A weird set of coincidences in my family…

Of the female blood relatives on my maternal side, I’m the only widow. There are plenty of widowers, and some uncles and male cousins (blood relatives) predeceased the women they married.
But of my female cousins who are gone, [b]they[/b] left widowers.
In my own line,
My great grand-grandmother died at age 59, leaving her husband.
My grandmother died at age 79, leaving my grandfather.
My aunt (my mother’s only sister), passed at age 69, leaving her husband.
Then my own mother, age 89, leaving my father.
My sisters and I were looking at the records and thinking how odd it was.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

DeWayfarer · 61-69, M

Quite the opposite on both sides of my family.

Only my grandfather on my mother's side and great grandfather on my father's side died because of war.

All the rest died long before their wives of so called "natural causes". I can go back three generations on both.

bijouxbroussard · F

@DeWayfarer But it’s more common for men to go first, that’s not considered unusual, for those reasons. My great-grandfather, grandfather and father were all veterans, and were older. But their wives went first.

DeWayfarer · 61-69, M

@bijouxbroussard the biggest reason though is because of war.

bijouxbroussard · F

@DeWayfarer True, but generally speaking, women live longer than men, right ?

DeWayfarer · 61-69, M

@bijouxbroussard there is some debate on this.

You see because of war certain long life genes get wiped out.

It's more complex than you might think.

They only send healthy men to war.

bijouxbroussard · F

@DeWayfarer But regardless of the why, it has been fact, hasn’t it ?

DeWayfarer · 61-69, M

@bijouxbroussard On the face of it, yes. Yet the healthy genes get wiped out. Many don't consider that.

We are talking about genetics over thousands of years. The why's do matter in genetics.

bijouxbroussard · F

@DeWayfarer

DeWayfarer · 61-69, M

@bijouxbroussard again. There is debate on this.

Yes, that is the "common" consensus. Yet they don't consider the why's!

Just like you have assumed. 🤷🏻‍♂️

The why's do matter though.

bijouxbroussard · F

@DeWayfarer But they don’t change what [b]is[/b]. Knowing why doesn’t make the situation of previous generations different. There’s even been speculation that the gap lessened when [b]women[/b] began working outside the home in larger numbers, and even serving in the armed forces themselves, which would [b]also[/b] have been a result of war.

DeWayfarer · 61-69, M

@bijouxbroussard data is only reliant on it's interpretation.

If you don't interpret the data, the face of it can mean anything, nothing or be outright misleading.

The why's do matter.

They are the interpretation of the data. This is a common mistake in science today and why the different meanings keep on changing. Often finally given some reasons. Yet not all the reasons.

"What is", actually keeps on changing by science.

Why in physics they keep on challenging things.

Challenging is the backbone of all science. Even if it doesn't follow "common sense".

How is e=mc² common sense? Yet quantum physics challenges that to it's very core by it's own "data" !

The data is interpreted differently.

Another controversy: Is energy a wave or a particle or a reaction?

They are all still being challenged! The data says all three. Yet how can two different things be the same thing much less three? Like saying god and the devil are the same entities, then include the in between as well.

Is that common sense‽ Is that "what is"? So how can anyone say precisely what anything is?

Only when you interpret the data can you give examples of reality.

So a electrician will say energy is a wave. A physicist will say energy is a particle. A chemist will say energy is a reaction.

Whose interpretation is "what is"?

bijouxbroussard · F

@DeWayfarer So in other words, my guess is as good as anyone’s, if the data is open to interpretation. Then there’s no solid answer. Which is okay. I’ve stated data that were on family death records, I found it interesting, and the last thing I was looking for was an argument.

DeWayfarer · 61-69, M

@bijouxbroussard ok! So you know, I'm not really arguing. This is not an issue with me. Just attempting to give how science interprets things. Statistics is considered a math science. You can prove anything with statistics.