I was given The Barbell Prescription[1] by a friend for my 40th birthday.

It is pretty thorough in suggesting why weightlifting (or rather; resistance training) is more important than endurance/cardio. In summary: they train different muscle types, and the anaerobic types age worse than e.g. the heart, so it's better to focus on that. They do suggest that you complement it with some cardio exercise, but it's a side gig rather than focus.

[1] https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/34823846-the-barbell-...

It's a bit of a "how long is a piece of string" question which is why it's helpful to sit down with a professional to get a plan together.

If I did cardio instead of weightlifting I would waste away. I do also ride bikes for fun so I do get some cardio.

For many, cardio is also boring as hell, and weightlifting is a better long term solution as you are more engaged and motivated.

I think both are important. I love running and started it first but ended up injuring myself and couldn't run for a number of years. Lifting fixed the issues I had and allow me to run consistently. The body you build with weight lifting is, in my opinion, a more aesthetically pleasing one as well.

Ideal would probably be a mix of resistance training, maximal intensity-metabolic conditioning work (sprints/HIIT/plyometrics), and low intensity steady state cardio (i.e. zone 2, cardio at the pace.you can hold a conversation). Each has unique benefits.

Both are important. My elderly father's doctor recommended he start lifting weights. My father already gets a reasonable amount of aerobic exercise, but they do different things for the body.