Slashdot Mirror


'Longest Living Human' Says He Is Ready For Death At 145 (telegraph.co.uk)

Slashdot reader schwit1 quotes an article from The Telegraph: An Indonesian man who claims to be the longest living human in recorded history has described how he "just wants to die". Mbah Gotho, from Sragen in central Java, was born on December 31, 1870, according to the date of birth on his identity card. Now officials at the local record office say they have finally been able to confirm that remarkable date as genuine. If independently confirmed, the findings would make Mr Gotho a staggering 145 years old -- and the longest lived human in recorded history.
"One of Mr Gotho's grandsons said his grandfather has been preparing for his death ever since he was 122," according to the article. Though he lived long enough to meet his great-great grandchildren, he's already outlived four wives, all 10 of his brothers and sisters, and all of his children.

314 comments

  1. December 30th by Rakshasa+Taisab · · Score: 2, Funny

    I was born on December 30, 1870 and as soon as my birth certificate arrives in the mail I'll be able to prove it.

    --
    - These characters were randomly selected.
    1. Re:December 30th by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 2

      I was born on December 30, 1870 and as soon as my birth certificate arrives in the mail I'll be able to prove it.

      Big deal. Your 6-digit id would seem to indicate that there are those older than you here on /. - but not me :-)

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    2. Re:December 30th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I disagree. Very old people do not tend to be avid Slashdotters. I do not even bother to have an account myself.

    3. Re:December 30th by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It me, fam.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    4. Re:December 30th by secretagentmoof · · Score: 1

      There were a couple of user database crashes around '98-'99 which wiped out everything; the people with the lowest numbers are not necessarily the oldest users of the site.

    5. Re: December 30th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Son, where have you been? Your Ma and me have been pretty worried since you left all those years ago. Your grandpa missed you every day till he died and grandma still asks when you're coming back.

    6. Re:December 30th by Pseudonym · · Score: 2

      It was also the "done thing" to lurk for a while before posting. Well, that was the case before Eternal September, anyway...

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    7. Re: December 30th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      /. != usenet

    8. Re: December 30th by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      It was still the done thing.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    9. Re:December 30th by knewter · · Score: 1

      6 digit IDs are for suckers.

      --
      -knewter
    10. Re: December 30th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Son, where have you been? Your Ma and me have been pretty worried since you left all those years ago. Your grandpa missed you every day till he died and grandma still asks when you're coming back.

      No quite right.
      What grandma said was "I came three times... when are you coming?"

    11. Re:December 30th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll sign up when September ends.

    12. Re:December 30th by Gussington · · Score: 1

      Big deal. Your 6-digit id would seem to indicate that there are those older than you here on /.

      You know that your userid is not tied to your age right? And not all people stick to one account for their whole lives.

    13. Re:December 30th by Mr_Whoopass · · Score: 1

      I wish I could understand why a low user ID seems to be such a bragging right. I kind of understood back in the days of ICQ since a lower number was easier to recall when you would give it out but the slashdot user ID is basically irrelevant isn't it? Or am I missing something?

    14. Re:December 30th by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 4, Funny

      Big deal. Your 6-digit id would seem to indicate that there are those older than you here on /.

      You know that your userid is not tied to your age right? And not all people stick to one account for their whole lives.

      Ya. It's a /. meme. But I guess you might be too young to know that -- having a 7-digit uid and all. :-)

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    15. Re:December 30th by Pathwalker · · Score: 1

      I don't remember any user database crashes. I created my account the afternoon of the first day that accounts existed, and it still works.

    16. Re:December 30th by Zak3056 · · Score: 1

      It was also the "done thing" to lurk for a while before posting. Well, that was the case before Eternal September, anyway...

      This. If I would have made an account when I started using /., I'd have a 3 or low 4 digit uid, and given that both of us made accounts around the same time, I'd wager you would as well. There's something to be said for actually learning about a community before you join it.

      --
      What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
    17. Re:December 30th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I decided to lurk for a while before getting an account..

    18. Re:December 30th by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      Yes.

      --
      No sig today...
    19. Re:December 30th by Kinthelt · · Score: 1

      You must be new here.

      --

      "Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Dark Helmet (Spaceballs)

    20. Re:December 30th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hmm... 000001?

      Do I win?

    21. Re:December 30th by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      These kinds of threads make me feel old. Not as old as some of you though.

      My problem is that I lurked far too long.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    22. Re:December 30th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was born on December 30, 1870 and as soon as my birth certificate arrives in the mail I'll be able to prove it.

      Only if you show us your LONG FORM birth certificate!

    23. Re:December 30th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was here when it was Chips and Dips. I hated Rob Malda and his fucking shit from day one. And I hate you god damned mother fuckers little fanatics licking his asshole. And I miss signal11. Fuck you, fuck your bitch slaps and fuck you masturbating to Kathleen Fent.

      You are a fucking low life piece of shit. You people also SHADOW ban shit here. You are fucking liars and propagandists. I spit on you. I spit on your 103. I have seen you and other heres for 20 years. You people are fucking garbage.

    24. Re:December 30th by Methadras · · Score: 2

      Should I +1 this for sheer effort?

    25. Re:December 30th by marklark · · Score: 1

      Joined up without lurking... I didn't know it was a thing!

    26. Re:December 30th by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      If you were truly around in the days of 3- and low-4- digit UIDs, then it's a very close question if there was a "community" to learn about then.

      I was told of the site by a friend one day - probably a few days after it was opened - who showed me a couple of threads. So when I went home and fired up the modem, I decided to log on and set up an account. By that point, I'd seen enough about it to have a fair idea of what I was letting myself in for.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    27. Re:December 30th by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      Ditto, from on the order of a week later.

      IIRC, JC@137 once said that he was inactive for a number of years, but I've never been inactive for more than a couple of weeks. (Well, I may have spent longer without commenting, but not without logging on and reading.)

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    28. Re: December 30th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to be on medication and spend a few years in therapy. I'm sorry for whatever happened in your life to cause you to turn out this way. This wasn't trolling by any definition; it was a cry for help.

    29. Re:December 30th by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      I don't know how the system works these days, but back in the day UIDs were assigned in sequence.

      I've always been a little suspicious of the length of UID appearing these days, and wonder if they have some less predictable scheme these days.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    30. Re:December 30th by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      And not all people stick to one account for their whole lives.

      I can understand why having multiple identities might appeal to some - you can be your own sock-puppet for example. But if you're planning such shenanigans, why not set up a half-dozen accounts at the same time? Surely that would occur to the "nerds" for whom this site was originally targetted.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    31. Re:December 30th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whippersnappers

    32. Re:December 30th by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      I lurked for years...how I regret that.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    33. Re:December 30th by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Not as long as I lurked. I used to read back in 98, but didn't get an account until Nov 2009 (according to my 5 year achievement).

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    34. Re:December 30th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Coren22 you're still hiding behind a fake name online to stalk, harass, libel and lie online proven here https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=9577115&cid=52791605/ guess pussies like you have to regret their entire lives being lazy jealous do nothing liars like yourself as opposed to those you stalk. Take your meds loon or get psychological help. Seriously. It's no one's fault but your own that you're such a loser with brain damage mentally defective assburgers too.

    35. Re:December 30th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Big achievement hiding behind a fake name online Coren22 as you lie, libel, stalk and harass others https://slashdot.org/comments.... because you're a lazy do nothing loser with nothing of worth to you. You'll always have to lurk and it's your fault you're such pitiful scum.

    36. Re:December 30th by Gussington · · Score: 1

      I can understand why having multiple identities might appeal to some - you can be your own sock-puppet for example. But if you're planning such shenanigans, why not set up a half-dozen accounts at the same time? Surely that would occur to the "nerds" for whom this site was originally targetted.

      Because sock puppeting isn't the goal.

    37. Re: December 30th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do know there are other web sites on the internet that you could just try out? Right?

    38. Re: December 30th by GrahamJ · · Score: 1

      Whatevs

    39. Re:December 30th by poptones · · Score: 1

      I've had stories posted and it doesn't even remember that. It seems likely some records are purged after a time.

  2. Captain Kirk says... by destinyland · · Score: 2

    "The problem with immortality is that it's boring."

    (There's an episode of the original series where a man gives up immortality to be with the woman he loves....)

    1. Re:Captain Kirk says... by queazocotal · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well - no.
      The person in the article has a sharply declining quality of life - having to have help going to the bathroom, and significant amounts of care, being able to do very little for himself, as well as being blind.
      Many people in this condition - even at a much, much younger age, would contemplate ending it.

    2. Re:Captain Kirk says... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Informative

      But immortality with a limited memory loss keeps the fun in it!

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re:Captain Kirk says... by queazocotal · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Quoting without permission Rob Landley:
      http://lists.celinuxforum.org/...

      "I'm sorry, I'm confused by the CONCEPT of having a shortage of TODO items.
      This is just the top of my head _Linux_ stuff, and doesn't include purely-me
      items like learning LUA. I want to get a mac and learn THAT stuff. I want to
      get my master's degree so I can become a full-time college professor when I'm
      ready to retire from programming. I want to write multiple books. I want to
      start a third convention so I have an excuse to wave the Cartoon Guide to
      Federal Spectrum Policy at people
      (http://www.newamerica.net/files/archive/Pub_File_1555_1.pdf). I want to learn
      to draw so I can start a webcomic. I have enormous stacks of books to read.
      I need to watch the rest of Mythbusters, catch up on the new Dr. Who, and play
      Dragon Age. I want to garden and cook and bike and swim. I want to get rich
      and start the world's largest nudist resort. I want to dig up the recording
      of the time I got Neil Gaiman to say "By Grabthar's hammer, you shall be
      avenged" into a microphone (after his reading of Crazy Hair at Penguicon 2)
      and also get Ralph Nader to say "Luke, I am your Father" into another
      microphone. I need to completely redo my website (and make a "random cool
      stuff" page listing http://sidhefaer.livejournal.c... and
      http://theglen.livejournal.com... and so on...)

      Theres... a shortage of stuff to do somewhere?

      Really?

      How does that work?
      "

    4. Re:Captain Kirk says... by CODiNE · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Living forever isn't boring, you are."
      -Me.

      --
      Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
    5. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, I guess that's a comforting thing to say to people who don't have immortal bodies. Seems kind of fox-and-grapes-y though doesn't it?

      If Immortality was actually achievable, would people really eschew it?

    6. Re:Captain Kirk says... by whoever57 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      My father was 100 years of when he died. Up until the last 4 months of his life, he was living semi-independently. He lived in his own house, with people coming in to help him with such things as cleaning and preparing meals; other than that, he looked after himself.

      I am terrified of the prospect. As some point, I should start living a more risky lifestyle, since 3 out of 4 of my grandparents lived well into their '90s. Maybe I can kill myself in my early '90s through a skydiving accident or something.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    7. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      "Living forever isn't boring, you are."
      -Me.

      I'm suspicious as to whether or not you're qualified to judge if that's the case.

      Do you have a birth certificate proving you've lived forever?

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    8. Re:Captain Kirk says... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 2

      I am terrified of the prospect. As some point, I should start living a more risky lifestyle, since 3 out of 4 of my grandparents lived well into their '90s. Maybe I can kill myself in my early '90s through a skydiving accident or something.

      Don't worry. It doesn't always work out that way. My wife's parents both lived until they were in their 90s -- father died of Parkinson's and mother died of Alzheimer's'' (both within a fairly short time after becoming debilitated), but Sue died at 61 of a brain tumor (just 7 weeks after diagnosis). I was 42 at the time, now 53. Both of my parents are still alive and healthy in their 70s. I don't know what's in store for me going forward, but at least I'm not afraid of death - because Sue is there somewhere (even if that's nowhere).

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    9. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sorry for your loss, keep your chin up

    10. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 2

      "The problem with immortality is that it's boring."

      (There's an episode of the original series where a man gives up immortality to be with the woman he loves....)

      I've been saying for 25 years now that I may not wanna live forever, but 70 years or so is wayyyyy too short.

      I could live a few thousand years eating cheeseburgers and chocolate.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    11. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Greyfox · · Score: 2

      Oh yeah! Mid 40's here and have been skydiving since 2012, and really gearing up on flying a wingsuit out of the plane for the last couple of years. Funnily enough life's been pretty awesome since then, so I'm in no hurry to rush into BASE, much less Wingsuit base, which seems like it has a ridiculously high fatality rate. I know three amazing wingsuit pilots, one who was my AFF instructor back in 2012, who have gone in this year. I think they were all trying to fly that ridiculous run in Charmonix. Cave diving and surfing the waves from collapsing glaciers in Alaska are similarly hazardous and awesome. There is no shortage of potentially deadly hobbies to get into!

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    12. Re:Captain Kirk says... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

      It's not how long you live. It's how long you live relatively healthy. Once you've lost independence, mobility and a significant amount of your senses live quickly loses it's appeal.

      Keep going on those kale smoothies!

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    13. Re:Captain Kirk says... by n3r0.m4dski11z · · Score: 1

      So maybe all that minor stuff on your list would take 20 years. Maybe. Lets triple it and say 60.

      you still have infinity more years. What will you do for the next thousand? the thousand after that?

      I mean many writers have touched on this. For me, I often can picture of the "apathetics" in the movie Zardoz. Who just kind of froze up one day.

      "First they stop by a colony of outcasts called Renegades. These are Eternals who, through boredom, malice or discontent, repeatedly violated the rule of law and as a result were punished by being aged, gradually, into senility. They will spend eternity in feeble-minded old age.

      The next group they visit are the Apathetics. These Eternals stand around staring blankly in a catatonic, vegetative state, having lost the will to live but, like the Renegades and all other Eternals, unable to die. Friend tells Zed that this is the main reason Brutals are now forced to farm crops for Zardoz-- someone needs to feed these unproductive members of Eternal society. Death is an impossibility in the Vortex because anyone who kills himself is simply reincarnated by the Tabernacle."

      I saw that movie when I was a kid and it always stuck with me as a great example of the necessity of a finite life.

      --
      -
    14. Re:Captain Kirk says... by murdocj · · Score: 2

      You're terrified of living a long time and being relatively healthy and independent up to the end? Just what are you scared of? I'm scared of spending years just lying on a bed semi-comatose. That would be hell on earth.

    15. Re:Captain Kirk says... by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      That's fine if you actually like Kale. Otherwise, you're just torturing yourself for no reason. Kale isn't even the only Brassica.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    16. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imagine that you did all that 120 years ago.

      110 years ago it became obsolete, and you had to do it all again with a whole new set of technologies/memes/pop culture.

      90 years ago, rinse and repeat.

      70 years ago, groaning and whining to everyone who'd listen, you retrained yet again.

      60 years ago, you finally said "fuck it" and decided to leave this technology crap to the young, who seemed to enjoy it, and spend more time with your family.

      Then...

      Get the picture? Your rant doesn't even begin to come close to being even tangentially relevant to this guy's situation, even allowing for the obvious difference in culture and wealth.

    17. Re:Captain Kirk says... by queazocotal · · Score: 1

      My list is currently expanding asymptotically.

    18. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With all the video games, movies, TV shows, books, etc in my back log, and more being released every day, I'm sure I'll be set for at least a couple hundred years.

      And if I get bored of that, I'll cross that bridge when I get to it.

    19. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been saying for 25 years now that I may not wanna live forever, but 70 years or so is wayyyyy too short..

      It is worth mentioning that life can be extended some good 30% if only we could get rid of sleeping.

    20. Re:Captain Kirk says... by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      Yeah - I had a neighbor who died at 98 and was still not only living on his own but DRIVING. As a matter of fact that's how he died. He was getting out of the truck to check his mail and didn't have it in park - ended up accidentally running himself over. Now, that incident itself probably proves he SHOULDN'T have been driving, but he was certainly in good spirits, independent, and was mentally sound all the way up to the end.

      Granted, if this story is true (big IF), he was still 47 years younger than this guy, but you can still live a productive live well up into old age.

      I sincerely doubt I'll make it that long though. On my mother's side both of my grandparents died in their mid 50's. On my dad's side both in their early 70's.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    21. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you seen secondhand lions? Because what you describe sounds rather similar to "Hub: What do ya want me to do? Die of old age?"

    22. Re:Captain Kirk says... by pubwvj · · Score: 1

      "I am terrified of the prospect. As some point, I should start living a more risky lifestyle, since 3 out of 4 of my grandparents lived well into their '90s. Maybe I can kill myself in my early '90s through a skydiving accident or something."

      Perhaps that is why there are so many first time 90+ year old skydivers. Interestingly, there are almost no second time 90+ year old skydivers.

      "The problem with immortality is that it's boring."

      I think that is only a problem for boring people. I find life fascinating and have over 1,000 years of ideas for things to do.

    23. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup, and the name on it is No One, which has been confirmed in the past, because multiple witnesses have said that No One lives forever. ;)

    24. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, forgetting your home address leads to lots of funny situations.

    25. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 2

      Absolutely. If he still had a 30 year old body, he would probably not want to die.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    26. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Given a young healthy pain free body, you would never finish your interests.

      There would always be new "pokemon go"'s coming along to get excited about.
      New musical instruments to master.
      New places to see (because they are changing if you live long enough. The world today is almost completely different than it was in 1935.
      New inventions to be excited about.
      A much longer investment horizon mean you'd probably go through being wealthy and being poor multiple times (I was wiped out in the panic of 2160, 2310, 2470, the big one of 3107, and was broke again in 3705. But today in 4212, I'm comfortably wealthy.)

      People who are old, people who are unhappy, people who know they will be old and unhappy in only 30 years make it sound bad to live for a thousand years. But the last 1000 years rocked.

      Even with the expected collapses of non-renewable resources and likely associated rapid population collapse, you'd then have an awesome world with fewer neat things but less crowding and get to see all the areas ruined by overuse recover and see the seas verdant with life again as it was in the 1870's.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    27. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I think that is only a problem for boring people. I find life fascinating and have over 1,000 years of ideas for things to do.

      I'm a lazy good-for-nothing layabout bum, and I'd love to keep doing fuck-all for the next 950 years.

    28. Re:Captain Kirk says... by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

      I support this way of thinking. New and interesting stuff (and people!) will always keep coming along.

      I wouldn't mind a several-thousand-to-effectively-infinite lifespan, as long as I had someone to share it with.

      --
      Eat the rich.
    29. Re:Captain Kirk says... by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

      Sooo... Coffee and various illegal substances?

      --
      Eat the rich.
    30. Re:Captain Kirk says... by swamp_ig · · Score: 1

      For the first thousand years, contemplate the number one in complete fullness. For the next thousand, the number two, and so on.

      Never run out of 'new and interesting things to think about'.

    31. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      someone needs to feed these unproductive members of Eternal society. Death is an impossibility in the Vortex because anyone who kills himself is simply reincarnated by the Tabernacle."/quote?

      that doesn't compute, if they simply get reincarnated when they die, why feed them? just let them die over and over again till they get tired of starving and start feeding themselves

    32. Re:Captain Kirk says... by houghi · · Score: 1

      My great aunt was 115 when she died. Lived alone till 106. Open-sourced her body to science.
      When she was 99, she had cancer and they had to take a breast. Doctor did not want to do it. She said: If I die on the table or in a bed is no difference to me and take the other one as well. I am not using them anymore.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    33. Re:Captain Kirk says... by wept · · Score: 1

      everyone is afraid of death.

    34. Re:Captain Kirk says... by chuckugly · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up.

    35. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 2

      I'm much less afraid of death than I am of the crap I might go through between now and then.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    36. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      you still have infinity more years. What will you do for the next thousand? the thousand after that?

      You don't have "infinity more years". The chances of you living more than a few thousand is not that great, even with biological immortality. At some point, something is going to happen to you: either you're going to have an accident, or someone is going to kill you. Or you could die of a new disease that they don't figure out how to cure in time. Sure, auto accidents will become more rare in coming years thanks to self-driving cars, but people die in accidents all the time, and there's always murders, terrorist attacks, etc. Your chances of dying this way in a 100-year life are not that high, but change it to an unlimited lifetime, with a 30-year-old body (so you don't spend your older years just sitting around the house), and now your chances of dying by accident or murder become 100%.

    37. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Well with an effectively infinite lifespan, and a body that never ages, it shouldn't be that hard to find a companion at some point. You might have to go a decade single, but over a 1000-year lifespan before you tragically get killed by a falling piano, that's not much.

    38. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I have lived a hundred and ten years," the old wizard said quietly (taking his beard out of the bowl, and jiggling it to shake out the color). "I have seen and done a great many things, too many of which I wish I had never seen or done. And yet I do not regret being alive, for watching my students grow is a joy that has not begun to wear on me. But I would not wish to live so long that it does! What would you do with eternity, Harry?"

      Harry took a deep breath. "Meet all the interesting people in the world, read all the good books and then write something even better, celebrate my first grandchild's tenth birthday party on the Moon, celebrate my first great-great-great grandchild's hundredth birthday party around the Rings of Saturn, learn the deepest and final rules of Nature, understand the nature of consciousness, find out why anything exists in the first place, visit other stars, discover aliens, create aliens, rendezvous with everyone for a party on the other side of the Milky Way once we've explored the whole thing, meet up with everyone else who was born on Old Earth to watch the Sun finally go out, and I used to worry about finding a way to escape this universe before it ran out of negentropy but I'm a lot more hopeful now that I've discovered the so-called laws of physics are just optional guidelines."

      "I did not understand much of that," said Dumbledore. "But I must ask if these are things that you truly desire so desperately, or if you only imagine them so as to imagine not being tired, as you run and run from death."

      "Life is not a finite list of things that you check off before you're allowed to die," Harry said firmly. "It's life, you just go on living it. If I'm not doing those things it'll be because I've found something better."

      Eliezer Yudkowsky, Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality

    39. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      30% -- only if you sleep 5.5 hours per night.
      If you sleep 8 hours per day, you'll get a 50% life extension.

    40. Re:Captain Kirk says... by dwye · · Score: 1

      The problem with immortality is that it never seems to come with unaging. The fats in cheeseburgers and chocolates become harder to digest and dairy starts giving problems (I can no longer binge on more than two pounds of jarlsberg at one sitting without problems for the rest of the week). In the case of this old Russian, losing all your children probably sucks a lot of the joy of life, even if he does still have grand children and gets to see his great great grand children (but cannot play with them).

    41. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      From elsewhere..

        Dr. Michael Roizen, MD , Internal Medicine, answered
      Although many studies have looked at the family history of disease in relation to the onset of disease, only three major studies have correlated overall longevity trends between parents and their children. The Framingham Study, the "Termite" Study, and the Alameda County Study looked at the age of parental death to determine if it predicted longevity of the offspring. Did the two correlate? Yes, but minimally. Each study showed a minor effect. The Framingham Study, the most comprehensive of the three, found about a 6 percent correlation between life span of the parents and life span of their offspring, meaning that many other factors affect longevity as well. If both your parents lived past the age of seventy-five, the odds that you will live past seventy-five increase to some extent. But to what extent? (Note that we are discussing, for the most part, death related to disease. If a parent dies at age forty in a car accident, for example, that provides little information about how long the child will live, although alcohol-induced accidents are a possible exception.)

      If you are a man and both of your parents died before the age of seventy-five, then your RealAge (physiologic age) will be as much as 4.2 years older. If you are a woman, your RealAge will be as much as 3.5 years older. If both parents lived past the age of seventy-five, then your RealAge will be 4.2 years younger if you are man, and 3.5 years younger if you are a woman. If no first-degree relative (parent, brother, sister) had breast, colon, or ovarian cancer diagnosed early, you are an additional 0.2 to eleven years younger than if your siblings or parents had those diagnoses. Some genetic conditions, such as being a carrier of the BRCA-1 breast cancer gene, can make your RealAge as much as 17 years older. This is one of the instances where genetics can make a big difference.

      https://www.sharecare.com/heal...

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    42. Re:Captain Kirk says... by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      That's interesting, but look again at my statistics: both parents lived past 85. My father to 100.

      But my family history is much more than just my parents: 3 grandparents lived into their '90s (the 4th died relatively young from flu). And one of my great-grandparents lived well into her '90s (I don't know about the others). If there is any genetic disposition towards long life at all, then I should have it.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    43. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Dayze!Confused · · Score: 1

      There's a great IQ^2 debate on this topic and what people really want is extended healthspan, not just extended old age. If you could be 60 with the body of a 30 year old, and 120 with a body of a 60 year old, then we've made real progress, but extending the life of the elderly once they're in the high care state with low quality of life, as others who read the article indicated (I only read the summary, but I'm on /. so that's sort of redundant), doesn't add value other than setting records.

      The myths and stories are always about a fountain of youth, not a fountain of eternal old age.

      --
      "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." [Thomas Jefferson]
    44. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      I think most people would not have marriages as we conventionally understand them for 1000 years.

      Also, the likelihood of getting an STD would rise to nearly 100% if you took even the slightest risks.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    45. Re:Captain Kirk says... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Maybe I can kill myself in my early '90s through a skydiving accident or something.

      Dying while leaping from the mantelshelf into a bed full of expectant sex partners seems to be the favoured way of "going out with style".

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    46. Re:Captain Kirk says... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Russian?

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    47. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Yes and the three studies show that may have just been a lucky roll of the dice because it doesn't appear to be true when we look at large groups.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    48. Re:Captain Kirk says... by pubwvj · · Score: 1

      Man with a plan(et). :)

    49. Re:Captain Kirk says... by dwye · · Score: 1

      Oops, Javanese.

      Never comment while reading other, unrelated, stuff, and be glad that I didn't call him a dark matter galaxy, as I probably would have if this happened before dinner today :-)

    50. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I should hope that if we figure out our biology enough to achieve biological immortality, we'd also figure out how to finally conquer those STDs. Of course, it probably won't be a single holy grail achievement, it'll probably come in stages, with each advance bringing longer lifespan and less age-related degeneration and disease, so maybe we'll have longer lifespans (like 150-200) for a while but still not have figured out the STD problem completely.

    51. Re:Captain Kirk says... by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      I don't know much about my father's side. But on my mom's side, mom is in good shape at 82, one aunt passed at 89, the other aunt is still alive, if not exactly kicking, at 97.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    52. Re: Captain Kirk says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those who have taken the time to truly evaluate the religious data available to us have come to an objective and demonstrable conclusion that, when accepted and followed, removes the fear of death.

      No freedom is worth anything except freedom from the fear of death.

    53. Re:Captain Kirk says... by queazocotal · · Score: 1

      One of my very favourite books.

    54. Re:Captain Kirk says... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Sure. Now, figure that you're old. You can't see well, if you can still see (eyes are complicated and not as durable as many other organs). You may be deaf in one or both ears. Your fingers shake badly, assuming you can use your fingers at all. Your balance is shot. You can't concentrate.

      At that point, what of your list are you going to accomplish? When I'm bored, it's not usually because there's nothing to do, but because I feel sick and not up to doing anything interesting.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    55. Re:Captain Kirk says... by queazocotal · · Score: 1

      That is not a problem with immortality. That is a problem with aging.

    56. Re:Captain Kirk says... by queazocotal · · Score: 1

      Or, indeed, illness of other sorts.
      I write as someone who has had a serious life-limiting condition for the past 30 years.

  3. Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "Marge, please, old people don't need companionship. They need to be isolated and studied so it can be determined what nutrients they have that might be extracted for our personal use." --Homer Simpson

    1. Re:Obligatory by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Put that Ayn Rand book down!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But Ayn Rand is made of people too! *Raises a bloody hand towards to blackened, dirty sky which covers the desperation of the abundant, "sea weed" eating population*

    3. Re:Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe it was actually a Ross Perot pamphlet.

  4. The key phrase here is by ScentCone · · Score: 5, Funny

    "If independently confirmed" - which is unlikely.

    Regardless, he'll still be around for quite a while yet. In an interview with Wired, he said he just wants to live until the year of Linux On The Desktop.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    1. Re:The key phrase here is by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

      "If independently confirmed"

      Can't they just cut him in half and count the rings?

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    2. Re: The key phrase here is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sawing of a lower limb and inspecting that would do.

    3. Re: The key phrase here is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *off

    4. Re:The key phrase here is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps somebody could hook him up with the No Man's Sky. He might like to finish it before dying.

    5. Re: The key phrase here is by Chewbacon · · Score: 1

      There's only one way to be sure. Cut him at the trunk and count the rings. I'll get a saw.

      --
      Chewbacon
      The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
    6. Re:The key phrase here is by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      "If independently confirmed" - which is unlikely

      Well, if he is really old, there is still carbon-14 dating.

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    7. Re:The key phrase here is by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Oh, oh I have one:

      He's waiting for September to end.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    8. Re:The key phrase here is by sh00z · · Score: 1

      Well, if he is really old, there is still carbon-14 dating.

      Which is only able to tell you when something died, not when it came into existence.

    9. Re:The key phrase here is by jae471 · · Score: 2

      They could use tooth enamel.

    10. Re:The key phrase here is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No worries. I can confirm his birth. I was there when we was born. He was screaming a lot, but I guess all newborns do that. Other than that he was just an ordinary baby.

    11. Re:The key phrase here is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that a joke? Carbon dating only works on dead things. It can tell time since death, nothing about time since birth.

  5. Seriously? by RoverDaddy · · Score: 0

    This has already been posted to reddit, ripped to shreds, and pulled down. Hardly newsworthy.

    --
    RETURN without GOSUB in line 1050
    1. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If so, please post a link.

    2. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, because being "posted to Reddit" and "ripped to shreds" there is an obvious sign of credibility.

      Are you forgetting the time that Reddit collectively lynched an innocent man in an effort to identify the suspects behind the Boston Marathon bombing, by any chance? Allow me to enlighten you:

      https://gawker.com/reddit-apol...

      Of course, being a redditor I'm sure you'll simply dismiss the entire post for being a link from Gawker, despite the fact that 70% of the content is direct quotes from Erik Martin, apologizing for the boorish and ignorant behaviour of people like you. Feel free. Redditors are like conspiracy theorists, they'll cherry-pick whatever details fit their own narrative and then circle-jerk around on their own, respective corner of the site.

      Do us all a favour and go back there for good. Redditors are the pus-filled herpes sores of the Internet.

    3. Re:Seriously? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 0
      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    4. Re: Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The pus filled heroes sores are 4chan. Reddit is the soon-to-erupt herpes outbreak that you know is coming, but isn't here yet. You know it's going to ruin your weekend, but it's meaningless for now.

    5. Re:Seriously? by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      Which tells us what?

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    6. Re:Seriously? by multi+io · · Score: 1

      Here's a link for you.

      Wonder how they arrived at a 0.893381 (impressive number of digits btw) probability of a 119 year old male dying within one year, considering that not a single man in history is confirmed to have reached that age.

    7. Re:Seriously? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 0

      That's not true! The oldest man is 145 right now! I promise! ;)

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    8. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, being a redditor I'm sure you'll simply dismiss the entire post for being a link from Gawker

      Just as you've dismissed the reddit posts ripping the credibility of this story to shreds, because reddit? Pot, meet bleating kettle.

    9. Re:Seriously? by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      You're right, both of them have the non-existent credibility that the Indonesian man does.

    10. Re:Seriously? by Calydor · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I will sooner dismiss the know-nothing who says "That can't be true, don't bother checking it!" than the know-nothing who says "That might be true, go check it."

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    11. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not true! The oldest man is 145 right now! I promise!

      Not possible. Gen 6:3.

    12. Re:Seriously? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      How about "That could be true, but the probability and significance is such that I don't think it's worth my time to check it"? I don't look into every claim I see, because even with a very long lifespan I wouldn't have the time to do anything else.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    13. Re:Seriously? by Calydor · · Score: 1

      You mean like the Higgs Boson?

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    14. Re:Seriously? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      The Higgs Boson was not worth my time to check (and was way out of my league in physics education and available test equipment). It was worthwhile for physicists working at CERN to check out. I then found out, with minimal effort on my part, that it exists.

      I find it extremely unlikely that this guy is anywhere near as old as is claimed, for a variety of reasons. I find it likely that ages get misstated for various reasons, particularly in societies without the same level of record-keeping and means of verification we've got now. I remember when there were lots of stories about the incredible age people in the Caucasus Mountains lived to.

      Therefore, using Bayesian probability, it's going to take a LOT of evidence to get me to believe the guy is that old, and somebody else can go look for it.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  6. Not sure it's worth living that long by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

    he's already outlived four wives, all 10 of his brothers and sisters, and all of his children.

    On one hand it would be kind of Interesting to be around that long. On the other, I can't imagine how terrible it would be to out live everyone you care about. And I would think it would be difficult to live in the world with the number of changes that have occurred over that amount of time. Think about the pace of life when he was a young adult compared to now.

    1. Re:Not sure it's worth living that long by Billly+Gates · · Score: 0

      Ignorant of the robber barrons of the 19th century which make modern corruption pale in comparison. Rockafeller, Carnagie, Tammy Hall, and others. Oh and since your post is right wing I will say Obama is not a socialist compared to the real communists like Karl Marx and Lennin who came from the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The time we live in today is a lite version of what life was like 130 years earlier on a massive scale.

    2. Re:Not sure it's worth living that long by tomhath · · Score: 0

      19th century which make modern corruption pale in comparison...The time we live in today is a lite version of what life was like 130 years earlier

      So that makes it okay?

      I will say Obama is not a socialist compared to the real communists like Karl Marx and Lennin

      I don't know why you would call Lenin (not Lennin) a communist or a socialist, he was a totalitarian dictator.

    3. Re:Not sure it's worth living that long by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2

      My point is those who say the times today are the worst ever and spew some right wing stuff do not know their history. Times were bad in the 19th century. Awesome too if you are educated and middle class (even more so than today) but very tough and brutal. Factories, 18 hour shifts, no EPA laws, children working, people being shot out west looking to escape the missery of the east and fed to pigs, corruption, and crazy dictators and radical ideologies were the norm.

      People think Victorian era paradise and Jane Austin, and wonderful class. Not the above

    4. Re:Not sure it's worth living that long by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You are absolutely right, of course; wealth inequality needs to be set against absolute poverty, which is improving at a staggering rate in almost every country.

      But the landscape of the modern developed west looks more like the Victorian (and pre-Victorian) eras than it ever has before. Huge wealth and ownership locked up in private equity, housing shortages and staggering house prices and rents, zero hours contracts, 'welfare to work' schemes that are sham mechanisms designed to strip benefits from claimants, rising credit card debt... it will not be long before the gains since 1945 are eradicated.

    5. Re:Not sure it's worth living that long by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "So that makes it okay?"
      Of course not. A lot of people seem to be under the impression that the US was once a golden society that achieved it's enlightened peek and somehow we are regressing today. The facts do not support this assertion. You need to look at the history of the country in order to see the progress made over the years. Yes, there is corruption today but it was a lot worse at one time. Today the government is more transparent than at any other time in the history of the country. This doesn't mean that striving for more transparency is no longer required. The US elected a two term black president. If you asked some pre-1980's that US would elect a black president who would have believed it possible? The fact he was elected at all is a major step forward in removing racial barriers. And that doesn't mean that racism no longer exists and you can stop trying to achieve more equality. It only means that a major milestone has been achieved and that milestone should be recognized.

      The US has been fighting wars of one type or another ever since it fought for it's independence from England. But that is hardly surprising since the history of the human species is a history of violence, destruction, and mayhem. People today seem to think it is only the US driving the on-going armed conflicts around the world while totally ignoring the other major international players contributing there own efforts to these conflicts. By singling out only the US the other participants get a free pass on any of their actions. Propaganda using false equivalence arguments to excuse the actions of others pretty much guarantees the conflicts will continue until they finally erupt into wars that will span the globe.

      The US Constitution and Bill of Rights are a work in progress and not absolute. It hasn't automatically made every man equal. The US Constitution and Bill of Rights are still being examined, tested, and modified today.

    6. Re:Not sure it's worth living that long by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      "I don't know why you would call Lenin (not Lennin) a communist or a socialist, he was a totalitarian dictator."

      No true Muscovite...

    7. Re:Not sure it's worth living that long by ChrisMaple · · Score: 2, Informative

      The poor quality of modern education is apparent in your post.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    8. Re:Not sure it's worth living that long by ChrisMaple · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Obama is racist and is making the racial divide dramatically worse.
      Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have both committed treason; you have to go back to Aaron Burr to find a high government official so willing to destroy the government.
      It appears that more than half of the country thinks that Hillary's crimes don't matter. That degree of widespread corruption in new.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    9. Re:Not sure it's worth living that long by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Those Trumpsicles that you've been snacking on -

      They have melamine, ethylene glycol and toxic concentrations of bile. You should just switch to plain ol Kool Aid. It's healthier.

      (See, got the conversation back on topic.)

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    10. Re:Not sure it's worth living that long by tomhath · · Score: 1

      Nobody is saying there weren't problems in the past. But the problems we have today are real problems.

      I'll agree with you that Obama isn't Karl Marx. But he might still be a socialist; one has nothing to do with the other

    11. Re:Not sure it's worth living that long by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "...not a socialist compared to real communists.." clearly you don't have a clue, those are two different ideologies. Under your premise NOBODY is a "socialist compared to communists"...

    12. Re:Not sure it's worth living that long by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      He said "Rockefeller".
      But do go on with your rant, even though your mention of a different (but strangely rather specific) era is non-sequitur. Nobody was saying this is the worst era ever. And actually, if anyone would suggest that, it'd likely be the left, not the right; they're ashamed of the US, everything is horrible, they cite inequality, sexism, racism, homophobia, islamophobia, "christian oppression", wars, joblessness, loss of rights, loss of privacy, etc.. like that stuff hasn't existed in some form all throughout history in greater degrees.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    13. Re:Not sure it's worth living that long by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      On the other, I can't imagine how terrible it would be to out live everyone you care about.

      The summary gave a list of people he'd outlived. It didn't say that he'd lost the ability to form new relationships (and 4 wives suggests that wasn't the case), or even to care about people he wasn't directly related to.

      Think about the pace of life when he was a young adult compared to now.

      What an exhilarating challenge!

      I think you've told us more about yourself than the subject of the article.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    14. Re:Not sure it's worth living that long by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      The summary gave a list of people he'd outlived. It didn't say that he'd lost the ability to form new relationships (and 4 wives suggests that wasn't the case), or even to care about people he wasn't directly related to.

      I never said he couldn't. But I've know people who have lost a child. It's awful. I can't imagine how it would be to outlive all of them.

      What an exhilarating challenge!

      I think you've told us more about yourself than the subject of the article.

      Not really. I lived in a house that didn't have running water when I was a kid. Unless you count the hand pump in the kitchen. I've seen a lot of change in my comparably short life. Many have been good, some miraculous, and some not so good.

      There's nothing exhilarating about being challenged to fit into society. I hope I never get old enough that it becomes such. But I do find constantly learning new thing to be wonderful. I'd love to live that long, or longer. But only if I don't become a burden on society or spend my days thinking how awful everything is.

      Politeness and paying attention are two things that I do miss. If you would have read the first part of my post you would have noticed that I was looking at both the good and the bad side of living that long, not simply the down side.

  7. Record Keeping.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For some reason, I just don't believe the record keeping is up to standard in countries like Indonesia. I'm sure the verification simply included "Here is 100,000 Rupia, can you drop in the records for us"

    1. Re:Record Keeping.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair, Indonesia was still administered by the Dutch when he was born, even if he is much younger than he claims. However, a more recent mistake or forgery is a more likely cause than any administration actually related to his birth.

  8. Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    ...and the longest lived human in recorded history.

    Not according to epitome of accurate and unbiased truth: The Bible. (cf Methuselah)

    1. Re:Sure by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      We're talking history. Not his story.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  9. Painful Life by JimSadler · · Score: 3, Interesting

    People don't dwell on such things. I had a neighbor who passed just a few weeks shy of 100. Things that all of us consider normal were simply impossible for him such as keeping in touch with his school friends or most of his family as they had all passed away. How many people wanted to talk to him about the way life was in 1880? It is as if the man's entire universe left town and moved too far away.

    1. Re:Painful Life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My grandmother made it to seven weeks short of her 100th birthday. In a care home for the elderly that she tolerated well enough considering. All her living children to visit her. Grandchildren visited too.

      But still... Turning 100? I think she just didn't want all the fuss.

    2. Re:Painful Life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had an aunt that was pushing a 100. She was in and out of hospital a few months of the year, had a colostomy bag, needed live in care, and was just miserable.

      She would say she wanted to die.

      In our culture we have this quantity beats quality attitude in just about every aspect of our lives. Whether it's buying a lot of cheaply made consumer items to living longer regardless of the quality of life we have. As I get older and have more pains, get tired easier and suffer injuries easier than I did decades ago, I remember the book "Brave New World" where folks have the health and vitality of a 25 year old until 60, then drop dead. I'm thinking that's not a bad idea.

      We didn't evolve to live so long. Medical science has outpaced our biology and it's taking a toll on our society.

      In a decade or so, Medicare is going to be one of the largest Federal expenditures - entitlement programs indeed.

      Oh, those few times a year my late aunt spent in the hospital, I got a ballpark figure on how much Medicare was billed each time - $50 to $100 thousand. So my aunt was costing the taxpayer anywhere from $250K to $400K - every year since her 80s. Almost 20 years of six figure medical bills.

      A century ago before our whiz bang medicine, she would have been dead thirty years ago. I miss her, but she was so miserable at the end and it was a relief to see her suffering end.

    3. Re:Painful Life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I come from a family of inquisitive introverts. They, including my 98 year old granny, would consider everybody else dying and leaving them alone to learn what's new in the world to be a good thing.

    4. Re:Painful Life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In a decade or so, Medicare is going to be one of the largest Federal expenditures - entitlement programs indeed.

      Uh yeah, you paid into it for a purpose, you're entitled to get that back.

      Fucking retards, they don't even realize when they've been triggered.

    5. Re:Painful Life by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      Oh, those few times a year my late aunt spent in the hospital, I got a ballpark figure on how much Medicare was billed each time - $50 to $100 thousand. So my aunt was costing the taxpayer anywhere from $250K to $400K - every year since her 80s. Almost 20 years of six figure medical bills.

      Not seeking to discount the premise of your story but the figures you are looking at are works of fiction. What is billed != what is actually paid out.

    6. Re:Painful Life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Entitled much?

      Was that the trigger?

      Or just showing us you are too fucking retarded to understand how Medicare works (or doesn't since people are living much much longer) ?

    7. Re:Painful Life by khallow · · Score: 1

      In a decade or so, Medicare is going to be one of the largest Federal expenditures - entitlement programs indeed.

      Already is.

      We didn't evolve to live so long. Medical science has outpaced our biology and it's taking a toll on our society.

      We didn't evolve for a lot of stuff that we currently do. And I doubt you had to evolve yourself in order to type your message.

      As to those medical care costs, I think most people would agree that US medical care is way overpriced for what it does. Sounds like you might agree. But my view is that this overpriced system is not a consequence of the technology, but rather of political systems operating on increasingly empty promises.

    8. Re:Painful Life by khallow · · Score: 1

      Uh yeah, you paid into it for a purpose, you're entitled to get that back.

      And who again promised you this entitlement? Weren't me.

      The key problem here is that many people are taking out several times what they put in.

      Some types of families did much better than average. A couple with only one spouse working (and receiving the same average wage) would have paid in $361,000 if they turned 65 in 2010, but can expect to get back $854,000 - more than double what they paid in. In 1980, this same 65-year-old couple would have received five times more than what they paid in, while in 1960, such a couple would have ended up with 14 times what they put in.

    9. Re:Painful Life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL if you're stupid enough to think she paid in ~6 Million on her own...

    10. Re:Painful Life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea in America you also need to add on tips !!

    11. Re:Painful Life by houghi · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My great aubnt lived to be 115 and was at one point the oldest know living person in the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      Many people wanted to talk about life then. She lived inb a time people in the Netherlands lived in "plaggenhutten". When people asked if she kne when the first cars came, she laughed and said she remembered when the first bikes came. Imported from the US.
      She lived alone till she was 106. She was always positive minded, even though almost all she knew had died.
      She wanted people to learn and she gave her body to science. From that came the knowledge that alzheimer is 'just' a dissease and not something everybody will get when you get old. She was the basis for other discoveries as well as a push to do research with 100+ year olds.

      She wanted the knowledge that came from her body to be her gift to some students that would cut her open or look at in a bottle. She never thought it would be such a success and she would have been delighted.

      She never gave the impression that her universe left town. More that she was welcoming a new universe of things to learn. With that I learned that contact and optimism are very important. She always wanted others to learn and that is why she open-sourced her body. She insisted that the knowledge should be used by all. Again: she open-sourced her body.
      An other thing the found : https://www.newscientist.com/a...

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    12. Re:Painful Life by Vermonter · · Score: 1

      Keep in touch with High School friends? I'm 32 and I have long since lost contact with my high school friends.

    13. Re:Painful Life by jarlsberg71 · · Score: 1

      Crap. Posting to undo mod error. I will never understand why Person A with X insurance for 1 drug could be $50, Person B with Y insurance is $75. and someone paying out of pocket is $55.

      --
      E8B8B
    14. Re:Painful Life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The key problem here is that many people are taking out several times [politifact.com] what they put in."

      I think you just described what "insurance" is.

    15. Re:Painful Life by khallow · · Score: 1

      It's an average over a large population which wasn't sorted for health conditions. They also noted that averaged over everyone retiring in the present, they still pull considerably more out than they put in.

      When your program is pay as you go and pays out more to early adoptors than they put in, then it's a pyramid scheme not insurance.

    16. Re:Painful Life by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Me too. Both of them.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  10. Verify by DNA analysis by Steve1952 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It would be interesting to use DNA analysis on the 145-year-old and his relatives (living or dead) to verify his age. If his story checks out, then (for example), it could be verified if he is indeed the father or brother to various other people, some long dead, with known dates of birth or death.

    1. Re:Verify by DNA analysis by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 0

      DNA gives biological age, not chronological age ; at best, (within 5 years), DNA gives an aging order of magnitude, but for someone that old it's likely to be very inacurrate.

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    2. Re:Verify by DNA analysis by squiggleslash · · Score: 5, Funny

      Surely they can just wait until he dies, and then saw his body in half and count the rings?

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    3. Re:Verify by DNA analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not what the first post suggested.
      Def: x1= claimed 140 year old man
      Def: x_k for 1:K
      K=number of relatives to check against with known dates of death
      results-list()
      for(k in 1:K){
      results[[k]]- genetic_distance(x,x_i)
      }
      in which known dates of death are compared with genetic proximity to relation, such that we can assess date of death of brothers, wives, etc. with repeated chronological age deaths paired with close genetic proximity supporting his claim of age.

  11. Extraordinary claims require ... by davidwr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... extraordinary evidence.

    An identity card whose date has only recently been confirmed isn't enough.

    You still need to confirm that the card-holder is the person who matches the genuine records.

    You also have to assess the credibility of those in the records office and answer questions like "why wasn't this confirmed long ago, like when he applied for a penson (no pension? okay, I'll accept that) or when he hit age 100 (not important enough? okay, I'll accept that), age 110 (you better have a darn good answer) or when he got to be the oldest man in his country (every month of delay in searching for accurate records from this point on makes his claim less and less credible).

    It's been 30+ years since he would've been the oldest person in the world. If there haven't been serious, continuous, diligent, credible efforts to find and authenticate his age since the mid-to-late 1980s, then it will take something extra-ordinary, such as confirmation that he fathered someone known to be born more than, say, 120 years ago, for his claim to be accepted. Even if there has been a serious, continuous, diligent, credible effort to find proof of his age for the last 30 years, the fact that it took so long to find it hurts his claim.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by Ken+McE · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Occams' razor is politely suggesting that at some point the ID card belonging to Mr. Mbah Gotho Sr. was passed along to Mr Mbah Gotho Jr. That appears to be what happened with all those ancient rural Soviets. Some of those back country/outside all their life people age fast. If they took Dads card after he passed, they could skip the draft. Voila, country towns with a lot of 104 year old men.

    2. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by hey! · · Score: 1

      Indeed. But Occam's Razor only applies to a conclusion's relation to the information you have at hand. It is conceivable that if you collect enough information the same heuristic can lead you in a different direction.

      It should be able to confirm his genetic relationship to his putative great-great-great grandchildren, and thus let a lower limit on his age. That and other documentary evidence of him and his descendants could make his age seem plausible. In a world with seven billion people, outliers can be very unusual indeed.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    3. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by Viol8 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "outliers can be very unusual indeed."

      There's outliers and there's statistical impossibilities. The chances of him having lived 23 years (almost a 3rd of the average humans lifespan) longer than the next oldest person I'm afraid are so close to zero that you couldn't tell the difference.

    4. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Of course you also need to factor in desire for fame - could be lots of people older than the established oldest who just never saw the point of trying to claim the title.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    5. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by dohzer · · Score: 1

      Cut him open and count the rings!

    6. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      I wonder if they can count otolith rings like they do for fish? There probably is some sort of (posthumous) dating method short of Carbon 14 that would work on this gentleman (assuming, of course, he agrees to such things).

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    7. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by OneHundredAndTen · · Score: 1

      What you have explained politely, lucidly and reasonably I will say bluntly: the guy is full of shit.

    8. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      There's always a relative who wants to cash in. The documentation in most of the world wasn't very good in the 19th century so it's likely that somebody has lived longer than the verified oldest, but 23 years longer isn't really statistically plausible.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    9. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      C14 dating only works on dead matter, i.e. telling you how long dead matter has been dead. I'm fairly sure when he dies we'll know down to the day, if not hour, when this happened.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    10. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      As I posted the link above, that's not about fame, it's a simple actuarial reality that above ~105, you're more like to die than to survive every next year. So this "could be" is I guess something like like p0.000000000001 for this guy.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    11. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Sorry, should have been "p<0.000000000001"...

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    12. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by sound+vision · · Score: 0

      You think a nigga from Java gets a pension? People in America don't even get pensions anymore.

    13. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by quantaman · · Score: 1

      ... extraordinary evidence.

      An identity card whose date has only recently been confirmed isn't enough.

      Don't worry, I heard that a UFO took dental records when it abducted him in 1923.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    14. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An analysis of his DNA and that of a few living relatives should do it.

    15. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think carbon dating was used on the corneas of Greenland sharks to establish them as the longest living vertebrates. The carbon in their corneas was deposited relatively early in their life and not replaced as they aged.

    16. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by quantaman · · Score: 1

      Indeed. But Occam's Razor only applies to a conclusion's relation to the information you have at hand. It is conceivable that if you collect enough information the same heuristic can lead you in a different direction.

      It should be able to confirm his genetic relationship to his putative great-great-great grandchildren, and thus let a lower limit on his age. That and other documentary evidence of him and his descendants could make his age seem plausible. In a world with seven billion people, outliers can be very unusual indeed.

      The thing is that age isn't the result of one thing. It's the confluence of multiple systems that only evolved to keep us going until 65 or so. With modern conditions that's closer to 85, but after that all our different systems start to fail, and fail hard. You need a lot of luck (and genetics) for each one of those systems to hold up.

      Lots of people make it to 90, a few to 100, some exceptional ones to 110, if you make it to 113 you might be the oldest in your country, 115 and you might be the oldest on the planet, 120 and you're the second oldest person ever. And that's if you're a woman, if you're a man you can chop about 3 years off of each of those estimates. For a man to be 120 would required extraordinary scrutiny, 125 would be absurd, 145? You're looking at about 3 or 4 layers of exceptional outliers.

      To make it to 145, you'd need a subgroup with unprecedented genetic differences. This isn't Usain Bolt running 9.58 when everyone else is 9.80, or East African's making 2:10 marathons look routine. This would be a sprinter running the 100 in 8.5, or someone else running a 1:50 marathon. It's just not something that happens.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    17. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by davidwr · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, I heard that a UFO took dental records when it abducted him in 1923.

      The extraordinary claim the guy is 145 years old makes your claim about the UFO almost ordinary by comparison.

      --
      Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    18. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Ok, that's a special case but as far as I know there's no such thing in the human organism.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    19. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And pray, what are the statistical probabilities of mutation? What are the statistical probablities of said mutation being benign (longlivety [sic]) or malignant (cancer)?
      I don't know enough about either statistics or human genetics to be able to answer. Though, if the topic still is Occams razor like in GP post, rather than Mr Mbah Gotho age, like in GGP post, my point becomes moot.

    20. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh bullshit, there's not enough data of people above 105 for the actuarial data to be statistically meaningfull

    21. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you derive the chances without making assumptions of the probability distribution?

    22. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Which should already tell you that any news of someone reaching 145 is pure bullshit.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    23. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      We might need to engineer better humans in the future. Presumably reproductive fitness doesn't help us very much here. But perhaps we could cherry-pick the relevant traits from long-lived people.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    24. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      there have been others that have lived similar or longer lives both now and throughout history, however they all suffer the same problem of almost impossible to verify as record keeping even 100 years ago was primitive and easily manipulated if they desired. regardless he is not an impossibility.

    25. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      no it tells us that record keeping over a century ago is simply awful, especially in countries like Indonesia and near impossible to verify with any certainty and the further back you go the worse it gets making any real statistical analysis on people over 100 years a practical impossibility at this point in time and hence any conclusions based on statistical evidence extremely flawed.

    26. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      So you're telling us that people between 100 and 110 dropping like flies is no indicator to what would happen to (hypothetical) people in their 130s? That there's some magical point at which the aged organism suddenly works better? I'm sorry, I just don't feel like buying that. Especially in Indonesia.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    27. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just ask him about Krakatoa. He was 13 then. He should remember.

    28. Re: Extraordinary claims require ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Your statement assumes that the risk of dying increases every year. According to Wikipedia, that is not the case:

      "Even today, no fixed theoretical limit to human longevity is apparent.[2] Studies[1] in the biodemography of human longevity indicate a late-life mortality deceleration law: that death rates level off at advanced ages to a late-life mortality plateau. This implies that there is no fixed upper limit to human longevity, or fixed maximum human lifespan.[3]"
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longevity_claims

      Thus, he is not a "statistical impossibility".

    29. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by holmstar · · Score: 1

      Does he still have any teeth? If he does, they should have the same carbon that they did when he was a child and his adult teeth grew in, shouldn't they?

    30. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by RonTheHurler · · Score: 1

      Also,

      Dec. 31, 1870 is only a couple of bits away from Jan 1, 1970.
      Bits flip. Dates and Epochs change.

      Was this card issued by a computer?

    31. Re: Extraordinary claims require ... by davidwr · · Score: 1

      According to Wikipedia, Wikipedia is not a reliable source, but the references used in the articles should be reliable sources.

      For what it's worth, the references in this quote from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/ind...

      "Even today, no fixed theoretical limit to human longevity is apparent.[2] Studies[1] in the biodemography of human longevity indicate a late-life mortality deceleration law: that death rates level off at advanced ages to a late-life mortality plateau. This implies that there is no fixed upper limit to human longevity, or fixed maximum human lifespan.[3]"

      are

      1. Gavrilov, Leonid A.; Gavrilova, Natalia S.; Center on Aging, National Opinion Research Center/University of Chicago (June 2000). "Book Reviews: Validation of Exceptional Longevity" (PDF). Population Dev Rev. 26 (2): 403â"4. doi:10.1111/j.1728-4457.2000.00365.x. Retrieved 18 May 2009. http://longevity-science.org/P...

      2. Gavrilov, L. A.; Gavrilova, N. S. (1991). The biology of life span: a quantitative approach. New York City: Harwood Academic Publishers. ISBN 978-3-7186-4983-9.

      3. Gavrilov, Leonid A.; Center on Aging, National Opinion Research Center/University of Chicago (5 March 2004). "Biodemography of Human Longevity (Keynote Lecture)". International Conference on Longevity. Retrieved 18 May 2009. http://longevity-science.org/B...

      If these are not reliable sources, then have that fight over on the Wikipedia article's talk page.

      --
      Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    32. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by cdrudge · · Score: 1

      Dec. 31, 1870 is only a couple of bits away from Jan 1, 1970.

      Unless you know the format of how the date is stored/represented, no such statement can be made that one date is only a couple of bits away from another.

    33. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      What is it with people thinking that Java is now a part of the Soviet Union? Or Russian Federation, or whatever you want to call it this decade.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    34. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      These are good reasons for being dubious.

      I find the date 31-Dec suspicious. It is by no means uncommon for people to not know the day or year of their birth, and it is by no means uncommon for "the authorities" when they meet such a case to issue a card with a vaguely believable date. So if the card were issued in 1970 to someone who looked anywhere near 100, then "1870-12-31" would have been a perfectly reasonable guess.

      Recently (last month or so), I saw a list of "100 things that people believe are true about personal names, but are not always true" which started with the idea "a person has a name by which they are recognised". I believe it was brought up in a discussion on here about the problems of handling name data in databases. Strange though it sounds to to our ears, there is no reason to expect that someone's family ever recorded their birthdate, not even to a season. And if your family and friends don't know even the time of year you were born, let alone the actual year, why should you care?

      Hmmm, I wonder if online translation systems could give a hint as to how many languages do not have a translation for "birthday". That would flag if ... well, what proportion of "central Java" languages have good, accurate, dictionaries? 50%? 10%?

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    35. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      The enamel of his adult teeth may have stopped interchanging carbon with the environment after the enamel stopped growing (around age 10-13, but with some variation). But I'm not sure on that point, and it would be highly susceptible to contamination by modern bacteria.

      What is commonly done with teeth is to study the oxygen and strontium stable isotope ratios, which gives you information about the latitude where the teeth's owner grew them (proxied by the oxygen isotope profile due to temperature of the oceans where their rainwater evaporated from), and the bedrock chemistry of the area where the owner's food was grown. That can give you some reasonably precise (or very imprecise) indications of where the owner grew the teeth. The oxygen and strontium are much less geochemically mobile than carbon. But even so, the technique often produces null results. It's very cutting edge.

      You'll note that this is a stable isotope technique. No dating information.

      Dating the birth of a person who interchanges the atoms in their flesh several times a year and the mineral atoms in their bones very couple of years is very difficult. If you hear CSI: Middle Earth telling you they can do this (in a few hours even!), then turn your isotope geochemistry Bullshit Detector up to howl-round.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    36. Re:Extraordinary claims require ... by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      yes they drop like flies, but as we don't have any reliable data on how fast or what percentage are really dropping like flies you can't make any definitive conclusion like the OP made that it is a statistical impossibility.

  12. recorded history by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Uhm, what about Methuselah? Or does it only count if a government nut says it's true not if a religious nut says so?

    1. Re:recorded history by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hebrew religious text aren't exactly history, more like fantasy.

      So was Methuselah 720 years or 969 years old? Depends on which text you read.

    2. Re:recorded history by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      Interesting fact (IIRC), if he lived to 969 then he died in the year of the flood.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    3. Re:recorded history by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Well, at least governments are real...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:recorded history by DavidRawling · · Score: 2

      I suggest that's months. As a friend pointed out, these stories come from people who were desert nomads. Time passing in the desert is measured by phases of the moon, often, AIUI. So did he perhaps live to be 80 years old? Not impossible, and at that age in those times he would be incredibly old.

    5. Re:recorded history by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So did Methuselah's son, Lamech. He lived to 777. Lamech's son, Noah, lived to 950. Clearly, something cut short Lamech's life since he died 200-ish years younger than both his father and his son, and coincidentally, in the same year as his father. Drowning is not an impossibility.

    6. Re:recorded history by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Methuselah sired a child at 187 years of age. If those were months, he would be only 15. That's not impossible. But let's look at the age of Methuselah's father when Methuselah was born: 65 years of age. That makes him a very much impossible 5 years old.

      Your theory is crap. Sorry.

    7. Re:recorded history by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He must have been very busy those centuries, let's guess. He was going to learn to swim next year right?

    8. Re:recorded history by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't assume consistency over several generations of story tellers and scribes, and later translators and ancient languages.

    9. Re:recorded history by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, religious nut jobs are real too.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    10. Re:recorded history by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, Methuselah died six years before the Flood.

       

    11. Re:recorded history by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So none of what is in these books is reliable information? Yeah, I kind of suspected that.

  13. Ready to die, you say ... ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... why not just fell him and count the rings?

    1. Re:Ready to die, you say ... ? by hambone142 · · Score: 1

      Core sample

  14. Most likely explanation by xlsior · · Score: 4, Informative

    He probably has the same name as his father, and somewhere long the lines their identities got switched up?

    1. Re:Most likely explanation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or grandfather, for that matter.

    2. Re:Most likely explanation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He probably has the same name as his father, and somewhere long the lines their identities got switched up?

      It's possible, but unlikely. AFAIK local custom there (Javanese) avoid giving same name to their children, it's considered rude in their culture. However, based on my own experience, there is a possibility typo error. Once I have an ID card that state my birth year is in 1952, while in reality i was born in mid 70s.

  15. Poor man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I would never want to outlive my children. :(

    1. Re:Poor man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me neither. Because if I do, it means I've had children.

  16. As Nelson said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Records from that era are spotty at best.."

  17. Precisely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    People want to believe that he is depressed because his kids and wives are gone. It is romantic to be depressed when you have no family or lovers.

    Smart people don't make others responsible for their own happiness. Wives and kids come and go (especially today, thanks to the divorce revolution). Once you can find the natural wellspring of joy within, you are no longer dependent on these ever-changing circumstances to be happy.

    But...when your daily routine is an ongoing repetition of pain and indignity, with no realistic means of pursuing self-cultivation (nor even just enjoying hobbies), the continual displeasure can easily overwhelm any sense of calm contentedness. Under these circumstances, even the most enlightened of minds will realize that life is handing them their hat, and gracefully take their leave.

     

    1. Re:Precisely. by Rakarra · · Score: 2

      Wives and kids come and go (especially today, thanks to the divorce revolution).

      Holy shit, nice hand-wave!

    2. Re: Precisely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a sociopath.

    3. Re: Precisely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Or a Buddhist. We prefer to be called pragmatic, however.

    4. Re:Precisely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why are you picking just one aspect, when obviously both come into play ?

      I could hold on for YEARS knowing somebody who loved me is around.

      But if almost everybody I ever loved was long gone AND i had to deal with a miserable and painful existence, what would the point be ?

      It isn't that people are romanticizing what it's like to grow old and be the last one left.

      It's that SOME of us have something called empathy, we can clearly understand what it must feel like.

      Sociopaths have a problem with this.

    5. Re: Precisely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If there's on thing the Catholic experience has taught us, it's that religiously inspired views of "pragmatic detachment" just don't work.

    6. Re:Precisely. by ferret4 · · Score: 1

      Yeah but there's a new series of Star Trek coming out next year, he'd be mad to miss it on purpose

  18. And he still chain smokes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's not surprising to see the western media censoring the second most remarkable fact about this fellow -- he still smokes video. Similarly, the officially recognized longest living man and woman on the world and only two humans verified to have lived beyond 120 years of age were both smokers (Jean Calment and Shigechiyo Izumi.

    Unlike that non-English video where he smokes almost throughout, in this English speaking video, they blur his cigarette in a crude attempt to hide the fact that doesn't fit in our antismoking Matrix. With the reporter's strong antismoking position thus clear, the implication is that he couldn't get several minutes of continuous footage without the old timer lighting up i.e. the fellow must still be practically chain smoking (not unusual among Indonesian man).

    1. Re:And he still chain smokes by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

      It's not surprising to see the western media censoring the second most remarkable fact about this fellow -- he still smokes video. Similarly, the officially recognized longest living man and woman on the world and only two humans verified to have lived beyond 120 years of age were both smokers (Jean Calment and Shigechiyo Izumi.

      Unlike that non-English video where he smokes almost throughout, in this English speaking video, they blur his cigarette in a crude attempt to hide the fact that doesn't fit in our antismoking Matrix. With the reporter's strong antismoking position thus clear, the implication is that he couldn't get several minutes of continuous footage without the old timer lighting up i.e. the fellow must still be practically chain smoking (not unusual among Indonesian man).

      Tar is a pretty good preservative. Cf, the LaBrea Tar Pits....

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:And he still chain smokes by Gavagai80 · · Score: 3, Informative

      There's absolutely nothing remarkable about somebody that age smoking. Everybody did for most of their lives. And no doctor has ever claimed that smoking is 100% fatal.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    3. Re:And he still chain smokes by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Likely though he's getting better shit than we do. I'm still not so convinced that it's the tobacco that kills you rather than the various "perfumes" that get added to cigarettes around here.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:And he still chain smokes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This guy isn't smoking Camels or Marlboro's, hes smoking hand rolled freshly farmed hash....with natural papers made of hemp most likely.

    5. Re:And he still chain smokes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This guy isn't smoking Camels or Marlboro's, he's smoking hand rolled freshly farmed hash....with natural papers made of hemp most likely.

      That was also my first guess. Here's an unedited video, and you can see the cigarette pack in the basket at his feet.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofgTrr0IC0o
      Watch him inhale that smoke. He's like a reverse Louis Armstrong.

      Check out the second comment on this one:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaeEEj1CWJ4

    6. Re:And he still chain smokes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm... My grandmother was a life long smoker and she died as a relatively young woman of of only 96 years old. Fat too. At lots of meat. Drank. And cussed. The running joke in our family was she was to mean for death to take.

    7. Re:And he still chain smokes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe he outlived his family and siblings because they died prematurely from the passive smoke.

    8. Re:And he still chain smokes by Mab_Mass · · Score: 1

      Don't forgot that *living* is 100% fatal.

    9. Re:And he still chain smokes by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      the various "perfumes" that get added to cigarettes around here

      Solution : roll your own. Choose what you put in your fag.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    10. Re:And he still chain smokes by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I know there's a buttsex joke in there, but I'm too tired to find it.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    11. Re:And he still chain smokes by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      There's only a "buttsex" joke in there if you're an American obsessed with such things. Since you see one, I take it that you're a Christian priest of some sort.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    12. Re:And he still chain smokes by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      No, I'm the Thing from Neptune.

      Well, not really, but if I said where I really came from you'd just call me obsessed again.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  19. Intestinal flora of a carp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looking at the guy i believe this story.

  20. I'm from the past by TimeTraveler1884 · · Score: 1

    I'm here to let you know it's on it's way. It was lost in Montana for awhile, and the crossing the Rockies was a bit rough. But it should be getting to you any day now!

    The only thing left is to confirm your current address. Unfortunately, I can only time travel forward so letting them know where to send it in 1884 may be a challenge.

  21. I don't believe it by stronggate · · Score: 1

    He doesn't look a day older than 119!

  22. Re:Captain Kirk says...More like Vampire Chronicle by shoor · · Score: 1

    I do think immortality could get boring.

    But there's something else, something more immediate. A line I remember from the Vampire Chronciles was one rather old vampire saying "The world changes, we do not. That is the irony." I'm old enough now that, when feeling particularly sour I said something about not liking the music now, the attitudes now, etc. And in the next sentence, I admitted that my father felt that way about current times when I was in my 20s. The world has changed and I don't fit in quite so well anymore. Some of that change is the physical aging of course. If my physical body were rejuvenated to 25 no doubt my libido would get a charge. In dealing with people, I think all the hard earned experience and knowledge I've gained could be put to good use (old saying: "we get too soon old and too late smart"), but would I really embrace the gestalt of today? I'm not sure. And I think the 25 year olds of today would know there was something different about me even if I looked like one of them.

    Here's something else from a more philosophical point of view:
    Even if you continue to live, are you still the same person? Sometimes, when I remember stuff from way back, it almost seems like I'm examining the memories of a different person. If you don't change, you're not really living, just existing, but in changing, the old you disappears a little bit at a time.

    --
    In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice they're different. (Yogi Berra & A. Einstein)
  23. Won't be uncommon in 70 years by justcauseisjustthat · · Score: 1

    Although there a many doubter, to me it doesn't matter whether this one person reached that age (his relative may argue or not), what matters is that it won't be uncommon in 70 years (those in their 50 and 60 could go beyond that). A number of technologies are reaching their tipping point.

    1. Re:Won't be uncommon in 70 years by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      For it to be not-uncommon in 70 years, a lot of 76 year olds now living will have to still be alive then.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    2. Re:Won't be uncommon in 70 years by careysub · · Score: 1

      Although there a many doubter, to me it doesn't matter whether this one person reached that age (his relative may argue or not), what matters is that it won't be uncommon in 70 years (those in their 50 and 60 could go beyond that). A number of technologies are reaching their tipping point.

      So far we have not come up with a single intervention of any kind, "technology" or not, that increases the human maximum lifespan by a single day. Nothing that actually slows down aging in humans. Nothing. What we are doing is preventing premature death. We are having a greater fraction living to the same maximum longevities already observed.

      So far the only interventions that actually extend observed maximum longevity in rats are regimes of privation that would be considered torture in humans, and could only be maintained by perpetual imprisonment (like lab rats).

      Tell us about some of these promising "technologies".

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    3. Re:Won't be uncommon in 70 years by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      So what miracle invention are you expecting in the next couple of years to make this viable? currently absolutely nothing is close to making what you're suggesting a reality, especially in such a short time frame to permit current old age individuals to suddenly double their lifespan from being at the tail end of their lives. I am 42, I doubt their will be anything by the time I reach old age, though I hold some very slim hope it would have to happen in the next few years to give today's young a chance.

    4. Re:Won't be uncommon in 70 years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell us about some of these promising "technologies".

      I would begin by finding how to eliminate the need for sleep. That would give us 33% increase in life span, It must not be too difficult,

    5. Re:Won't be uncommon in 70 years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, that would give you 33% increase in conscious hours. It would do zero for your actual lifespan.

    6. Re:Won't be uncommon in 70 years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be nice the same.

    7. Re:Won't be uncommon in 70 years by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      So far we have not come up with a single intervention of any kind, "technology" or not, that increases the human maximum lifespan by a single day

      To the best of my knowledge, we don't know what the maximum human lifespan is.

      observed maximum longevity

      Which I think you recognise.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  24. Taking up sky diving at 75. by gurps_npc · · Score: 1

    Some day I won't remember to pull the ripcord.

    That's my insurance against living too long.

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    1. Re:Taking up sky diving at 75. by dwye · · Score: 1

      You forget that the skydiving firm won't let you jump alone after a certain point. George H.W. Bush has to be strapped to the guy with the parachute, anymore, to prevent what you "plan" from happening by accident. Even if you had no heirs to sue them, the department regulating aviation safety will come down on the operator.

      If you want to try this trick, you'll have to check out while still hale and hearty, at least seemingly so.

    2. Re:Taking up sky diving at 75. by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      You forget that the skydiving firm won't

      Which skydiving firm? If you're doing it regularly, who needs to pay someone to check your harness? If no-one will hire you a plane and pilot, than go BASE.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  25. Immortality by Jason+Levine · · Score: 2

    The big problem with living a long time is that your body deteriorates. I'm 41 and my body isn't what it was when I was 21. When I'm 61, I'm sure I'll be wishing I still had 41-year-old-me's body. But if I was 145? The problems I'd face simply because the human body doesn't handle that extreme level of aging well? I'm sure death would be preferable.

    If you could guarantee me immortality with my body frozen at 21 (or even 41), I might jump at the chance. Yes, I might regret it when everyone I knew passed away, but I'd constantly be able to see what's coming up next an could forge new friendships. But aging to 145 seems too long for me. Not that I'm looking forward to death, but I have a feeling that I'd be eagerly waiting it way before I hit 145.

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    1. Re:Immortality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm 50. A car accident messed up my back. Cancer messed up my legs. Now arthritis is attacking my knees. I walk with a cane, and by the time I'm in a nursing home, if I last that long, I will almost certainly be in a wheelchair.

      I'd have off'd myself long ago, but it would make my mother sad. So, I don't.

      Sounds horrible,right? After seeing the other people in the cancer ward, the ones who didn't get back out, I consider myself so fucking lucky it's indescribable.

    2. Re:Immortality by typhoonius · · Score: 1

      If you could guarantee me immortality with my body frozen at 21 (or even 41), I might jump at the chance.

      Even that might not be all it's cracked up to be...

    3. Re:Immortality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bodies deteriorate at different rates, I'd pull the relevant/. Article if I were ambitious

  26. The one guy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There was the one guy who they estimated to be around 240. He received several notices that spanned several emperors, which placed him at least near 200.

    1. Re:The one guy by sabbede · · Score: 1

      According to the Sumerian King List, that's nothing.

  27. 6.5 million active SSNs for people over 112 by phrackthat · · Score: 3, Interesting

    However there are only about 35 people in the world over the age of 112. I'd say that having an identity card is a little short of absolute proof that this guy is 145.

    Between 2008 and 2011, there were over 4,000 people who applied for jobs using SSNs for people who were born before the 20th century.

    http://insider.foxnews.com/201...

  28. YOLO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's living every day like it's his last.

  29. Commit him! by Time_Ngler · · Score: 1

    An Indonesian man who claims to be the longest living human in recorded history has described how he "just wants to die"

    Get this man to a mental hospital immediately! If he wants to die, he's obviously insane and must be committed! He could potentially harm himself or others!

  30. we wuz kangs fam ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    we wuz kangs fam !

  31. An auspicious date by quantaman · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Unix Epoch is 01/01/1970, this guy is recorded as being born 31/12/1870.

    Perhaps someone was born 31/12/1969 and some function was trying to translate timestamps from one system to another.

    One day before the epoch is a bit of an edge case, and timestamp conversions can be funky. So instead of subtracting 1 from the 70 the function subtracted it from the 19 and now you have an official, but nonsensical, piece of identification in the system.

    Of course it clearly doesn't match the guy born in 1969, but surely someone noticed and "fixed" the problem by associating the record with it's rightful recipient, the oldest guy in the village.

    --
    I stole this Sig
    1. Re:An auspicious date by Talderas · · Score: 1

      The Unix Epoch is 01/01/1970, this guy is recorded as being born 31/12/1870.

      Perhaps someone was born 31/12/1969 and some function was trying to translate timestamps from one system to another.

      What a potential theory I don't think it is at all credible. We know that he has had four generations follow him which would make it quite difficult for him to have been born in 1969. If his great-great-grandchildren were just born then using an aggressive 15 years to the generation would put him at being born in 1956. I would say it's more likely a typo with the real birth year being 1907 than him being born in 1969.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
  32. Dick Cheney.... by zawarski · · Score: 1

    ....will outlive all of us.

  33. Birth certificates are mostly joke in some places by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I am from India. My uncle suddenly lopped off 25 years from his age.

    He was working as a village karnam a hereditary village official assisting land tax office and other official government work. A coupld of decades after the independence, the government decided to abolish the heridiatry position and regularize them all as "village officers". Part of the application process was filling documents for age and dates of birth. My dad told him government retiremnet age was 58 and he would be retired in 13 years or so. He did not want to suffer the loss of income. One of the official forms of documentation for date of birth was an affidavit fron the village karnam. So he issued himself an affidavit proclaiming him to be 20 years old!. Only adverse consequence was his traditional Hindu ceremonies he had to do as he turned 60 all had to be done in secret, lest the government becomes aware of his true age!

    Was thinking all the birthers could have gone to Kenya. The could find a local dynamic_cast(village karnam) to issue birth certificates for any one for any date.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  34. But others have said it better... by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

    It's only when we truly know and understand that we have a limited time on earth---and that we have no way of knowing when our time is up---that we will begin to live each day to the fullest, as if it was the only one we had. -- Elisabeth Kübler-Ross

    Death gives meaning to our lives. It gives importance and value to time. Time would become meaningless if there were too much of it. -- Ray Kurzweil

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    1. Re:But others have said it better... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Romantic nonsense. Every day should be lived to the fullest no matter what. "Fullest" may mean just sitting there contemplating your navel all day or it may mean being out doing something.

  35. It's easy to tell. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Saw him in half and count the rings.

  36. The law of small numbers by davidwr · · Score: 1

    If you held a lottery where the odds of winning were 1 in a billion billion billion, but someone won, would you call the shenanigans?

    Living to 143 or even 153 would be an extreme outlier, but to imply it is an actual impossibility by calling it a "statistical impossibility" isn't helpful.

    Now, it may actually be the case that there is an upper limit on the human lifespan (personally, I think there is, but we don't have the science to prove it yet), and it may be the case that this upper limit is under 143 years (personally, I doubt this is the case). If we eventually prove that man cannot live more than 142 years, then - and only then - can we say that this claim is actually impossible on its face. Until then, we can - and should - say that it is extremely improbably and the claimant has a very high burden of proof.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re: The law of small numbers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This topic is too important for your formal logic shenanigans!

    2. Re:The law of small numbers by khallow · · Score: 1

      If you held a lottery where the odds of winning were 1 in a billion billion billion, but someone won, would you call the shenanigans?

      Depends on the number of tickets, but normally yes, I would call shenanigans.

    3. Re:The law of small numbers by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      If you held a lottery where the odds of winning were 1 in a billion billion billion, but someone won, would you call the shenanigans?

      If someone won, no. If someone claimed to have won, yes.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    4. Re:The law of small numbers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If someone claimed to have won, an they actually won, you would call shenanigans and you would not call shenanigans?

      Ouch, the logic of yes=no, it hurts my brain!

    5. Re:The law of small numbers by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Natural language pragmatics. The latter sentence excludes the former situation.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    6. Re:The law of small numbers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The lottery being referenced isn't a drawing of a single ticket; it's a selection of a set numbers out of a predetermined set. The most popular in the US is Power Ball. For Power Ball 5 numbers (from 1-69) are drawn but the sixth number (from 1-26) has to match. So even if only one ticket was bought but all the right numbers (in the right order) were picked then that ticket would win the 'jackpot'. A quick search shows the odds of getting the first 5 numbers + the Powerball is 1 in 292,201,338.00. Statistically very unlikely, improbable, but not impossible. Sort of irrelevant but multiple tickets could have the right set of numbers so there would multiple winners.

    7. Re:The law of small numbers by cwsumner · · Score: 1

      There is no such thing as a "statistical impossibility".

      Some here might know that statistics cannot be generalized to larger groups, unless there are a certain minimum number of test samples?

      Well, the math works both ways, the statistics can not be reliably applied to groups -smaller- than that sample size.

      So, statistics are invalid for groups consisting of one person. ;-)

      (That mistake has caused a whole list of bad things to happen in many societies.)

    8. Re:The law of small numbers by khallow · · Score: 1

      And now we're reduced the odds from 1 in 10^27 to nearly 1 in 1. This is not the earlier lottery case.

    9. Re:The law of small numbers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the problem with some people. Improbably (even highly-fucking-improbable) does NOT equal impossible.
      Yeah, someone making a 1 in a billion billion billion shot is so unlikely it would merit serious investigation. But not to outright dismiss it as an impossibility. That's just being intellectually lazy by substituting statistics and rounding for thinking.

    10. Re:The law of small numbers by khallow · · Score: 1

      Who dismissed it as an impossibility? I merely pointed out the obvious, if one outcome (here, shenanigans) is many orders of magnitude more likely than a second one, then why assume the second is true?

  37. Indonesia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, if I lived in Indonesia I would want to die too.

  38. I thought there was a limit in the low 120's. by sabbede · · Score: 1
    Something about neural degradation in the brain? Been a while since I looked into such things.

    If he really is 20-some years past that, I'd sure like to know how/why. I'd like researchers to know how/why even more, and then put their findings to the best conceivable use - keeping me around longer.

  39. What's more likely? by Maritz · · Score: 1

    What's more likely? That the record for oldest human has been shattered by 23 years, or this guy is full of shit? I know which I find more plausible.

    --
    I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  40. You are immortels. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    God is good, and loves you, thus you are immortels.

  41. Not the oldest on record. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Methuselah was the longest living human on record at 969 years. The Bible is a historical record, even if some won't accept it.
    There may have even been older people of that day who weren't mentioned simply because there genealogy wasn't important.

  42. Ready for death. What kind of talk is that? by Script+Cat · · Score: 1

    He's 145 supposedly. Try to make it an even 150. If he's that old, he could maybe tell us some stuff about the late 19th century. That predates planes, cars, WW1. What was it like?

    1. Re:Ready for death. What kind of talk is that? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      If he's that old, he could maybe tell us some stuff about the late 19th century. That predates planes, cars, WW1. What was it like?

      In central Java, probably sensibly indistinguishable from 1940. Probably (I don't know the history of the suppression of the revolution well enough) the World War 2 and the Malaysian Emergency might have made some impression - if the Japanese got that far south.

      The changes in the last 3/4-century are probably much more noticeable than those in the previous 3/4-century.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  43. August 26, 1883 by Script+Cat · · Score: 1

    Ask this man how his day went on August 26, 1883.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    1. Re:August 26, 1883 by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Decent test. But at 560-odd km range, there would probably have been some ash fall and sound of distant explosions. Just like the 1990 (Kelud), 1982 (Galunggung, of the Glider fame), 1966 (Kelud again), 1951 (Kelud again), 1919 (Kelud, again!) eruptions.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  44. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  45. You guys are all talking about the wrong story. by Narcocide · · Score: 1

    All of you are wasting time arguing about whether its inherently good or bad to live this long. I just want to know what he's been eating, and how much cardio he gets in.

  46. static Mars in Stranger in Strange Land by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Mars is composed of mostly immortal beings. Very static society consisting of millennia long art projects.

  47. Please... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    145 years old? That's a big nope. 115 is a pretty solid threshold, kinda interesting statistically. You get 120s here and there, but not 130s. Claiming to be in your 140s without extremely detailed documentation is laughable.

  48. I assume they're not dog years... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It helps to be talking about the same time-span here. :-P

  49. Re:Captain Kirk says...More like Vampire Chronicle by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    I'm old enough now that, when feeling particularly sour I said something about not liking the music now, the attitudes now, etc. And in the next sentence, I admitted that my father felt that way about current times when I was in my 20s.

    Assuming you're around my age (40s), your father was wrong. The music of the 70s-80s was the best. The music being made now is crap, at least if you're talking about commercialized stuff. (There's a lot of good independent stuff though.)

    The world has changed and I don't fit in quite so well anymore.

    Oh please. The nice thing about modern times and the internet is that you don't need to "fit in" any more; you can live in your own secluded subculture. There's no shortage of online communities (and offline ones too: see meetup.com) catering to any eclectic interest you might have. You really do need to live in or near a metro area to take advantage of much of this though if you want any in-person interactions with others of your subculture.

  50. This guy, was the longest living human that we can by SteelWolf13 · · Score: 1

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... When seventy-eight he retired from his military career after fighting in a battle at Golden River, and returned to a life of gathering herbs on Snow Mountain in Sichuan province. Due to his military service in the army of General Yu Zhongqi, the imperial government sent a document congratulating Li on his one-hundredth year of life, as was subsequently done on his 150th and 200th birthdays.[10] In 1928, Dean Wu Chung-chien of the Department of Education at Minkuo University discovered the imperial documents showing these birthday wishes to Li Qingyun. His discovery was first reported in the two leading Chinese newspapers of that period, North China Daily News and Shanghai Declaration News, and then one year later in 1929 by The New York Times and Time magazine. Both of these Western publications also reported the death of Li Qingyun in May 1933.[10]

  51. And the supporting evidence is where? by iceco2 · · Score: 1

    The article doesn't mention any supporting evidence. I'm not even talking about documents from before age 22 like the guiness records people usually ask for. If he is indeed 145 years old there should be an abundance of evidence prooving at least he is more than 113 years old making him the oldest man alive. Where is this evidence, the article mentions nothing, and neither does a five minute google search. I call bull.

  52. Confirmed? by superdave80 · · Score: 1

    Now officials at the local record office say they have finally been able to confirm that remarkable date as genuine.

    Really? There were no details given on this. Did they find his original birth certificate? I didn't realize Indonesia had such great recordkeeping that long ago. Frankly, I find this whole story as BS. Dec. 31st, 1870? Sounds like somebody just filled in a random date because they had no idea how old he was.

  53. Not new by dafradu · · Score: 1

    Such claims are not new, in Brazil a woman had an ID with birthday in 1880, she died at age 130. Also this year they found a men whose birth certificate has his birthday in 1884, 131 years old. This men lives in a remote village and has a 30 years old daughter, it is also very unlikely he was a father at 101.

    100 years ago in remote places the records are just not trustworthy, the birth certificate from the men above is from the 70s and it probably was his first one. It was very common even 50-70 years ago to people get their first birth certificate when they started working or applying to social benefits when already adults.

  54. Count the rings, again by Bratch · · Score: 1

    I'm counting how many people suggest to cut him in half and count the rings, without having read all the previous comments where this was already said. Seems to be a trend around here.

    Just like listening to others before talking, you should read other comments before posting.

    --
    Beware of the Redittor who loans you a Sharpie.
  55. Java by GrahamJ · · Score: 1

    If I lived in Java if want to die too.