From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Date brought from Seychelles?[edit]

If Robert Clive lived from 1725 to 1774, can Adwaitya have been brought to India for Clive in 1875 as the article states at present? -- JimR 08:58, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

It must be a mistake. It was brought to the Indian Zoo in 1875 (and has been there since). It was brought for Clive at the late 1700's. JackO'Lantern 17:43, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Merger of Adwaita and Adwaitya[edit]

Suppport of merge. As the two articles use the same BBC article in their lists of sources, it appears that both articles refer to the same turtle while using alternate spellings of name. --Allen3 talk 18:46, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Support obvious need to merge. JackO'Lantern 18:55, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Of course the two articles refer to the same tortoise. Just the spelling is different. We can follow the BBC spelling, which is Adwaita that also conforms with the Bengali spelling better.--Dwaipayanc 19:10, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

As there appeared to be concensus that this was the same turtle, a history merge has been performed on the two articles. --Allen3 talk 19:26, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

From WP:CPMV, it appears that history merge should be done only for cut and paste moves and no where else. This is also confirmed by a reading of WP:MM. Am I missing something? --Gurubrahma 15:46, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

The traditional spelling is Calcutta not Kolkata.

Oldest creature?[edit]

The claim that Adwaita may be the oldest creature is wrong. See List of long-living organisms. 'Oldest animal' might be correct, though. DirkvdM 19:12, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

There are various sponges and corals which can live well over 1,000 years, so Adwaita cannot be the oldest animal, but if he really was 255, I believe that would make him the oldest recorded vertebrate in history. Oisín(Message) 14:29, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Carbon dating[edit]

Carbon dating? Are you all fucking idiots? Carbon dating a corpse tells you how long ago it died, not when it was born. Adding to that the already mentioned fact that the half-life of 14C would make the results here statistically random, this is a totally useless method for this purpose. I don't personally believe anyone outside Wikipedia has suggested carbon dating a fucking tortoise that fucking died last fucking year. -- 20:39, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Do you realise how embarrasing you sound like? -- (talk) 09:44, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

I was thinking the same thing, albeit in slightly less vulgar terms. Radio carbon dating is about as useful for this purpose as singing the national anthem of Tonga backwards. No one seriously involved in trying to determine the age of and organism for scientific purposes would propose anything as ludicrous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:52, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I have removed the material regarding carbon dating the shell. It is indeed impossible to do. Keegantalk 18:52, 29 October 2007 (UTC) This link from the BBC says its shell will be carbon dated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Qbadge (talkcontribs) 00:05, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
does anyone have a link to an actual scientific study on this? i wouldn't call the risk management society a credible scientific source and the BBC could have made a mistake which was later embellished to a full blown urban legend. carbon dating isn't really plausible for the reasons given above —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:54, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
No one asked the Turtle how old he was at any given point in time? If someone had, maybe we could find that person and ask him how old the turtle said he was, and go from there. --1sneakers6 (talk) 12:31, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Gotta agree with the original poster, User:Keegan and - radiometric dating methods are used to tell how long ago something died. They aren't useful for telling how long something lived as living things are constantly taking in carbon-14 and other radioisotopes, thus the level of parental isotopes is kept constant despite the constant breakdown. A news organization misunderstanding science is hardly surprising.--Khajidha (talk) 23:15, 2 August 2011 (UTC)


Is there a public accessable genome sequence avaible? (talk) 23:08, 26 January 2016 (UTC)