How many documented cases are there of people living more than 5 days without water? Anyone?
[quote]RSGZ wrote:
Indeed, so let’s not believe that Jesus was wandering a desert for 40 days without food, you can’t pick and choose what to take literally and what not to. [/quote]
LOL. If you’re saying that Jesus wandering around a desert sans food is acceptable, but a talking snake isn’t (because that would be ridiculous), then I’m afraid that you’re the one doing the picking and choosing. I shouldn’t have to point out that a certain talking snake figured quite heavily in the Bible.
[quote]
Yes, and logically that would mean his body would be storing nutrients and partitioning energy more efficiently. I was saying the same thing from another perspective, it’s not impossible but still implausible. [/quote]
Point is though, you’re not just coming at it from another perspective: you are complicating the idea, thereby making more implausible - that’s fine, but don’t put words in my mouth.
The partitioning of energy and nutrients don’t come into play here because everybody agrees that it is possible for a human to survive for more than ten days without food. What we are talking about is whether a human can stave off the effects of dehydration for the same amount of time.
[quote]roybot wrote:
RSGZ wrote:
Indeed, so let’s not believe that Jesus was wandering a desert for 40 days without food, you can’t pick and choose what to take literally and what not to.
LOL. If you’re saying that Jesus wandering around a desert sans food is acceptable, but a talking snake isn’t (because that would be ridiculous), then I’m afraid that you’re the one doing the picking and choosing. I shouldn’t have to point out that a certain talking snake figured quite heavily in the Bible. [/quote]
I’m saying all that is absurd and NONE of it should be taken seriously. I never brought up Jesus in the first place.
So his body wouldn’t need to be more efficient at storing energy prior to going on a no water and no food fast?
If he truly had gone 72 years without food or water (really come on now…really?) why is this the first time anybody has talked about it.
/72 years…really?
//oh India…that explains it
[quote] RSGZ wrote:
I’m saying all that is absurd and NONE of it should be taken seriously. I never brought up Jesus in the first place.[/quote]
So you didn’t bring up Jesus and talking snakes?
[quote]RSGZ wrote:
"Those same people believe in talking snakes and parting oceans. "
"Indeed, so let’s not believe that Jesus was wandering a desert for 40 days without food, you can’t pick and choose what to take literally and what not to. "
“I’m saying all that is absurd and NONE of it should be taken seriously. I never brought up Jesus in the first place.” [/quote]
If you can’t accept accountability for what you said, then I’m not going to discuss this any more. If you think the idea of hidden meanings and ideas behind ancient symbolism is “absurd”, then I suggest you start reading around. Start with some Joseph Campbell.
From my last post:
“The partitioning of energy and nutrients don’t come into play here because everybody agrees that it is possible for a human to survive for more than ten days without food. What we are talking about is whether a human can stave off the effects of dehydration for the same amount of time.”
Why are you bringing up food again after what I said above?
Let’s put it this way. The fact that you think there is a chance ONE person out of 7 billion can live without consuming any water for 10 days tells me all I need to know. The fact that people with medical degrees will entertain the same idea is laughable.
And X brought up Jesus, not me.
You don’t think that weight loss after a mere ten days is relevant given that he claims 72 years without food or drink?
Where did he lose the weight then? Muscle? Fat? Water he doesn’t drink? Food he doesn’t eat? It would have made more sense if he hadn’t lost any weight.
If your first reaction isn’t to think that this is complete bullshit, then you’re probably in the midst of writing a check to a Nigerian prince. I mean hey, this time he’s probably telling the truth.
[quote]RSGZ wrote:
Let’s put it this way. The fact that you think there is a chance ONE person out of 7 billion can live without consuming any water for 10 days tells me all I need to know. The fact that people with medical degrees will entertain the same idea is laughable.
And X brought up Jesus, not me.[/quote]
This is dumb. I am asking fucking questions. I am asking how well they watched the guy. I am asking if their “watching” is valid. if this were done in Texas Children’s Medical Hospital with around the clock surveillance, it would be much more believable.
This is NOT about simply believing he lasted for ten days without food and water. It is about questioning the possibility in someone whose body is used to long term fasting for most of his life due to religious reasons.
If this is still hard for you to understand, so be it.
If a HOSPITAL claims they watched the guy and he ate and drank nothing, I start asking more questions.
No one gives a shit about his 72 year claim.
[quote]Ronsauce wrote:
You don’t think that weight loss after a mere ten days is relevant given that he claims 72 years without food or drink?
Where did he lose the weight then? Muscle? Fat? Water he doesn’t drink? Food he doesn’t eat? It would have made more sense if he hadn’t lost any weight.
[/quote]
Really? No one is question the 72 year claim so why would it make more sense to you if he didn’t lose weight?
I do believe most in this thread are discussing THE TEN DAYS THAT HE WAS WATCHED IN A HOSPITAL.
[quote]RSGZ wrote:
Let’s put it this way. The fact that you think there is a chance ONE person out of 7 billion can live without consuming any water for 10 days tells me all I need to know. The fact that people with medical degrees will entertain the same idea is laughable.[/quote]
And the fact that you think there is no chance that one person out of 7 billion can live without consuming any water for 10 days under any circumstances tells me all I need to know.
[quote]
And X brought up Jesus, not me.[/quote]
Yes, he did mention Jesus first, but he didn’t do so to highlight the futility of believing there may be more to the sacred image of a talking snake than meets the eye. It hadn’t even been mentioned then; it was an unrelated point, but you brought up Jesus again in a failed attempt to trip me up. Anyway, I’m done.
my dad can beat up all you dads.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
“You can hold a lot of water in those yogi beards. A sneaky yogi for certain,” he said. “He MUST take in water. The human body cannot survive without it.” The effects of food and water deprivation are profound, Van Rooyen explained.
[/quote]
Someone should sneak a knife into Van Rooyen’s back. Who the fuck holds water in a beard?
Yogis can spend many hours in focused meditation. Has there not been enough evidence of the mind’s strength over the body? Imagine years of concentrated effort. There are sects within religions of India (mostly stemming from Hinduism) that focus on the preservation of life ranging from not eating food grown in the ground (carrots, potatoes etc) to being against the killing of any life (even microbial life that is destroyed when breathing for which they wear white cloth over their mouth).
A friend of mine is from a religion known as Jain that has origins in Hinduism and while it felt incredulous to believe him at first mentioned once yogis could spend 300 to 400 days without food and water (rather absorbing moisture from the atmosphere). While I know this means the yogis DOES consume water how much water do you think you can consume from moisture before you need real food and water (6 hours, 8 hours, a day?)
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Our understanding of our own bodies is extremely young so I don’t understand the stance some of the docs are taking on this.
LOL[/quote]
This is absolute horse shit.
[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Our understanding of our own bodies is extremely young so I don’t understand the stance some of the docs are taking on this.
LOL[/quote]
This is absolute horse shit.[/quote]
Brilliant.
Look up Robert Bogucki. Then come back and tell me why you believe no human can EVER survive more than 6 days without water.
How many people even TRY to live that long without water? How many people go 70 years living a lifestyle that embraces fasting as a normal aspect of life and get tested to see how long they can go without water?
It is “horseshit” that we still can’t explain all aspects of our own being and that much of it is still theory?
Hell, inside your own mouth the idea of how pain is sensed inside of a tooth is STILL A THEORY…yet you think we have it all figured out?
Why do you think we are not still in infancy as far as our own understanding?
Eggs were bad for you 10 years ago but not now…yet you think we have full understanding of EVERYTHING.
97 year old woman survives 8 days without food and water:
http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/01/03/iran.quake/index.html
Could someone get me those studies proving this is impossible?
I mean, clearly it must be if so many are calling me an idiot for thinking that 10 days may just be possible.
Newborn babies survive 7 days without food or water under wreckage:
Under “Hospital Juarez”
Of course, clearly this is also impossible…because I’m an idiot…for asking questions about what the human body is capable of.
I am still waiting on those studies proving all of this to not be true.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Our understanding of our own bodies is extremely young so I don’t understand the stance some of the docs are taking on this.
LOL[/quote]
This is absolute horse shit.[/quote]
Brilliant.
Look up Robert Bogucki. Then come back and tell me why you believe no human can EVER survive more than 6 days without water.
How many people even TRY to live that long without water? How many people go 70 years living a lifestyle that embraces fasting as a normal aspect of life and get tested to see how long they can go without water?
It is “horseshit” that we still can’t explain all aspects of our own being and that much of it is still theory?
Hell, inside your own mouth the idea of how pain is sensed inside of a tooth is STILL A THEORY…yet you think we have it all figured out?
Why do you think we are not still in infancy as far as our own understanding?
Eggs were bad for you 10 years ago but not now…yet you think we have full understanding of EVERYTHING.[/quote]
How pain is sensed inside a tooth? I don’t understand what you mean. Is there a double meaning behind this?
I don’t get it. I would assume nerve endings would have to do with it.
http://knol.google.com/k/-/-/iQYfUduC/Oz_Htw/normal-tooth-marked-sized.jpg
As for Robert Bogucki, he says he survived by drinking muddy water and eating plants.
He lost 45 pounds in those odd 40 days he was lost.
What is that supposed to prove?
We know a lot about the human body. We might not know everything, but we know quite a bit.
Eggs were never bad for you. The study that said eggs were bad for you was conducted in the 70s and involved egg substitute powder. Just because a few retards ran with it doesn’t mean it was the cold hard facts.
edit: The exceptions, which you have linked, are not the rule. Either way, we know the human body can do incredible things in trying times.
I wasn’t talking about that. The part I said was horseshit was when you basically said we don’t know much.
[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
How pain is sensed inside a tooth? I don’t understand what you mean. Is there a double meaning behind this?
I don’t get it. I would assume nerve endings would have to do with it.[/quote]
It is a THEORY (THE HYDRODYNAMIC THEORY OF DENTINAL PAIN PERCEPTION) that dentinal tubules react to some foods and acidic environments sending a wave of water through the tubules causing pain…so NO, it is not as simple as “nerve endings” and you are speaking to someone who actually went to school for this…yet you thought I didn’t know what I was speaking of in my own specialty???
[quote]
http://knol.google.com/k/-/-/iQYfUduC/Oz_Htw/normal-tooth-marked-sized.jpg
As for Robert Bogucki, he says he survived by drinking muddy water and eating plants.
He lost 45 pounds in those odd 40 days he was lost.
What is that supposed to prove?[/quote]
That the human body can go through very extreme conditions and still survive?
Do you think everyone you see walking around would survive in those conditions?
If not, then would that not point to some variability at the least as far as the extremes some can endure?
[quote]
We know a lot about the human body. We might not know everything, but we know quite a bit.[/quote]
The point is that we do NOT know everything. We aren’t even close. Yes, we know quite a bit, but there is still enough undiscovered to turn what we think we know upside down.
Good…then show me proof of the limit of survival for a human being as far as days without water.
You called me out for saying we are still in infancy as far as our own understanding…yet you have shown nothing that indicates otherwise.
Yes, we know a lot. No, we do not know everything. Yes, what we are missing is still A HELL OF A LOT.
[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
edit: The exceptions, which you have linked, are not the rule. Either way, we know the human body can do incredible things in trying times.
I wasn’t talking about that. The part I said was horseshit was when you basically said we don’t know much.
[/quote]
Oh, I see you added some. If these are exceptions, THAT WOULD MEAN THEY ARE FUCKING POSSIBLE. Yet look at how many have come out of the woodwork to act like a doctor even THINKING 10 days is possible should somehow call my entire education into question.
We haven’t even discovered all of the life on our own planet yet you are going to hold the position that we know enough about ourselves and our surroundings that we are at an advanced stage in our understanding of those issues and the universe itself?
Please.
Like I said, it is most often the LEAST educated who hold this stance.