No Water for 72 Years

Off Topic
121

[quote]Rational Gaze wrote:
I’m familiar with the life of Ramanujan; I’m a mathematician, by the way. [/quote] I was aware of that from some of your previous posts, and that last post wasn’t directed at you [quote] You’re taking that stuff far too literally.

Yes, Ramanujan had little formal training in mathematics; although Hardy and Littlewood tried to educate him in topics like complex analysis, he had picked up lots of bad habits from his isolated studies. He wasn’t coming up with theorems using automatic writing, or channeling some divine source of mathematical knowledge.

His notebooks show how much his work was derived from an intimate understanding and study of numbers. He stated false results occasionally. There are so many fantastic ideas of his though, that you may think there was something magical about him, and there was. But it was that he was a great genius, not some kind of mystic. [/quote]

Actually, I’m not it taking literally. In thinking that you’ve totally misunderstood my point:
I brought up Ramanujan as an example of a person who made a great contribution to science and mathematics while drawing inspiration from a divine source. I didn’t say that I believed that a deity was responsible for his genius; you are assuming that’s what I’m saying.

What I’m actually saying is that Ramanujan believed it, but it didn’t seem to limit him, whether or not you think his genius was purely the result of genetics. In fact, it could be said that his religious devotion helped nurture his genius.

And just for the record, not once have I ever made any reference in this thread to my belief in the mystical, so I don’t know where that idea comes from.

Didn’t I explain to you that I was referring to one specific law?

My thoughts on karma from a different thread:

"Whether or not you believe in ‘karma’, one thing’s for sure: if you go around acting like a complete bastard, you increase your chances of stepping on the wrong set of toes; if you treat everyone around you like shit, then you push away the people who would help you if you fell.

There is a definite truth there, it’s just that most people choose to dismiss that truth because it was supposedly issued by a fat guy in a cloud. The idea is still sound… A lot of “recent” scientific breakthroughs and modern philosophical concepts have a lot in common with the underlying messages in ancient religions.

People usually don’t make the connection because their own religious views get in the way, or they can’t see the underlying message in the first place…

Interesting link to support my last comment:

http://en.wikipedia.org/...The_Golden_Rule

There are analogues of the concept of Karma in every major religion. Same thing, different phrasing. "

So the sum of your argument is that the underlying idea of karma (as explained above) is not a variation on cause and effect because it doesn’t follow a “proposed mechanism”? If I went out of my way to destroy the lives of everyone around me, then sooner or later I’m going to destroy my own quality of life. That’s not a vague notion nor is it an example of the supernatural at work, but it is essentially “karmic”. Even if there is no god forcing my hand. Both of the above are examples of action/ reaction at work, but they are totally unrelated to Newton’s law - which observes the same thing just with objects and forces instead of people?

122

[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]

You have no understanding of the human body, let alone your own body. There is a reason why the term “the practice of medicine” exists. There are so many mechanisms and feedback loops that are complicated and not yet discovered.

Why experiments on soldiers who have been trained to withstand conditions considered to be impossible for the human body to withstand. Cold, heat, humidity, pain, so many different situations and environments where adaptation has allowed people to survive, and even thrive.

123

Ramanujan certainly observed Hindu customs, but it is debatable whether he believed in religion to the extent this quote suggests. It was his religion that killed him in the end, sadly.

I thought that your point was that many modern scientific ideas had been anticipated in older religious or spiritual ideas? I don’t really see any evidence for that. There are many scientists are religious, or talk about imagination and intuition in spiritual terms, but I don’t think that’s the same thing.

I’m still unconvinced that Newton’s law is in any way a rediscovery of an existing karmic principle.

124

[quote]Rational Gaze wrote:

Ramanujan certainly observed Hindu customs, but it is debatable whether he believed in religion to the extent this quote suggests. It was his religion that killed him in the end, sadly.

I thought that your point was that many modern scientific ideas had been anticipated in older religious or spiritual ideas? I don’t really see any evidence for that. [/quote]

But that wasn’t my only point - you’ll see what I’m talking about quite clearly by reading my previous posts in succession and not taking them as individual points.

I’m not saying that modern science dug directly into ancient texts for every major breakthrough in the modern world, which is what your last comment suggests; I’m saying that parallels can be found in earlier cultures if you are open enough to see them.

[quote]
I’m still unconvinced that Newton’s law is in any way a rediscovery of an existing karmic principle.[/quote]

Again, not a rediscovery; a parallel. Clearly Newton’s law is more sophisticated, but the underlying principles in their most basic forms are similar. We got to this point because you seem to think I’m taking all the elements of Karma (including the mystical aspect) and likening it to dictionary definition of Newton’s action/reaction law - that’s not it.

125

[quote]MaximusB 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]

You have no understanding of the human body, let alone your own body. There is a reason why the term “the practice of medicine” exists. There are so many mechanisms and feedback loops that are complicated and not yet discovered.

Why experiments on soldiers who have been trained to withstand conditions considered to be impossible for the human body to withstand. Cold, heat, humidity, pain, so many different situations and environments where adaptation has allowed people to survive, and even thrive.

[/quote]

I have a good understanding of the human body. My HOBBY is studying the human body. While I don’t have a PhD or doctorate in biology, I do read up on studies and the like on my free time.
So spare me your bullshit.

We don’t know everything, obviously, but we have a good understanding of the human body.
Using microchips implanted in mice brains to control them. The ability to replace lost limbs. A large knowledge of chemicals and how they affect the human body. What do these mean to you?

Sure, in the 19th century, we didn’t know much but our knowledge has exponentially increased.
In the early 1900s, we were just beginning to truly develop machines and the automobile.
Today, we can fly to space, break the sound barrier a dozen times, transplant arms, create artificial intelligence, split the atom, and send information at the speed of light.

It blows my mind that Prof X, a doctor, believes that going 10 days without food or water is possible.
That being said, he also believes in ghosts; maybe I shouldn’t be so surprised.

126

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[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?

Shown nothing to indicate otherwise? I linked a video of a guy having a fucking arm transplant!
What more do you want?

“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.”
So how are we in our infancy then, exactly?

I’m sure many special forces members have been put in extremely trying conditions.
From that, we could probably estimate how long most people could go without water.
Yet, the consensus is still 2-3 days MAX.
Not 10 days.
I don’t have to prove to you anything. YOU are the one saying that 10 days might be possible.
You have to prove it.
My survival handbook says 3 days without water.
Weren’t you in the army? What did they tell you about survival without water?

127

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
We don’t know everything, obviously, but we have a good understanding of the human body.
Using microchips implanted in mice brains to control them. [/quote]

LOL - if we are that advanced, PM when you have enough faith in contemporary medicine to have a chip implanted in your brain. I’ll gladly cover the medical expenses. Even if it bankrupted me, it would be worth it for the entertainment value. I won’t hold my breath though.

You, as an individual, have no fucking idea of how those mice are controlled. - they might be just be reacting to pain, so to cite them as an example of intimate knowledge of the human body is mind-boggling.

Guiding a mouse through a maze by prodding it in the ass with a needle is more precise. At least you know where the stimulus is coming from. You think an experimental procedure which involves an internal stimulus is more advanced than using an external stimulus purely because it’s implanted in a mouse brain, yet you have the balls to call out people with practical experience far, far beyond your own. Delusional.

You are relying on whatever knowledge is drip-fed to the public, yet somehow grasp the intimate mechanisms of closed-door experimental procedures conducted by people with knowledge far beyond your own.

You know more than an ex-soldier because you’ve read a survival handbook, more than a qualified Doctor because your hobby is “knowing a lot about the human body”, and you’re a virtuoso guitarist. Geez, I can’t take you anywhere…

128

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[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?

Shown nothing to indicate otherwise? I linked a video of a guy having a fucking arm transplant!
What more do you want?

“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.”
So how are we in our infancy then, exactly?

I’m sure many special forces members have been put in extremely trying conditions.
From that, we could probably estimate how long most people could go without water.
Yet, the consensus is still 2-3 days MAX.
Not 10 days.
I don’t have to prove to you anything. YOU are the one saying that 10 days might be possible.
You have to prove it.
My survival handbook says 3 days without water.
Weren’t you in the army? What did they tell you about survival without water?[/quote]

Retarded.

We will be advanced when you won’t need to transplant an arm but simply have one grown matching your own genetic code…because without that, the REAL problem with transplants is preventing the body from rejecting them AFTER the surgery.

You were shown news articles and info showing humans who have survived up to 8 days without food and water (infants who survived 7 days with no human contact other than their own voices)…yet 10 days is still so hard for you to consider as a possibility?

You know what’s funny?

That people like you don’t even see that YOU are what is holding back progression.

People who think like you are who limit us scientifically, not the other way around.

This thread was fun…and it was great getting called out yet again by people only to have them retreat by the end of it.

Have a great one.

129

[quote]Fezzik wrote:
The video said that they were testing his blood three times a day. It seems like there at least should have been some evidence of his body dehydrating, but the article and video both make it seem like he could have kept going easily. That’s what makes me not even believe any of it.[/quote]

It’s just ten days. I discussed this with a physicist friend, and he said a human could realistically survive for ten days without water. It all depends on the speed of his metabolism and how hostile the environment is during those ten days.

Most here know that the metabolic speed of the human body varies between person to person, and fluctuates as we age - whatever shifts can be controlled, so it is perfectly realistic to say that if somebody has even a moderate degree of control over their metabolism.

They could slow it to the point where they wouldn’t need to eat/ drink for a certain period of time, and it wouldn’t show up in a blood test (I 've already outlined how somebody could slow their metabolism via autohypnosis, so I’m not going to repeat myself again) . If it did, it would indicate a lack of control. The lack of results could indicate a mastery of metabolic processes…if you’re open to the possibility…

I’m not gonna take credit for that, even though it is obvious considering that we talk about the human metabolism here regularly.

Also, nobody has ever conducted a controlled study dedicated to how long a human can survive without water, so to say it is bullshit…is bullshit.

130

Thread Title: NO WATER FOR 72 YEARS.
72 years > 10 days