Genetic manipulation?

That's two fancy words for NATURAL SELECTION.

Its really just about making a beginning. It didnt take much intelligence to use the first tools. But it took intelligence to start using complicated tools. So we had to develop that intelligence somehow. Eventually it happened, and their children learned how, and their children and so on. Anyone that couldnt handle tools, died. Simple as that. And it grew into villages, and they all learned from each other. Knowledge spreads like wildfire.

That the thing. "Intelligence" like we define it is like 99% knowledge. Grow a kid in complete solitary confinement and he wouldnt know how to use advanced tools, speak or do anything we consider "normal".

yes, much of what we do is aquired knowlege; however, we have genes in our cells that grow a brain 3 times larger than a chimpanzee for the same environment. The HAR1 gene has 18 mutations compared to the chimpanzee; all the other species in the whole world have the same gene up to 18 million years ago when it mutated for primates. Someone altered our DNA drastically in a very short period of time. Even the scientists who discovered it can't explain the rapididy of the change. That's what I'm getting at.....It seems like some help might have been given to get the ball rolling. remember, we were not a very large population back when we evolved, so genetic drift would have been very difficult as would "spreading through the population." Humans lived in very small groups, far from earch other and were scavengers.

Human beings did seem to evolve pretty rapidly over the past million years, but a lot of that can be chalked up to living on a planet that has decided to periodically freeze over for no apparent reason.

Besides, if aliens have manipulated us to be smarter, I think they would have done a better job.

Sort of like God and "Intelligent Design." Even I could come up with a better design for people than God supposedly did. Pretty sloppy work, all around.

[edit on 17-4-2007 by SuicideVirus]

well, i agree that our code is pretty iffy, but what did they start with? austrolopithecus? neanderthals. if climate variation caused us to become smarter, why didn't other mammals evolve the same way? i doubt the aliens, if they exist, are perfect, they probably didn't evolve to use the same DNA as us, so had to learn our entire biology first. Then they have to learn hjjow to successfully manipulate our DNA to achieve a desired result with a species that is "alien" to them=us. We are only just starting to think about modifying our DNA to fix diseases and finding it to be unbelievably complex and difficult to do. Can you blame them for a poor result? But we are lightyears ahead of chimpanzees and other primates as well as reptiles, fish, dolphins, cephalopods even though these other species have been around for millions more years. Wouldn't a bigger brain have benefitted a bear or a lizard or an octopus? yet they didn't get one, despite living on the same planet as us.

[edit on 17-4-2007 by j_kalin]

Originally posted by j_kalin
Wouldn't a bigger brain have benefitted a bear or a lizard or an octopus? yet they didn't get one, despite living on the same planet as us.

That's not the way natural selection works. It's not a matter of whether or not a species might benefit from having certain characteristics, it's a matter of whether a small variation in the species already exists enough to get it through tough times.

Obviously, bears, lizards and octopi already had the attributes they needed to get through the ice ages, or they wouldn't have made it. And they didn't start out in the same place we did, anyway. We started out as these little monkey-things, not bears. So any variations in that population allowed some of us to survive and eventually become the people we are today.

As for us being tremendously superior to our primate cousins, the more we understand about them and ourselves, the more we become aware of the similarities, and not the differences measured in percentage variations in DNA. Yeah, we're clever, and our ability to speak and communicate using abstract symbols has definitely worked out well for us (until we overpopulate the planet, anyway).

But those things are a matter of tiny degrees of difference between us and other animals, and not that difficult to account for with natural selection. No curious, industrious aliens required.

well, suicide,
you make a good point about variations accumulating in a population as it grows larger during plentiful times and then the population gets pared down during tough times. I suppose the human race is now ending it's 10,000 year period of plenty, having exploded in population. Presumably we have accumulated some interesting variations which will now be placed under selective pressure as we run out of food, oil, space to live, healthcare, and have to live with resistant superbugs and viruses. I wonder which traits will be selected for. Will it be high IQ or will it be the ability for obese people to survive a famine? Obviously the presence of HIV resistance or immunity(already present in 5% of caucasians) would be of benefit for survival in a worl without high tech medicine. I think the human population is definitely due for about an 80% reduction, or back to where we were in the 1700s. I don't think the die off will stabilize until we are at self-sufficiency levels by local farming ( see "The Long Emergency" a book by a guy last named Kunstler, I think).

Originally posted by merka

Its really just about making a beginning. It didnt take much intelligence to
That the thing. "Intelligence" like we define it is like 99% knowledge. Grow a kid in complete solitary confinement and he wouldnt know how to use advanced tools, speak or do anything we consider "normal".

That's an example I also use to prove the point that intelligence does not even exist. I think Intelligence is a man made concept to supposidly show our superiority over other organisms. People have a hard time believing that for the greatest part, we behave just like any other mamal. The diffrence in my eyes is complexity. And that is apperently what we have become to call intelligence. When behaviour is more complex. But it is only complex to a mind which cannot grasp certain concepts of behaviour.

I can go on like this for hours you know.

But anyway, to get back on track of the original post. It's a good possibility that there has have been gentic enhancements to the human race. What the exact purpose could we, we can only guess. Maybe we are just an experiment. Maybe we are a cure for something or maybe we are a weapon. All different angles which could be [proven to be probable.

There's also the possibility that we just did evolve from a lesser being just by being in the right place at the right time theory. Just because no other being on this planet shows a comparible evolutionary growth, doesn't really mean we are special in any way. We do not have the knowledge or experience in these fields to even come close to really knowing..

Thanks for your thoghts Lodgikal,
I never considered the purpose one might have for engineering humans. However, if we consider the premise that we have been enhanced in the past, we then need to consider WHY? We do however have a few interesting traits: high adaptability, resourcefulness, we get along in large groups, language for complex communication, reasonably high IQ for learning abstract concepts and performing logical operations, an innate sence of fair/not fair...These would be good traits for a race bred to be a weapon, ie. to be sent out against a cunning enemy. We seem to be perfecting the art of war here on earth; perhaps our ultimate purpose is to go exterminate some other race that is threatening the grays, our presumed designers. They seem to be quite feeble and I doubt they could fight off their own reptilian enemies...

Interesting thread

I personally believe we evolved naturally, climate changes are the main reason for our genetic mutations.
The reason I believe we evolved without interference from an outside source is that I think there is an intergalactic code in which other ET races have to abid to. Meaning that they are allowed to study us as scientist's, however are not allowed to interfer with our natural evolution. I do think things have changed since we detonated a atomic bomb and are now in the computer revolution. I feal the ET are watching us much more than before and are ready to intervene if needed. Reason being is we are not only a threat to ourselves but in the near future we could be a threat to other civalizations in our galaxy perhaps the universe.

well, i appreciate the input, but it is still unresolved in my mind why OUR ancestors were the species to suddenly evolve intelligence/speech/hand dexterity/upright posture/bpedalism,etc, etc. All simultaneously and no trait seems to be on it's own that useful. However together, they created a "super-animal"=us. Back around 20 million years ago, our ancestors, austalopithecus, were just one of the animals living in balance with oiur environment, being preyed upon to keep our numbers down, mostly living as scavengers. For some unknown reason, only our ancestors were lucky enough to evolve all the many traits simultaneously to outwit nature and begin our rapid changes and population explosion. The fact that we are out of balance with our environment proves, to me, that we are not evolving in accordance with the "natural selection" of the earth environment; otherwise we would be in balance with the earth, not destroying it. I think this is clear evidence of external interference. No other predatory species on earth has ever undergone such an amazing amount of development in so short a time that it basically escapes the normal feedback mechanisms of nature. Other species have existed basically unchanged for hundreds of millions of years(tigers/sabertooth cats/lions/wolves/bears, octopus/cetaceans, etc) and never abruptly developed big brains and the other traits that we have, even though it would seem to be beneficial to them; why did we? I wonder if higher/tool-using intelligence is a trait that must be given to a species by another species, rather than evolving naturally. Perhaps we are "owned or sponsored" by the grays; they may have been created by the so-called draconians, and on and on until one would get to the first and perhaps only natuurally evolved sentient species....just a thought. Perhaps this is why we don't detect other intelligent civilizations. Ther may be very few of them, all created by other races. Perhaps natural evolution produces planets with live living in harmoneous balance without higher intelligence. What does everyone else think?

I would like peoples opinion on a psychological trait of humans that is so widespread that it seems that it must be genetically programmed into oiur brains: the idea of a creator. Why do all cultures feel compelled to invent(or genetically remember) the concept of a creator? Perhaps we are programmed that way so we will be amenable to being directed by our overlords when needed? We wouldn't be very good servants unless we were bred to be this way. We breed dogs for certain personality traits including loyalty, obedience, calmness, ability to follow instructions, even for complex behaviors like herding sheep or retrieve things, so why couldn't a sufficiently advanced alien race do the same to us? There is a legend of the Annunaki/Enki which I believe says that were were created as a slave race and then I guess we were abandoned by our masters and have been sort of on our own since. Does anyone know more about this?

I don't believe humans were manipulated by aliens. Why would they do that?

Aslo j_kalin remember that a brain the size of a human one requires a very big daily amount of sugar to fuel it. I'm quite certain it's the most energy demanding organ in the human body.

Humans,due to the fact that they are bipedal, can use their arms solely for using tools and have a thumb that is placed in order to allow the hand to be very agile and able to manipulate nearly anything. This allows humans to be less food dependant than other animals (we can make elaborate tools, for hunting, fishing, etc, while most other animals are depending on a certain type of prey). Add to that the fact that we are social animals and are able to help each other to catch more food. This means we are able to gather the necessary food to fuel our big brain.

Lions altough they live in groups rely on old/sick/young/dead mammals to feed on and even at that lots of prey escape. This goes for lots of species.

Originally posted by j_kalin
I would like peoples opinion on a psychological trait of humans that is so widespread that it seems that it must be genetically programmed into oiur brains: the idea of a creator. Why do all cultures feel compelled to invent(or genetically remember) the concept of a creator?

I think there are 2 sides (maybe for other people more ) to this. You have the idea of the leader, which is present in other animals, like wolves and lions etc. That's the usual piramid type control which is also present in our lives. There's one or few people on top and the rest is us.
You also have the God trait. Recently while thinking about this, I came to an insight which I haden't thought of. What are people actually looking for or believing in when they worship a god. I think it just might be a psychological trait that tries to explain your existence. There's must be something, so we'll just name it and then we don't have to think about it anymore. On the other hand, scientists are looking for the same thing, the why are we here and what is the purpose, only they don't give up by saying it's something they can't figure out. So, actually, science and religion isn't all that different. They are just different ways of trying to cope with our existence. So as you say, the urge to find a creator, could actually be the urge to find out where/what/how. Finding a creator is just a tool to put in perspective for us.

But then again, I could be horribly wrong. But until now, I have been testing this theory and it seems to pretty much hold up....

I guess until we have a full sequencing and identification of all the genes involved in human evolution from our common ancestor with the apes, we will not be able to definitively say whether the changes in humnans over the past 50, 000 years or so are the rusult of random evolution or by deliberate interference. If, for example, we found entirely new genes present in us that have no analog in the chimps, then we would have a smoking gun. If, however, we simply show a slow progression from our common ancestor, then I would have to concede that there is no evidence for tampering. Selective breeding, perhaps, but not genetic engineering.

I think this topic has been well probed by professionals, with far greater depth of knowledge and insight than anybody is going to be find here. It would be best to read their work.

That said, I can repeat some of the theories I've heard.
Quite a number of the genes for the brain are on the X chromosome. Males have only one and so are more likely to have genetic mutations take hold and be more strongly expressed. Some of the genetic evidence seems to suggest selective pressure on males in particular. Contemporary evidence shows males have a wider dispersion of traits with genetic influences on the X chromosome, as expected. In IQ and other areas, men are more numerous in both tails of the distribution.

It is true that such large intelligence isn't necessary for raw survival in a natural environment as evidenced by all the other animals.

However, once the first rudiments of language came about then there was a Red Queen evolutionary 'arms race' in sexual selection. Basically, females chose males who were articulate leaders and smart enough to figure out other people.

A, and probably the, primary threat to humans was other humans. Both for survival and reproductive success.


You can already see this in instictual politics. Humans appear to be very prone to seeing and responding in an emotional way (perhaps indicating long term evolutionary influences) to threats by other people--- see nearly any 'national security' debate or political campaign in any era and any nation --- and quite oblivious and unaroused by strong, but abstract threats of the natural world (e.g. climate change, aquifer depletion, peak oil). These, the average homo sapiens sapiens genomic carrier in the street consider to be irrelevant or simply something to be accepted. But tell them some swarthy/pale/foreign/neighboring/far-off Bad Guy Is Coming To Get Ya--- they go nuts----even if the actual numbers in terms of harm is so much less than other, more abstract problems. (same thing re germ theory of disease---we are deathly afraid of snakes instinctively, when we ought to be deathly afraid of viral-spreading behaviors, on an instinctual level, and yet we're not).

In evolutionary strategy it makes sense---humans evolved enough natural brainpower to figure out how other humans worked and what they were plotting, but no animal ever had an instinctual ability to predict global climate or tsunamis! Too hard for evolution to build into the brain.

Even now, we have to use a general purpose cortex at great effort (which is why only a tiny # of people can become scientists) to discover unobvious facts of the world that are not directly perceptible and far from being common sense.

"common sense" == what evolution preprogrammed as a default logic.

Originally posted by j_kalin
Why do all cultures feel compelled to invent(or genetically remember) the concept of a creator? Perhaps we are programmed that way so we will be amenable to being directed by our overlords when needed? We wouldn't be very good servants unless we were bred to be this way. We breed dogs for certain personality traits including loyalty, obedience, calmness, ability to follow instructions, even for complex behaviors like herding sheep or retrieve things, so why couldn't a sufficiently advanced alien race do the same to us?

Given that we're doing our own thing here, it sure seems like we were the rejects!

Those properly-bred and obedient slaves are sweeping the kitchen of their ET slavemasters right now.

Humans? Galactic nasty rottweiller mutts? Remember, Friends don't let Friends genetically engineer species drunk.

I find it difficult to believe that genetic intelligence (mutated or otherwise) is only strongly expressed in males. From an evolutionary perspective, it actually appears foolish - right up there with having your brain wrapped around your esophogus (see bloodsucker et al.). Unless your species is already displaying an EXTREME form of sexual dimorphism then I would dismiss such claims as nothing more than cultural projection. The idea that evoltionary theory cannot account for sudden changes is basically a neo-darwinian idea; evolution itself can occur slowly, gradually or quickly.

I wrote something similar not long ago. I believe if Alien life is here, their not only advancing us, the Human Race, there debriefing us too, perhaps through abduction.
I'm beginning to wonder if our avg life being 65-75 is genetically designed? In the sense they don't want us, humans, to become to far advanced, too fast.

Dallas