It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


We are not from this planet, possibly from Mars&Nibiru???

page: 10
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 13 2007 @ 05:22 PM
Density of Martian atmosphere mostly have to do with gravity, first cosmic velcocity and kinetic energy of gass molecules, and that 's it.

But Mars atmosphere could be denser than we think.

And one more thing, look at the what we are into building massive underground facilities, this is what all Mars is now, big underground base, where you can control everything, even comet cores should sustain life in that way by heating and keeping the energy below the surface when away from sun.
But what I still had not seen here it is counter proof on my theory

posted on Mar, 14 2007 @ 09:48 AM
What is the topic again?? It seems to have strayed from the path of prominence and into the path of pathetic indulgence. Indulging in to one's own D-Ego...tsk tsk.

On another note, I have always loved the Ancient astronaut theory because it is probable but not proven. It lays on the brink of humanity, that questioning will we have when we look to the stars for answers. Can you just imagine what the first thought in a human being's mind was when they looked up at the stars after they gained self awareness? It must have been spectacular, like its own microscopic big bang; with neurons firing creating multiple sensory explosions...fantasmical!

posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 11:15 AM
Ok I'm all for Humans are not from earth...But come on. A fifth grader could come up with a more believable argument than our bones shouldn't break. This was absolutely the biggest pile of compacted # I have ever read here.

Der, humans aren't from here cause our bones break, der der der.

I tell ya what, let me punch you as hard as i can in the chest and we will see if your bones still break. cause we are both human and gravity should have nothing to do with it if we break eachothers bones.

I'm sure on our "Homeworld" the results will be the same you idiotic twat.

posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 11:35 AM
reply to post by Aelita

I was with you until you pulled a dishonest move: It is NOT OK to ask a question that the writer never even came close to hinting at: " Are you saying that Africans are damaged?" and then asking if he is a racist all in the same breath. By saying that NORTHERN hemispheres have lower UV rates, I did not ASSUME ANYTHING Negative or racist about it, how could you?

You extrapolated far afield from the subject matter: While I agree that the post is silly and not backed by anything that can be measured, I still do not like seeing people accused of being a racist because they frame a statement in a way that literally has to be turned upside down and misinterpreted to be taken that way.

If I say that in all of human history there has never been a shred of evidence that the negroid race in Lower Africa developed beyond tribal and rudimentary technologies before the edvent of colonialism, would that make me a racist or an accurate historian? If I say that in my opinion that if Africa had been left alone, the lower half at least, and never had any foreigner ever set foot on the Continent at least below the Sahara, and a traveler were to arrive there today that he would find exactly the society that was found in the 1500's, with no technology, and no paved roads and infrastructure such as sewers and running water and transportation systems and health care beyond the witch doctor stage, and no buildings that were constructed to stand for more than a brief period, would that make me a racist or an accurate guesser of the state of developmental abilities of peopls left alone and not influenced by ' modern ' society?

I am NOT a racist of any kind, my many friends of color will tell you that, but I am not afraid to state what I believe to be the truth if I have historical reason for soing so, such as recorded and discovered examples of archeology and history that give a clue as to what is likley. That does NOT mean anything that could lead one to call names.

Opinion can be challenged, established facts cannot. While I disagree with the OP on his views, merely mentioning the things he did in NO WAY , shape or form should cause the reader to assume anything negative at all. The poster was merely strectching his theory about the earth and human nature to the sun and the hemisphere: That should never bring any calls or racism. Now the entire southern hemisphere cannot be mentioned without someone alleging some evil intent?

Me thinks that ye doth protest too much!!

posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 04:40 PM

Originally posted by RabidGoose
We're from Earth, we were created by a magical egotistical being that doesn't love us anymore.

Aww come on. That makes me sad. Tell you the truth since I came to ATS sure I was challenged at times- but one thing never failed me. Faith. When applied you will be surprised how far it will go.

People are lost and times are getting tough, but that dosen't mean the Big Man upsatairs no longer loves us.

Just hang in there.

Back on Topic


And Mars.. Thats yet to be determined. I don't buy it sorry.

posted on May, 26 2008 @ 03:50 AM
reply to post by MankoW

Your points may not be the best, but I agree that we may very well be some type of genetically altered being that is mamilian based with a higher intelligence. If we evolved here millions of years, then why is it in the colder climates we haven't evolved with more hair? Another question is if we evolved here, why are we as humans some of the most helpless beings at birth? We have no real means to defend ourselves other that the use of our brains. We have no claws, sharp teeth, or anything else to truly defend ourselves, yet we DO have many natural enemies. It's an interesting topic and shouldn't just be written off. Also, humans don't seem to be born with any real instinct, at least as far as I can tell. We all seem to be "trained", and are very trainable, at that. Even Darwin stated that the science world had taken his theory, and turned it into a religion. This upset him, as he only meant it to be a theory which had yet to be proven. I myself don't buy the creation, and I don't buy evolution as far as humans are concerned. I THINK we're something different.

posted on May, 27 2008 @ 12:36 PM
Man is closely related genetically and chemically to the other creatures around us.

If we came from a different place there should be no genetic connection.

posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 06:21 PM
reply to post by sinatracementshoes

-98.6% shared DNA
-Bacteria manipulates DNA (even our personalities, did you know that?)

These are both fair facts. Now lets apply logic.

We are a product of our surroundings, we we share the same bacteria as everything else on this rock, so its fair say if the above statements are true that we also have the same "dna manipulating effect".

This makes us 98.6 similar because of the bacteria found on earth, not our necessarily our genetic source (two enzymes in a pond). Take away bacteria and we die. We cannot digest food, we cannot see, arguably we might not even have certain congnative thought, we'd be a lifeless shell.

Think about this, just because we're almost totally identical, doesn't mean the code for "sentience" came from here. This also means that sentience might not be inherent to some SPECIAL human thing, there is no reason that the an evolutionary state of a combination of bacterial mutations causes a freak accident in a monkey. not an evolution by us, but rather a small # controlling us making us believe we are human and alive. See "depths of human consciousness" for more wack circumstantial evidence of this.

not only is it possible we're not from here orginally, its not worth arguing about it. doesnt change the fact that when u die you will degrade back into an energy and evaporate into the cosmic mist from whence you came.

Only the facts here people.

posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 08:13 PM
Great post there stalker.

Why exactly should DNA and genetic information be any different elsewhere in the universe than on Earth??

The "elements" are after all "Universal".

You cannot logically argue with that.

It seems that a lot of folks here got carried away with the OP's arguments rather than with the general idea of humans coming to Earth from elsewhere. I thought that their attacks were rather sadistic, especially since there was a "pile-on" by susequent posters. As if one dissent on his opinions and several agreements wasn't enough. Page 10 2 years later they are still going on about the bones.

Also thee many statements on the invalidity of the Mars connection was very unscientific. How can any logical mind make a statement about the past environment of Mars based on its present condition?

Evolution - humans from apes.
That is quite a leap of faith.
Oh they say we have 98% of DNA in common with them.

I callenge you to put them side by side and closely examine each and compare them meticulously from top to botton - and that includes the inner anatomy, not just exterior appearance.

posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 11:21 PM
reply to post by OhZone

Howdy OZ

That has been done its called comparative anatomy. That humans, chimps and bonobos are related to us is beyond question- and that man himself is related to every other creature on this planet.

DNA might evolve on another planet but then we have no evidence to support that.

If one goes for diffusion of life then yes it possible but not probable that life started on Mars and was transferred here by meteor impact. It is equally possible the opposite occurred.

posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 12:19 AM

Originally posted by Hanslune
Man is closely related genetically and chemically to the other creatures around us.

If we came from a different place there should be no genetic connection.

I agree to what Hans has stated.

All Animals including man are related gentically.

Unless there was Panspermia (unintentional or directed), from another source, we can all be sure that we evolved here and no where else.

posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 12:41 AM
reply to post by coredrill

Hey Coredrill

Once when I was discussing this subject on another board far, far away. We had gone on for several days and hundreds of messages when the believer admitted defeat and bowed out. A few days later he came back and had the solution. Earth and Mars had SWITCH positions during pre-historic times so life had started on Mars and had moved to Earth because the orbital paths determined what the planets names were.......

posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 10:08 PM
So, I wasn't planning on responding to this topic until I saw what MankoW
said about the asteroid belt having once been a planet (this bothers me). The asteroid belt was most likely never one planet. There are significant differences in the chemical compositions of the asteroids...which would be really hard to explain if they came from the same planet. Also, the large amount of energy that would have been required to destroy that planet probably would have affected Mars or Jupiter. Check wikipedia. No, seriously, do it. I'll even give you the link.

On another note: MankoW said that a while ago but it just bugged me so much ><

[edit on 31-1-2009 by karaxdeath]

posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 10:24 PM
reply to post by karaxdeath

MankoW is still active on ATS, you could send him a friendly u2u query

posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 11:07 PM

Originally posted by Karaya
What planet doesnt have a magnetic field?

So does this mean we didnt have fire on our homeworld? Or that we breathed water on our homeworld? Last time I checked fire burns and I will drown if I am not careful.

I tested theory #1 as well. I always suspected my dog wasnt from Earth. So I stepped on her leg. Guess what it broke. Proof positive!!!

[edit on 8-3-2005 by Karaya]


Send my regards to your dog, I hope she still here and fine.

Or does she went back to her planet to get her leg fixed?

posted on Mar, 10 2018 @ 07:50 PM
proof number five
if we were born on Mars we would can walk instantly, every newborn can in low gravity like on Mars.
I rest my case What more proof you people want?

posted on Mar, 10 2018 @ 07:54 PM
Zhe dogs leg wouldn't broke if gravity is lower this earth gravita helped you to break dogs leg, it is one more proof for me a nd one less for you you are not even getting it omg

posted on Mar, 10 2018 @ 07:55 PM
a reply to: Hanslune

this is just wonderful, I never thought on that, it explains a lot

posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 06:23 PM

originally posted by: MankoW
proof number five
if we were born on Mars we would can walk instantly, every newborn can in low gravity like on Mars.
I rest my case What more proof you people want?

Newborns can't walk, even in Mars gravity. Walking requires something more than being able to support weight.

Also... Mars' atmosphere is very thin AND is 98% carbon dioxide. Our genes evolved on an oxygen-rich Earth.

posted on Jun, 4 2018 @ 08:32 PM
a reply to: Byrd
are you sure????

<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in