ADN

The simplest answer, is usually the best answer to me... /:D" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":D" border="0" alt=":D" /> Interesting notes raum, thank you...

That's interesting what you said Raum...I've gotta learn some of that

as i develop this section, it will suddenly be easier for you to do so..

Not to discount Consideration 1, but #2 (lunar, and or solar cycles as original means of accounting time) makes a lot of sense to me. Our present time-keeping is what, little over 500 years?

see, the considerations all-interconnected. they are not choices, they are all inclusive of each other,.. the word "year" is inappropriate,.. it wasn't until the 1500's it had the context we use it in,.. and shortly thereafter the King James Version of the bible was compiled. they have had ample time to have this meaning degrade to its current , pretty preposterous notion of men living almost 1,000 annual years.

In fact, due to the mental lag of having more data and how mental associations slow the thought process, a 1,000 year old man would be comotose for almost 700 of them without severe amounts of meditation, where no external input is gathered.. we have to forget in order to function... until we are capable of fare more memory processing.

hint - the greek word for Truth is "aletheia" is literally "un-forgetting."

And for those of use who drank of Mnemosyne, I say, zakar ha-aemeth.

that is immortality, not the body.

vertical,
raum

that makes a lot of sense raum
you cannot question how old ppl were in the bible, if you dont know wut a "year" really was to them. without that definition, it is impossible to make any sense of it.

yup az,..

exactly what you said.

the key to making a statement like that is though making it from a point where you show evidence that they had varying definitions of a year, from the conventionally used model for the annual motion of earth around the sun which is our perameter.

Eh...this is why I am scared to read the Bible a lot right now...It seems with everything the actual meaning/message is completely different than it appears...I don't want to learn, unlearn, and learn something else...

Good clarification..

/sad.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":(" border="0" alt="sad.gif" />

QUOTE(AYHJA)I'm not sure if it is the same, Calcium and what you're talking about, but as it pertains to the body, calcium is awesome...

It  is essential in the healthy functioning of the circulatory and nervous systems...The  kind I am talking about comes from coral, which is in the ocean, and inhabitants that live near these waters and drink it, are thus getting the vitamin that way...

Of course, people say bullshit, but they say the same thing about space travel, so...I guess its like all other things, what you make of it...

Sorry, I wasn't really clear there.....


Aragonite and calcite are polymorphs of Calcium Carbonate. Basically the same thing but different shapes- aragonite has a more elongate crystal structure, while calcite is more stubbyish, square-like.

Most marine organisms that have calcium carbonate in their skeletons, like coral, are in the form of aragonite. Others have calcite. I am not sure if Halimedia produces aragonite or calcite (it is a little green leafy plant organism that grows on reef flats and other shallow marine environments).

Anyway, aragonite is unstable once it is out of the sea for long. The sea is alkaline in relation to the terrestrial environment (rain dissolves Carbon dioxide in the are, forming weak carbonic acid), so the aragonite breaks down, but adapts by changing its crystal structure, forming calcite.


Bones consist of Calcium Phosphate. As most of us know, milk is a vital source of calcium for bones. I don't know for sure, but maybe the calcium in milk is Calcium Phosphate, which is why it helps in this area.

And about the circulatory and nervous systems, I guess that it requires a more easily extractable source of calcium, which can be sourced from aragonite. That may be why some folks chew on bits of acropora and drink the reef lagoon water.


My hometown is right on the shore of a mainland fringing reef system, but I have seen no records or knowledge of local people utilising the coral for their health, only to harvest it for lime production (that's been stopped for a long time now, since it's part of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, and a Green Zone).

Thanks Raum for explaining the whole kaboodle about the 'year's. It really clears alot up and dispells the way-out idea that people lived for milennia.

Lunar cycles! It absolutely makes more sense about why people in the past lived so long!

Also about the floods- like in Egypt the Nile would flood in July, from the meltwaters of the snow up in the Ethiopian highland catchment area. That would signal the time for farmers to commence work on building the Pyramids, since their paddocks were inaccessible (and getting naturally fertilised with silt). It made sense to base a time period around an event that happens once in every while.


Imagine how short our years would be if they were based on a 'blue moon'? /wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />


I don't know when the Gregorian calendar was developed, which is what forms our concept of the year being 365 (approx) days long. Wait up, was it the 1500s?


Raum, I don't understand the bit about Mnemosyne.