It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by schuyler
Originally posted by ldyserenity
Statistically speaking anybody living for a very long time makes the odds for accidental death increase. Even thirty year olds are twice as likely to be killed in vehicular accidents than the 20 something year olds.
I'm not seeing where you are getting that kind of statistic. Here's a table that lists causes of accidental death. It depends on the question you are asking and how you ask it, but the statistics seems to support the opposite conclusion. 30 year olds are half as likely to die in an auto accident than 20 year olds. Also drivers under the age of 24 are responsible for 30% of the damage caused by accidents, hence higher insurance for teenagers; higher insurance for males.
But this really doesn't answer the question: What are the chances in a certain period of time that a given individual will die an accidental death--not death by disease, but by more or less being in the wrong place at the wrong time? That's a much harder questuon to answer. Even if you can show that for 2009 there were 1.13 deaths per 100 million miles traveled, that does not translate to if you drive 100 million miles, you'd certainly die in an accident. I might drive a million miles in my lifetime, so sometimes these kinds of statistics wind up meaningless. And behavior has a lot to do with survival. If you were immortal, would you go skydiving?
I found this place which suggests your lifetime odds of accidental death are one in 24 to 37, yet several of these "accidents" are self-caused and they change every year. In 10 AD your chances of dying in an airplane crash were few. Now it's lifetime odds of one in 4,608. All these things involve behavior, and if you were intentionally changing your behavior expressly to increase your chances of living, you could alter those statistics significantly. Simply saying, "I don't think living within striking distance of this volcano is a very good idea." is potentially a life-saving event.
edit on 9/10/2011 by schuyler because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by ldyserenity
reply to post by schuyler
Oh I see no, what I was saying is that of the accidents that happen amongst the age groups. Ok how do I put this if there are say 400,000 teenagers in accidents a larger percentage of them will get injured as opposed to dying, but in the 30 somethings even if they have less accidents they possess a larger percentage of deaths instead of injuries of their accidents. Do you understand what I mean now?
Originally posted by ldyserenity
reply to post by BlackSatinDancer
Going further with the Biblical recounts also in Gen. I think that God's punishment was not just banishment from the Garden, but isn't there some reference to them (Adam & Eve) having to experience Death? Didn't it infer that they were granted everlasting life until they bit from the fruit? No I think it was referenced that "what if they eat from the tree of life and be like gods immortal"? okay never mind I got it backwards lol. Well still I remember something about eternal life, maybe it was that the soul/spirit was granted life eternal up to the point where they bit the apple and then seperation from God happened and there would be only eternal life for those that found their way back to God? Maybe that is what is screwing me up idk?
However I beleive that if they did live so long in the days of Genesis, wouldn't it go without saying that maybe during evolution a mutation evolved in at least one person that granted them eternal physical life? Also other biblical stories elude to this, can't remember exactly which ones but oen metioned that one dude would walk the earth until judgement day he would not die, etc. Can't remember who the story is about. Maybe that story evolved from someone who had part in the construction of the bible who actually met a person of immortality? See every writer knows the main law of writing fiction, it is to write what you know, so if you're even writing what is supposed to be non-fiction, you still want tos tick with what you know.And if you were immortal would you not think it a curse? Or if you met an immortal, would you not think it to have been a curse hearing how the person described losing everyone they love and having to continue, not being able to die, no rest for the wicked, right?
Originally posted by jjf3rd77
Firstly my all time favorite movie is called The Man From Earth. It's about a Caveman who has lived up until the modern era and he tells a group of professors his life's story.
I know this topic has been discussed here before but maybe my theory is a little bit different.
A couple of interesting "paranormal" or "science fiction" topics were highlighted in the movie.
A) These Immortals wouldn't be invincible, they wouldn't have super powers. They could still get sick. Still get wounded, still get killed. A quark in their immune system would allow their body processes to keep on living, forever.
B) Change identities every 10 years or so to prevent from being discovered.
C) They would only have knowledge as knowledge emerged. For instance, he explains that he didn't know what the ocean waves were until they were actually knowledge and printed/described in textbooks.
D) They would be outside of our time-stream as in Doctor Who.
E) They are not God, They are not all knowing. They still live lives and only have one perspective of events.
F) Would they start religions? Except in the story the man goes on to explain that when he traveled with Buddha and tried to teach it to others, they took the teachings and layered it with myths upon myths. Once they saw that he couldn't die, they chased him until they TIED him to the cross. Apparently Nails and blood were added to the story later for religious symbolism. In another lifetime he learns how to control his body movements to near-death like state and thus is resurrected! People freak out and Christianity is born! This to me seems like a better version than a virgin birth and a miracle worker from the Heavens right? Why not?
G) Who else would they be in history? Or travel with and learn from if they just had TIME to explore everything possible? Van Gogh, Columbus?
H) Would they be able to tell if there were others like them? How could they prove it?
How much knowledge would they have about the world?
It is often stated in Alien lore that our alien ancestors have longer life spans than we do. Primitive cultures worship immortal beings. What if these beings weren't aliens? What if they were human but immortal humans are just as alien to these primitive cultures!!!!
edit on 9-9-2011 by jjf3rd77 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by himalayanhermit
reply to post by jjf3rd77
Mind-blowing it was (Man from Earth). I have probably seen it at least 10 times. The dialogues are so engrossing that I still watch it line to line. The topic discussed was also wonderful. If it could be real, not sure...
Originally posted by BadNinja68
A few years ago I came across this story on the web.
It's chatlogs from a guy who talks to a chatbot program.
Originally posted by schuyler
1. The possibility that this site, The Ageless Gene, is a hoax has to be taken seriously. Whoever put this site up has gone to a lot of effort not only on the site itself, which is well done, but in taking steps to make sure he remains anonymous. In his FAQ, to which you alluded, I don't think his answers to, "Is this fake?" are very good. He goes on at great length about how Gene's language structure is stilted and reflects age and that he must learn a new language every ten years or so.
Both these assertions are unlikely. Gene's language would have changed with the times, just as ours does. I wouldn't have said, "Google this!" ten years ago; I do now with some frequency. You can't tell an accent via typing. so that whole strain makes no sense. Gene would NOT have been forced to learn a new language every ten years. It would put him at a distinct disadvantage to do so. Not that he NEVER would have, but there is no good reason why he would have to do it every decade. He has more than a continent to move around in for English.
This is a fault I see on "Man from Earth" as well. All John Oldman would have had to do is dye his temples a bit grey and he'd have had another ten years and been able to "retire" normally from his position. His sudden resignation mid-year rings a lot more alarm bells than if he had quietly waited to the end of the school year. Plot devices sometimes require this and I'm cool with it, but this does not reflect logical thinking.
So the FAQ does not sit well with me. It's as if the author anticipated the objections and simply worked around them, then pointed out how clever he was in his FAQ. I also question why the author put up the site in the first place. It costs money to maintain. What's the motivation here? I do not understand that.
canonical name agelessgene.com.
Domain Whois record
Queried whois.internic.net with "dom agelessgene.com"...
Domain Name: AGELESSGENE.COM
Registrar: GODADDY.COM, INC.
Whois Server: whois.godaddy.com
Referral URL: registrar.godaddy.com...
Name Server: NS19.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
Name Server: NS20.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
Updated Date: 13-oct-2010
Creation Date: 12-oct-2005
Expiration Date: 12-oct-2011
>>> Last update of whois database: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 18:54:13 UTC