Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

sevendogs · Mar 6, 2007, 08:57 pm

How long any species should live? It depends on its genetically programmed makeup. What is important, life span is predetermined genetically and under other optimal equal conditions humans can live only so long. Death of everyone is inescapable and it is as important as birth. Interesting that in some animals species larval (baby stage) is considerably longer then adult stage. For example, several years as larva and only a month, a few weeks and even a few hours as adult. Ephemeroptera, insects superficially similar to moths, live only a few hours, but their larvae develop up to three years. Adults do not have mouth or digestive system. Only honey moon and this is all! They court, mate, lay eggs in water and die the same day, when they emerged. Some big moth females, if not found a male yet, can extend their life another month or two. When they mate, they lay eggs and die soon after that. Our lives become less protected genetically after reproductive age. Life and evolution operates by populations, not individuals. Individuals are only temporary and disposable. Their destination is survival, reproduction and leaving viable offspring. After that, evolution does not need us much. Population is like a genetic river in time and space. Potentially it is eternal. Individuals are perishable and short lived. AR focus their attention on individuals with their pains, suffering and death. This does not matter for evolutionary success. Survival of the population is the goal of evolution. If this goal is not achieved, the species becomes extinct.

Gods_Mercenary · Mar 6, 2007, 09:23 pm

In large mammals, there is an average heart beat number that most individuals about reach before they die, we humans have done something like triple it.

Technosoul · Mar 7, 2007, 02:26 am

A turtle might hatch from an egg and can continue living for way over a hundred years, however I think they might also remain reproductive for most of that time. They say that humans who continue having an active sex life will live longer then those who do not.... hmm? However it is true that once they can no longer reporduce they (we) start to degenerate.

Some scientists believe that some fish will live forever until they die by accident or are consumed by a preditor. But not sure if they did a long term study to confirm that theory. Mice are highly reproductive but have a relatively short life span (a few years from birth to death).

But one thing is certain and that is that nearly all animals have four stages of life, as an infant, a child, a reproductive adult, and an "old age" or "dieing stage". Insects up to humans. And they each have a particular bio-time clock that seems to regulate that system of growth.

Now some preditors will have less off spring when food supplies are less, and more off spring when the food supply is abundant. How that is regulated I am not sure. I think such is the case for wolves.

Needless to say - reproduction is important for the survival of a speices. But remaining strong and healthy is also important when it comes to reproducing the next generation. And so evolution would also depend upon that factor to insure the survival of a healthy species, and might even push for improvements in that area.

As Spark said "Humans are the fluke of the universe". We are odd relative to some of the normalities of nature.

But when it comes right down to it... how can evolution have a purpose, it is not a "thinking idenity" is it? How can reproduction be the purpose of evolution if evolution is not a "design of intelligent thinking"? Cause and effect would simply be a happening not a purpose to be maintained, upgraded upon, or supervised in any way. A process of elimination or adaptation due to random encounters or whatever?

We are all born with a will to survive, which is our self evident truth. But we and other animals have sex because it means "pleasure" or because it is a non-thinking "sex drive" motivation. How was that motive introduced into all creatures is a big question. Not by evolution because evolution is not a "being or thing" - it is a theory or an explaination of happenings, and on the other side of the topic, surely death is not determined by the will to survive - unless you are speaking about the the survival of the "whole ego system" instead of persoanal survival or spiecies survival. Called "the balance of nature".

sevendogs · Mar 7, 2007, 05:33 am

My post is about the longevity. The longevity is a result of adaptive evolutionary change of each species to survive. Overall pictures shows that animals with a shorter life of individuals have a higher fertility then animals with longer life of individuals, such as humans, elephants or parrots. Fertility is also linked with mortality/survival rate. It is well known that warm blooded mammal and bird species living further in the north have a higher mortality rate, especially when young, and their fertility is higher then in their counterparts, living in the south. This is particularly interesting, when you compare authentic populations within one species. Individuals from northern populations have bigger body and even bigger heart, liver and kidney, all indicating a more intense metabolism necessary for survival under harsh conditions of northern environment and adaptation to life in lower temperature regime. Northern birds lay more eggs, northern mammals have more young per litter. Populations of the north tend to be huge numerically to compensate high mortality caused by harshness of life conditions. All these differences are a part of the larger picture created by natural selection and evolutionary changes under way.

Kuldeep · Mar 7, 2007, 07:08 am

Recently in a gossip, I was told by one friends that age is directly propotional to breath rate of a specie. Look at any specie faster it breathes less is the age is.

I feel, normally breathing rate is related to heart beats so longivity should also be related to heart beat. But, it is related more to breathing because, oxygen oxides and accelerates cell degeneration rate.

Therefore, under identical genetic mapping, environment, general living and diet etc for one particular specie, say humans; control of breath is predominant factor for longeivity. It is this reason great saints in India reduce breath rate to live longer.

I can write volumes on this idea but, I am haulting to hear first from the thread opener, viz sevendogs!!!!:)

sevendogs · Mar 7, 2007, 07:39 am

This is a hearsay view. In fact, longevity is a genetically programmed trait of each species and it is variable individually, just like color of eyes, blood group, etc. Frequency of heart beats in birds is much higher then in mammals of similar size. This is because of demanding metabolism of flying creatures. However, birds are among longest living species. Starling can live in captivity up to 60 years. Goose lives about 50 years. Some parrots can live as long as humans. Canary or finch species (in cages) can live up to 12 years. Crayfish can live as long as a dog, about 12-15 years and so can do tarantula spiders. House chicken can live about ten years. The same discrepancies can be traced among fish species. Big and beautiful salmons do not live as long as carps do. There are experiments done on populations of rodents and insects. Artificial selection for longevity is productive. There are strains, which can live longer then usual. Mother nature is cruel. Its design is for survival of the population and it does not care about longevity as such. This is concern of individuals only; the toughest survives and breeds. If one does not breed, his input in the population is zero, evolutionary speaking, he is like dead. Life of individuals of each species is only as long as it is needed for procreation under specific ecological conditions.

Deus_ultima · Mar 8, 2007, 04:15 am

I want to live as long as I can walk about.

If my body cannot carry me around anymore, then it's past it's due date.

Gods_Mercenary · Mar 8, 2007, 08:18 pm

I'm not to interested in a long life, I'd rather go out in style in my sixties than linger into my eighties. What do you think of starting a gun fight? :)

loser · Mar 8, 2007, 11:01 pm

Quote:

Needless to say - reproduction is important for the survival of a speices. But remaining strong and healthy is also important when it comes to reproducing the next generation. And so evolution would also depend upon that factor to insure the survival of a healthy species, and might even push for improvements in that area.

If evolution was working the way it should, I would be the only male impregnator left alive in the world with randy women scrambling and clawing everwhere to be the one to offer me their egg.

Alas, we don't live in a perfect world and God has decided to let lesser individuals procreate as well.

Mar 6, 2007, 08:57 pm	#1 (permalink) (top)
sevendogs Igneous Magma Location: Virgnia, USA Posts: 425	Longevity How long any species should live? It depends on its genetically programmed makeup. What is important, life span is predetermined genetically and under other optimal equal conditions humans can live only so long. Death of everyone is inescapable and it is as important as birth. Interesting that in some animals species larval (baby stage) is considerably longer then adult stage. For example, several years as larva and only a month, a few weeks and even a few hours as adult. Ephemeroptera, insects superficially similar to moths, live only a few hours, but their larvae develop up to three years. Adults do not have mouth or digestive system. Only honey moon and this is all! They court, mate, lay eggs in water and die the same day, when they emerged. Some big moth females, if not found a male yet, can extend their life another month or two. When they mate, they lay eggs and die soon after that. Our lives become less protected genetically after reproductive age. Life and evolution operates by populations, not individuals. Individuals are only temporary and disposable. Their destination is survival, reproduction and leaving viable offspring. After that, evolution does not need us much. Population is like a genetic river in time and space. Potentially it is eternal. Individuals are perishable and short lived. AR focus their attention on individuals with their pains, suffering and death. This does not matter for evolutionary success. Survival of the population is the goal of evolution. If this goal is not achieved, the species becomes extinct.

Mar 6, 2007, 09:23 pm	#2 (permalink) (top)
Gods_Mercenary Altruism Assassin Location: Massachusetts Posts: 5,239	In large mammals, there is an average heart beat number that most individuals about reach before they die, we humans have done something like triple it. “Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.” -Albert Einstein

Mar 8, 2007, 08:18 pm	#8 (permalink) (top)
Gods_Mercenary Altruism Assassin Location: Massachusetts Posts: 5,239	I'm not to interested in a long life, I'd rather go out in style in my sixties than linger into my eighties. What do you think of starting a gun fight? :) “Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.” -Albert Einstein

Mar 7, 2007, 02:26 am	#3 (permalink) (top)
Technosoul Volcanic Erupter Posts: 8,663	A turtle might hatch from an egg and can continue living for way over a hundred years, however I think they might also remain reproductive for most of that time. They say that humans who continue having an active sex life will live longer then those who do not.... hmm? However it is true that once they can no longer reporduce they (we) start to degenerate. Some scientists believe that some fish will live forever until they die by accident or are consumed by a preditor. But not sure if they did a long term study to confirm that theory. Mice are highly reproductive but have a relatively short life span (a few years from birth to death). But one thing is certain and that is that nearly all animals have four stages of life, as an infant, a child, a reproductive adult, and an "old age" or "dieing stage". Insects up to humans. And they each have a particular bio-time clock that seems to regulate that system of growth. Now some preditors will have less off spring when food supplies are less, and more off spring when the food supply is abundant. How that is regulated I am not sure. I think such is the case for wolves. Needless to say - reproduction is important for the survival of a speices. But remaining strong and healthy is also important when it comes to reproducing the next generation. And so evolution would also depend upon that factor to insure the survival of a healthy species, and might even push for improvements in that area. As Spark said "Humans are the fluke of the universe". We are odd relative to some of the normalities of nature. But when it comes right down to it... how can evolution have a purpose, it is not a "thinking idenity" is it? How can reproduction be the purpose of evolution if evolution is not a "design of intelligent thinking"? Cause and effect would simply be a happening not a purpose to be maintained, upgraded upon, or supervised in any way. A process of elimination or adaptation due to random encounters or whatever? We are all born with a will to survive, which is our self evident truth. But we and other animals have sex because it means "pleasure" or because it is a non-thinking "sex drive" motivation. How was that motive introduced into all creatures is a big question. Not by evolution because evolution is not a "being or thing" - it is a theory or an explaination of happenings, and on the other side of the topic, surely death is not determined by the will to survive - unless you are speaking about the the survival of the "whole ego system" instead of persoanal survival or spiecies survival. Called "the balance of nature".

Mar 7, 2007, 05:33 am	#4 (permalink) (top)
sevendogs Igneous Magma Location: Virgnia, USA Posts: 425	My post is about the longevity. The longevity is a result of adaptive evolutionary change of each species to survive. Overall pictures shows that animals with a shorter life of individuals have a higher fertility then animals with longer life of individuals, such as humans, elephants or parrots. Fertility is also linked with mortality/survival rate. It is well known that warm blooded mammal and bird species living further in the north have a higher mortality rate, especially when young, and their fertility is higher then in their counterparts, living in the south. This is particularly interesting, when you compare authentic populations within one species. Individuals from northern populations have bigger body and even bigger heart, liver and kidney, all indicating a more intense metabolism necessary for survival under harsh conditions of northern environment and adaptation to life in lower temperature regime. Northern birds lay more eggs, northern mammals have more young per litter. Populations of the north tend to be huge numerically to compensate high mortality caused by harshness of life conditions. All these differences are a part of the larger picture created by natural selection and evolutionary changes under way.

Mar 7, 2007, 07:08 am	#5 (permalink) (top)
Kuldeep Kuldeep Location: Bhopa, M.P, India Posts: 1,640	Recently in a gossip, I was told by one friends that age is directly propotional to breath rate of a specie. Look at any specie faster it breathes less is the age is. I feel, normally breathing rate is related to heart beats so longivity should also be related to heart beat. But, it is related more to breathing because, oxygen oxides and accelerates cell degeneration rate. Therefore, under identical genetic mapping, environment, general living and diet etc for one particular specie, say humans; control of breath is predominant factor for longeivity. It is this reason great saints in India reduce breath rate to live longer. I can write volumes on this idea but, I am haulting to hear first from the thread opener, viz sevendogs!!!!:)

Mar 7, 2007, 07:39 am	#6 (permalink) (top)
sevendogs Igneous Magma Location: Virgnia, USA Posts: 425	This is a hearsay view. In fact, longevity is a genetically programmed trait of each species and it is variable individually, just like color of eyes, blood group, etc. Frequency of heart beats in birds is much higher then in mammals of similar size. This is because of demanding metabolism of flying creatures. However, birds are among longest living species. Starling can live in captivity up to 60 years. Goose lives about 50 years. Some parrots can live as long as humans. Canary or finch species (in cages) can live up to 12 years. Crayfish can live as long as a dog, about 12-15 years and so can do tarantula spiders. House chicken can live about ten years. The same discrepancies can be traced among fish species. Big and beautiful salmons do not live as long as carps do. There are experiments done on populations of rodents and insects. Artificial selection for longevity is productive. There are strains, which can live longer then usual. Mother nature is cruel. Its design is for survival of the population and it does not care about longevity as such. This is concern of individuals only; the toughest survives and breeds. If one does not breed, his input in the population is zero, evolutionary speaking, he is like dead. Life of individuals of each species is only as long as it is needed for procreation under specific ecological conditions.

Mar 8, 2007, 04:15 am	#7 (permalink) (top)
Deus_ultima Molten Ash Location: Wales Posts: 132	I want to live as long as I can walk about. If my body cannot carry me around anymore, then it's past it's due date.