- Apr 17, 2008
- 6,574
- 3
- 0
they say hes the oldest dude evar:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-last-week-could-be-oldest-living-person.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-last-week-could-be-oldest-living-person.html
Shame he had no kids.
Whatever special sauce he had in his genes will be lost.
not all people are the way you want people on the internet to believe you are....i bet he does have kids out there, he just doesnt know about em
Shame he had no kids.
Whatever special sauce he had in his genes will be lost.
Shame he had no kids.
Whatever special sauce he had in his genes will be lost.
There is no conclusive evidence that he is that old and they are about to perform some tests to figure out if his claim is real or not. He wouldn't be the first person that claims to be a ridiculous age and isn't anywhere near that claim.
There is no conclusive evidence that he is that old and they are about to perform some tests to figure out if his claim is real or not.
"Hecka"? That's like hella, but even dumber.
I call bullshit on his age.
What can they do? Cut off a leg and count the rings?
The special sauce might simply have been chance.
As funny as this comment is, you should know there are very good scientific ways to accurately estimate a person's age similar to "counting rings" of a tree. It's not going to give an exact date down to the day, but it can estimate the year pretty well depending upon the test.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2465138/
For example and MRI test looking at the fusing process of wrist bones across a wide sample has shown full fusion doesn't ever occur before age 17. The median of full fusion, as shown by an MRI and not an X-ray, is at 18.3 years. X-rays are a bit off as they aren't as precise an instrument to measure with, although they are cheaper to use still.
As for determining the age of the very old, still not that hard to do either.
There are several tests though that can be used to determine age with a various amount of deviation in the result. DNA tests looking at the telemore fraying for example can be used to determine the age of a person +/- 2.5 years of accuracy. That just takes a single drop of blood or DNA sample to run.
When several tests are run though, as needed, it's possible to get a pretty good accurate age for a person making claims such as being 120+ years old.
Yeah I knew they could accurately characterize it, but what I don't know is if they can tell the difference between, say, 109 years and 120 years.
Most people that have claimed to be over 120 years of age though are far from it. Most test into the range of 80ish. They are far off and know it.
that dude doesnt look like hes 100, his face and hands dont have than many wrinkles
