Re: new human longevity record?

Date: Mon Apr 17 2000 - 15:07:52 MDT

In a message dated 4/17/00 11:11:36 AM, writes:

>Anders Sandberg wrote:
>> The "evidence" seems really to
>> be the registry and the fact that the Church affirms it is real.
>True, but...under the circumstances, what other evidence would there
>likely be? If this is the only evidence for any birthdate, then so be
>it. (The only biological evidence is that she's alive and old. Past a
>certain point, +/- 10 years can't be determined from the body itself.)

I don't think church records are enough for Guinness. There was (or maybe
still is) a woman in Brazil who was reputedly 128, based on church documents,
and that wasn't enough.

The comment that this Dominican woman got married after 1920 and still
had 3 children make me *extremely* suspicious she's not 125. Marriage and 3
kids, starting in her late 40's? Possible, but a few years of stretch is
more likely.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:09:26 MDT