Grandpa on a half shell
 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...8/nclam128.xml

Eh, "Oldest animal ever"--well discovered anyway, until they killed it that is.

Question for believers: if Superdude so values existance, why do we grubby primates only get a few creaky decades when stuff like turtles and clams and trees get plenty more in many cases? Why is a multi-billion year-old being so selfish with such a cheap resource? Or is this just more evidence that the whole business is the result of random processes? Be honest, now.

Re: Grandpa on a half shell
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why is a multi-billion year-old being so selfish with such a cheap resource?

[/ QUOTE ]

the concept of an eternal afterlife, would be one reason as well as religions that believe in reincarnation.

Re: Grandpa on a half shell
 

Clam power!

Re: Grandpa on a half shell
 

[ QUOTE ]
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...8/nclam128.xml

Eh, "Oldest animal ever"--well discovered anyway, until they killed it that is.

Question for believers: if Superdude so values existance, why do we grubby primates only get a few creaky decades when stuff like turtles and clams and trees get plenty more in many cases? Why is a multi-billion year-old being so selfish with such a cheap resource? Or is this just more evidence that the whole business is the result of random processes? Be honest, now.



[/ QUOTE ]

Other animals that show no sign of aging are: female flounders, lobsters, sturgeons, sharks, and alligators.

Anti oxidants have been shown to increase the lifespan of mice by 30%. By selective breeding, we can increase the life span of fruit flys by 70%. Severe Caloric restrictions of mice have increased their lifespans from 50% to 100% and the interesting thing about this, is we've isolated the gene that turns off and on with coloric restriction. The compound resveratrol, found in the skins of grapes has been shown in some experiments, in large doses, to turn off the same gene that caloric restriction turns off ( in mice ). In humans things might be a bit different. See the actual study. I'll find it myself and reference it, if anyone actually reads my post and is interested.

Re: Grandpa on a half shell
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why is a multi-billion year-old being so selfish with such a cheap resource?

[/ QUOTE ]

the concept of an eternal afterlife, would be one reason as well as religions that believe in reincarnation.

[/ QUOTE ]

But 70 is so pedestrian a number (more like 40 for the vast majority of our species' existence). It could easily be much more, in keeping with our being "in his image", at little cost. Life apparently has little true value to this creature.

Of course there will be lots of blathering about "in his image" means this or that or the other but not the subject at hand. All this Holy Dissonance...only among believers would such a thing be considered an asset.

Re: Grandpa on a half shell
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why is a multi-billion year-old being so selfish with such a cheap resource?

[/ QUOTE ]

the concept of an eternal afterlife, would be one reason as well as religions that believe in reincarnation.

[/ QUOTE ]

But 70 is so pedestrian a number (more like 40 for the vast majority of our species' existence). It could easily be much more, in keeping with our being "in his image", at little cost. Life apparently has little true value to this creature.

Of course there will be lots of blathering about "in his image" means this or that or the other but not the subject at hand. All this Holy Dissonance...only among believers would such a thing be considered an asset.

[/ QUOTE ]

if it was 200, then you'd be saying "Meh, 200 is such a small number it could easily be more at little cost." I don't really think its a persuasive argument.

And I don't think you will get much argument from theists that life on Earth is fairly trivial and unimportant. Thats usually part of the package.

Re: Grandpa on a half shell
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why is a multi-billion year-old being so selfish with such a cheap resource?

[/ QUOTE ]

the concept of an eternal afterlife, would be one reason as well as religions that believe in reincarnation.

[/ QUOTE ]

But 70 is so pedestrian a number (more like 40 for the vast majority of our species' existence). It could easily be much more, in keeping with our being "in his image", at little cost. Life apparently has little true value to this creature.

Of course there will be lots of blathering about "in his image" means this or that or the other but not the subject at hand. All this Holy Dissonance...only among believers would such a thing be considered an asset.

[/ QUOTE ]

if it was 200, then you'd be saying "Meh, 200 is such a small number it could easily be more at little cost." I don't really think its a persuasive argument.

And I don't think you will get much argument from theists that life on Earth is fairly trivial and unimportant. Thats usually part of the package.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah. any amount of finite time will pale in comparison to an eternal after life, be it 20 ears or 2 million.

Re: Grandpa on a half shell
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why is a multi-billion year-old being so selfish with such a cheap resource?

[/ QUOTE ]

the concept of an eternal afterlife, would be one reason as well as religions that believe in reincarnation.

[/ QUOTE ]

But 70 is so pedestrian a number (more like 40 for the vast majority of our species' existence). It could easily be much more, in keeping with our being "in his image", at little cost. Life apparently has little true value to this creature.

Of course there will be lots of blathering about "in his image" means this or that or the other but not the subject at hand. All this Holy Dissonance...only among believers would such a thing be considered an asset.

[/ QUOTE ]

if it was 200, then you'd be saying "Meh, 200 is such a small number it could easily be more at little cost." I don't really think its a persuasive argument.

And I don't think you will get much argument from theists that life on Earth is fairly trivial and unimportant. Thats usually part of the package.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're ignoring that list at then end of the article, which is sort of the point. If 200 years were the max it would seem likely (not demanded, just likely) that we would be the ones experiencing it. Instead we're just in the middle of a happenstance pack.

And I thought life on earth was the deciding time for an outcome with countless trllions of years of fruition; you'd think we'd at least get an equal shot with the turtles.

Re: Grandpa on a half shell
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why is a multi-billion year-old being so selfish with such a cheap resource?

[/ QUOTE ]

the concept of an eternal afterlife, would be one reason as well as religions that believe in reincarnation.

[/ QUOTE ]

But 70 is so pedestrian a number (more like 40 for the vast majority of our species' existence). It could easily be much more, in keeping with our being "in his image", at little cost. Life apparently has little true value to this creature.

Of course there will be lots of blathering about "in his image" means this or that or the other but not the subject at hand. All this Holy Dissonance...only among believers would such a thing be considered an asset.

[/ QUOTE ]

if it was 200, then you'd be saying "Meh, 200 is such a small number it could easily be more at little cost." I don't really think its a persuasive argument.

And I don't think you will get much argument from theists that life on Earth is fairly trivial and unimportant. Thats usually part of the package.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're ignoring that list at then end of the article, which is sort of the point. If 200 years were the max it would seem likely (not demanded, just likely) that we would be the ones experiencing it. Instead we're just in the middle of a happenstance pack.

And I thought life on earth was the deciding time for an outcome with countless trllions of years of fruition; you'd think we'd at least get an equal shot with the turtles.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, if the argument you are trying to make is "Well, the Bible makes it seem like we are special but the evidence sure isnt compelling in nature" I think you'd be better off pointing to the billions of years that the universe was ticking along before humans sprouted up. Its not that I think you are wrong, per se, its just that it isnt that compelling of an argument. Death is important for human beings, less so for trees, maybe. Or a thousand other trivial explanations for why we dont live the longest. Actually, a better question would be, why do animals and plants die at all? That makes no sense. They dont go to heaven. No purpose is served by it. Why do animals reproduce? Its stupid and wasteful. Why not just have X number and give us the ability to make more as needed? Old age for animals is dumb.

Re: Grandpa on a half shell
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think you're ignoring that list at then end of the article, which is sort of the point. If 200 years were the max it would seem likely (not demanded, just likely) that we would be the ones experiencing it. Instead we're just in the middle of a happenstance pack.

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't compelling. We don't have to be the greatest at everything, even if we are the chosen of God. "Hey, how come elephants are so big? We aren't that big. If we were created in God's image, then obviously we'd be bigger than elephants! But instead, we're just mediocre. Even gorillas are bigger than us. What kind of God would do that?"