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.


Neanderthals - a new species?

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on May, 13 2008 @ 05:01 PM
Now, get this, some have even tried to claim the painted images that are about 12,000 years old found in the Pyraness and mountains of Spain and France, were created by Cro Magnon man apes. This is a joke.

And about the paintings in the Pyranees mountains and caves in France....

This is one of the exact locations that the Atlantean Children of the Law of One retreated to prior to the destruction of Atlantis. The CLO , knowing the signs and knowing the times, went to the Pyraness somewhere before or around 10,500 BC

Cro Magnon man apes didn't do it!

more about what is actually going on with the prehistoric cultures and pre historic cave paintings, they weren't the cro magnon ape men who were creating these things! no way!

more images of the prehistoric culture etc.

Baciscally you're trying to say this-

Created this-

Not buying it. Cro magnons are very, very different than humans. Did you ever see a human with ape eye brow lines and no third eye like cro magnon apes? No

Geez, I didn't even realize some people still believed cro magnon man apes painted the cave paintings in the Pyraness mountains and caves of france and spain. And I didn't realize people still believed civilization was only 12,000 years old.

Genetic Research on the Ancient Basques of the Pyranees mountains yeilds unexpected results, Cayce's Atlantean history completely viable-



More about evolution-

posted on May, 13 2008 @ 05:03 PM

Civlization less than 10,000 years old? Yeah right!

It should be clear that Neanderthals and Cro Magnons were apes, and animals. Not related to humans.

Ok, as we go on here, I'm starting to really see evolution for what it really is.

You know, when it comes down to it evolutionists really do believe we were a bunch of cro-magnon man-apes until 12,000 years ago when we developed culture and agriculture all around the world at the same time suddenly

Gentic data reveals however that humans are at least 200,000 years old in their current form.

So you decide to move the goalposts and call 5 different apes along with humans as homo sapiens

How the 5 races were formed? No way you can explain it if Cro Magnon is related to man, since why then did all 5 races evolve away from Cro Magnon and into the same modern human?

They're animals not people

There have been many apes on earth, but only one human race.

Notice that all apes have ape eye brow ridges

compared to

human vs. ape, perfectly round with 3rd eye vs. warped oval and ape brow ridges

Every single peice of DNA has some kind of reason and purpose, whether science fully understands it or not.

No, sorry but this is simply not a human being and not related to human beings. It's a cro magnon man ape from 9,000 years ago

Yeah, these are "homo sapiens", yeah right ns.htm

Evolution Revolution-

Now, over 10,000 years ago Africa was largely flooded, so it wasn't really a place of "plains" at all, no good for "roaming" and "hunting and gathering". Not where humans would choose to live :rolleyes: .

the scientific consensus is that Africa was largely underwater in 10,500 BC and at the least covered in lakes and flooding anywyas. I am not saying no humans lived there, and clearly primitive apes and cavemen type creatures lived there. But the majority of humans clearly would have chosen elsewhere to live.

there is no such thing as chance, nor is there "junk" DNA, it all serves a purpose

There's no evolution asp

[edit on 13-5-2008 by Hollywood11]

posted on May, 13 2008 @ 05:17 PM
i commend you for posting that plethora of sites and information. But i must say, in most cases, it seems as if you are trying so hard to believe something, that you're willing to accept any finds and speculations, no matter how extraordinary they may be.

posted on May, 13 2008 @ 05:21 PM
What am I "trying hard" to believe?

posted on May, 13 2008 @ 05:38 PM
And who determines what is "extraodinary"? If it's not in your mainstream textbooks it's extraodinary?

posted on May, 13 2008 @ 09:50 PM

From reading your posts you appear to be grossly misinformed as to what a Cro-magnon is and its relationship to modern humans. So for your enlightenment:

Why Don't We Call Them Cro-Magnon Anymore?

For pictures of Cro-magnon skulls:

For pictures of Neanderthal skulls:

Genetically, it's been shown that Neanderthal is not directly related to Modern Humans. Where do you see PRONOUNCED BROW RIDGES in the Cro-magnon skulls that you indicated were there?

As to Basque DNA, looks pretty diverse to me. See here:

Basque DNA Project

For Haplogroup X, taken from:

The Solutrean Hypothesis posits that haplogroup X reached North America with a wave of European migration about 20,000 BP by the Solutreans, a stone-age culture in south-western France and in Spain, by boat around the southern edge of the Arctic ice pack.


Another possible way to explain existence of haplogroup X in mtDNA of indigenous peoples of the Americas is that it was brought to North America with the people of Caucasian origin through the Bering land bridge.

And you said:

the scientific consensus is that Africa was largely underwater in 10,500 BC and at the least covered in lakes and flooding anyways.

I beg to differ, there is NO scientific consensus to that claim. The only thing there is general consensus on is that between the end of the last Ice Age and around 3000 BC Northern Africa, where the Sahara is now, was much wetter and predominantly more savannah than it is now.


posted on May, 13 2008 @ 10:17 PM

Originally posted by cormac mac airt

From reading your posts you appear to be grossly misinformed as to what a Cro-magnon is and its relationship to modern humans. So for your enlightenment:

Whatever name you want to call them, they are clearly apes that are not human nor related to humans

For pictures of Cro-magnon skulls:

Huge brow lines, non human mouths, no third eye.

I'd have to say that if someone called that a human they kinda have problems they need to deal with in their lives

For pictures of Neanderthal skulls:

Genetically, it's been shown that Neanderthal is not directly related to Modern Humans. Where do you see PRONOUNCED BROW RIDGES in the Cro-magnon skulls that you indicated were there?

It's obvious just by looking

posted on May, 13 2008 @ 10:23 PM

As to Basque DNA, looks pretty diverse to me. See here:

The Solutrean Hypothesis posits that haplogroup X reached North America with a wave of European migration about 20,000 BP by the Solutreans, a stone-age culture in south-western France and in Spain, by boat around the southern edge of the Arctic ice pack.

Which predates the contrived "Berring Straight" migration theory or "Clovis First" theory by a lot.

Notice again we are being led back to the mountains of france and spain where it is known many spiritual people lived in the past

Another possible way to explain existence of haplogroup X in mtDNA of indigenous peoples of the Americas is that it was brought to North America with the people of Caucasian origin through the Bering land bridge.

Ummm, like who? What people exactly? See this is all just contrived theory made up by scientists

Your articles are ridiculous because they don't even distiguish between anatomical humans like today, and non human ape skulls.

If they start calling non humans humans, then it's obviously nonsense

Now, what DNA evidence in fact does prove is that Native americans did not cross the bering straight and did not evolve out of Siberians. Native Americans are the red people, what they are is a mixture of all the other peoples, white, yellow, black, and brown.

Isolated groups of people and genetic drift in fact can show us that humans did not come out of Africa and Native Americans did not come out of Siberians

DNA Evidence for Atlantis: Beyond the Bering Strait - DNA Evidence Rocks the Boat

Genetic analysis on Native American DNA samples began in the 1980s. However, the research effort greatly accelerated in the 1990s due to rapid technological progress in the field. In fact, the early results confirmed the generally accepted theory showing a clear link between Native Americans and DNA samples collected from native peoples in Siberian-Asia. Nevertheless, as the studies both deepened and broadened to include Asians across the continent, the increasing data revealed that the migration pattern had been more complex than anthropologist's had envisioned.

The early results showed that Native American tribes were comprised of four distinct mtDNA haplogroups, A, B, C, and D. The haplogroup designations represent four different (maternal) lineages. These four lineages are found throughout North, Central and South America. However, only three of them A, C, and D were discovered in the Siberian-Asian populations. The B haplogroup was traced to aboriginal population groups in Southeast Asia, China, Japan, Melanesia, and Polynesia.

Before proceeding we should briefly clarify what mtDNA is. There are two types of genetic material used for analysis, cellular and mtDNA, the latter is found in human mitochondia outside the nucleus of cells and is only transferred down generations through females, hence mtDNA stands for maternal DNA. This type is simpler than the cellular DNA and it evolves faster,so it is used to distinguish human groups that evolved in separate geographic areas.

Genetic researchers determined that 96% of Native Americans fell into one of the four A-D haplogroups and while these mtDNA types were also found in Asia they are not present in Europe or Africa. This too indicates that Asia was the ancestral region of most Native American tribes. Then in 1997 another lineage was discovered, which geneticists dubbed X. This discovery ignited a storm of controversy that has not died down to this day. The X haplogroup needs careful,thoughtful, and deep historical analysis because this group may well hold one of the most important keys to unlocking the secrets of our collective past.

posted on May, 13 2008 @ 10:24 PM

Obviously about 4 percent of Native Americans, from Alaska to the tip of South America, do not fall into one of the four major haplogroups. Scientists assumed that these minority lineages came from interactions with European and African groups since the time of Columbus. This proved to be true for about 1.5% of Native Americans however 2.5% were found to belong to the X lineage. Once this small mtDNA group was identified as a distinct genetic type, the race was on to ascertain their place of origin.

This is where the mystery really gets complicated and interesting. In spite of the fact that the previous genetic data was forcing the orthodoxy to make some alterations in their migration scheme and chronology, as we saw their basic paradigm had been confirmed. But the discovery of the X haplogroup changed that situation dramatically. It was known to exist in Europe in about 5% of the population and unknown in Asia and Africa at the time. The X lineage was ascertained to have arrived in the Americas from about 38,000 to 10,000 years ago. What could this mean?

At first anthropologists argued that since Europeans had not traveled across the Atlantic at such a remote point in time the X group had to be the outcome of post Columbus contact and intermarriage. However when researchers analyzed ancient DNA samples, found in the Great Lakes (Mound Builder) region, which dated back long before Columbus they identified some of the samples as belonging to the X group. This proved they were not the outcome of any post-Columbus contact and were not of recent origin.

When investigators compiled the genetic data on the distribution of the X haplogroup in the America's what they discovered sent shock waves through the conventional and alternative history camps. The X lineage was only found in a handful of tribes scattered across the country, the Yakima and Sioux in the northwest and the Navajo in the southwest, in about 5% of their populations. However, the greatest concentrations by far occurred in the Ojibway, Oneota and Nuu-Chah-Nulth tribes where almost 25% of the tribal members fell into the X lineage.

Moreover, the vast majority of tribes contained no X members. In fact, it was not found in any native tribes in Central or South America. Again, what did these patterns mean? Independent researchers associated with the Edgar Cayce Association (A.R.E.) quickly pointed out that the data supported some of the material found in the Atlantis readings that the 'sleeping prophet' had given in the 1930s. Cayce noted that some Atlantis refugees had immigrated to the northeastern region of the United States and later formed the Iroquois nation. It was in those tribes that the highest concentration of the X haplogroup was found.

As for the "out of Africa, it ihas also long been disproved, no matter how many scientists still try to desperately hangout, desperately data mining the genome for anyhting they could construe as supporting their "out of africa nonsense"

The apparent widespread presence of the X lineage across what is now known as the United States appears to show a wide initial dispersal. One could postulate a west-east migration of this haplogroup from Siberian Asia. But that scenario poses two serious obstacles:1) the greatest concentration of this group is found in the northeastern region of the United States and 2) X is virtually absent in Asia.

posted on May, 13 2008 @ 10:26 PM

Like a good detective novel, all of the clues had not been uncovered in the late 1990s when the X group had been identified and was being hotly debated. Geneticists pressed forward and launched a probe into the Altai tribe located in the Gobi desert and found the X lineage in small numbers. This is the only population in Asia that exhibits this haplogroup and as such they comprise a tiny, isolated genetic island. Orthodox anthropologists were elated when the news reached their ears. They seized on this finding as smoking gun proof that the X group in North America had its ancestral roots in Siberian Asia, end of story.

To say that this was an unscientific rush to a final conclusion that just happened to agree with their long held beliefs is an understatement. Let us pause and use logic and commonsense and try to walk through what we are being asked to accept. The Gobi Desert is about 8,000 miles from the northeastern section of the United States. We are being told that this tribe trekked that distance and transferred their genes from their ancestral homeland to the Great Lakes without depositing the X group genes in any other part of Asia, Alaska, Canada, and the region between Washington and the Northeast America.

Everyone agrees that any such migration would have taken place during the harshest of conditions since the Ice Age still held this entire region in its frigid grip. Furthermore, we are being asked to suspend our disbelief raised by the notion that a tiny tribe trekked these vast distances across a frozen landscape for unknown reasons. Why would any small tribe risk everything and wander half way around the globe during an ice age when they did not know what lay beyond the next horizon? In fact, anthropologists and historians know that this is not the way human tribes have operated since the dawn of time.

On February 16, 1932 Cayce related some information during a reading that is extraordinarily cogent to this unfolding genetic mystery story. When asked about the position of the continent of Atlantis he replied:

"The position the continent Atlantis occupied, is that as between the Gulf of Mexico on the one hand - and the Mediterranean upon the other. Evidences of this lost civilization are to be found in the Pyrenees and Morocco on the one hand, British Honduras, Yucatan and America upon the other."

Now, we must pick up the trail of clues on the other side of the Atlantic. Let us keep in mind that when Cayce gave this reading DNA had not yet been discovered and there was no such thing as mtDNA analysis. Nevertheless, he mentioned "evidences" in two specific locales, the Pyrenees, a mountain range sandwiched in between France and Spain where the Basques live, and Morocco where another ancient group, the Berbers resides. Astonishingly, these two populations contain the highest frequencies of the X lineage found in Europe and North Africa.

The Basques have long puzzled anthropologists, linguists and historians because, although they are Caucasian they do not fit in with the rest of the European populations. Their language is not related to any other tongue in the world. Prior to the advent of genetic research tools investigators used the ABO blood groups to study the relationships between human populations as well as their migration patterns. The Basques turned out to be unique in terms of blood types as well. As a population they contain the highest levels of Rh- 'O' negative blood in the world and among the lowest type B.

posted on May, 13 2008 @ 10:28 PM

Now, what Cayce was suggesting is that some of the people that fled the sinking continent went west and settled and became the Iroquois. Others went east to the Iberian Peninsula then the Pyrenees (Basques), and the West Coast of North Africa then the Atlas Mountains (Berbers). Turning to the Berbers we find yet another group that contains the highest frequency of haplogroup X in the world. Is it a coincidence that these disparate peoples share a very rare mtDNA lineage?

It is unfortunate that the Berbers have never received much attention from science over the years. Here we have a Caucasian race living in North Africa of all places. Anthropologists dismissed them because they did not fit well into the 'Out of Africa' scenario and it was assumed that they had back immigrated southward from somewhere in Europe. However, that theory has been abandoned and scientists now accept the fact that they are an indigenous people, which they believe go back to the Stone Age. But how can this be we must ask since the rest of the continent below the Sahara is black African?

Analysis of Basque DNA

So it's pretty clear Native Americans did not evolve out of Siberians, but rather, they are a mixture of all other peoples.

So no, humans did not all originate in Africa, only black people did. White people originated in Carpathia I believe, the Yellow probably in China, etc.

Caucasian mummies found in South America in a deep underground tunnel 85 feet underground. They were the Chachapoyas and the incans called them "the people of the clouds" becasue they lived among the clouds in remote areas. The "Bearing Strait" land bridge theory is now down the toilet lol!.

Land Bridge finished

However, there are more and more scientists that are contesting the Beringia Land Bridge theory as the only means by which humans came to the Americas. In fact, some maintain that new evidence suggests that there were a variety of routes from different directions that were possibly taken by groups of ancient peoples. Others have disproved the theory of migration through the ice-free corridor at the times when travel was assumed to have taken place.

Geologist Alejandra Duk-Rodkin of the Geological Survey of Canada has completed extensive research of the Mackenzie River Valley, the area commonly assumed to be where an ice-free corridor was open for ancient peoples to walk through. She has found strong evidence to prove that this journey was not possible without the aid of boats between 30,000 to 10,000BP. Read about the results of her research in Chapter 21 “The Corridor That Wasn’t” in Bones: Discovering the First Americans by Elaine Dewar (Toronto: Random House Canada, 2001).

There's also Kennewick Man

posted on May, 13 2008 @ 10:29 PM
And Monte Verde disproves the bering straight theory

The problem with this hypothesis is that, while there are many Clovis sites found in North and South America, no evidence has ever been found in the area of the ice-free corridor, within the correct time frame, to support this theory of migration. However, as no alternate theories had been found acceptable, though a minority of archeologists clamored for recognition of an earlier migration, this theory had become standard thought. This was before the artifacts at Monte Verde came to light, a discovery that threw an unexpected spanner into the works of current archeological thought on the populating of the Americas.

7,500 miles from Beringia you’ll find MVII, the site number for an archeological dig at Monte Verde in southern Chile. Carbon dating from MVII has resulted in dates of 12,500 BCE. These findings caused a bit of a stir, as it was evident that people were dining on Pleistocene llamas and fish in Monte Verde 1000 years before the opening of the ice-free corridor. Upstream from MVII there would be more evidences to stir the pot. MVI, about 35 miles away, consisted of stone tools and hearths as much as 33,000 years old. Though the MVI date was, and still is, severely contested, it was obviously time to reevaluate the accepted theory of migration.

So anyways, apparently humans migrated from Africa straight to south america....yeah right! Explain 40,000 year old footprints in mexico evolutionists

40,000 year old footprints in mexico cause evolutionists to scramble to make desperate and irrational exuses.

lol! "evolutionists uhappy with results!" Notice how they claim, "it must be either a whole magnitude wrong and they must be way older, or they're not footprints at all then probably, or this or that excuse, but it can't be what the dating methods indicated!" Lol @ scrambling to make excuses and reinterpret things

It should also be noted, that not many humans would have lived in Africa prior to 10,500 BC, as before that, it was covered in lakes. Certainly not a good place ot roam around and throw spears around.

Prior to 10,500 BC most humans lived much closer to the equater, and the pre-historic cvilizations have mostly been submerged

Ice Age civilizations destroyed

Earth changes, we know the exact dates 9/

The rate of sea level rise slowed between 14,000 and 12,000 years ago during the Younger Dryas cold period and was succeeded by another surge, "meltwater pulse 1B", 11,500-11,000 years ago, when sea level may have jumped by 28 m according to Fairbanks,


"This event happened near the end of the last Ice Age, a period of de-glaciation that lasted from about 21,000 years ago to 12,000 years ago," Clark said. "The average sea level rise during that period was about eight millimeters per year. But during this meltwater pulse there was an extremely rapid disintegration of an ice sheet and sea levels rose much faster than average."

The amount of sea level rise that occurred during a single year of that period, Clark said, is more than the total sea level rise that has occurred in the past 100 years.

The reality is that sea levels rose quite rapidly.

Don't be too brainwashed by scientific theories. Obviously throughout human history, some lines will become extinct leaving no trace other than perhahps ancestors. If modern science has no idea such a lineage existed, youcannot trace back to it.

posted on May, 13 2008 @ 10:30 PM
Don't believe DNA magically can trace back all the lineages there are. It can't be used to identify a lineage that went extinct thousands of years ago that we don't even know existed.

Edgar Cayce can explain very clearly

Q. Was Atlantis one of the five points at which man appeared in the beginning, being the home of the red race?

A. One of the five points. As has been given, in what is known as Gobi, India, in Carpathia, or in that known as the Andes, and that known as in the western plain of what is now called America -- the five places. In their presentation, as we find, these -- in the five places, as man (Let's get the difference in that as first appeared (as thought forms) in what is known as Atlantis, and that as man appearing from those projections in the five places -- and, as has been given, from their environ took on that as became necessary for the meeting of those varying conditions under which their individualities and personalities began to put on form) -- one in the white, another in the brown, another in the black, another in the red. These, as we find, taking that form -- Would snow be the place for the black? or the sun the place for the white? or the desert and the hills for the white or the black? as were partakers of those things that brought about those variations in that which enters, or becomes as the outer presentation, or the skin, or the pigment that is presented in same.

Q. Did the appearance of the five races occur simultaneously?

A. Occurred at once.

Q. Describe the earth's surface at the period of the five projections?

A. This has been given. In the first, or that known as the beginning, or in the Caucasian and Carpathian, or the Garden of Eden, in that land which lies now much in the desert, yet much in mountain and much in rolling lands there. The extreme northern portions were then the southern portions, or the polar regions were then turned to where they occupied more of the tropical and semi-tropical regions; hence it would be hard to discern or discriminate the change. The Nile entered into the Atlantic Ocean. What is now the Sahara was an inhabited land and very fertile. What is now the central portion of this country, or the Mississippi basin, was then all in the ocean; only the plateau was existent, or the regions that are now portions of Nevada, Utah and Arizona formed the greater part of what we know as the United States. That along the Atlantic board formed the outer portion then, or the lowlands of Atlantis. The Andean, or the Pacific coast of South America, occupied then the extreme portion of Lemuria. The Urals and the northern regions of same were turned into a tropical land. The desert in the Mongolian land was then the fertile portion. This may enable you to form some concept of the status of the earth's representation at that time! The oceans were then turned about; they no longer bear their names, yet from whence obtained they their names? What is the legend, even as to their names?

Q. Are the following the correct places? Atlantean, the red?

A. Atlantean and American, the red race.

Q. Upper Africa for the black?

A. Or what would be known now as the more western portion of upper Egypt for the black. You see, with the changes -- when there came the uprisings in the Atlantean land, and the sojourning southward -- with the turning of the axis -- the white and yellow races came into that portion of Egypt, India, Persia and Arabia.

posted on May, 13 2008 @ 10:31 PM
more about why DNA doesn't prove humans came from africa, only some. 2million year old gene found only in asians i?artid=1712470

Archaic African and Asian lineages in the genetic ancestry of modern humans.
R M Harding, S M Fullerton, R C Griffiths, J Bond, M J Cox, J A Schneider, D S Moulin, and J B Clegg
MRC Molecular Haematology Unit, Institute of Molecular Medicine, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, United Kingdom.

A 3-kb region encompassing the beta-globin gene has been analyzed for allelic sequence polymorphism in nine populations from Africa, Asia, and Europe. A unique gene tree was constructed from 326 sequences of 349 in the total sample. New maximum-likelihood methods for analyzing gene trees on the basis of coalescence theory have been used. The most recent common ancestor of the beta-globin gene tree is a sequence found only in Africa and estimated to have arisen approximately 800,000 years ago. There is no evidence for an exponential expansion out of a bottlenecked founding population, and an effective population size of approximately 10,000 has been maintained. Modest differences in levels of beta-globin diversity between Africa and Asia are better explained by greater African effective population size than by greater time depth. There may have been a reduction of Asian effective population size in recent evolutionary history. Characteristically Asian ancestry is estimated to be older than 200,000 years, suggesting that the ancestral hominid population at this time was widely dispersed across Africa and Asia. Patterns of beta-globin diversity suggest extensive worldwide late Pleistocene gene flow and are not easily reconciled with a unidirectional migration out of Africa 100,000 years ago and total replacement of archaic populations in Asia.

also ob1.htm

Templeton's views on human evolution spark heated debate. But reservations about the power of current DNA studies to describe human evolution are not uncommon.

Mountain, who views accumulated genetic evidence as moderately supportive of a recent African origin for humanity, still sees a pressing need for improved analyses of large DNA samples.

"Far too often, anthropological geneticists draw conclusions about human evolutionary history without testing hypotheses or exploring alternate models," Mountain remarks. "In some cases, this is because data are insufficient. In other cases, the immediate impression generated by the data blinds us to alternatives."

Hammer, who remains undecided on how modern humans evolved, suspects that investigators will increasingly experiment with statistical formulas for weighing the contributions of natural selection and other factors to DNA diversity.

"Over the next 10 years, more complex genetic models will emerge," Hammer says. "DNA research has not solved the mystery of human origins."

posted on May, 13 2008 @ 10:36 PM
reply to post by Hollywood11

Whatever name you want to call them, they are clearly apes that are not human nor related to humans

From the article, "Why Don't We Call Them Cro-Magnon Anymore?":

Recent research over the past 20 years or so, however, has led scholars to believe that the physical dimensions of so-called 'Cro-Magnon' are not sufficiently different enough from modern humans to warrant a separate designation. Scientists today use 'Anatomically Modern Human' (AMH) or 'Early Modern Human' (EMH) to designate the Upper Paleolithic human beings who looked a lot like us, but did not have the complete suite of modern human behaviors.

So what part of "Anatomically Modern Human" which is what Homo sapiens sapiens is do you not understand.

It's obvious just by looking

The only thing obvious is that you see what you want to see. Cro-magnon is the same as Modern Man. The only thing you have right is that we are not directly related to Neanderthals.


posted on May, 13 2008 @ 10:45 PM
That's absolutely ridiculous. Look at the huge brow lines. They have no third eye. Their mouths are also ape shaped with huge buck teeth protruding. They are apes not human

Cool Video program about evolution

Some people would like you to believe that your great, great, great, great, grandfather was a monkey. This is certainly not true and is disproven over and over. Some people and organizations obviously have too much at stake to ever admit the truth, ever.

Some will try to take it farther, and claim your great, great, great, great, great, great, grandfather was soup. Yeah right.

DNA is universal, however, the same gene that regulates the tail in one species regulates legs in another, this was the case since the beginning of life, so natural selection is wrong. This is why the gene that controls eyes in humans controls testicles in chimps

Humans aren't just simply the mutated result of 5 monkeys having butt sex plus survivial of the fittest and disease resistance, sorry.

Now, Humans vs. Monkeys-

This website is in especially bad taste, can you find the one that doesn't belong kids?

The Elongated skull, animal mouth, and ape eyebrow lines are strong evidence apes are animals not related to people. Ape skulls are also elongated and warped and not perfectly shaped like a humans.

Neanderthal skull clearly shows the oval shaped skull of an ape

Clearly shows the eye brow ridges of an ape-

But let's take a look at what evolutionists would claim is "The Missing link", Homo erectus. It's still an ape. Not related to humans at all. Not even related, absolutely unrelated

[edit on 13-5-2008 by Hollywood11]

[edit on 13-5-2008 by Hollywood11]

posted on May, 13 2008 @ 10:49 PM
People then will say, oh but Cro-Magnon! Aha! "Cro-Magnon" caveman from 9,500 years ago. Non-human

If the “missing link” that allegedly proves that humans and apes have evolved from the same animal has been found, why continue the search? News reports regularly feature evolutionary “missing link” stories, as evidence of either human or animal evolution. Piltdown man, Neanderthal man, Cro-magnon man, Java man, “Lucy,” Ramapithecus, Nebraska man, the Tourmai fossil … have all been touted as “missing links” at some time. Nebraska man was a pig's tooth, Piltdown man was a fraud, and the others are either human or ape — not “missing links.”

The theory of evolution is incapable of finding the link to prove how everything could evolve from nothing, how life could evolve from non-life, or how one kind of creature could evolve into a completely different kind when it lacks the genetic coding to do so.

Scholars often refer to the "missing link". There has not been enough fossil evidence to positively link Homo Erectus to Homo Sapiens. Some schools believe that Homo Erectus was an evolutionary dead end, and that Homo Sapiens evolved independantly in a number of geographically separate areas from other sources. What we do have today is a wide range of human "races" - Negroid, Mongoloid, Caucasian, with skin colours varying from white, to yellow, olive, reddish, brown and black, varying eye colour, hair colour, blood types, etc. All humans on the planet are able to inter-breed.

Cro Magnon Man can be found to have lived from about 45,000 to 10,000 years ago in the Upper Paleolithic period of the Pleistocene epoch. The Cro Magnon man is named after its first findings, they were discovered by Louis Lartet and Henry Christy in March of 1868 in the Cro Magnon cave at Dordogne, France. The remains were those of 3 adult males, 1 adult female, and one infant. Cro Magnon probably developed in asia, migrated to europe, and co-existed with Neanderthal man for a time (eventually they drove the Neandertals into exctinction) and flourished in southern Europe during the last glacial age. In Europe, by convention, Cro-Magnon times (the Upper Paleolithic) ended together with Pleistocene 11,000 years ago.


Oh, and evolutionists think cromagnon ape-men created this

posted on May, 13 2008 @ 10:50 PM
They're animals not people-

Perfeclty round vs. warped oval

Third Eye

Asian female

Primordial Soup-

Now, the ridiculous "Reptile to Bird theory" is still convoluted even if it's not as bad of a hoax and sham as to claim Humans came out of apes and animals.

Evolution possible? Maybe, if you mean as in the word "Change" over many years. If you mean Darwinism then, no I don't really think so.

posted on May, 13 2008 @ 11:39 PM
reply to post by Hollywood11

I see.

Journey of Mankind


Atlas of the Human Journey

So these are in error according to you right, but Edgar Cayce, Graham Hancock, youtube and the fictional story of a submerged island continent, among others are credible sources? Much of what you posted doesn't even have anything to do with the topic at hand.

I really think you need to bone up on genetics, human migration, Solutrian blades and Haplogroup X and how they may have gotten to America, anthrogenealogy and where each Haplogroup came from, etc. You are obviously missing alot.


posted on May, 13 2008 @ 11:54 PM
Alot of people these days it seems, like to take concepts like "science" and 'logic" as if they are tangible laws and not just illusions. But isn't that the biggest illusion of all? That you can somehow trancsend the limitations of the human mind and ego and somehow understand truth or the real nature of something by somehow implementing protocols? The mind is always the ruler, and yet human minds as they are born into the earth plane are bound by limitations at every turn. You can't eliminate the effect of the mind on reality and it's surroundings no matter how hard you try, as there is also the subconcious mind and the inner being. Parasychology has proven humans can project images and thoughts to other humans minds, and that human minds and thoughts effect random particle generation making it not so random.

Most Science Studies Appear to Be Tainted By Sloppy Analysis

Dean Radin on the "Stupidity Hypothesis" and why it is actually skeptics who are stupid. He explains that in fact the more educated people statistically beleive in Pychic phenomena more than uneducated people do. If you ask me, I think the reason skeptics are stupid is becasue they take science as religion but don't realize that's what they are doing. It's in fact the materialists and atheists, ignorant deniers and the like, who take science as a religion because they are in fact simpler than the educated people who believe psychic phenomena exists. It shows also that intuition is just as important as knowledge.

Alot of people just have a hard time accepting that their History textbooks are wrong and full of gaps and holes. It's not me who is missing large parts of history, but the modern scientists who are missing huge portions of the past.

[edit on 13-5-2008 by Hollywood11]

[edit on 13-5-2008 by Hollywood11]

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in