@beaumont Catherine Shafto is my 8th cousin 7 times removed!

I haven't seen Jimmy post on here in a long time. Is Jimmy okay?

I'm alive. Just very busy with my studies and life in general. I'm in a step-competition and am hoping to place near the top, so I'm out walking or running most of the day. I ran 34k this morning and am currently out for a long walk/run with my dog Kia.

@930310 I'm glad to know that you're ok! Good luck on your competition! Let us know how it went and how much faster your race time was than everyone else's! Have a good day:)

Good on you J.

I hope the body isn’t too sore.

That level of exercise can be tough on it. though I do know you’ve done a fair bit of running in the past.

Posted by: @aq

↑

Just a thought I had today. I was looking at the Chronological list of the oldest man since 1972 and I noticed that the average age seemed to dip between Chitetsu Watanabe and Emilio Flores Marquez. Now this theory might be WAYYY out there, but I think it's possible that Weighton, Marquez, De La Fuente Garcia and Mora were never the WOLM titleholders and neither were Domingo Villa Avisencio or Watanabe. It's possible that after Nonaka passed away, Tómas Pinales Figuereo took over and when Figuereo passed away in September 2020 that João Da Missanga took over from him. And remember Figuereo's birthdate of March 1906 and Missanga's birthdate of March 1908 is quite a big jump. There may have even been another man or two from 1906, and a man or two from 1907 who took over for Figuereo for a while before Da Missanga reached WOLM. I know there's some cases from Latin America who were pretty old around that time. I'll look into it and make a possible chart. 

 

So if my theory is wrong (which I mean it could be) Eusebio Quintero Lopez may not have been vice-doyen. There are other candidates from 1909 and 1910 that are older. 

- Santos Cruz Flores, 01 November 1909

- Eugenio Zanotty, 23 December 1909

- Alvaro Jose de Souza, 14 February 1910

 

No disrespect to any of the SCs I mentioned. Just a thought I had. 

Do you think that the case of Mr. Juan Jose Vera Villalva from Ecuador is plausible? He even claims to have been born four months before JVPM...

Posted by: @wellabove110

↑

Posted by: @aq

↑

Just a thought I had today. I was looking at the Chronological list of the oldest man since 1972 and I noticed that the average age seemed to dip between Chitetsu Watanabe and Emilio Flores Marquez. Now this theory might be WAYYY out there, but I think it's possible that Weighton, Marquez, De La Fuente Garcia and Mora were never the WOLM titleholders and neither were Domingo Villa Avisencio or Watanabe. It's possible that after Nonaka passed away, Tómas Pinales Figuereo took over and when Figuereo passed away in September 2020 that João Da Missanga took over from him. And remember Figuereo's birthdate of March 1906 and Missanga's birthdate of March 1908 is quite a big jump. There may have even been another man or two from 1906, and a man or two from 1907 who took over for Figuereo for a while before Da Missanga reached WOLM. I know there's some cases from Latin America who were pretty old around that time. I'll look into it and make a possible chart. 

 

So if my theory is wrong (which I mean it could be) Eusebio Quintero Lopez may not have been vice-doyen. There are other candidates from 1909 and 1910 that are older. 

- Santos Cruz Flores, 01 November 1909

- Eugenio Zanotty, 23 December 1909

- Alvaro Jose de Souza, 14 February 1910

 

No disrespect to any of the SCs I mentioned. Just a thought I had. 

Do you think that the case of Mr. Juan Jose Vera Villalva from Ecuador is plausible? He even claims to have been born four months before JVPM...

 

According to his ID card, he was born in 1921. While it's entirely possible this could just be a mistake (just like how some old ID cards support an older age), I think it's more likely he was actually born around a decade younger than claimed. Eugenio Zanotti's ID card also supports 1919. 

@mendocino source?

Omg I just realized the only Venezuelan restaurant in my city is on 1909 street and the phone number has "527" in it. I am baffled. 

Restaurant:

Theme: Venezuelan (JVPM's country)

Street: 1909 (JVPM's birth year)

Phone: beginning with 527 (JVPM's birth month and day)

This is a huge coincidence!

Is there 1909 streets in your city or is that the address of the building? Or is the street just called “1909”

@mrcatlord the street is just called 1909

Posted by: @mendocino

↑

Posted by: @wellabove110

↑

Posted by: @aq

↑

Just a thought I had today. I was looking at the Chronological list of the oldest man since 1972 and I noticed that the average age seemed to dip between Chitetsu Watanabe and Emilio Flores Marquez. Now this theory might be WAYYY out there, but I think it's possible that Weighton, Marquez, De La Fuente Garcia and Mora were never the WOLM titleholders and neither were Domingo Villa Avisencio or Watanabe. It's possible that after Nonaka passed away, Tómas Pinales Figuereo took over and when Figuereo passed away in September 2020 that João Da Missanga took over from him. And remember Figuereo's birthdate of March 1906 and Missanga's birthdate of March 1908 is quite a big jump. There may have even been another man or two from 1906, and a man or two from 1907 who took over for Figuereo for a while before Da Missanga reached WOLM. I know there's some cases from Latin America who were pretty old around that time. I'll look into it and make a possible chart. 

 

So if my theory is wrong (which I mean it could be) Eusebio Quintero Lopez may not have been vice-doyen. There are other candidates from 1909 and 1910 that are older. 

- Santos Cruz Flores, 01 November 1909

- Eugenio Zanotty, 23 December 1909

- Alvaro Jose de Souza, 14 February 1910

 

No disrespect to any of the SCs I mentioned. Just a thought I had. 

Do you think that the case of Mr. Juan Jose Vera Villalva from Ecuador is plausible? He even claims to have been born four months before JVPM...

 

According to his ID card, he was born in 1921. While it's entirely possible this could just be a mistake (just like how some old ID cards support an older age), I think it's more likely he was actually born around a decade younger than claimed. Eugenio Zanotti's ID card also supports 1919. 

 

Interesting! Thank you!

An interesting thing to think about is that of the top ten right after Lucile died, 6-10 have all died and been replaced while 1-5 have stayed the same for over 200 days now 

Hello everyone, I've been out of this forum for a long time, I didn't know where to put what I'm going to say:

My thought for the day is: How to participate more in the forum?

I really like to do stats with future milestone SCs, but I know there are better things beyond just basically making predictions.

I know the rules have changed, so I would like to adapt more to be a good member and not affect my "trusted member" status when I earn it.

@adancho yeah bro! My suggestion is make more posts! It's nice to have you back on here 🙂 Like if you're busy (which I totally understand) you can try to set aside 10-15 minutes per day to just come on here, and make a post or reply. I'm sure everyone on the forum would be happy to hear from you! Also, maybe comment more on topics, I think it was excellent what you wrote about Fusa Tatsumi! I hope you're doing alright!

I think this forum as a whole needs more participation. I feel like people might feel restricted from talking because others might see that as spam. I know on the 110 club a lot of people’s threads only get posted in when they surpass someone (usually by Gnus3) and there isn’t enough, you know, just chatting about these amazing individuals. If you scroll back to the “early days” of the 110 club in the eras of Besse, Walter, Kimura, there seems to be a lot more threads created that could be called “pointless” by more restrictive admin, which could potentially make the forum more cluttered but also just provides more casual conversation, whereas now there seems to be less of that which in my opinion might make the forum less active. Obviously the whole controversy that has arisen in the past year has had an effect too, with the departure of Mr. Young who was a very active member, and who did provide a lot of information to users however problematic as he is. I notice he doesn’t say much on the WSF, I guess because literally nobody is one there, 90% of posts are Waclaw. Ok I’ll stop ranting now 

this is one of my favourite threads from early 110 club

https://the110club.com/kama-chinen-drafted-by-celtics-t865.html

That's true, clearly making predictions about how long supercentenarians will live or making future milestones is wrong.

But I honestly think that this forum needs a more "informal" touch, perhaps not making predictions directly to supercentenarians, but talking about cohorts without referring to a specific supercentennial.

I have some threads to do that I already did in the 110 club.

If it could be a private section for members so that it would not be seen from the outside.

@mrcatlord Someone is inactive because he has, nowadays, problems because of his bad behavior.

@mrcatlord At this forum we're respecting the individual and their exceptional longevity. Milestone threads (longevity is not a competition) or jokes about supercentenarians (respect the individual) are not in line with our views.

But I am very open to extended discussions about behaviour, lifestyle factors and other peculiarities that distinguish the most long-lived individuals.

@930310 You're right, the truth is that if that joke about supercentenarians was in bad taste, that can make the supercentenarian and his family uncomfortable.

Posted by: @930310

↑

At this forum we're respecting the individual and their exceptional longevity. Milestone threads (longevity is not a competition) or jokes about supercentenarians (respect the individual) are not in line with our views.

I agree that jokes are disrespectful to SC, but I think it's short-sighted to see milestones as disrespectful to SCs, and usually members post about milestones for the purpose of praising a specific SC, I think.

You got angry about the post where I pointed out that Lucile Randon would have been older than Kane Tanaka if she were still alive, but would SC him/herself and his family be so reluctant and/or hate to post about milestones? In fact, a famous member known as a SC's family member (although this person does not participate in the public areas of Japanese forum) is not so averse to talking about milestones. When I become WOP (what if this happen), I will not be dislike about people talking in internet about myself's longevity milestones, and I will be even happier.

If can't talk about milestones, then can't create threads when a particular SC has a birthday. I think I can agree with some of your opinions, but I hope that you don't overreact it about people's non-malicious milestone posts.

Also, you criticized me in a strong tone about a post a few months ago (I have since, chosen to eternally stop talking about Milestones on this forum, as well as almost retired here), however as far as I know you're never give a criticize to Ale76 and ChrisR, a member who post about milestone of top-level supercentenarians many times, you seem to ignore thier a lot of milestone posts and without paying attention. Sometimes I honestly wonder what the difference is.

Noting your comment above, I do post a little bit about milestones Record116, because I think short term ones, if advised respectfully (as you suggest) are ok and can usually honour the person concerned.

I sometimes try and dissuade people from looking at distant milestones, firstly because we should treasure the supercentenarians we have and also because statistically, mortality rates are typically above 50% per annum.

Also, if it is of any help to you, I don’t think there is much point in posting milestones for deceased people. In this regard it can be disrespectful but is also pointless. The longer someone has been deceased, the older that would otherwise have been. so not much point really.

Posted by: @adancho

↑

I know the rules have changed, so I would like to adapt more to be a good member and not affect my "trusted member" status when I earn it.

I think the only technical difference between members who have TM status and those who don't is can access to private discussion areas. So, normally, I think that TM authority should be given to all members who can be trusted without the possibility of leaking information written in the private area to the outside, which not supposed to be happen. As for you, I think it's a case of being fine/ok to given TM membership (both here and in The 110 Club).

I can understand of course, why you want TM rights. One of the reason is a big difference in appearance/looks: I feel sorry for, for trusted member here, the color of the account name will be a bright color, otherwise it will be an include gray-like color. At The 110 Club, the situation is even wrose. Color of the unauthorized member is black, the same color as the necktie of the man when he first reported the death of Queen Elizabeth II. (But I'm not, I'm blue now, so I'm happy with the status quo there.)

@adancho yeah, I think it can be okay to say “this supercentenarian looks good” or something like that, as long as you’re not saying “so-and-so will probably die soon“. Although I understand that we don’t want to say things that could be offensive, I do feel there is a bit too much restriction on this matter. And if certain people want to have conversations about these individuals that could go against the rules they could create a private area in the forum so family members or those who wouldn’t want to see such messages are not able to.

You're right, maybe we should look at not-so-distant milestones and in a realistic scenario, let's say it's 1 month or less away, we might even see the small milestones.

For example, a next milestone for Juan Vicente Pérez Mora would be August 27, he would reach 114 years and 3 months.

María Branyas Morera on September 4, she would be 116 years and 6 months old.

Fusa Tatsumi she would turn 116 years and 4 months old on August 25 and would eventually surpass Jeanne Bot in age on August 30.

Among other examples.

Comments like "this supercentenarian looks great" or "this supercentenarian looks bad, experiencing a decline" are fine.

But do not make predictions about how long they will live or if they will die soon, and if you do think about it, it is better to keep those thoughts to yourself.

I’ve always felt like the photo quality of the pictures of current SCs when they were young are better than pictures of late-20th century SCs taken when they were old, compare say the pictures of Barbara Barton or Edie as young children or the portrait of young Tekla, with pictures of Lydie Vellard, Augusta Holtz, or Annie Jennings when they were older, which were taken half a century or more later. What do you guys think of this?

After looking at more photos I’ve noticed there are more better photos from the late 1900s then I’d been thinking in my head, but I also just like the style of the early photographs, especially how in the photos of Edie and Tekla it’s technically black and white but the photos are tinted a certain colour. I wonder of the Edie photo has the record for “earliest-taken photo of a living person”. The only photo I can think of that would contest this is the baby photo of Clarabell Demers

It’s quite interesting that there were two different years (2020 and 2022) in which nobody born in 1904 died even though there was still someone living, and oddly those two years weren’t even right after one another

I've left before, but I think this time I'm going to leave for good. I'm tired of feeling unseen and ignored on this forum. And I'm tired of being mistreated and talked down to by other members on here. This forum doesn't deserve me, because I deserve better. My dream is to create my own forum, and I would invite a select few of you that I trust. I'm not saying I want you to choose between forums, it would just be a friendly invite where we can chat away from this place. This place is one of the most toxic and hateful places I've ever come across, but it seems that several members here like to "gang up" on me for some bizarre reason. I don't care if you want to be on this forum and my future one. No judgement. You're all grown adults that can make your own choices, and using that statement, I am going to exercise my rights as an adult and leave, because I'm tired of putting up with these psychological mind games and verbal abuse. However unfortunately my own forum will probably never happen due to me not knowing how to create a website. I think there are people on here who are part of a secret invasion plot, who plan on practicing their tyrannical world views. You don't REALLLLLLY care about the validation process of SCs deep down, all you want is to take the recognition for yourselves. That's why you criticize and ignore me personally, because I call you out and I stand up for Supercentenarians who deserve the recognition for themselves. I don't care about recognition for myself, just listened to, that these are very special people who deserve more than they're getting. I've partnered up with many organizations and I have a wide knowledge about what SCs are likely to be true, and which ones aren't. I think there are people on here who control what goes on "behind the scenes" which I'm totally cool with, but the part I'm not cool with is that they are now manipulating their powers. I am a unique thinker, and I don't need this toxic manipulation any more. 80% of the time that I'm actually "seen" on here is just comments in the dms criticizing me, or talking down to me. There are some good members who treat everyone as an equal, and I am grateful for people like you. These demons in my head have me greatly outnumbered, and it's time for me to get off the forum so I can actually began to be seen as a human being again. I'm not just a "Pinocchio Clone" that you can push around. You pushed me too far and forgot that I'm a real person with real feelings. And now, I don't want to be here anymore. This place is too toxic for my well-being. Some of you people have been so SO kind to me and I consider you my friends, but I can't deal with the people who have mistreated me. I'm not hurt at all of you. I'm leaving. 

@aquanaut_chalk In what way is it toxic? There are hundreds of exaggerated unverified claims from all over the world, and how should we react when a member posts about them and how he's convinced that the ones he's found are true, without having any evidence to support his claims? 

That’s the thing about age validation, you need proof. You can’t will a 114-year-old man into existence just because you hope that a claim you've found is accurate. There is an excellent group called LAS that is specifically oriented towards Latin America that I implore you to contact. Most of us here are not knowledgeable about this area, so se don’t want to discourage you.

Also, most of us are busy with life outside the internet, I am personally currently doing two master's degrees simultaneously as well as being in the process of having a couple of papers published and preparing for a conference where I am presenting supercentenarian research. People not responding to every post is common on forums and is in no way toxic behaviour.

Toxic behaviour is members belittling you, gaslighting you into not knowing whether you are sane or not, and constantly demanding respect. That’s not what we do here.

Not sure if you’ll ever read this Aquanaut_Chalk but it’s also worth remembering a suggestion made some time back on the 110 Club that about 98% of all 115+ claims turn out to be invalid.

For the male sex that sort of percentage is probably also accurate at 114.

Whilst my own contributions to this area lie outside research, I’m also aware that people with strong experience in this area can also get a “gut feel” quite quickly (not always but usually) on which cases are more likely to yield outcomes and which are not.

This is equally critical because everyone is time poor. As noted above this is another key reason why posts or age claims can go without responses.

For the bigger ages rather than initially expecting them to be likely, try and go into any research with a “professionally skeptical” attitude and look for strong data to refute that. If you find that kind of evidence, then ok, but until that stage, the big age claims will usually not progress.