Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What is the oldest living organism on the planet?

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 71 posts

Re: What is the oldest living organism on the planet?

#11

Post by to3m »

hplust wrote: post #6

is it just me or is this article written like someone who did a few google searches for old organisms and then writes down their speculations in the form of what some would call an article? tl;dr https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pando_(tree) "However, the oldest, precisely measured organism living on Earth today remains, for now, a Great Basin Bristlecone pine tree. Pando the quaking aspen and Antarctic glass sponges co…

As always, if your curiousity is piqued by one of these articles, you really might as well do exactly what the journalist did and go to Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_longest-living_organis...

(My favourite thing from the list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lomatia_tasmanica)

Re: What is the oldest living organism on the planet?

#12

Post by ComodoHacker »

hplust wrote: post #6

is it just me or is this article written like someone who did a few google searches for old organisms and then writes down their speculations in the form of what some would call an article? tl;dr https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pando_(tree) "However, the oldest, precisely measured organism living on Earth today remains, for now, a Great Basin Bristlecone pine tree. Pando the quaking aspen and Antarctic glass sponges co…

To me, it's just an indicator of what an amazing time we live in, when almost any kind of information is just a few Google searches away (no sarcasm).

Also, I probably would never make these searches myself if this article wasn't written and appeared here.

That said, I admit Antarctic glass sponges deserve mention in the article.

Re: What is the oldest living organism on the planet?

#14

Post by njarboe »

Diederich wrote: post #9

The main Bristlecone Pine grove in California is a lovely place. It sits near 10,000 feet, and yet is pretty easy to drive to. It's about five or six hours east of the SF bay area, depending on whether Tioga pass is open or not. (This year, the pass will be opening quite late.) I strongly encourage a visit if at all possible. It is truly like another world up there, and the silence is magnificent.

I would second visiting. It is a great experience and quite unlike visiting other ancient forests. Unlike say a giant sequoia grove or a virgin rain forest, the trees size are more at the human scale. They look very old and it hits your psyche below the conscious level. Some trees having only a small strip of living bark attached to a few branches and needles with the rest of the dead trunk exposed. The wood is very hard and over thousands of years is eroded by the wind/sand-dust like a rock formation in a desert. The high elevation puts your mind slightly off balance if you come directly from the Owen valley at 3000 ft. These trees like to grow on limestone and there is almost no other plants around and no dirt. On a clear day (and most are) you experience just a jumble of bare white rock with an amazingly deep blue sky, a cool breeze, and these ancient trees clinging to life.

The photo in the article is not from the preserved groves in the White Mountains near Bishop. There it is more high rolling hills than dramatic mountain views. I prefer that setting as one is not distracted from the trees.

Re: What is the oldest living organism on the planet?

#15

Post by TACIXAT »

Diederich wrote: post #9

The main Bristlecone Pine grove in California is a lovely place. It sits near 10,000 feet, and yet is pretty easy to drive to. It's about five or six hours east of the SF bay area, depending on whether Tioga pass is open or not. (This year, the pass will be opening quite late.) I strongly encourage a visit if at all possible. It is truly like another world up there, and the silence is magnificent.

While I was there I asked how the trees got so old (3000 - 5000 years), if it was a special kind of tree or what. The ranger told us that trees don't die of age, if they have roots, bark, and leaves, they can keep on going. It was the environment of that area that allowed the trees to grow live so long. It's relatively high elevation, so there are few bugs and other predators. The biggest threat they faced was from erosion, and wind taking the bark off over time. Absolutely awesome place.

Re: What is the oldest living organism on the planet?

#16

Post by excalibur »

I've been under the impression for many years that the oldest living organism on the planet was the giant underground fungus in Oregon.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/strange-but-true-...

It seems to have the title of "largest" locked down, but it's a viable contender for "oldest" as well. It's at least worth a mention anyway.

Re: What is the oldest living organism on the planet?

#17

Post by criley2 »

babesh wrote: post #10

How cavalier we are about taking life of other species.

We're arguably the least cavalier about taking life of any life on earth.

In the wild, life is so cheap and valueless that when we witness unspeakable acts of horrific wild violence, we have to condition it: wild is wild, nature is nature, human expectations and morality don't apply.

Re: What is the oldest living organism on the planet?

#18

Post by abhishivsaxena »

criley2 wrote: post #17
babesh wrote: post #10

How cavalier we are about taking life of other species.

We're arguably the least cavalier about taking life of any life on earth. In the wild, life is so cheap and valueless that when we witness unspeakable acts of horrific wild violence, we have to condition it: wild is wild, nature is nature, human expectations and morality don't apply.

Really? What did you have for lunch today?

All the herbivores in Animal Kingdom would disagree with that statement.

Re: What is the oldest living organism on the planet?

#19

Post by monkmartinez »

abhishivsaxena wrote: post #18
criley2 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're arguably the least cavalier about taking life of any life on earth. In the wild, life is so cheap and valueless that when we witness unspeakable acts of horrific wild violence, we have to condition it: wild is wild, nature is nature, human expectations and morality don't apply.

Really? What did you have for lunch today? All the herbivores in Animal Kingdom would disagree with that statement.

No really. Go to /r/natureismetal and witness it for yourself.

Here is a goat eating baby chickens...http://imgur.com/kHJhMjW

Re: What is the oldest living organism on the planet?

#20

Post by mikeash »

abhishivsaxena wrote: post #18
criley2 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're arguably the least cavalier about taking life of any life on earth. In the wild, life is so cheap and valueless that when we witness unspeakable acts of horrific wild violence, we have to condition it: wild is wild, nature is nature, human expectations and morality don't apply.

Really? What did you have for lunch today? All the herbivores in Animal Kingdom would disagree with that statement.

Plants still count as life.
Post reply on HN