RE: [asa] Ages of the Patriarchs

From: John Walley <john@walley-world.org>
Date: Sat Feb 17 2007 - 17:35:39 EST

Randy,
 
RTB has published the below paper on some of the current research that
supports the possibility of longer ages and a slower aging process.
 
In addition the biochemistry of again is a frequent topic in their daily
emails. Several studies are referenced showing dramatically increased life
spans and reduced aging in several organisms including transgenic mice and
Drosophila through manipulating body temperatures and enzymes and other
compounds.
 
 

Long Life Spans: "Adam Lived 930 Years and Then He Died"

New Discoveries in the Biochemistry of Aging Support the Biblical Record

 
<http://www.reasons.org/resources/fff/2001issue05/index.shtml#long_life_span
s>
http://www.reasons.org/resources/fff/2001issue05/index.shtml#long_life_spans

 

Today's New Reason To Believe-Monday, December 18, 2006
Biochemistry Supports Bible's Long Life Spans

* Another advance in the biochemistry of aging makes the long life
spans recorded in Genesis 5 and 11 scientifically plausible. Skeptics often
charge the Bible with absurdity for recording human histories of hundreds of
years. In a recent study, researchers demonstrated that life expectancy of
mice can be increased by genetically engineering the mice to overproduce a
protein called the uncoupling protein in neurons associated with the
hypothalamus. This process leads to a reduction in body temperature of about
0.5 C, which results in a 20 percent increase in life expectancy. If
scientists can significantly manipulate life spans by biochemical
intervention, it is not unreasonable to think that a Creator could adjust
human biochemistry to permit long life spans and then shorten them after the
Flood. In light of this study, the long human life spans described in
Genesis are scientifically reasonable.

* Bruno Conti et al., "Transgenic Mice with a Reduced Core Body
Temperature Have an
<http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/314/5800/825> Increased Life
Span," Science 314 (2006): 825-28.

 

Today's New Reason To Believe - Monday, January 3, 2005
Biochemistry Supports Bible's Long Life Spans

* For many skeptics the long life spans recorded in Genesis 5 and 11
seem absurd. Recent advances in the biochemistry of aging, however, make
these long life spans scientifically plausible. In this study, researchers
demonstrate that increased activity of the enzyme Sir2 extends the life span
of the fruit fly, Drosophila. This process provides a biochemical means for
the Creator to permit long life spans (through increased Sir2 activity) and,
in turn, to shorten them (through decreased Sir2 activity) at the time of
the Flood. In light of this study, long human life spans described in
Genesis are scientifically reasonable.

* Blanka Rogina and Stephen L. Helfand, "
<http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/0404184101v1> Sir2 Mediates
Longevity in the Fly Through a Pathway Related to Calorie Restriction,"
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA (2004): 15998-16003.

 
Today's New Reason To Believe - Friday, September 26

* This study shows that subtle changes in the cell's biochemistry
cause aging and suggests one way that the Creator could have worked to
decrease human life spans as described in Genesis. During the aging process,
oxidative damage to DNA in the nucleus and mitochondria takes place. This
study demonstrates that when aging occurs, the enzymes that repair this
damage in mitochondria become trapped in the mitochondrial membrane during
transport into the mitochondria and are unavailable.

* Bartosz Szczesny et al.,"
<http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/1932854100v1> Age-Dependent
Deficiency in Import of Mitochondrial DNA Glycosylases Required for Repair
of Oxidatively Damaged Bases," PNAS, USA 100 (2003), 10670-75.

 
Advances in the Biochemistry of Aging Corroborate the Bible's Long Life
Spans

* Ongoing advances in the biochemistry of aging make the long life
spans recorded in Genesis 5 and 11 scientifically plausible. In a recent
study, researchers demonstrated that feeding the compound resveratrol to
mice improved the function of their mitochondria and protected them from
metabolic disease. Previous studies have shown that resveratrol increases
life expectancy in laboratory organisms, and the compound is being explored
as a life-extending pharmaceutical agent. This latest work provides a
mechanistic explanation for resveratrol's activity. If scientists can
significantly increase life spans by administering pharmaceutical agents, it
is not unreasonable to think that a Creator could adjust human biochemistry
to permit long life spans (such as those recorded in Genesis 5 and 11) and
then shorten life expectancy after the Flood. In light of this study, the
long human life spans described in Scripture are scientifically reasonable.

* Marie Lagouge et al., "
<http://www.cell.com/content/article/abstract?uid=PIIS0092867406014280>
Resveratrol Improves Mitochondrial Function and Protects against Metabolic
Disease by Activating SIRT1 and PGC-1," Cell 127 (2006): 1109-22.

 

 
 
 
  _____

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Randy Isaac
Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 8:42 AM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] Ages of the Patriarchs

I have several questions on this topic.
 
First, for Dick Fischer:
 
You wrote "Evidence for long life is scant at best, but personally, I take
the ages at face value" by which I take it you mean the stated numbers in
Gen. 1-11 are the physical years of life of the patriarchs. I've long
admired your work, and that of Carol Hill, Conrad Hyers, etc. in the sense
that a deep understanding of the mesopotamian culture is vital to
understanding Genesis. Given the indications that numbers had a great
symbolic value in that culture, why do you feel that these numbers represent
chronology instead of symbolism? Or at least would you have an openness to
the possibility that they might be?
 
To any paleontologists or similar expertise:
 
How is the longevity of a pre-historic species determined? esp. of mammals?
Is there any evidence for enhanced longevity in Homo Sapiens at any time in
the past? (assuming the longevity wasn't limited to a small number of
special cases)
If not, is it simply that there is no evidence of it? or is there evidence
that there was no enhanced longevity?
 
To biologists:
 
What is the latest research thinking on aging? How big a factor is radiation
considered to be?
What is the role of telomeres in aging? Can you help explain telomeres?
Is there any reason to believe that Homo Sapiens could have had, from a
biological point of view, enhanced longevity in the past?
Is there reason to believe it couldn't have had it?
Is the increase in life expectancy over the last couple of centuries
entirely due to the shift in distribution of life spans? or is there also an
element of increasing longevity?
(assuming I'm using the terms longevity and life expectancy correctly to
mean, respectively, the inherent 'early disease-free' life of an average
individual, vs the actuarial expectation)
 
 
Randy
 
 
 
 
 

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Feb 17 17:36:42 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Feb 17 2007 - 17:36:42 EST