Marianna Ostrowska

I believe the chances Mr Kimura is NOT truly the oldest man, is very low. About the world oldest women. I believe the chances someone is older than Misawo are 50/50. I agree it is very much possible. You are also right when you say that the GRG data is imcomplete. However, if it upon the claimant to deliver us the proof that they are older than the current WOW. If someone from China would deliver us the three documents required for validation, that person WILL appear on table E. But the truth is, that NOONE from China has ever send us any document at all.

It aint fair that people without a birth record who are truly 115+ years old, do NOT appear on our lists. But suppose we would accept these claims just because the son of that supercentenarian is called Robert Young and he just KNOWS his mother is 115. Even then, we couldnt accept the claim. If we start accepting claims of people who have no proof, we let the door open for frauds. The oldest person on our list would be 150+ by tomorrow (not kidding) and the truly oldest person would be number 115 on that same list. It that what you really want to happen ???????

I believe the chances Mr Kimura is NOT truly the oldest man, is very low. About the world oldest women. I believe the chances someone is older than Misawo are 50/50. I agree it is very much possible. You are also right when you say that the GRG data is imcomplete. However, if it upon the claimant to deliver us the proof that they are older than the current WOW. If someone from China would deliver us the three documents required for validation, that person WILL appear on table E. But the truth is, that NOONE from China has ever send us any document at all.

It aint fair that people without a birth record who are truly 115+ years old, do NOT appear on our lists. But suppose we would accept these claims just because the son of that supercentenarian is called Robert Young and he just KNOWS his mother is 115. Even then, we couldnt accept the claim. If we start accepting claims of people who have no proof, we let the door open for frauds. The oldest person on our list would be 150+ by tomorrow (not kidding) and the truly oldest person would be number 115 on that same list. It that what you really want to happen ???????

These are very fair comments.

Significantly lowering the standard of proof would ensure the WOP top 100 list became "inaccurate rubbish" in a fairly short time period.

Regretably current standards do mean some very true claims are never able to be verified - but one cannot fault the efforts of those who do attempt to verify claims whenever possible.

It is worth remembering the old wording that used to appear in the annual Guiness Book of Records for many years.

It basically said in respect of old age that "no topic has been the subject of greater deceit or falsehood (or words to that effect) than claims of extreme age".

To be fair I don't see that general summary as innaccurate today - so I believe that validation process (though tough on some parts of the world) can't really be changed. - at this stage anyway

I believe the chances Mr Kimura is NOT truly the oldest man, is very low. About the world oldest women. I believe the chances someone is older than Misawo are 50/50. I agree it is very much possible. You are also right when you say that the GRG data is imcomplete. However, if it upon the claimant to deliver us the proof that they are older than the current WOW. If someone from China would deliver us the three documents required for validation, that person WILL appear on table E. But the truth is, that NOONE from China has ever send us any document at all.

It aint fair that people without a birth record who are truly 115+ years old, do NOT appear on our lists. But suppose we would accept these claims just because the son of that supercentenarian is called Robert Young and he just KNOWS his mother is 115. Even then, we couldnt accept the claim. If we start accepting claims of people who have no proof, we let the door open for frauds. The oldest person on our list would be 150+ by tomorrow (not kidding) and the truly oldest person would be number 115 on that same list. It that what you really want to happen ???????

These are very fair comments.

Significantly lowering the standard of proof would ensure the WOP top 100 list became "inaccurate rubbish" in a fairly short time period.

Regretably current standards do mean some very true claims are never able to be verified - but one cannot fault the efforts of those who do attempt to verify claims whenever possible.

It is worth remembering the old wording that used to appear in the annual Guiness Book of Records for many years.

It basically said in respect of old age that "no topic has been the subject of greater deceit or falsehood (or words to that effect) than claims of extreme age".

To be fair I don't see that general summary as innaccurate today - so I believe that validation process (though tough on some parts of the world) can't really be changed. - at this stage anyway

I agree that really could have more cases older than Kimura, but, we cant forget, Robert and GRG work on this research for more than 15 years, they never said that Kimura is the oldest living person in the world, they say that, Kimura is the oldest VERIFIED living person. Is not the same thing.

In my opinion, Kimura is one of the 5 oldest living person in the world, verified or not.

But, with no shadow of doubt, he is the oldest living man and oldest man ever recorded

I believe the chances Mr Kimura is NOT truly the oldest man, is very low. About the world oldest women. I believe the chances someone is older than Misawo are 50/50. I agree it is very much possible. You are also right when you say that the GRG data is imcomplete. However, if it upon the claimant to deliver us the proof that they are older than the current WOW. If someone from China would deliver us the three documents required for validation, that person WILL appear on table E. But the truth is, that NOONE from China has ever send us any document at all.

It aint fair that people without a birth record who are truly 115+ years old, do NOT appear on our lists. But suppose we would accept these claims just because the son of that supercentenarian is called Robert Young and he just KNOWS his mother is 115. Even then, we couldnt accept the claim. If we start accepting claims of people who have no proof, we let the door open for frauds. The oldest person on our list would be 150+ by tomorrow (not kidding) and the truly oldest person would be number 115 on that same list. It that what you really want to happen ???????

These are very fair comments.

Significantly lowering the standard of proof would ensure the WOP top 100 list became "inaccurate rubbish" in a fairly short time period.

Regretably current standards do mean some very true claims are never able to be verified - but one cannot fault the efforts of those who do attempt to verify claims whenever possible.

It is worth remembering the old wording that used to appear in the annual Guiness Book of Records for many years.

It basically said in respect of old age that "no topic has been the subject of greater deceit or falsehood (or words to that effect) than claims of extreme age".

To be fair I don't see that general summary as innaccurate today - so I believe that validation process (though tough on some parts of the world) can't really be changed. - at this stage anyway

What about using advanced facial recognition technology and comparing old photographs of a person with no documents to the person's face nowadays? Could this help getting some unverified cases verified (if the old photos have the year in which they were taken, I mean)?

I believe the chances Mr Kimura is NOT truly the oldest man, is very low. About the world oldest women. I believe the chances someone is older than Misawo are 50/50. I agree it is very much possible. You are also right when you say that the GRG data is imcomplete. However, if it upon the claimant to deliver us the proof that they are older than the current WOW. If someone from China would deliver us the three documents required for validation, that person WILL appear on table E. But the truth is, that NOONE from China has ever send us any document at all.

It aint fair that people without a birth record who are truly 115+ years old, do NOT appear on our lists. But suppose we would accept these claims just because the son of that supercentenarian is called Robert Young and he just KNOWS his mother is 115. Even then, we couldnt accept the claim. If we start accepting claims of people who have no proof, we let the door open for frauds. The oldest person on our list would be 150+ by tomorrow (not kidding) and the truly oldest person would be number 115 on that same list. It that what you really want to happen ???????

These are very fair comments.

Significantly lowering the standard of proof would ensure the WOP top 100 list became "inaccurate rubbish" in a fairly short time period.

Regretably current standards do mean some very true claims are never able to be verified - but one cannot fault the efforts of those who do attempt to verify claims whenever possible.

It is worth remembering the old wording that used to appear in the annual Guiness Book of Records for many years.

It basically said in respect of old age that "no topic has been the subject of greater deceit or falsehood (or words to that effect) than claims of extreme age".

To be fair I don't see that general summary as innaccurate today - so I believe that validation process (though tough on some parts of the world) can't really be changed. - at this stage anyway

What about using advanced facial recognition technology and comparing old photographs of a person with no documents to the person's face nowadays? Could this help getting some unverified cases verified (if the old photos have the year in which they were taken, I mean)?

I think this wouldn't be a reliable proof, such as late-life documents. It gives us an idea about the claim, but it may be insufficient.

Any updates on the Marianna Ostrowska case?

This is a pretty inmature thing to say..

"I dont believe in GRG's data."

All the people involve in the GRG's data ages is fully verified. Yes, it is only a few countries, but it is because of many factors...rather no data than wrong data!

And yes, there might be other people than Misawo,Jiroemon and Hatsue alive today that were born in 1897 and 1898, no 1 is disagree with that. But they are mostly from countries with too little documentation and lack of correspondents.

This is a pretty inmature thing to say..

"I dont believe in GRG's data."

All the people involve in the GRG's data ages is fully verified. Yes, it is only a few countries, but it is because of many factors...rather no data than wrong data!

And yes, there might be other people than Misawo,Jiroemon and Hatsue alive today that were born in 1897 and 1898, no 1 is disagree with that. But they are mostly from countries with too little documentation and lack of correspondents.

Wrong... The japanese cases are not verified by the GRG but are supposed to be by the japanese government.

This is a pretty inmature thing to say..

"I dont believe in GRG's data."

All the people involve in the GRG's data ages is fully verified. Yes, it is only a few countries, but it is because of many factors...rather no data than wrong data!

And yes, there might be other people than Misawo,Jiroemon and Hatsue alive today that were born in 1897 and 1898, no 1 is disagree with that. But they are mostly from countries with too little documentation and lack of correspondents.

Wrong... The japanese cases are not verified by the GRG but are supposed to be by the japanese government.

But the GRG is believing in their data