Got a small question.

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
Jay

posted on Oct, 7 2003 @ 06:53 AM
link   
Yes i agree with you, but would you view it as a energy being like we talked about. Or another race (physical form) being pointed in this direction and told by the higher race what to do to us??




posted on Oct, 7 2003 @ 06:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jay
ValHall

Excellent points you make, but here is one thing. Most insects haven't changed in the time their species have been around. Minus changes in size, flight, and a few others. Most of these changes wouldn't even change the dna code itself, only what is active and inactive along the strand of dna.
Yes i agree with you carbon dating is flawed and can give you a big gap in the age. But the gap i was talking about was the gap between Neanderthal and Homo Sapiens. Both species coexisted 50,000 years ago. Then neanderthal died out. But before that there are no skulls to date that show a step between. This is the gap i talk about.
No i have a question for you, if to you carbod dating is to inaccurte, what dating method do you use. I belive in the early 90's i heard the catholic church went through and counted the years in the bible and came out with a realitive age for the earth at 5000 years. Even i find this number to be way inaccurte. But we do have to find a more accurte way to date things.


First let's talk about the insects. You see, you can't proselytize a theory (I'm sorry, I can't stand to do that...in the case of evolution it is still a hypothesis) and then kick out great big populations of exceptions. IF, the scientific method had EVER been applied to the hypothesis of evolution, it would have been kicked out long ago...but they avoid the scientific method like it were the plague. So the insect fact is damning against evolution.

Your question concerning an alternative method of time measurement. That's a good and almost unanswerable question at this point. As long as the "scientists" demand to hang their hypothesis off of the biggest unproven hypothesis (the big bang one), we're stuck with this. BUT, at least they could try doing the following:

there are certain structures on earth that there are very adequate records for dating the time passed, they need to be focusing on THOSE "knowns" and developing a dating method that pinpoints those. NOW, they would then say...but the accuracy might be off due to the "relatively" short period of time since the base-object was created that over extremely LARGE periods of time the error could be gross...yeah, if you're going to stick with billions of years since the creation of the universe that would be true. But we're no worse off starting from a PROVEN, say, 4000 years ago and working backward than we are starting from an UNPROVEN 4 billion years ago (or whatever they've moved it back to now) and working forward...heck, we'll probably be better off.



posted on Oct, 7 2003 @ 07:01 AM
link   

intelligent form of life have survived during that time and left no trace on the planet.


Ahh, but there is the contradiction.... As far as we have seen, (i.e. with us), intelligent civilizations, now matter how ancient, always leave some clues behind....not intentionally of course, but simply as a by-product of them being there, and shaping the environment to suit their needs. Therefore, assuming the existence of such a society, without a shred of evidence, is certainly a leap of faith....

As for honeybees, etc. Evolution happens because adaptation is needed, not just for the hell of it. If a design is working...mother nature pretty much just keeps right on trucking. In the cases of most insects, they represent the most successful life forms ever to evolve on the planet, so of course, the design has changed little over the years...(i.e. if it ain't broke, she doesn't fix it...)


Jay

posted on Oct, 7 2003 @ 07:04 AM
link   
Excellent idea on the starting with a established age accountable building, possible the mayan ruins? The only problem i see here is that after say double that many years say just say mayan ruins are 5000 years old. Then after about 7500 years to 10000 years, would all be guess work. Because we already know for a fact that humans and dino did not live together. So you see how hard it will be to come up with an accurate way to measure time beyond human written history.
Now as for evolution, yes it is flawed never gonna agrue with you there. It needs one heck of a major over haul, but as uIVIa said the roach is a prime example, hasn't changed much over the years. Most likely will out last the entire human race as we know it. Another example of a species that for the most part stop evoluving, the coelcanth. Supposed to have died out realtivly when dinos did, only to be found again in 1938. And from what i here kept in most local big city aquariums.
Evolution is a tricky thing, i don't think we will ever nail it down just right. It will probally be a mystery as long as our race is alive and kicking.



posted on Oct, 7 2003 @ 07:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by bigsage
yet in my opinion it allows for the infrastructure to exist...
the spiritual one that is...
and maybe you are correct that without i would still have a connection...
yet it shold have its own institution if others get their own...
or are you that spiritually advanced that you not need such a place...
jesus supposedly went into the church only 3 times...
and, yes the christ body is with me, as is most...

in short, id much rather people praising the father and loving their lives, than not...

for i know not the reprocussions of such a thing...

as well if it be it be for a necessary reason...

[Edited on 7-10-2003 by bigsage]



Don't get me wrong here, I'm not blasting religion. That's just where I'm at. I attended church the whole time I was growing up and learned a great many things. I consider all I learned as being positive. For instance, I learned (or relearned depending on perspective) how to treat others. In the same frame I learned other things that might be considered "negative" but if it's learning then to me it's not negative. For instance, I learned hypocrosity in church by observing it. I seen what happened and chose to do my best not to be a hypocrite.

Anyway, church has it's place and many people require that foundation to work from. And it's not that I'm "above" any of it, it's just that I learned the lessons I needed and moved on. I cannot speak for others.

I see many ways to praise the Creator (Father). One of those is to learn and be as much as I can therefore adding stature to the Creator/Creation. This is my response for the gift of free-will and consciousness. This is my testimony and my praise.

I do my best not to put down or block out any part of creation because that would be the same as blocking out part of God. However, there are many things that I do not act upon that are still part of me since I did experienced them. Church/Religion is one of those things. A "negative" example is I know how to kill people but I don't act on that because I don't feel I need that experience.

So by all means if you like church/religion then do it. If it is who you are at the moment then you are giving praise to your Creator by actively integrating and BEing the creation (by knowing yourself).


Jay

posted on Oct, 7 2003 @ 07:08 AM
link   
Gazrok,

I agree with you that yes that if we die out tomorrow, or today we will leave behind things for well into the future. But the gap in the time from when the KT barrier starts to us is over 40 million years( don't have figures right here). So in that time i would be guessing that the earth went through some pretty big changes and got rid of most evidence suggesting a life form before us.
OK, for the sake of arguement a piece of evidence got through the years, a super plastic or such. I doubt if any one would actually bring the evidence to light. To many people think we are the only ones, and it would diffintly send this world into a fluster.



posted on Oct, 7 2003 @ 07:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jay
Yes i agree with you, but would you view it as a energy being like we talked about. Or another race (physical form) being pointed in this direction and told by the higher race what to do to us??



I think you are asking me.

I say both. An energy being could manipulate matter which we are made of. But it would be much easier to create your own race of simple beings, say with just a couple organs, to do most of your bidding (like a grey for instance). Then you can just sit back and pig out. I mean you would have to give orders and such. You would probably give the greys some of your thinking processes, in a manner of speaking, so that they stay subordinate. You could possibly even give the humans the same thinking processes as to make them forget who/what they actually are (spiritually speaking). Then a false choice of the "lesser of two evils" presents your intelligent slaves with no real choice.

It's kinda like playing a football game where the opposing team makes up all the rules and all the referees work for them. And one rule being that you aren't allowed to score.


Jay

posted on Oct, 7 2003 @ 07:20 AM
link   
uIVIa,

So inessence like the movie dark city, where the greys are actually being controlled by a higher being, say a hive mind. Being directed into controlling us and genetically altering us to what the hive mind wants. Then another theroy presents itself, or maybe a couple. Is this "hive mind" doing this because of malice, or good. Two, is the grey race themselves dieing and the hive mind needs a new "host" to move into. Do have to say this is one of the most deep conversation i have had in a long time.



posted on Oct, 7 2003 @ 07:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jay
Now thinking like i do sometimes when i have to much time on my hands. In evolution monkeys evolved in to humans in little over 3.6 million years( might be wrong on the years).

That's definately wrong.

Firstus... humans didn't evolve from monkeys. Monkeys are very very very distant cousins. We had a common ancestor more than 10 million years in our past.

Second, "human beings" (the species 'homo') have been around for about 5 million years. Before that came Australopithecenes -- the evolutionary stage before 'homo' species... Australopithecus looked a LOT more human than gorillas (they weren't descendants of gorillas, either.)



So i was thinking when dinosaurs ruled they rulled for hundreds of millions of years. So i pose the question could a intelligent form of life have survived during that time and left no trace on the planet.

Only if they left no artifacts and their bodies were soft and left no fossils. We can tell from the dinosaurs how small their brains were (T-Rex, which was as tall as a house, had a proportionally tiny brain... imagine a human being with a brain the size of a cat's. That's how small it was in comparison.)

Intelligent species tend to change their environment. We do find stone tools that are 5 million years old (older, I believe, but can't recall.) We find evidence of humans butchering animals (tool cut marks on fossil bone.) We can find evidence of them using fire and doing other things to change the environment.

So far, there's no record of any creature other than one in the hominid line making any change to the environment.



posted on Oct, 7 2003 @ 07:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jay
Excellent idea on the starting with a established age accountable building, possible the mayan ruins? The only problem i see here is that after say double that many years say just say mayan ruins are 5000 years old. Then after about 7500 years to 10000 years, would all be guess work. Because we already know for a fact that humans and dino did not live together. So you see how hard it will be to come up with an accurate way to measure time beyond human written history.
Now as for evolution, yes it is flawed never gonna agrue with you there. It needs one heck of a major over haul, but as uIVIa said the roach is a prime example, hasn't changed much over the years. Most likely will out last the entire human race as we know it. Another example of a species that for the most part stop evoluving, the coelcanth. Supposed to have died out realtivly when dinos did, only to be found again in 1938. And from what i here kept in most local big city aquariums.
Evolution is a tricky thing, i don't think we will ever nail it down just right. It will probally be a mystery as long as our race is alive and kicking.



Jay,

No, we don't know that humans and dinosaurs didn't live together. See the unlearning that has to take place in order to get this all straightened out?


Jay

posted on Oct, 7 2003 @ 08:14 AM
link   
Valhal,

Its not a matter of unlearning, its a matter that no human or human relative has ever been found laying next to a dinosaur. Yes i know that it would never happen like that, but they aren't even in the same type of rock, when skeletons are found.

Bryd

This website gives an approaxoment age of 4.4 million years ago, for the Austropithakis. Now just using that as a base line, i can see finding tools since then.

dekalb.dc.peachnet.edu...

No as for my theroy on the Reptiods, thing is this. Had man lived 65 million years ago yes we should find evidence, that we existed. Now take how long it takes, PLaxtics to decay over 100 of years, But sooner or later it does deceae. Now assuming this race of lizards, developed like any oher race .Now say they have a infrasturcture like ours. Military purely addvisable to an over all coucil, then your council,
Yes they would erect buildings, monuments, and the like. But When their race got rdy to leave the planet. Be it death, a mass exodus( due to weather ) or just to leave the planet and carrier on with there lives.
No say that happened just 20 million years ago, all evidence would be gone, and any that was left would be buried deep within the earth. But again this is my two cents.



posted on Oct, 7 2003 @ 08:31 AM
link   
No but their footprints have, Jay.



posted on Oct, 7 2003 @ 08:33 AM
link   
Yes, but erosion, and other factors tend to "unbury" such things, and that's where get fossils in the first place. So, it seems logical that we can find evidence of Before (i.e. dinosaurs) and After these supposed Reptoids...but not during? Circular logic maybe....


Byrd made some excellent remarks such as the evidence of hand tool cutting on bone, etc. I whole-heartedly concur... There would be SOME trace of such a species....they wouldn't simply vanish... It's an interesting theory, but not one that seems to be supported by the evidence we have... Still, there are stranger things under the sun...so kudos for thinking outside the box....


Jay

posted on Oct, 7 2003 @ 10:02 AM
link   
Ok with the foot prints i do agree with you guys and gals, sorry little tired had to stand duty. Thanks for the comment, this is one of the only boards i haven't been bashed at for my out of the box thinking.
Got another one for any willing to discuss it. The other day i was watching a show on deep sea life, and they were talking about the creatures the live near the ocean vents. Almost a total sulfur environment, could this be a possible model to use for the search on other planets for alien life forms( or on moons of other planets in the system).



posted on Oct, 8 2003 @ 01:56 AM
link   


in reference to the hive mind yes i believe it is possibly look at "modern" civilization...

in reference to humans and their time frame of existence...
it does not matter those beings had not the souls we do...
i believe that it was maticuliously planned to place our "divine" souls into these hu man bodies...
and that is the potential fall referred to in the bible...
a continuous fall if you look at life in the dark light...
yet a rise if one "sees" the truth...

a rise you may ask?...

for we have already been and will be...

thus my comment about the placement of man in your hierachy of "races"...

which also hold no validity...
supposedly there were 7 original races of man...
and i mean man as you see and know him today with a soul mind and body in tact...



posted on Oct, 8 2003 @ 03:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jay
uIVIa,

So inessence like the movie dark city, where the greys are actually being controlled by a higher being, say a hive mind. Being directed into controlling us and genetically altering us to what the hive mind wants. Then another theroy presents itself, or maybe a couple. Is this "hive mind" doing this because of malice, or good. Two, is the grey race themselves dieing and the hive mind needs a new "host" to move into. Do have to say this is one of the most deep conversation i have had in a long time.



Well, just all assumptions here on my part.

I don't think it's quite malice as we would call it. Unless, you call what we do to cattle and such, as malice. The entities just want food. We are an excellent food source.

This is how I see the rest of it.

The greys were created and given a strong hive mind and a weak individual mind. They were also given a history of memories. One such memory is that they destroyed their planet because of their warlike nature. These warlike implanted memories were a catalyst so that the greys would not fight their "saviors" because they "remember" what war has cost them.

Both races seem to be of the same energy level. Both races can create matter bodies to reside in but it takes extra food and energy so that's only done when necessary. The greys can basically grow their own food (human). But the "raptors" need conscious energy for their food.

Since the greys were created as energy beings by energy beings they do not have a higher level body or soul. The raptors, however, do. Both races take part in shaping the human race. The "raptors" are basically of the darwinistic mind where there is a pecking order and hierarchy. They pass this on to races (such as human) which basically gives 2 sides of the same coin for choices. You can either kill each other through war or you can live at peace in a hierarchy where "elite" will make the rules.

If that doesn't answer the questions just let me know.



posted on Oct, 8 2003 @ 03:23 AM
link   


Evolution is just a theory... nothing has really been proven. In fact more scientists are leaning towards creationism.

???
Where did you get this from?
Sunday morning Church school?

I for one would rather believe that aliens seeded us than the christian point of view.

And with Dinosoaurs evolving into inteligent beings sounds interesting to me, and I might even agree that it could be possible.
David Icke did some research on the subject, though he is widely discredited it might not be a good idea to jump into his world without further evidence.

And I find it hard to believe that one could debunk carbon dating so easily without knowings its process and merits.
www.mnsu.edu...
I personaly after reading that have no clue what the hell they were talking about, so im a bit lost for words.
I do remember reading a much simpliar version of how the process works but cant seem to find the site.
Deep



posted on Oct, 8 2003 @ 03:49 AM
link   
lookin at it lineraly...
if we were created then who knows when they were...
bought into existance...

the dino's could have been food for them...

and since their brains are so small why not entice some angelic 5th density beings into their world...

but i still believe in the father...


Jay

posted on Oct, 8 2003 @ 10:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by uIVIa

Since the greys were created as energy beings by energy beings they do not have a higher level body or soul. The raptors, however, do. Both races take part in shaping the human race. The "raptors" are basically of the darwinistic mind where there is a pecking order and hierarchy. They pass this on to races (such as human) which basically gives 2 sides of the same coin for choices. You can either kill each other through war or you can live at peace in a hierarchy where "elite" will make the rules.

If that doesn't answer the questions just let me know.


Ok on this then I look at the drive of human society, we drive to conqure everything we come in to contact with. If the "raptors" made us as a food source then, they made us wrong. We are a race of predators, yes we maybe a good food source but when we get to there level of technology will not be. Look to history for proof of this, we go to war with anything we don't understand. I see this happening when we start to come into contact with other races.The only way i see us peacefully contacting other races, is if they come to us first.
Even though they are millions of years more advanced, they are energy and in my thoughts they will have stopped to develop new things. They would have long ago thought that anything they can create will never challenge them. I have to think they would get complicent in there superiority. Thus giving way to thier creations to exceed them, technology and evolutionary wise.

ZeroDeep,

I'm not jumping into his world, its just a thought i had. This was due to the time span that we as a race came into being, and the time that dino's ruled the world. The time is what bothers me the most, something should have developed. Heck for all i know the evidence got suppressed along time ago, or could not exist. But hey it was just out of the box thinking.



posted on Oct, 8 2003 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jay
Ok on this then I look at the drive of human society, we drive to conqure everything we come in to contact with. If the "raptors" made us as a food source then, they made us wrong. We are a race of predators, yes we maybe a good food source but when we get to there level of technology will not be. Look to history for proof of this, we go to war with anything we don't understand. I see this happening when we start to come into contact with other races.The only way i see us peacefully contacting other races, is if they come to us first.
Even though they are millions of years more advanced, they are energy and in my thoughts they will have stopped to develop new things. They would have long ago thought that anything they can create will never challenge them. I have to think they would get complicent in there superiority. Thus giving way to thier creations to exceed them, technology and evolutionary wise.



Since all this is purely conjecture I can give you that. Let's say the human race splits off. Some decide they like the pecking order and go that route. The other route, if we did get more advanced really quick, wouldn't want to fight anyway. We would be too busy creating and wouldn't have enough time or interest for destroying.

So I think in the end it's a moot point. And keep in mind that a hierarchy is kept in place by keeping the upper level knowledge secret. So how could those within the pyramid structure surpass those at top?





top topics
 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join