scientific in my opinion.

As for the idea that medical "factors" explain the seeming "uplift" of human age I would ask. How does this explain the scientific reason why those before the deluge eclipsed mans average modern life expectancy. ( Ancient preflood= 969 years / Modern post flood= "76"). In order for a scientific postulate to be acceptable it must answer questions related to both sides. Your scientific proposal therefore is lopsided. While it may "explain" 9 verses truly define) the one it fails to do so with regard to the other. Or: Perhaps the medicine before the flood was much more superior to modern medicine. To say this would be to accept things about the pre flood world that would make many so called "opinionists' shift in their seat .

Perhaps the "fly and alien" scenario may just be relevant. Or perhaps: Humans fail to acknowledge that there are superior entities with superior capabilities of purpose and design…or the relegation of such. If this were the case perhaps humans make entropic choices to relegate their relativity and dependency on these extra earthly entities. Perhaps these entities are not initiating "a fly" or disease, rather responding to humans bringing these things upon themselves. Aliens acting proportionate to the actions of humans. Aliens as capable in the long run of NOT creating the "fly" rather ultimately disposing of the fly.

As for the "clean safe water"…proposal. The poster seems to say that "clean safe water" is an invention of man. NO! Clean safe water ( necessary for all life forms on the earth.) predates modern "aqua-technology" by millions if not billions of years. Again we may see the recurrent theme: Why is such clean safe water so hard to find "nowadays"? Could this have something to do with the entropic choice of humans. So I ask the poster: When was water invented and by whom? Who was the great inventor of water? When? Why?

What are "critical factor(s)" one must acknowledge and understand in order to "tackle" these questions? Where is the "abundance of high quality and reliable research" that is available to answer these questions?

I would say that the aliens would say of modern as well ancient human civilizations: "Ancient and modern humans are not to be trusted." As well due the lies, deceptions, crimes, murders, pollutions( water?), slanders etch of humans the aliens would talk amongst themselves and agree unanimously: " anything and everything humans say and do must be taken or "given to" a big bag of salt ( Sodom and Gomorrah anyone…lots wife)

There is not a bag of salt big enough to ..squelch the real historic facts that the fly= the human disposition? We shall see.

New proposal:

Before the flood the bible speaks of a "canopy" or "expanse" if you will that enveloped the earth before the flood. This 'canopy" was said to be emptied upon the earth during the flood.

Question: If one is laying down on a hot beach underneath an umbrella or tent..his experiences will be different than if one is laying on the hot beach with no protection from the "elements"

1)Long life before the flood= protective "atmospheric shade" from harmful UV( harmfull radiation). As well when this canopy ( heavenly ocean= Hebrew word "mabbul" for the word "deluge) was removed cosmic radiation genetically harmfull to man increased; introduced into the realm of the sphere earth.

2) Short life after the flood with no significant improvement to this day= removal of protections.

Both 1 and 2 were relative to divine responses to human choices.

Is it possible for this canopy to be replaced? Scientific and historical facts ( as well engineering, human technology and ingenuity) indicate irrefutably the following:

If it is replaced man cannot do it himself. He needs help. Why? Because man as he is "basking in the hot sun of his decisions" is inferior to the "aliens" who possess the ability to both " put up the canopy" as well experience the delight from living under the canopy. They can "give to or take away" but always relative to human choices.

To address a few points:

Nutrition - This is based upon the the assumption that regular and sustained access to high quality food sources were the norm during the time period in question (later neolithic/early Bronze age?). This is not supported by the bio-anthropological data. Such indicators as the dental Harris lines demonstrate that nutritional quality/availability was not necessarily consistent. In addition, it has been found that with the advent of agriculture and a more restricted dietary range, such factors as dental caries actually increased while the over-all life expectancy decreased.

Flood - There are precisely zero geological indications of a complete global inundation. In fact, this would appear to be a physical impossibility. The volume of water on earth is, barring the rare and quite minor cometary input, a fixed volume, and has been so for literally billions of years. If one were to melt all the glacial ice presently extant, it would amount to an oceanic basin rise of some 80.32m (263.52ft). While this would affect landforms at or below this level, a simple viewing of topographic mapping will illustrate the vast amounts of land that would not be affected. Please see below:

http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs2-00/

Human lifespan - Once again, there is no bio-anthropological support for the 969 year figure, nor anything even remotely close. You should be aware that human (and faunal) skeletal structures are subject to an extensive number of growth, maturation, and aging processes that are well documented and routinely utilized in the aging and sexing of recovered remains. For more in-depth discussion consult Burns (2007), Byers (2008), Ubelaker (1999), etc., etc. Here is one simple example from (am speculating) the proposed time period:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16054-ancient-grave-reveals-flintstone-nuclear-family.html

Clean water - Potable water has always been a concern. While the mechanisms of microbial/parasitic actions have only more recently been determined, clean water sources are not at all that common. Hence the tendency of many cultures to partake of a variety of boiled or fermented beverages. Just a brief example of what may be lurking in that local stream, with outcomes:

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

Re: "abundance of high quality and reliable research" - Should you choose to narrow your questions to one specific topic at a time, this aspect can be well addressed. The above is a mere taste.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To address a few points:

Nutrition - This is based upon the the assumption that regular and sustained access to high quality food sources were the norm during the time period in question (later neolithic/early Bronze age?). This is not supported by the bio-anthropological data. Such indicators as the dental Harris lines demonstrate that nutritional quality/availability was not necessarily consistent. In addition, it has been found that with the advent of agriculture and a more restricted dietary range, such factors as dental caries actually increased while the over-all life expectancy decreased.

Flood - There are precisely zero geological indications of a complete global inundation. In fact, this would appear to be a physical impossibility. The volume of water on earth is, barring the rare and quite minor cometary input, a fixed volume, and has been so for literally billions of years. If one were to melt all the glacial ice presently extant, it would amount to an oceanic basin rise of some 80.32m (263.52ft). While this would affect landforms at or below this level, a simple viewing of topographic mapping will illustrate the vast amounts of land that would not be affected. Please see below:

http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs2-00/

Human lifespan - Once again, there is no bio-anthropological support for the 969 year figure, nor anything even remotely close. You should be aware that human (and faunal) skeletal structures are subject to an extensive number of growth, maturation, and aging processes that are well documented and routinely utilized in the aging and sexing of recovered remains. For more in-depth discussion consult Burns (2007), Byers (2008), Ubelaker (1999), etc., etc. Here is one simple example from (am speculating) the proposed time period:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16054-ancient-grave-reveals-flintstone-nuclear-family.html

Clean water - Potable water has always been a concern. While the mechanisms of microbial/parasitic actions have only more recently been determined, clean water sources are not at all that common. Hence the tendency of many cultures to partake of a variety of boiled or fermented beverages. Just a brief example of what may be lurking in that local stream, with outcomes:

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

Re: "abundance of high quality and reliable research" - Should you choose to narrow your questions to one specific topic at a time, this aspect can be well addressed. The above is a mere taste.

.

The above is a "mere taste" of evolutionary dogma, psuedo-scientific "spin; anthropological interpretations and lastly: Arrogance.

Your statements are equally “assumptive” . Immediately you “spout” …”Neolithic/early Bronze age.” evolutionary assumptions. “Bio-anthropological data” supporting creation or argumentum “crutching” evolution. You decide. The interpretations go both ways and there are “ abundant and high quality” arguments supporting creation. To the contrary: There are equally as plethoric interpretations from evolutionists to the contrary.

Your bold assertive statement that there is “zero” geological indications of complete global inundation..is frankly erroneous. Aside from MANY indications there is the historical narrative found in the Genesis account that demonstrates how this occurred. It had “not much “ to do with ice or water on the earth rather a “heavenly body of water” ABOVE the earth. While the “volume of water on earth” may or may not be a “fixed volume” this does not invalidate the volume of water in the skies both present and past. It is believed that there was a time when the oceans were smaller and the continents were larger than they are now, as is evidenced by river channels extending far out under the oceans . It should also be noted that scientist have stated that mountains in the past were much lower than at present, and some mountains have even been pushed up from under the seas.

National Geographic , January 1945, p. 105:

“ There is 10 times as much water by volume in the ocean as there is land above sea level. Dump all this land evenly into the sea, and water would cover the entire earth, one and one-half miles deep.”

How astute and scientifically sound. The bible explains other relevancies as to the potentiality of a worldwide deluge. Of course..there is much more evidence supporting a worldwide deluge in the not to distant past. ( a past that does not include and in fact precludes Australopithecus, Neanderthal or , sigh: Piltdown man.)

There is not bio-anthropological support AGAINST the “969 year figure.

While things may be “lurking in the drinking water” relative to our modern earth..as a direct result of humans ruining the earth this does not mean that water faced such a human “plight” in the past ( spanning a little more than 6,000 years).

Should I choose to narrow my questions so as to magnify the historic/scientific/archeological/anthropological realities no doubt your responses would persist in broadening the discussion to all inclusively adopt evolutionary interpretations of such …“data”

Edited by physicsolved
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The above is a "mere taste" of evolutionary dogma, psuedo-scientific "spin; anthropological interpretations and lastly: Arrogance.

Your statements are equally “assumptive” . Immediately you “spout” …”Neolithic/early Bronze age.” evolutionary assumptions. “Bio-anthropological data” supporting creation or argumentum “crutching” evolution. You decide. The interpretations go both ways and there are “ abundant and high quality” arguments supporting creation. To the contrary: There are equally as plethoric interpretations from evolutionists to the contrary.

Your bold assertive statement that there is “zero” geological indications of complete global inundation..is frankly erroneous. Aside from MANY indications there is the historical narrative found in the Genesis account that demonstrates how this occurred. It had “not much “ to do with ice or water on the earth rather a “heavenly body of water” ABOVE the earth. While the “volume of water on earth” may or may not be a “fixed volume” this does not invalidate the volume of water in the skies both present and past. It is believed that there was a time when the oceans were smaller and the continents were larger than they are now, as is evidenced by river channels extending far out under the oceans . It should also be noted that scientist have stated that mountains in the past were much lower than at present, and some mountains have even been pushed up from under the seas.

National Geographic , January 1945, p. 105:

“ There is 10 times as much water by volume in the ocean as there is land above sea level. Dump all this land evenly into the sea, and water would cover the entire earth, one and one-half miles deep.”

How astute and scientifically sound. The bible explains other relevancies as to the potentiality of a worldwide deluge. Of course..there is much more evidence supporting a worldwide deluge in the not to distant past. ( a past that does not include and in fact precludes Australopithecus, Neanderthal or , sigh: Piltdown man.)

There is not bio-anthropological support AGAINST the “969 year figure.

While things may be “lurking in the drinking water” relative to our modern earth..as a direct result of humans ruining the earth this does not mean that water faced such a human “plight” in the past ( spanning a little more than 6,000 years).

Should I choose to narrow my questions so as to magnify the historic/scientific/archeological/anthropological realities no doubt your responses would persist in broadening the discussion to all inclusively adopt evolutionary interpretations of such …“data”

Listen to him, Swede, he quotes from National Geographic, 1945...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listen to him, Swede, he quotes from National Geographic, 1945...

Do you debate the statements made by National Geographic?

If so provide proof that such accurate statement is not..accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you debate the statements made by National Geographic?

If so provide proof that such accurate statement is not..accurate.

“ There is 10 times as much water by volume in the ocean as there is land above sea level. Dump all this land evenly into the sea, and water would cover the entire earth, one and one-half miles deep.”

That is just a hypothetical situation.

When did that situation ever really occur on earth?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“ There is 10 times as much water by volume in the ocean as there is land above sea level. Dump all this land evenly into the sea, and water would cover the entire earth, one and one-half miles deep.”

That is just a hypothetical situation.

When did that situation ever really occur on earth?

This is a statement of scientific and mathematic fact. Facts that would refute any who refer to the historical biblical account of a world wide deluge as ...impossible. That event ( aside from mythos "copy cat" stories of floods found in just about all cultures that have ever existed) occurred about 2370 B.C.E and is recorded in the history book referred to as the bible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The above is a "mere taste" of evolutionary dogma, psuedo-scientific "spin; anthropological interpretations and lastly: Arrogance.

Your statements are equally “assumptive” . Immediately you “spout” …”Neolithic/early Bronze age.” evolutionary assumptions. “Bio-anthropological data” supporting creation or argumentum “crutching” evolution. You decide. The interpretations go both ways and there are “ abundant and high quality” arguments supporting creation. To the contrary: There are equally as plethoric interpretations from evolutionists to the contrary.

Your bold assertive statement that there is “zero” geological indications of complete global inundation..is frankly erroneous. Aside from MANY indications there is the historical narrative found in the Genesis account that demonstrates how this occurred. It had “not much “ to do with ice or water on the earth rather a “heavenly body of water” ABOVE the earth. While the “volume of water on earth” may or may not be a “fixed volume” this does not invalidate the volume of water in the skies both present and past. It is believed that there was a time when the oceans were smaller and the continents were larger than they are now, as is evidenced by river channels extending far out under the oceans . It should also be noted that scientist have stated that mountains in the past were much lower than at present, and some mountains have even been pushed up from under the seas.

National Geographic , January 1945, p. 105:

“ There is 10 times as much water by volume in the ocean as there is land above sea level. Dump all this land evenly into the sea, and water would cover the entire earth, one and one-half miles deep.”

How astute and scientifically sound. The bible explains other relevancies as to the potentiality of a worldwide deluge. Of course..there is much more evidence supporting a worldwide deluge in the not to distant past. ( a past that does not include and in fact precludes Australopithecus, Neanderthal or , sigh: Piltdown man.)

There is not bio-anthropological support AGAINST the “969 year figure.

While things may be “lurking in the drinking water” relative to our modern earth..as a direct result of humans ruining the earth this does not mean that water faced such a human “plight” in the past ( spanning a little more than 6,000 years).

Should I choose to narrow my questions so as to magnify the historic/scientific/archeological/anthropological realities no doubt your responses would persist in broadening the discussion to all inclusively adopt evolutionary interpretations of such …“data”

Thank you for finally defining your base-line date. Matters can now be addressed in a more succinct manner.

1) Are you now suggesting that the aquatic borne microbes/parasites are only a product of the last 6000 years? Please provide documentation.

2) Please provide qualified documentation for a global inundation within the last 3 billion years.

3) It would appear that your understanding of geologic processes/plate tectonics may be rather lacking. Please see below:

http://www.scotese.com/sfsanim.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:TectonicReconstructionGlobal.gif

4) Your references to members of the hominid line prior to or contemporary with H. sapiens or H. sapiens sapiens would also appear to indicate a lack of understanding regarding the current state of knowledge in this regard. Please see below:

http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo2/mod_homo_4.htm

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2005-02/uou-toh021105.php

5) As you will (hopefully!) observe, the above has been presented in such a manner as to progressively (and very briefly) narrow the time range down to a period closer to your 6000 BP figure. Now one must be willing to address the quite voluminous bodies of evidence that clearly support the presence of a fully modern members of your own ancestry (and their cultures) that predate your 6000 BP figure. For starters:

http://www.catalhoyuk.com/newsletters/08/radiocarbon01.html

http://www.roperld.com/YBiallelicHaplogroups.htm

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MImg&_imagekey=B8JDD-4RDPT4K-6-1&_cdi=43612&_user=10&_pii=S0002929707631310&_coverDate=08%2F31%2F2006&_sk=%23TOC%2343612%232006%23999209997%23677385%23FLA%23display%23Volume_79,_Issue_2,_Pages_i-ii,_193-417_%28August_2006%29%23tagged%23Volume%23first%3D79%23Issue%23first%3D2%23date%23%28August_2006%29%23&view=c&_gw=y&wchp=dGLbVtz-zSkWA&_valck=1&md5=91876969b04fbf5dd828cb9fc25c99d9&ie=/sdarticle.pdf

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.roperld.com/graphics/MigrationMap.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.roperld.com/mtdna.htm&usg=__2osehK2CD6L0xEBxg79tr3r31ok=&h=1036&w=1528&sz=435&hl=en&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=uLjlSk__2PzL8M:&tbnh=98&tbnw=144&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dhuman%2Bhaplogroup%2Bmap%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26sa%3DG%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-

US:official%26biw%3D1350%26bih%3D597%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=416&vpy=172&dur=6118&hovh=185&hovw=273&tx=144&ty=72&ei=9QB_TN6XNZPWtQON4JX1Cg&oei=9QB_TN6XNZPWtQON4JX1Cg&esq=1&page=1&ndsp=23&ved=1t:429,r:2,s:0

The above are, yet again, just for starters. More in-depth references can be readily supplied.

6) Re: Human life-span - It would be incumbent upon you to provide data supporting your claim. The proof of a negative is a logical fallacy.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hopefully scientists are studying them so they can work out how to make humans live foreverf

Really ? Perhaps you might like to think that through, no-one dies but we still have children ? Won't be too long before we're crowded out !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a statement of scientific and mathematic fact. Facts that would refute any who refer to the historical biblical account of a world wide deluge as ...impossible. That event ( aside from mythos "copy cat" stories of floods found in just about all cultures that have ever existed) occurred about 2370 B.C.E and is recorded in the history book referred to as the bible.

Yes.

The earth is as smooth as a billiard ball.

... sigh ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

our scientists love the fruit fly because it completes a generation in just 3 weeks and so it is useful when studying what effect a certain substance may have on subsequent generations

could it be that humans have such pitifully short lifespan for the same reason?

[annunaki were supposed to live to age 36000 for example]

could aliens who have been tinkering with our civilization since year dot be using us to study substances over generations before giving it to their own population? someone who lives to age 36000 could study several of our generations after releasing a substance such the plague to see what it does. [yes apparently they saw men in black dressed as grim reapers releasing gas substances around villages prior to that village succumbing to the plague - this was on an episode i just watched called ancient aliens

it is quite obvious from reading ancient writings and also reading about current ufo abduction reports that aliens have always had their own agenda and sometimes it was for our good and sometimes it was not.

I would love to know what others think

Humans do have longer life spans than most other mammals, not that that makes any particular consciousness "more important" than another. Basic Darwinian evolution dictates that evolved characteristics of any species are compelled by natural forces to benefit the species, not the individual. The species forces have "concluded" up to now that humans beyond a hundred years old are dead wood to the species, and has arranged the telomeres to turn off the biological clock at a certain general area of time.

But then of course that is all a theory, a brick in a wall, a way of viewing the universe as some abstract machine which is larger than one’s own awareness. This mechanistic view seems "to work" well enough, but it has a flaw the size of a barn door.

Let's speak of time, when one speaks of "life", a more appropriate definition of time is subjective time.

Life for the person yearning to experience more, and yet has been dazzled with talk from everyone of the existence of death, and even had so called "first hand viewing" that death exists (meaning to say that they believe in death, and that other than the present moment exists (which can never by definition be death), or for many common people for that matter,... well for those common people then sitting at the coffee table, or feeling the loss of others, life might seem very short. This would mean that for this class of people, "life feels short".

On the other hand if a person is in agony or dispair, life might feel interminably long.

There are other people who at times are very much living in the moment and don't even have time for such abstract thoughts as death.

If you can’t experience death, then death cannot really exist.

If you can experience death, then death cannot really exist either.

Either way it doesn't matter, and death cannot really exist.

However, death can be a really good advisor, an advisor of how to live each moment more intensely.

Edited by Henry Morgan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Henry, if you keep talking in riddles, it's gonna do my head in, O.K. ? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:rolleyes::sleepy: Edited by shangdi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greetings, megabyte, and welcome to UM. :)

I echo the sentiments of others who have commented and must stress the fact that human lifespans are hardly static. In the Bronze Age, when the Sumerians, Akkadians, Egyptians, and others were honing the their creation myths, the average lifespan was approximately 35 years. Approximately thirty percent of all children died before their fifth year of life; 20% of all pregnancies ended in spontaneous miscarriage.

Today, on the other hand, the average lifespan (in the West, at least) is around 76 years. Further, the average human is significantly taller than his ancestor of some 3,000 years ago. Whereas most Westerners get married in their twenties and have children in their twenties or early thirties, in the Bronze Age a bride could be as young as twelve or thirteen years of age and her husband only a few years older. When you were eighteen years old and "middle-aged," you started a family by what we modern folks would consider to be extremely young--still kids, really.

A multiplicity of factors determine lifespan, and it's all well understood through scientific principles. Aliens are not needed. The most obvious factors are good nutrition and modern medicine. The absence of something so basic as vaccinations is one main reason the infant mortality rate in the ancient world was so universally high. And something many people don't realize is that one of the greatest inventions in all of human history was the capability to produce clean, safe drinking water; that alone lengthened average lifespans.

When trying to tackle these subjects in the course of one's studies, the critical factor is the quality of sources to which one turns. While there is an abundance of high-quality and reliable research material that is available to everyone, I cannot agree enough with something TheSearcher mentioned in the second post of this discussion: sources like Ancient Aliens are not to be trusted. I've seen numerous episodes of this program, myself. TheSearcher said that when you watch this program, you must take it's information with "a big bag of salt." I might extend this analogy and suggest there is not a bag of salt in this world that's large enough. The information dispensed on Ancient Aliens is so lacking in substance and scientific evaluation that, in my opinion, it has no research value whatsoever. In other words, you won't learn a single thing that's pertinent to real-world historical facts.

Finally, on the subject of aliens, I am not the least shy about stating my own opinion. I am absolutely certain that aliens had nothing whatsoever to do with the developments of ancient cultures around the world. Indeed, these ancient societies did not need the assistance of aliens. This is the sort of thing of which TV shows like Ancient Aliens are so unforgivably guilty: at the same time that they dispense oodles of intellectual flotsam, they rob ancient societies of the great things ancient peoples achieved. Give credit where credit is due. ;)

I agree to that every detail of yours!

Give credit to ancient people for their civilizations!

The worst will be giving credit to aliens for the Great wall of China.LOL

probably because its the only man-made structure visible to the moon.

Why are those ancestors of our less intelligent than us? Then what if the following generations they'll take wikipedia, google and yahoo even the internet credit to the aliens?

Is it not insulting for our generation? That's what these people are doing to the past.

If indeed there were aliens why not make pyramids out of steel, cement or strange materials not out of bricks and limestone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really ? Perhaps you might like to think that through, no-one dies but we still have children ? Won't be too long before we're crowded out !

it is nice to live forever. but if your loves ones are gone, too many friends die soon, your left alone, what is worth living for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This argument of supposed “good nutrition” seems to be less than scientific in my opinion.
Seems that your definition of scientific has nothing to do with science.
As for the idea that medical “factors” explain the seeming “uplift” of human age I would ask. How does this explain the scientific reason why those before the deluge eclipsed mans average modern life expectancy. ( Ancient preflood= 969 years / Modern post flood= “76”). In order for a scientific postulate to be acceptable it must answer questions related to both sides. Your scientific proposal therefore is lopsided. While it may “explain” 9 verses truly define) the one it fails to do so with regard to the other. Or: Perhaps the medicine before the flood was much more superior to modern medicine. To say this would be to accept things about the pre flood world that would make many so called “opinionists’ shift in their seat .
There is nothing scientific about what you've said. The sumerians also had longevity myths, with kings living for tens of thousands of years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a statement of scientific and mathematic fact. Facts that would refute any who refer to the historical biblical account of a world wide deluge as ...impossible. That event ( aside from mythos "copy cat" stories of floods found in just about all cultures that have ever existed) occurred about 2370 B.C.E and is recorded in the history book referred to as the bible.

Yet the Epic of Gilgamesh is older but it must be a "copy cat".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Henry, if you keep talking in riddles, it's gonna do my head in, O.K. ? :P

Riddle? There were no question marks in my post.

If you can’t experience death, then death cannot really exist.

-That is to say, if at the end of it all my awareness simply vanishes, then in the subjective, the only point of view which is self-evident, there is no such thing as death.

If you can experience death, then death cannot really exist either.

-If I experience, who knows, let's say, going down a long tunnel, uh spiritual guides that say or do this or that, uh, Saint Peter at the pearly gates, uh, reincarnation. Well then, that is all once more direct self-evident subjective experience too and not really "death", in the sense of the end of it all.

Either way it doesn't matter, and death cannot really exist.

-Subtract your fear from the situation and maybe you will understand the clarity of the logic better.

However, death can be a really good advisor, an advisor of how to live each moment more intensely.

-I don't know about death, but life can be lived at various levels of intensity, and that can warp the subjective experience of time. The notion that death is stalking us is a useful ploy that can allow us to live the present moment more intensely. If anything, the experience of time is one of the hallmarks of life, and memory is an essental cornerstone to experience life and gives it a useful definition.

People see living things become non-self-sustaining, and have one useful definition among eachother for the word "death". However we (I) have been trained to project into my own mind the idea that the world experienced through the senses has it's own reality apart from my experience, and even develop elaborate ideas about what "others" experience, but not based on direct knowing. This scenario seems to "work well" within itself, and we call that "scientific", or "objective", but it does nothing to help me understand about things like death.

I don't concern myself much about things I don't have some direct control over. I am aware at this very moment. The past is only a memory, it doesn't exist. The future is a pure abstract unknown, and exists even less.

I am alive in the eternal now = I am eternal, there is no death.

I think that if me and most people really think about it, what they fear is not death, but pain associated with possible deaths. I have had a number of serious injuries and near death experiences and no longer fear pain much either, because beyond a certain point the experience of pain sort of cancels itself out too and becomes a non issue.

I think that when we clear away the layers and layers of abstract thought, we come to a surprising conclusion, that our most basic desire is to really fall asleep, that is to say, to die.

Edited by Henry Morgan
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How does this explain the scientific reason why those before the deluge eclipsed mans average modern life expectancy. ( Ancient preflood= 969 years / Modern post flood= “76”).

Which do you think is more likely - that after a certain period of time humans stopped living for hundreds of years, or from a certain point record keeping became better and the lives of humans were more accurately recorded?

Its no coincidence that the recorded life of Sumerian kings drops down from tens of thousands of years to a mere 100 years right around the time that written records began to be kept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for finally defining your base-line date. Matters can now be addressed in a more succinct manner.

1) Are you now suggesting that the aquatic borne microbes/parasites are only a product of the last 6000 years? Please provide documentation.

2) Please provide qualified documentation for a global inundation within the last 3 billion years.

3) It would appear that your understanding of geologic processes/plate tectonics may be rather lacking. Please see below:

http://www.scotese.com/sfsanim.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:TectonicReconstructionGlobal.gif

4) Your references to members of the hominid line prior to or contemporary with H. sapiens or H. sapiens sapiens would also appear to indicate a lack of understanding regarding the current state of knowledge in this regard. Please see below:

http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo2/mod_homo_4.htm

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2005-02/uou-toh021105.php

5) As you will (hopefully!) observe, the above has been presented in such a manner as to progressively (and very briefly) narrow the time range down to a period closer to your 6000 BP figure. Now one must be willing to address the quite voluminous bodies of evidence that clearly support the presence of a fully modern members of your own ancestry (and their cultures) that predate your 6000 BP figure. For starters:

http://www.catalhoyuk.com/newsletters/08/radiocarbon01.html

http://www.roperld.com/YBiallelicHaplogroups.htm

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MImg&_imagekey=B8JDD-4RDPT4K-6-1&_cdi=43612&_user=10&_pii=S0002929707631310&_coverDate=08%2F31%2F2006&_sk=%23TOC%2343612%232006%23999209997%23677385%23FLA%23display%23Volume_79,_Issue_2,_Pages_i-ii,_193-417_%28August_2006%29%23tagged%23Volume%23first%3D79%23Issue%23first%3D2%23date%23%28August_2006%29%23&view=c&_gw=y&wchp=dGLbVtz-zSkWA&_valck=1&md5=91876969b04fbf5dd828cb9fc25c99d9&ie=/sdarticle.pdf

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.roperld.com/graphics/MigrationMap.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.roperld.com/mtdna.htm&usg=__2osehK2CD6L0xEBxg79tr3r31ok=&h=1036&w=1528&sz=435&hl=en&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=uLjlSk__2PzL8M:&tbnh=98&tbnw=144&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dhuman%2Bhaplogroup%2Bmap%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26sa%3DG%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-

US:official%26biw%3D1350%26bih%3D597%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=416&vpy=172&dur=6118&hovh=185&hovw=273&tx=144&ty=72&ei=9QB_TN6XNZPWtQON4JX1Cg&oei=9QB_TN6XNZPWtQON4JX1Cg&esq=1&page=1&ndsp=23&ved=1t:429,r:2,s:0

The above are, yet again, just for starters. More in-depth references can be readily supplied.

6) Re: Human life-span - It would be incumbent upon you to provide data supporting your claim. The proof of a negative is a logical fallacy.

.

Succinct! Respectful

1) Please provide “scientific” proof that “fresh clean water” is a modern phenomenon. Please provide scientific evidence that “microbes/parasites” are NOT a product of creation.

Note: As for when these “living organisms” were created the bible does not define the exact length of time nor the exact time theses creative events transpired . However the bible does state that these creatures ( Genesis 1:20: “ let the waters swarm forth a swarm of living things”) were created on the 5th “day”. This day came after the 1st through 4th day. Thus living organisms dependent on processes of light and photosynthesis( 1-4 day) naturally and scientifically proceeded the “coming to be “ of light and luminary. The word “day” has many meanings in the Hebrew language. Thus the “day” when these “microbes/parasites” were created could have represented thousands of years BEFORE the 6th day( when man was created). As it is the term “day” has a broader meaning than just a 24 hour period. One thing for sure it took more than “144” literal hours to accomplish all the works of creation. Thus when these “aqua-swarms” were created and how long the process took is not specifically stated in the bible. However the bible does indicate that the extra terrestrial that is God certainly predates the creation of the heavens and earth. As well the bible indicates that “one day to Jehovah is 1000 years”( to man). Thus if each creative day represented a complete 1,000 years( inferential verses any defined methodology of chrono) then this could “indicate” that the “microbes/parasites” could have came into existence about 12,000 years ago. However this is not definitive. What we do know is that the earth is billions of years old. Take into consideration the broad use of the Hebrew word “day” then from the strictest standpoint all time preceding the 6th day could have been used in the creative processes.

2) Many geological, anthropological, cultural, and geographical “qualifications”. Equally as feasible as the “lack of proof” you would seek to “prop up” relegating this possibility.

3) Not interested in your “interpretive references.” Been there, saw the movie, have done the research ( open mindedly)…not convinced. Moved on!

4) Correction: Human! ( verses “hominoid”= a witty preposterous evolutionary “term”). “current state” of evolutionary dogma is inferior to the “current state” of creation(ary) evaluations. ( save evolutionary “peer review”)

“..lack of understanding..” No! Rather: A better ability of perceiving the principles of creation as demonstrative relative to what you call ’indicatives.”

Equally indifferent to your references. Many if not most of which I have entertained.

5) Rhetoric! “..more in depth references..”= selectively choosing ones ideals and subsequently framing a RELIGIOUS belief system around them. Religion in the particular being….”chance.”

6) I will choose logical over “illogical chance fallacy” at all times. ( Note: Where the word “fallacy is necessarily removed from the “logical” equations)

You will admit: History/science/anthropology/geology...all of these human endeavors represent actualities "orchestrated" to conform to mans ideologies. I know it is a travesty of historic justice but it is a phenomenon that cannot be denied. Thus true history is only obscured or distorted relative to mans way of thinking.

History= orchestra (aich+ eye+es+te+owe+are+y)....akestory....."orchestra"

Humans "playing the keys of history" in a way that appeals to themselves.

orchestrate ( defined): to arrange or manipulate, especially by means of clever or thorough planning or maneuvering: to arrange, organize, or build up for special or maximum effect.

Some of those who "arrange, manipulate," history do so with the purpose of "stretching the strings", "warping the sounds" ..so as to produce "distorted, false" histories. Others "play the instruments" by closely adhering to the "true" sounds" and do not deviate into "wantonness" of historical musicality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which do you think is more likely - that after a certain period of time humans stopped living for hundreds of years, or from a certain point record keeping became better and the lives of humans were more accurately recorded?

Its no coincidence that the recorded life of Sumerian kings drops down from tens of thousands of years to a mere 100 years right around the time that written records began to be kept.

Before the “ Chernobyl disaster” occurred, a disater that was called a “ nuclear accident of catastrophic proportions” people lived regular healthy lives. After the disaster of “catastrophic proportions” ( not dissimilar to a world wide deluge) peoples life span was cut short.( either literally dying or following the disaster continuing to suffer and die as a result).

Shortly after the explossion the “radiation levels” were equally as catastrophic. “Four hundred times more radioactive material was released than had been by the atomic bombing of Hiroshima”. We do not have to discuss the long term results of this sudden release of radiation. Save:

“The radioactive contamination of aquatic systems therefore became a major issue in the immediate aftermath of the accident.”

“After the disaster, four square kilometers of pine forest directly downwind of the reactor turned reddish-brown and died, earning the name of the "Red Forest".[85] Some animals in the worst-hit areas also died or stopped reproducing. Most domestic animals were evacuated from the exclusion zone, but horses left on an island in the Pripyat River 6 km (4 mi) from the power plant died when their thyroid glands were destroyed by radiation doses of 150–200 Sv.[86] Some cattle on the same island died and those that survived were stunted because of thyroid damage. .. robot sent into the reactor itself has returned with samples of black, melanin-rich radiotrophic fungi that are growing on the reactor's walls.”

(note: all words in quotations were extracted from an article related to Chernobyl …Wicipedia)

Thus and then!

Now! Imagine that the Ukraine represents the sphere (obloid) earth . The nuclear plant represents space outside the earth. Imagine that the earth at one time had a impregnable canopy separating space from the earth. Imagine that this canopy was either removed or partially deconstructed. Imagine the “volume” of “heavenly radiation” that would now be introduced into the atmosphere of the earth. Imagine that before this event humans lived “a long time” would such be the case after the event? Rhetorical.

[

“It is no coincidence” that: Humans, flora, fauna,..and all other living things on the earth…after this historical event( written in the record of the bible) were greatly diminished as to the potentiality to live “long lives”.

Add to this “radiation” the pollutions compounded by greedy, selfish, never satisfied humans…and the result inevitably means the following:

“969.to 76”

Also typical of humankind is the following:

Blaming others for the eventuality of their actions.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet the Epic of Gilgamesh is older but it must be a "copy cat".

Can you prove this statement? Irrefutabally? Thus no need for me to engage you in conversation about it.

Thus the preceeding post as to "historic orchestrations"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now! Imagine that the Ukraine represents the sphere (obloid) earth . The nuclear plant represents space outside the earth. Imagine that the earth at one time had a impregnable canopy separating space from the earth. Imagine that this canopy was either removed or partially deconstructed. Imagine the “volume” of “heavenly radiation” that would now be introduced into the atmosphere of the earth. Imagine that before this event humans lived “a long time” would such be the case after the event? Rhetorical.

If you actually think that this is more likely than the decreased ages simply being down to better record-keeping, then this board has reached a new nadir.

Edited by Emma_Acid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you prove this statement?

http://fajardo-acosta.com/worldlit/gilgamesh/

Irrefutabally? Thus no need for me to engage you in conversation about it.
To you? The person who re-defined scientific to include mythological events? No.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting theory. I don't believe it, but it is fun to think about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes.

The earth is as smooth as a billiard ball.

... sigh ....

I know your pain, Abramelin. Frustrating, isn't it? And tedious.

I particularly like the date of 2370 BCE for the biblical flood. Theologians of old came up with dates like this one, which is why the Church was so mortified by proper scientific studies of ancient Near Eastern cultures. The more people delved into the past, the more the Church feared its tenets would be upset.

That was in the nineteenth century, however. I should hope we have evolved somewhat since then, intellectually. Well, for the most part, we have. But using this date of 2370 BCE and looking at just pharaonic Egypt alone, this places us in Dynasty 5 of the Old Kingdom. The Egyptians had already been building pyramids nonstop for several centuries and would continue to do so for another dynasty or two, down to about 2200 BCE.

LOL But then all of a sudden comes the Flood! I guess all the pyramids of Dynasty 6 were more difficult to build because of it: "Well, boys, look at all the water. Better build the next ones with big floats at the bottom." :rolleyes:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.