[Responding to a question asking if it is possible for someone to live 900 years as stated in the Bible]
so yes its possible and yes it did happen...if you dont want to
61 comments
640 years, with modern technology (if, in fact this is true, which I doubt) is still 260 years short of 900. Math isn't your strong suit any more than science.
I don't know too many people that don't believe in the bible who whine about the fact that they don't believe. Most, in fact, are pretty grounded about the matter and have quite a bit of knowledge and research to back them up.
I believe the oldest person who ever lived that we know of was Jeanne Calment who got to be 122. To be honest, based on my knowledge of centenarians, living to be 200 sounds really, really shit.
sceintists did a study in the early 90's...they figure that they can get someone up to 640 years with the technology we have coming before a random event gets you and they cannot get to you in time to save you....
Just like Terri Schiavo was alive...?
So the scientists who did this study in the early 90's getting someone up to 640 years you're willing to believe...
but the scientists who have formulated the theory of evolution is a complete fabrication?
And this study was published where? SciFi magazine? Amazing Stories? Ripleys' Believe it or not?
And in biblical times, they had modern cybernetics?
Actually, which study?. I have reviewed six or seven and the maximum they give is 120 years. And by the way, do you realise that, at the time, THEY DIDN'T HAVE OUR TECHNOLOGY.
It's the "random event" bit that baffles me. You mean that 640 years is the longest a person can live before their luck runs out and they get hit by a truck?
Or does fate step in Final Destination-style on a person's 640th birthday, to kill them in an unlikely and messy way?
If you can answer these questions with bible verses i'll be doubly impressed.
@Sceptic Sceptic:
I'm guessing he read somewhere that your chances of dying in an accident in any one year are 1/640, hence your chances of an accidental death in 640 years are 640/640, i.e. 1.
I think it was one of the final exam questions on the Creationist Statistics exam at Patriot U.
scientists are the portals of Satin, how could you use Satin, the great deciever, to justify your Bable book.
fundamentalists delenda est
@David B:
But the point was valid. Why stop at 640? Either death from gradual organ failure can be prevented, making near immortality, or it can't. Odds are some corrective measure needs to be taken on the DNA replication level to prevent new cells from differing from old cells. The very same process that causes evolution (random mutations on cell division) actually gradually damages the body.
Posted by Benjamin328:
"Since when is making an argument whining?"
If you don't believe in their fairytales, to them it's whining, regardless of how civil you are being.Oh, and it's also "intolerant" to disagree with them.
What is it with fundies?
They dismiss evolutionary biology despite the fact that a huge proportion of scientists who have actually studied it agree with it.
Then they come out with something like this, and apply the claim "Scientists said it, so it must be true!"
You can't have it both ways.
Yet maximum lifetime is 122.4 yearsNote what I put below this, it's called a citation, even if it is only wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_life_span
I can't find anything that has this theoretical age anywhere on the internet. So........
Lying for Jeebus?
I have also "read something something, somewhere..." ((and I REALLY wish I could cite my sources, but no such luck).
The source put forth a hypothesis that biblical-era historians could have confused months with years.
Doing the math (900 / 12 = 75), a person living to 900 "years" (months) old would, in actuality be only 75 years old. Since the average life expectancy in that era was about 35, a 75 year old would be REALLY old to those people.
It's an interesting hypothesis, though.
Please cite the paper that those scientists in the early 90s published, or at least their names.
No, it is not possible for animals to live 900 [or 640] years.
No, the Tanakh is not believable. Sorry.
James: The point of life-extension isn't meant to age normally and just refuse to die. The point is to slow down or prevent aging, meaning you'll still be healthy after 100 years, so it won't be shit.
If scientists ever can do that that's with modern technology and wouldn't have worked back then.
However, some scientists believe that it might even be possible to cure aging and I think that sounds possible though possibly far in the future. Aging essentially involves changes in chemical processes. I think I read somewhere that telomerase is responsible for the current maximum life span. However, if they could synthesize and replace the telomerase as you get older it wouldn't be a problem. Even if it takes a long time they will probably figure it out eventually.
Well, 640 sounds like a nice age to start building a retirement boat. A big one, for a year long world cruise.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
