nzak

The last volume of the trilogy on the world's oldest con artist Jeanne Calment, the Secret of Longevity Unravelled: Volume III, The Calment affair: How we know that the “oldest person who ever lived” was faking her age: Zak, Nikolay, Gibbs, Philip: 9798395710628: Amazon.com: Books

We have been researching the biography of Jeanne Calment and her daughter Yvonne for more than four years. The outcome is being published in books, in 3 languages. I've also started the video course on the Calment's life, her validation, and our investigation, also in three languages. Firts two episodes of the first lecture are available on youtube Let's see how long it would take for the obvious truth to break through such a thick wall of lies.

Tuberculosis is key to longevity

Tuberculosis is key to longevity

True

True, because I have studied this subject for many years and know the truth. I prefer to contribute where I know the answer. And it is not true that the truth can't be proved. There is more than enough information available for those who would like to look.

The fact that you don't care does not make your opinion more valuable, so what's the point? How does your "investigation" contribute to anything?

Switch in her signature in 1933 is just a part of her story which is necessary to understand it, not the only argument in any way. People do look like that shortly before their death in late nineties. If you check her earlier photos and videos, she looked and talked like people in their 80s when she was "113". The point of lying so much was not to go to jail for her fraud. She was lying even to her child who thought she was his grandmother. But to get the point one should check the evidence.

Unlike Young's, our conclusion is based on real research, and unlike Young we don't ban and spread lies about those who ask questions, but answer them. Anyone can read our work (search "Jeanne Calment" on amazon from example) and make his own conclusions. But this requires more effort than just arguing that it is impossible to switch identity or that it is impossible to prove anything or get any reasonable conclusion without the DNA test.

Her mind was very clear and mistakes she made were always going in one direction: she confused herself with her own daughter, then she usually corrected herself or was corrected by the interviewer. DNA test would be fine, but for this case there is so much evidence in favor of the identity switch that those who are pro-truth can find it out without exhuming the bodies. The only problem is that people are too lazy to study evidence and prefer to rely on expert opinions, or just believe in what they prefer to believe.

It is important to use the audio and videotapes and not what journalists wrote about her. With Van Gogh her main problem was that she said she was introduced to him by her husband as his wife, while in reality Jeanne married 7 years later. Jeanne would know better how to make up this story, but her daughter confused the dates and ages. With the tower she said she visited it for her honeymoon and that it was built only up to the first floor at that time - again a mistake with dates. There are not two but 57 "strange" things about this case, we have reviewed them all and also did the Bayesian analysis.

It is not a matter of belief, her biography was reconstructed, and it is obvious that Madame Calment was Yvonne who assumed identity of her mother Jeanne since 1933.

For Robine Calment's record is much more important than for Young. He validated her when he was an unknown demographer, and since then he suddenly became a very well-known prominent scientist, founder of the IDL, etc. Without Calment, he wouldn't have built his career. And he invested too much to defend it. It is very easy to debunk his claims, but so far, he got away with it. For those who do not have time to look into evidence this is a matter of belief. You can choose the experts and agree with their conclusion. Or you can say it can't be resolved without the DNA test. But the truth still exists. Her biography was studied in finest possible details and there is no reasonable doubt about her identity. Those who would like to check can easily do that. Signature change alone doesn't prove that she was Yvonne, but it is an important part of the story. A lot of interesting things happened in early 1930s: Jeanne was secretly treated for tuberculosis in Switzerland (confirmed by photographic evidence and by the son of her doctor) and their notary in Arles retired. Then she bought the villa in Paradou in February 1933 with the help of this new notary, new Identity Card and new signature. This was a year prior to the official death of her daughter. Previous 10 years her signature always had the long tail after the final t, and after this new ID card and new deal with the new notary, her signature never again had this tail after the final t. There are also other permanent changes after this sudden signature switch.

Lafaucheuse: " but the details that Calment gave about her life in the last interviews of her would be hardly known by anyone even by her own daughter (her meeting with Van Gogh, the name of the person who made her communion dress, the name of her piano teacher who wasn't even in the region when Yvonne was in age of playing piano herself etc…)." In fact, her real interviews which are now public expose her switch very clearly. E.g. when talking about her dress the day of Yvonne's communion, she slipped to talking as Yvonne on several occasions, including: "VL: Do you remember well? What were you wearing that day? MC: A muslin dress, white. VL: But what were YOU wearing? MC: Well, I had a pink dress in the fashion of the time, a pretty dress. A fashionable dress, of course! " About the piano teacher, it was Cesarie Gachon who was teaching in Arles until she died there in 1916 when Yvonne was 18 years old. By now, the biography of the Calments is very well researched, the truth is known, and the question is if the obvious truth can break such a thick wall of lies.