posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 07:45 PM
Tool making? Hmmm....
Can this so advanced tool making species reproduce a simple biochemical evolutionary achievement of the so called algae - photosynthesis?
Algae is a prototype of plant life. So the highest achievement of plant happens at the assumed beginning of plant evolution.
I think something is upside down here.
Our understanding of toolmaking is so limited by our own practice, that it has rendered us totally blind to other possibilities and paths of advanced
evolution. All this kind of limited science is looking for is its own image in the mirror. That is all they are doing when they are classifying
species and their accomplishments in this fashion.
Ultrasonic tools have been invented and biologically utilized by many fish and water mammals. They don't need hands to use these tools. Also bats
have this Doppler tool, what more do they need for their advancement? They are totally advanced, as bats. I'm sure they enjoy it.
The whole human self-importance apparatus is about the worst possible outcome of evolution. It is such a horrible and humilating fixation.
And besides, the whole thing about theory of evolution proves only correct when applied to one species at a time, as it takes note of changes. There
is no proof that any species just turned into another species. There isn't even proof there is something like species, it's just a statistical
The fact that we don't know how one species is begotten, only proves - that we don't know.
Theory of evolution, as is understood by most, is nothing but speculation and a screen for all kinds of agendas to be projected onto.
Humanoid evolution proves that linear succession didn't happen. Many different "species" of humanoids lived at the same time.
Mammoths and elephants lived at the same time.
The "missing links" will be missing forever.
The importance of who came from where and at what time is purely for political purposes.
How are we going to understand ourselves better if we prove that we originate from some lemur? What is the real meaning of that?
I think that its meaning is totally empty of contents. Only opens lots of space for all kinds of speculation and agendas. And that is our truth,
admitted in broad daylight by "scientists". We don't know who we are, that's what science claims. Yeah, right! I know who I am and I don't need
to know this evolution thing at all, because personal evolution has nothing to do with it. My personal evolution is my own responsibility. It has
nothing to do with my place of birth, not even with my parents.
So, American Indians are descendants of Tibetans, Japanese, Mongols, Samoyed, anything but themselves. Science has the answer of who they are, they
themselves don't. This is all so unconvincing!
The fixation on genetics originates from the military industrial "intelligence", and scientists are so happy with this "origins" toy, they don't
see what they have been used for.
Genetics can be used and will be used for "creation" of monsters. And only from this it is clear that genetics has nothing to do with purposeful
evolution. Purposes are not determined by chance. They are intended.
This kind of motivation which clearly exists among humans is totally unnatural and in my opinion is a deviation and certain way to the self
destruction of this "most successful" species on Earth, and God knows, of the whole Universe.
The near future brings us myriad of very dangerous, poisonous, destructive alterations to human physical and psychical form. Many of such
accomplishments are already in place and working at full steam. Genetics, chemistry, biochemistry, bioengineering, nanitoid technologies,
electromagnetic technologies - all will destroy human bodies and put such pressure on human minds that this species of ours isn't going to last much
longer. And all of that is deemed as the result of some extraordinary evolutionary development, as if nature itself picked us for some specific and
Perhaps it would have been so, if one thing was not forgotten, and especially by scientists - the ethics. I'm sorry, but it isn't going to work. We
have abandoned what nature gave us, we have blinded ourselves to at least half of the picture.
Ancient people were much more aware of the importance of ethics, and they did not disappear because they were "outcompeted" by the more advanced
humans. On the contrary, what we have now is the lowest point of human evolution, not its peak.
We, the survivors of this so called "evolution" are in a very big trouble and about to fully understand the impact of ignorance which brought us
here, as a "species".
Spiritual advancement is personal achievement, it is not social achievement.
But it is neglected and denied as such by society and institutions, and especially by science which is mostly a tool of social engineering.
None of us, individuals and personalities, came from anywhere and have nothing to do with our ancestors. We don't have to comply to this kind of
trickery which tries to bond us to causality as is presented by the idea of dependent origination and importance of tradition. The identity of
personality is within its own personal knowledge end ethical effort, not within its physical species.
I am convinced that every living being can accomplish personal quest. So what does it matter what species it belongs to? I have seen enough proof for
this, there is plenty of evidence, provided even by science, only it is in most cases misinterpreted in the most vicious way.
The fact is, we cannot understand animals or plants if we rely on science. But we can if we rely on ethics and knowledge of personality. Nothing
easier! And especially, by using the "medium" of ethics, we can understand ourselves in others, in the first place.
Personalities do exist parallel and they are source of each other. They are not enemies and they don't compete in order to survive. The only way they
can live is in this unity, sharing, which is not species, or race, or nation dependent. There is no conditioning in interpersonal relationship.
Personalities do not come from this or that geographical position. It is a total mistake to believe that. Science observes human beings only through
such oculars, determined by space and time, and never admits spirituality and metaphysical quality. They say there's no proof for that. They label it
as "creationism". They denounce it.
What a shame. All science has is a promise that at one time in the future it will eventually find the important answer. That's too little, you