Alpha Centauri 2

Community => Recreation Commons => Topic started by: Mart on February 09, 2015, 05:30:22 PM

Title: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Mart on February 09, 2015, 05:30:22 PM
Among materials on health, gevity, etc. I find this one very interesting one:
Ulrich Strunz
Forever Young

He wrote also other on similar topics. This one is from Abe Books:
http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/BookDetailsPL?bi=14907444633&searchurl=an%3DStrunz%2C+Ulrich (http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/BookDetailsPL?bi=14907444633&searchurl=an%3DStrunz%2C+Ulrich)

And another thing pertaining to exercise:
Recently I found some info on "Old school new body" and I try this. What's interesting, the authors claim, that excessive workout produces a lot of free radicals in our bodies, so we actually often can age quicker. They recommend the basic program, 3 x 30 minutes workout a week. Intensive, where you do repetitions around 40 seconds and another 40 seconds rest. No stopping. They claim, actors decades ago were able to get in shape this way very quickly.

And this is only a small part, like many findings/options/etc. According to Bible, people were living over 900 years before the deluge, and creationists explain why, if someone believes that.
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Vishniac on February 09, 2015, 07:22:08 PM
According to Bible, people were living over 900 years before the deluge, and creationists explain why, if someone believes that.
I don't. Thanks!

Pause soundtrack:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHIIATt0BaM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHIIATt0BaM)

In English, this book is interesting but goes perhaps too far for most people. However I think benefits are linear.
http://www.findingultra.com/ (http://www.findingultra.com/)

Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Rusty Edge on February 09, 2015, 08:45:51 PM
And this is only a small part, like many findings/options/etc. According to Bible, people were living over 900 years before the deluge, and creationists explain why, if someone believes that.

I figure that part of the book is really old, has been retold, translated and transcribed a lot.
Sometimes I wonder if maybe they only lived ,  say, 900 months. Wouldn't that be remarkable in the stone or bronze age, before sanitation, medicine, nutrition, parasitology, etc.? I think so.  Or maybe somebody moved a decimal or comma or put down an extra zero.
Or maybe the records were lost, or maybe the old people were senile and confused, , or maybe they were practical jokers and knew that nobody remembered them as young people and they could get away with whatever they said.

Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Mart on February 09, 2015, 09:14:32 PM
It was found, that after the Deluge, or Flood, people started to live considerably shorter. Here is an article, that explains why:
http://www.examiner.com/article/global-flood-and-cancer (http://www.examiner.com/article/global-flood-and-cancer)

In short, before the Flood Earth had a kind of atmospheric water layer, or high temperature water vapor due to radiation, or some say could be ice, on higher altitude? Anyway, this provided shielding from ionizing radiation from the Sun. Now we cannot escape this, unless maybe at the bottom of the ocean.

Additional effect was increased oxygen partial pressure, as creationists suspect the total Earth pressure was something above 2.0 atm.
Here is something I found on HBOT as anti-aging:
http://deserthealthnews.com/stories/hyperbaric-oxygen-therapy-can-it-turn-back-the-clock/ (http://deserthealthnews.com/stories/hyperbaric-oxygen-therapy-can-it-turn-back-the-clock/)

Both effects combined allowed for 900 years life span. This is what creationism states. If these things are true, interesting would be to see some experimental results.
What I am afraid though, is that some people in such case could get an idea to revert The Flood. How? Evaporating oceans?
In creationisms The Flood was precipitation of that water atmospheric layer. Earth had much less surface waters before. Climate was different, that is why we find plants beneath antarctic ice.
And we approach technological capabilities of evaporating oceans.

This topic is what interests me, so I was reading about for some years now.
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Valka on February 09, 2015, 09:20:02 PM
And this is only a small part, like many findings/options/etc. According to Bible, people were living over 900 years before the deluge, and creationists explain why, if someone believes that.

I figure that part of the book is really old, has been retold, translated and transcribed a lot.
Sometimes I wonder if maybe they only lived ,  say, 900 months. Wouldn't that be remarkable in the stone or bronze age, before sanitation, medicine, nutrition, parasitology, etc.? I think so.  Or maybe somebody moved a decimal or comma or put down an extra zero.
This is basically what Isaac Asimov suggested. In one of his essays he said that there could have been a mistranslation somewhere along the way, in which months became years, since 900 months is a respectable lifespan even now, although quite a few people in the West tend to live 5-10 years longer than that due to better nutrition and advanced medicine.
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Buster's Uncle on February 10, 2015, 12:47:55 AM
I never gave the long lives a lot of thought, but I never took the account of very much in the book of Genesis as literally true.  A 900-year lifespan is hardly the most difficult thing in the narrative to reconcile with what we now know is possible.

-As far as the healthy living part, it's certainly true that there's a lot most of us can do to increase our chances at health and long life - the first step, is I gotta get up out of this chair more.
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Flux on February 10, 2015, 01:11:44 AM
I never gave the long lives a lot of thought, but I never took the account of very much in the book of Genesis as literally true.  A 900-year lifespan is hardly the most difficult thing in the narrative to reconcile with what we now know is possible.

-As far as the healthy living part, it's certainly true that there's a lot most of us can do to increase our chances at health and long life - the first step, is I gotta get up out of this chair more.
If you're willing to let go of keeping your ridiculous PPD up, you can do this.
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Buster's Uncle on February 10, 2015, 01:13:14 AM
Yes.
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Rusty Edge on February 10, 2015, 01:24:21 AM
This is basically what Isaac Asimov suggested. In one of his essays he said that there could have been a mistranslation somewhere along the way, in which months became years, since 900 months is a respectable lifespan even now, although quite a few people in the West tend to live 5-10 years longer than that due to better nutrition and advanced medicine.

Thank You. Well, I don't think I've read his essays, but apparently it occurred to him first.
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Valka on February 10, 2015, 01:57:18 AM
This is basically what Isaac Asimov suggested. In one of his essays he said that there could have been a mistranslation somewhere along the way, in which months became years, since 900 months is a respectable lifespan even now, although quite a few people in the West tend to live 5-10 years longer than that due to better nutrition and advanced medicine.

Thank You. Well, I don't think I've read his essays, but apparently it occurred to him first.
He wrote hundreds of essays, and some of my favorites are about time and the calendar. One of his essay collections is called Science, Numbers, and I. I'm not sure, but the one I refer to above may be in this volume.
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Rusty Edge on February 10, 2015, 01:59:41 AM
It was found, that after the Deluge, or Flood, people started to live considerably shorter. Here is an article, that explains why:
http://www.examiner.com/article/global-flood-and-cancer (http://www.examiner.com/article/global-flood-and-cancer)

In short, before the Flood Earth had a kind of atmospheric water layer, or high temperature water vapor due to radiation, or some say could be ice, on higher altitude? Anyway, this provided shielding from ionizing radiation from the Sun. Now we cannot escape this, unless maybe at the bottom of the ocean.


First, let me make clear that I don't have the science education that most of you here seem to have, and beyond biology, I don't share the interest. So I may not know much about what I'm going to address.

Sure, I can accept that a dramatic difference in radiation could affect longevity. Maybe a sunspot storm could even damage genes and shorten lifespans ever after. I'm sure people could live longer, healthier lives if there were no cancer...at least in my family.

But I'm not sure I accept this premise from your link-
1Ionizing radiation affected the earth after the Global Flood, but not before. As Brown discusses elsewhere, every radioactive element in the earth's crust formed during the Global Flood event. Magnitude-10-to-12 earthquakes deformed the quartz in the earth's crust. This generated megavolt electric potentials. These sufficed to turn large amounts of heavy elements into plasma. The plasma fused and formed super-heavy elements. These then split or cluster-decayed to form uranium, thorium, and the other heavier-than-lead elements. All this produced background radiation human beings had never before known.

I don't think new elements are formed at low, life sustaining temperatures. Is cold fusion a proven fact? I thought you naturally needed supernovae and such, or artificial  nuclear reactions to create new atoms. All of the heavier than lead elements in the Earth's crust were created during or since the Great Flood?  That sounds.... rather unlikely.

I didn't go to college, and even my high school education is outdated by today's standards. I could be wrong.
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Rusty Edge on February 10, 2015, 02:40:03 AM
While I have a personal experience with oxygen during hospitalization for an obscure genetic lung issue, and dislike for it, I certainly agree with the statement-
fight infection by destroying bacteria, viruses, parasites and fungi that thrive in low-oxygen environments.
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Mart on February 10, 2015, 05:33:51 PM
...

But I'm not sure I accept this premise from your link-
1Ionizing radiation affected the earth after the Global Flood, but not before. As Brown discusses elsewhere, every radioactive element in the earth's crust formed during the Global Flood event. Magnitude-10-to-12 earthquakes deformed the quartz in the earth's crust. This generated megavolt electric potentials. These sufficed to turn large amounts of heavy elements into plasma. The plasma fused and formed super-heavy elements. These then split or cluster-decayed to form uranium, thorium, and the other heavier-than-lead elements. All this produced background radiation human beings had never before known.

I don't think new elements are formed at low, life sustaining temperatures. Is cold fusion a proven fact? I thought you naturally needed supernovae and such, or artificial  nuclear reactions to create new atoms. All of the heavier than lead elements in the Earth's crust were created during or since the Great Flood?  That sounds.... rather unlikely.

I didn't go to college, and even my high school education is outdated by today's standards. I could be wrong.



I agree, synthesis of heavy elements cause of earthquakes seems completely fiction, at first. Then, they suggest quite strong earthquakes, 10 to 12 magnitude, also plasma state. Maybe there is truth in this, we would know more, if someone tried it experimentally. All this is hypothetical. The same hypothetical is heavy elements synthesis in supernovas. We just think this is how they were made. theories are build based on some data from other processes, but more exact experiments will probably stay out of our reach for long time. There is though an alternative to supernova heavy elements synthesis, which is called r-process (rapid), it is s-process (slow), that can occur in stars and in not so high temperatures, as they say.

A large part of this issue is time itself. Quantum physics is just abundant in incredible findings in last decades. A lot of our science is based on assumptions, that in time turn out not to be true.
Recently two things from cosmology/physics were very interesting or incredible, like almost unreal for me. When I watch and listen to some statements of cosmologists and physicists, I wonder, do they do science or fiction? These two are:
- quantum entanglement and what it implies for time.
- holographic universe

So the entanglement:
Here a short, easy to watch explanation, intro style
http://www.universetoday.com/109525/quantum-entanglement-explained/ (http://www.universetoday.com/109525/quantum-entanglement-explained/)

and this article is very interesting.
https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/quantum-experiment-shows-how-time-emerges-from-entanglement-d5d3dc850933 (https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/quantum-experiment-shows-how-time-emerges-from-entanglement-d5d3dc850933)
In short, what they conclude:
"...
This is an elegant and powerful idea. It suggests that time is an emergent phenomenon that comes about because of the nature of entanglement. And it exists only for observers inside the universe. Any god-like observer outside sees a static, unchanging universe, just as the Wheeler-DeWitt equations predict.
..."

So everything is in fact simultaneous? time is a sequence of quantum states? (I read it some time ago, don't remember where) and someone from outside sees it all static!!!

Can there be outside? At first, seems there can be no outside, there is matter and space, but when we go into the holographic universe stuff...

Some materials, lengthy, but they say so much new stuff:
Leonard Susskind on holographic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DIl3Hfh9tY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DIl3Hfh9tY)
another discussion:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NsbZT9bJ1s4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NsbZT9bJ1s4)

Interesting are also explanations of how everything in our universe can be presented on 2D surface - black holes and their event horizon

And there is also a series of videos, but from part 3 the author enters into area of mysticism. The first 2.5 parts are quite scientific ones though
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMBt_yfGKpU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMBt_yfGKpU)

So is our universe/dimension a projection from some outside?
Is our consciousness from that outside?



Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Yitzi on February 10, 2015, 07:50:21 PM
This is basically what Isaac Asimov suggested. In one of his essays he said that there could have been a mistranslation somewhere along the way, in which months became years, since 900 months is a respectable lifespan even now, although quite a few people in the West tend to live 5-10 years longer than that due to better nutrition and advanced medicine.

It's difficult to say that, though, as then you'd also have to cut down the rest of the stuff in that passage similarly, meaning that Enoch fathered Methusaleh when he was only 65 months old.
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Rusty Edge on February 10, 2015, 09:24:09 PM
This is basically what Isaac Asimov suggested. In one of his essays he said that there could have been a mistranslation somewhere along the way, in which months became years, since 900 months is a respectable lifespan even now, although quite a few people in the West tend to live 5-10 years longer than that due to better nutrition and advanced medicine.

It's difficult to say that, though, as then you'd also have to cut down the rest of the stuff in that passage similarly, meaning that Enoch fathered Methusaleh when he was only 65 months old.

 ;lol   That is somewhat problematic.
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Buster's Uncle on February 10, 2015, 09:28:12 PM
I wonder if it isn't more likely than a 976-year lifespan, though...
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Yitzi on February 11, 2015, 09:55:50 PM
I wonder if it isn't more likely than a 976-year lifespan, though...

Either way forces you to say that things were different (although things being different before the Flood isn't that difficult); better to take the one that doesn't require a mistranslation and is a smoother transition to the ages of people like Abraham.
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Buster's Uncle on February 11, 2015, 11:22:00 PM
Ah, but how important are those details compared to the message that The Lord made us, The Lord is God, and the Lord God is one?
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Yitzi on February 12, 2015, 04:58:26 AM
Ah, but how important are those details compared to the message that The Lord made us, The Lord is God, and the Lord God is one?

Probably not as important, but judging relative importance is tricky in general.

In any case, that's an excuse for not answering the question, not an answer to it.
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Buster's Uncle on February 12, 2015, 02:59:44 PM
Well, it can be fun to bat around the possibility of various details in Genesis, but I'd say a strong faith can survive finding out that Earth is more than 6,000 years old and took more than a week to form.  Those aren't the central truths of the book.
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Valka on February 13, 2015, 09:45:48 AM
It was found, that after the Deluge, or Flood, people started to live considerably shorter. Here is an article, that explains why:
http://www.examiner.com/article/global-flood-and-cancer (http://www.examiner.com/article/global-flood-and-cancer)

In short, before the Flood Earth had a kind of atmospheric water layer, or high temperature water vapor due to radiation, or some say could be ice, on higher altitude? Anyway, this provided shielding from ionizing radiation from the Sun. Now we cannot escape this, unless maybe at the bottom of the ocean.

First, let me make clear that I don't have the science education that most of you here seem to have, and beyond biology, I don't share the interest. So I may not know much about what I'm going to address.

Sure, I can accept that a dramatic difference in radiation could affect longevity. Maybe a sunspot storm could even damage genes and shorten lifespans ever after. I'm sure people could live longer, healthier lives if there were no cancer...at least in my family.

But I'm not sure I accept this premise from your link-
1Ionizing radiation affected the earth after the Global Flood, but not before. As Brown discusses elsewhere, every radioactive element in the earth's crust formed during the Global Flood event. Magnitude-10-to-12 earthquakes deformed the quartz in the earth's crust. This generated megavolt electric potentials. These sufficed to turn large amounts of heavy elements into plasma. The plasma fused and formed super-heavy elements. These then split or cluster-decayed to form uranium, thorium, and the other heavier-than-lead elements. All this produced background radiation human beings had never before known.

I don't think new elements are formed at low, life sustaining temperatures. Is cold fusion a proven fact? I thought you naturally needed supernovae and such, or artificial  nuclear reactions to create new atoms. All of the heavier than lead elements in the Earth's crust were created during or since the Great Flood?  That sounds.... rather unlikely.

I didn't go to college, and even my high school education is outdated by today's standards. I could be wrong.

The article referenced in Mart's post is from a creationist website. There isn't one shred of scientific validity to this nonsensical claim that there were no radioactive elements on Earth before Noah's flood.

Earth (and our Solar System) were formed from the remains of older stars that went supernova over 5 billion years ago. When a star blows itself up this way, it forms many heavy elements in a very short time. Eventually these elements (plus the more common ones) are drawn together by gravity and may form a new solar system. When this happens, any heavy elements, including radioactive ones, are incorporated into the new solar system's rocky planets from the get-go.

But don't take my word for it:

Quote from: United States Geological Survey
All rocks and minerals contain long-lived radioactive elements that were incorporated into Earth when the Solar System formed. These radioactive elements constitute independent clocks that allow geologists to determine the age of the rocks in which they occur.

Source. (http://geomaps.wr.usgs.gov/parks/gtime/ageofearth.html)

So no, Rusty Edge, you are not wrong.
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Yitzi on February 13, 2015, 05:08:42 PM
The article referenced in Mart's post is from a creationist website. There isn't one shred of scientific validity to this nonsensical claim that there were no radioactive elements on Earth before Noah's flood.

There isn't one shred of Biblical validity to such a claim either, for that matter...
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Rusty Edge on February 13, 2015, 06:28:33 PM
Thank you Valka. That is in keeping with what I thought I knew, ( 4 billion year old Earth, 14 billion year old Universe ).

It seems to me that in the Great Flood scenario,  a lot of loose neutrons are required, not to mention protons. That suggests that they are either already present and there's a lot of radiation, or that there's a lot  of nuclear reactions going on.  Otherwise, iron and nickel couldn't  transmutate into heavy metals. Or even lead for that matter.

I wonder if somebody was looking for a way to affirm Methusalah and discredit Carbon dating in one bold stroke when they came up with this theory.

Regardless, reducing one's exposure to radiation should extend one's lifespan. I've been to too many funerals on account of skin cancer.
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Yitzi on February 13, 2015, 06:32:24 PM
It seems to me that in the Great Flood scenario,  a lot of loose neutrons are required, not to mention protons.

Well, the Flood itself wouldn't require that, although the addition of radioactive elements, according to that theory, would.  (Well, unless that was also a miracle...)
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Buster's Uncle on February 13, 2015, 06:36:51 PM
Perhaps the brand-new radioactives in this scenario are supposed to have generated a lot of heat that melted subterranean ice and supplied the waters of the deep?
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Geo on February 13, 2015, 08:12:09 PM
This is basically what Isaac Asimov suggested. In one of his essays he said that there could have been a mistranslation somewhere along the way, in which months became years, since 900 months is a respectable lifespan even now, although quite a few people in the West tend to live 5-10 years longer than that due to better nutrition and advanced medicine.

It's difficult to say that, though, as then you'd also have to cut down the rest of the stuff in that passage similarly, meaning that Enoch fathered Methusaleh when he was only 65 months old.

Oh, but in that case they perhaps mistranslated the amount of seasons instead of months? ;cute
Title: Re: Health, longevity and the reality of Methusulah
Post by: Yitzi on February 15, 2015, 12:09:40 AM
This is basically what Isaac Asimov suggested. In one of his essays he said that there could have been a mistranslation somewhere along the way, in which months became years, since 900 months is a respectable lifespan even now, although quite a few people in the West tend to live 5-10 years longer than that due to better nutrition and advanced medicine.

It's difficult to say that, though, as then you'd also have to cut down the rest of the stuff in that passage similarly, meaning that Enoch fathered Methusaleh when he was only 65 months old.

Oh, but in that case they perhaps mistranslated the amount of seasons instead of months? ;cute

Well, I can guarantee it's not a mistranslation, as the Hebrew also says "years".  Having it be seasons would make the low numbers less problematic, but would not really solve the problem that the change would be trying to solve, as living 900 seasons is still far above what we have today.  (Also, with either approach, you get a similar issue, though with somewhat smaller numbers, in the list from Noah to Abraham in Genesis 11...and there, the problems from "months" or even "seasons" are even bigger because you have births at ages like 30.)
Templates: 1: Printpage (default).
Sub templates: 4: init, print_above, main, print_below.
Language files: 4: index+Modifications.english (default), TopicRating/.english (default), PortaMx/PortaMx.english (default), OharaYTEmbed.english (default).
Style sheets: 0: .
Files included: 31 - 840KB. (show)
Queries used: 14.

[Show Queries]