Could gene splicing be the answer to increasing longevity?

[Jalopy]

Have you noticed that the smaller the organism, the lower the lifespan? Mice have a lower lifespan than cats, who have a lower lifespan than dogs. Humans have a lower lifespan than bears, who have a lower lifespan than giraffes. 

The scientific explanation is that the more complex an energy lifeform, the more time it takes to do its thing before fizzling out. And the religious principle of Karma contends that every energy being, a compilation of matter of all sorts, must run its course, complete its destiny, before the totality runs its course. Each individual bit of energy must complete it's god given purpose on the universal plane, and the more energy there is in a thing, the more destiny there is to be traversed, in a vague sort of way. 

So the trick about increasing human lifespan is to make ourselves a bigger species.

One way to do this, is to clone human genomes with giraffe genomes. Giants would result, and giants of the old testament lived for hundreds of years, which supports that theory too. 

Edited March 2, 2022 by Jalopy

[CharonY]

You can refute the assumption rather easily by not cherry-picking examples. Turtles have longer lifespan than most mammals of equivalent size. Many simpler animals have incredible lifespans (e.g. corals) or are virtually immortal (hydra). A part that is connected to lifespan is metabolic activity, but that does fully correlate either. Moreover, animals with very short lifespans simply do not have enough time to accumulate more biomass, so even theoretically there would be a limit on how big they can get. But even if we limit ourselves to a narrow group of animals, we see exceptions. Bats, for example are tiny, but some species have lifespans beyond 20 years.

14 minutes ago, Jalopy said:

The scientific explanation

Considering what you wrote following that start, it does not seem that you are quite clear on what a scientific explanation is. Instead of providing literature that supports your notion you write some new-age inspired random thoughts that are based on nothing but gut feeling perhaps (and again, starting from a wrong premise, to boot). 

[Peterkin]

23 minutes ago, Jalopy said:

Mice have a lower lifespan than cats, who have a lower lifespan than dogs. Humans have a lower lifespan than bears, who have a lower lifespan than giraffes. 

This is incorrect. Domestic cats and dog have the same approximate life expectancy: 10-20 years, depending on breed. Bears and giraffes both have an average life expectancy between 20 and 30 years - the giraffe being on the lower side. Humans may live 70-100 years, given hospitable environment. 

23 minutes ago, Jalopy said:

The scientific explanation is that the more complex an energy lifeform, the more time it takes to do its thing before fizzling out.

"Fizzling out" is not, AFAIK, a scientific principle.  A little more time at the drawing-board may be advisable.

Edited March 2, 2022 by Peterkin

[Phi for All]

2 minutes ago, Jalopy said:

Mice have a lower lifespan than cats, who have a lower lifespan than dogs.

Cats, in general, live longer than dogs. Small dogs, in general, live longer than big dogs. 

9 minutes ago, Jalopy said:

Trees top the lifespan list with longetivity sometimes going into the hundreds of years.

And yet the oldest trees aren't the largest. It's looking like your idea is incomplete.

10 minutes ago, Jalopy said:

The scientific explanation is that the more complex an energy lifeform, the more time it takes to do its thing and fizz out.

And like most phenomena, there is no single scientific explanation, especially for complex lifeforms (don't say "energy lifeforms" unless you're prepared to define this for us). There are lots of factors in this instance besides size. Some lifeforms (like cats) live longer because they live a more isolated life, and aren't as prone to disease as herd and pack species are. Some creatures live in stages where size has less of an impact than function. 

16 minutes ago, Jalopy said:

So the trick about increasing human lifespan is to make ourselves a bigger species.

We're already getting so big that many babies have to be cut out of their mothers at birth. Bigger size means using more resources, and that's another "big" problem. I think your solutions are far too simplistic for the complex stuff you're talking about. I really wish you'd put that wonderful mind to use studying mainstream science rather than trying to solve all problems with a hammer you made yourself.

 

[Jalopy]

3 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

Cats, in general, live longer than dogs. Small dogs, in general, live longer than big dogs. 

And yet the oldest trees aren't the largest. It's looking like your idea is incomplete.

And like most phenomena, there is no single scientific explanation, especially for complex lifeforms (don't say "energy lifeforms" unless you're prepared to define this for us). There are lots of factors in this instance besides size. Some lifeforms (like cats) live longer because they live a more isolated life, and aren't as prone to disease as herd and pack species are. Some creatures live in stages where size has less of an impact than function. 

We're already getting so big that many babies have to be cut out of their mothers at birth. Bigger size means using more resources, and that's another "big" problem. I think your solutions are far too simplistic for the complex stuff you're talking about. I really wish you'd put that wonderful mind to use studying mainstream science rather than trying to solve all problems with a hammer you made yourself.

 

you say cats live longer than dogs, but thats just nitpicking. on principle, the bigger the animal, the longer it lives. otherwise trees would have a lower longetevity than cats, which would never be the case. not trying to be pert or cheeky, jussayin.

[Buai]

Afaik aging isn't related to how old the parents are during conception (as the Church has been experimenting on in my line)

It has more to do with epigenetics and lifestyle choices and 'aging' is really just transfiguration. Now at some level the 'shaping of the body due to lifestyle's does effect the barometric pressure readings inside the fertilized egg of the mother at the time of conception.

The gene expression for aging and death has always been 70-120 in the Orangutan-line that 'white people' come from afaict. 

Edited March 2, 2022 by Buai

[Peterkin]

1 minute ago, Jalopy said:

the bigger the animal, the longer it lives. otherwise trees would have a lower longetevity than cats, which would never be the case.

Couple of issues: I can't exactly trace the taxonomy of "tree" in Animalia. Trees are various in size and range in lifespan from shorter than a cat's to longer than the rise and fall of human empires. A short fat olive tree may be a 1000 years old, while a tall, majestic Lombardy poplar fizzles out in 15. And you did put humans, who live three times as long as bears, four times as long as a bison and five lifetimes of a musk-ox, far too low on the longevity scale.

[Buai]

It says that from Chimpanzee to Native African males it has gone from 15 years to 79 years and from Orangutans to Caucasian it's gone from 58 to 75.

 

So it's really that is just the transfiguration of change in the species. 

[Peterkin]

4 minutes ago, Buai said:

(as the Church has been experimenting on in my line)

What? How? Which church?

[Phi for All]

1 minute ago, Jalopy said:

you say cats live longer than dogs, but thats just nitpicking. on principle, the bigger the animal, the longer it lives.

https://www.akc.org/expert-advice/health/why-do-small-dogs-live-longer/

Quote

Although large mammals tend to live the longest, small body size within a species is associated with longer life and slower aging. 

 

9 minutes ago, Jalopy said:

otherwise trees would have a lower longetevity than cats, which would never be the case.

I'm not sure this reasoning is good. Some fruit trees live as long as some house cats. And some smaller animals live much longer than some larger ones, as CharonY mentioned. And besides that, trying to make humans bigger in order to extend life expectancy would seem to create more problems than it solves. Better healthcare, better nutrition, more attention to safety, all these things show a much better chance of succeeding.

2 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

What? How? Which church?

You like herring, do you?

[Peterkin]

2 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

You like herring, do you?

Not to eat, but I'm up for chasing the odd one.

[Buai]

You could really take a Primate line, change their lifestyle and get a new protohominid from the next few generations.

The electrical activity in the atomic orbitals of the molecules of the DNA in our reactive nervous tissue does get mitigated post-morten but the cells don't actually stop reproducing. It's safe to assume that the cells die and procreate faster and shorter than the organism they compose and that has to do with your overall lifespan.

However, as trauma can effect memory function it is a matter of fact that death is caused due to the limit of information in the form of memory that the mind can old.

And obviously if we can predict the weather a day or two in advance we have the tech for future predictions (quantum computers) already.

6 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

What? How? Which church?

People have always been trying to defy their fates. Even the Church is no different than your 'scientific authorities'.

[Phi for All]

Folks, even in Speculations we don't bring up religion, and for several good reasons. 

[Buai]

11 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

 

You like herring, do you?

Having a Dunning Kruger effect are we? Stay green.

Anyways, obviously enough people aren't for the ole 'red' faction b/c I'd have pretty laidies knocking instead of an overkill number of armed thugs.

4 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

 religion, 

DHEY tryna get me out dah way!

& on the phone the feminazi Xenomorph Queen wannabe was trying to make me think about time dilation before the fact like I'm that stupid 😭😂😴

Edited March 2, 2022 by Buai

[Peterkin]

8 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

Folks, even in Speculations we don't bring up religion, and for several good reasons. 

Sorry! It as the word "experiment" that snagged my attention, not the religious aspect. But now that the poster's identity has been further revealed, I'll not make that mistake again.

Edited March 2, 2022 by Peterkin

[Buai]

11 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

Sorry! It as the word "experiment" that snagged my attention, not the religious aspect. But now that the poster's ident

You sound like a big fat black lady

[Peterkin]

1 hour ago, Buai said:

You sound like a big fat black lady

Thank you.

[TheVat]

Did someone open a large canister of nuts this week at SFN?  Wow.