It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

The Terra Papers - Fact or Fiction

page: 8
9
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Why is it so important to you to "disprove" The Terra Papers?


It's not that we are trying to disprove the terra papers. It's nothing specific with the papers. It's with everything pandered around as being even remotely true without the slightest shred of evidence that we are questioning.

So far = 0% evidence

You are avoiding peoples questions as well. It's plain to see for everyone involved in this thread.

Thank you atlastro for being so dogged and concise.




posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 02:14 AM
link   
Hi Atlas -



But fundamentally you are doing exactly the same as older religions but with a new myth set that is acceptable within a scientific and technologically dominant paradigm.
You are accrediting unseen supernatural beings for the creation of man, you have a myth set, a heir-achy of "higher beings" some good, some bad, you extract the reason for the existence of humans. You get this from a book, told as a story, to a man. Sound familiar? Because it sure does to me!


I don't get that finding genetic manipulation part of our origin as plausible makes it fundamentally anything like religions (dogma).

No one is praying to the DNA. No one is worshiping the DNA and waiting for its omnipotent return. Or declaring the son of DNA is our one true savior. I actually see all this as quite the opposite and freeing from the BS (belief systems). I agree replacing one religion for another is still a religion - but trying to understand history is trying to understand, period.

As for unseen, supernatural beings, their presence (literally) is all around if you know what to look for.

If you are making the assumption that believing we were test tube creations = religion, there's no way to work with your rationale as it's a semantic dodge.

Some good, some bad. Why not? There's good and bad everywhere, what does that have to do with whether or not there's a hidden history?

Proof of what, that they're true? Impossible to prove.

I would also sincerely be interested in what you think are very origins are from? Evolution? God?



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 07:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by akkad
Amaterasu, I enjoyed this thread and I enjoyed reading the Terra Papers. Thankyou for bringing them to my attention.

I can't take them seriously as a reliable source of information, however, because you can't provide the proof that they are genuine, only that you yourself have seen the proof. On balance it's more likely than not that the Papers are made up. That's not to say that I don't belive that some of the story could be true, just that the Terra Papers are unreliable evidence. For example, as it resembles Star Wars so much it needs to be proven beyond any reasonable doubt that it predates Star Wars. And why, when we come to recent times does the narrative become vaguer and less detailed, when it was fantastically detailed in its description of faraway, and unverifiable, events?

Sorry, thread over for me.

Atlasastro, thanks and a star for your efforts.


Thank you, as well. Atlasastro. I guess it doesn't matter...insofar as they are true or they are not, and beliefs are irrelevent. As for the tale that seemed to be "vaguer... Well, I'm thinking that when one is tracing history, it's easy to define the key pieces that led to the present, but once one is in the (generally) present time, there is SO much one could address, and deciding the specifics to bring up - and the fact that the key elements of the initial history become "diluted" in the effect on any specific situation - I can see why the Papers would follow the pattern as you describe.

Thanks again for your input, and the future will bring what truth there is to the fore.



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 08:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Elepheagle
 


Thank you for your response. I suspect that until we are shown the truth, none of us can say for sure that we have the truth. I am merely saying that one can make a very strong case for much of this being true.

My issue with the poster who I was addressing was that there was almost a passion about this subject specifically, and, whereas most merely were content to say, "Not enough evidence," that poster was...less than fully civil and eager to make sure my speculations and associations were stomped, rather than questioned.

When, on this single question, such a vehement effort is made, I am highly curious WHY.

Thanks again.



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 08:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by bloodline

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Why is it so important to you to "disprove" The Terra Papers?


It's not that we are trying to disprove the terra papers. It's nothing specific with the papers. It's with everything pandered around as being even remotely true without the slightest shred of evidence that we are questioning.

So far = 0% evidence

You are avoiding peoples questions as well. It's plain to see for everyone involved in this thread.

Thank you atlastro for being so dogged and concise.


Well, I agree that so far, there is onlt corratative evidence, and no specific evidence to be had. If I am "avoiding questions," it is because either I cannot address them or the questions are, in the end, moot.

[shrug]

Thank you for your input.



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 06:52 PM
link   
I pretty much stopped reading around where they describe "fiery explosions" in a vacuum followed by a "shockwave" destroying another space ship. clearly the fantasies of someone with a very poor grasp of physics and reality. is it possible that the ancient gods were extraterrestrials? the odds are not tremendous, but it is possible and it does make sense considering the almost universal identification of gods with the heavens. is it possible that human beings are a genetic experiment? far less likely, but hey if aliens have been visiting there is always a slim chance. are the terra papers possible? sure, if i could breathe in space.

[edit on 18-6-2009 by JScytale]



posted on Jun, 19 2009 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by kshaund

Originally posted by jimminycricket
I watched some of the videos in the past, and while interesting, I just couldn't buy into it, and there was just something odd about the man presenting the ideas, he seemed a bit too much like a dodgy salesman mixed with a fraudulent guru.


Are you sure you were watching Robert Morning Sky? I have been unable to find any videos except for some segments recently on youtube from a way back when workshop... Just wondering ....


The ones I saw where posted by nephratari on media.abovetopsecret.com, but they have since been removed, if you google for

"media.abovetopsecret.com terra papers"

It will show you that they used to be there, anyway, they look very similar to the ones on youtube, I guess it was about an hour long talk.



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 10:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by kshaund
Hi Atlas -
Hi. I know you have invested alot of your own personal time and energy with Robert Morningsky and I value your insights and experiences.
But my discussing the religious nature of the Terra Papers with you is akin to me Knocking on a Church and argueing with a parishioner about the religious nature of the Bible, a book witten by the Grandchildren of Abraham who got the Story from a "being", and it tells the history of man, and that a parishoner telling me that does not make the Bible a religion because that parishoner believes it is the real history of Earth.
But I will answer your post.

I hope your health is holding up too, and this reply finds you as well as possible.



I don't get that finding genetic manipulation part of our origin as plausible makes it fundamentally anything like religions (dogma).
Firstly, what genetic manipulation. Show it too me.
Second. Point out the "creators". Show them to me.
Thirdly, other than a book, point out where I can find evidence of this.
Your belief system is as abstract as every other religion. You cannot show any of this. The content is vastly different, I agree, but the belief systems are fundamentally the same. You just have a Tech and Science update with "genetic manipulations" and "ET's".



No one is praying to the DNA. No one is worshiping the DNA and waiting for its omnipotent return. Or declaring the son of DNA is our one true savior. I actually see all this as quite the opposite and freeing from the BS (belief systems).
You are not free from any belief system, you are just updating an older version. You still rely on Bek Ti's(supernatural ET character) Narative to Robert. You practice a belief in the narative from a supernatural being. Which is now in a Book. What will the next step be? Robert has the Terra Bible now(i mean please).


I agree replacing one religion for another is still a religion - but trying to understand history is trying to understand, period.
Your view of religion is very narrow and restricted to a limited idea. Religion is thought to be the highest of truth, and this is what you claim to have. Religion is a stance, a belief, a personal conviction and a way of life(sounding familar yet) most often surrounding supernatural, devine or metaphysical beings. People don't have to pray to believe in "god" or "dna manipulation" or go to church to be religious.
Your view of your belief is that you are merely "understanding history" you are not understanding history, you are creating a new one from a story apparently told to Roberts grandad, who then told Mr. Morningsky, who then claims it is the real history of the Earth. You believe Mr Morningsky. Lets be clear and honest about that.

As for DNA being your saviour, your playing on Iconography within any one "mythset" to try and distance yourself from traditional belief. You don't need a saviour for your belief to be a religion. Your salvation is that you are now "free" from the system that has been built around you by these "ets".
Also in the case of the Terra Papers, the "creator myth" involves the "El's". That is how you explain Humanity being created, you believe this from a book. No evidence of DNA manipulation. No El's to show. Same with the God of Abraham, no one who uses the bible to explain humanity can show God, or even point to DNA evidence(like in the Intelligent design arguement) of God creating humans.

I have asked repeatedly for Ama to point out the evidence in our DNA, and the ET dna that was used to compare to our own so as to show that we have been genetically engineered. Now I will ask YOU to do the same, as Ama has repeatedly ignored this question.



As for unseen, supernatural beings, their presence (literally) is all around if you know what to look for.
Lol. You are proving my point. Christians will tell you they can hear God, if you will only listen. If you could show me or anyone else these beings, you would have by now. But you can't, why is that? These beings that a literally here, you cannot literally show them. Why not?


If you are making the assumption that believing we were test tube creations = religion, there's no way to work with your rationale as it's a semantic dodge.
What exactly am I dodging. The fact that you have a belief from a book, a story. That this story explains humanity and our existence to you and you believe it, and that as I have stated before as my opinion, that this is exactly what religious people do with the bible, the Koran, the torah, the Vedas etc etc etc and that you, like these other religious books, cannot show your "el's" or "dna manipulation" anymore that christians, jews or muslims can show God.
Because I am not dodging that.
I'm not Dodging the fact that the Papers resemble many other peoples work.
I am not dodging that there is no evidence of the Terra Papers until the 90's.
I am not dodging Robert having to add "hypotheticals and linguistic interpretations" to the papers.
Yet when I ask about what DNA evidence and many other questions, to support the Terra Papers. I get all sorts of dodging. Mostly the IGNORE THESE HARD QUESTIONS kind of dodge.


Some good, some bad. Why not? There's good and bad everywhere, what does that have to do with whether or not there's a hidden history?
The very Idea of good and bad is bound up in religion. That is why I mention it. It is also central to nearly all religious naratives, cultural mythologies etc. It is just another curious trait that leads me to the opinion I hold. If you can manage to endure reading Kant and Nietzche or some determanists, you will gather different insights into "good and bad" and religion but I warn you they are hazardous if you indulge in them as absolutes, like any religious or philosophical texts.


Proof of what, that they're true? Impossible to prove.
Then how do you believe it as being the truth? How can you possibly know if it is the truth if it is impossible to prove? How did you prove it to yourself?


I would also sincerely be interested in what you think are very origins are from? Evolution? God?

I am still asking those questions. I know the Terra Papers did not answer them. Even remotely. I guess that makes us different.

I know one thing for certain. Those that tell you they have the truth, are everywhere, but all with something different.

But you REALLY have the truth?
Good for you.




[edit on 20-6-2009 by atlasastro]



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by atlasastro
 


my thoughts are that there may some bits of truth in some of the ideas the papers present. There are an awful lot of historical mistakes in the latter part of part 2 though. Like Jesus being found missing the next day, and Barrabas not being a murderer, but the son of Jesus. Hitler did not create the Nazi party. There are also many other things which don't make sense to me. How can Neptune and the other gas giants be inhabited? They're essentially giant balls of gas with no surface on which to stand. Did the writer know this? Theres just way too many discrepancies for me to believe all of it, but again..... I do believe there may be bits of truth thrown in.



posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by atlasastro
 


I don't think I've ever claimed to have "the" truth - far from it - I keep looking for "truths" out there and in here (as in looking internally, not ATS ;-) )

Terra Papers aren't the only source - there are dozens of authors who have written about the alien intervention of our DNA. Dr. Arthur Horn, Zecharia Sitchin, Hancock & Bauvel, Michael Behe (Darwin's Black Box) explains how evolution of us is impossible - it had to be intervention - likened us evolving as likely as throwing all the parts to a motorcycle into a garage and a million years later the thing puts itself together, fills its tank and voila - a motorcycle is born.

Proof? - no, not proof, all this stuff to me (including Terra Papers "SUPPORTS" a different history), doesn't prove it.

Aliens? As fetuses in the first few weeks we all have a tail that then disappears. We have part of our brain called the reptilian cortex, why is that?

Races throughout history have virtually disappeared and another one sprung up completely unrelated (we're talking Cro-Magnon and before) many times in history, not just once. How could that be without genetic manipulation?

Recently they discovered aborigines aren't actually even related to us - they have their 'own' DNA. These things lend support to the premise of alien intervention - I don't believe I've ever said it's proof -

There's less than 2% difference in the DNA of us and Bonobo apes.

Now through DNA they find whales are related to hippopotamus - there seems to be a basic "muffin mix" used with variations between here and there.

The thing is, I had a gut feeling since I can remember that aliens have something to do with this - after thirty plus years of reading books, talking to authors and researchers and channelers, etc. (Yep, I ran the new age gammut too) - and it was when I read the Terra Papers everything else I'd read or learned that didn't make sense, now did.

The lies upon us are endless, even to the point our "hidden history" could well have been made up too which will pretty much ensure there is no ultimate truths revealed in this lifetime.

I think our souls have been trapped, that's my concern



I presume the ultimate truth is we are all part of "Creation of All That Is" and so everything in between is distortions, separations from that.

I haven't stopped looking for answers, I just have different questions now.

Could Robert have been lied to by Bek Ti? Absolutely! Could Robert be lying? Absolutely! I just haven't found anything better to explain this mess we're in.




posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by kshaund
 


Graham Hancock is mentioned by you to have written about extraterrestrial intervention in us humans. I have read his books, and Mr Graham does not mention any ETs. His theory is that human civilization is much older than we currently believe. He brings up ruins underwater to show that there may have been an ancient sea faring race of people that were destroyed by several catastrophic floods over 12,000 years ago.

Mr Hancock has never written about aliens playing with our DNA, or even building our monuments. He believes mankind is intelligent enough to have built them ourselves.



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by kshaund

Terra Papers aren't the only source - there are dozens of authors who have written about the alien intervention of our DNA. Dr. Arthur Horn, Zecharia Sitchin, Hancock & Bauvel, Michael Behe (Darwin's Black Box) explains how evolution of us is impossible -

Sitchin has been shown to be wrong IMHO.
Behe was tested in court and his irriducible complexity theory that is used by Intelligent Design advocates to support a belief in God, and now you to support a belief in Aliens, was shown to be miss guided if not plainly wrong. There is ample evidence to show that Behe is wrong in his opinion. Have you endeavoured to look for criticism of Sitchin or Behe to gain a balanced view in the matters that these two individuals advocate?
I have found it useful to search for all oposing opinions when I choose to accept the opinions of others and intergrate these opinions into what I believe. It is hard sometimes but it does help give you gain a balanced view from many different angles.

Whilst I agree that there are many mysteries regarding the origins and evolution of life, this only supports a belief in Aliens because you insert Alien into the equation as the explanation for these mysteries. Ever heard the phrase "god of the Gaps". It is a term used when in abscence of more knowledge or the complete understanding of issues like our origins, our DNA etc, people insert "god". We are seeing more and more people inserting "ets" now.
I agree that I could be wrong, about both the Abrahamic God and Aliens, but at the moment it is a trend I am observing that seems to be God being replaced by Aliens.



it had to be intervention - likened us evolving as likely as throwing all the parts to a motorcycle into a garage and a million years later the thing puts itself together, fills its tank and voila - a motorcycle is born.
In Micheal Behe's theory, complex organisms that are reduced by removing parts of the complexity fail to function as we observe them. What Behe failed to consider was that the function we observed as the end product of such complexity was not necessarily exactly the same all the time as that organism developed over time. So, when elements of complexity are removerd, they are still functional as organism, just not as we knew them when observing them as complete and highly complex organisms.

Like the Motorbike analogy, we observe all the seperate parts and wonder how as individual pieces did they form a motorbike, a motorbike incapable of functioning if we reduce it by one complex part. But Behe assumes that without that one part, makes the motorbike useless, but in evolution theory this i not the observed case, as in this theory the motorbike is capable of performing other functions, just not the ones we assume it should be performing because we see it as the end result, the complete and complex end product. The theory that argues against Behe, has been shown to be true and is observed in nature. You will find this simply, if you search. It has been discussed vigorously here on ATS. It is a very interesting subject.


Proof? - no, not proof, all this stuff to me (including Terra Papers "SUPPORTS" a different history), doesn't prove it.
How dose it support a different theory? None of it is provable. This i why it seems rather religious to me. The Bible "supports" a belief in God. Can you see the comparisons.



Aliens? As fetuses in the first few weeks we all have a tail that then disappears. We have part of our brain called the reptilian cortex, why is that?
Have you bothered to look for the answer? Or do you only filter what you want to see and hear from the perspective of a belief that it is Aliens? The reptilian complex(cortex) is one of the oldest parts of the brain that all mammals share. It is observed through out a wide range of fossil records and its development can be shown in stages and plateaus through all phyla groupings amongst the animal kingdom.
How do you explain the Neo Cortex and Limbic systems. If we are genetically engineerd it is these systems that seperate us from many other animals and mammals. Especially the Neo-cortex which is where our higher reasoning takes place, behaviour and activity such as talking and memory, where we form concepts etc.


Races throughout history have virtually disappeared and another one sprung up completely unrelated (we're talking Cro-Magnon and before) many times in history, not just once. How could that be without genetic manipulation?
The dinosaurs dissapeared, was that Genetic manipulation? Species disapear everyday now! Is that genetic manipulation. Look at the amount of species that become extinct every year, there are many causes for these extinctions, mainly environmental ones, competition, change, inability to adapt to change, rates of change overcoming species, polution, introduced species, disease etc etc.
On the same token new species are found all the time too, plants, bacteria, birds.


Recently they discovered aborigines aren't actually even related to us - they have their 'own' DNA. These things lend support to the premise of alien intervention - I don't believe I've ever said it's proof -
Can you link this please. I would greatly appreciate that.


There's less than 2% difference in the DNA of us and Bonobo apes.
How does that support Aliens any more than evolution. With the abscence of an explainable Abiogenesis and no showable Aliens to account for the beginning, it still comes down to a belief in intervention, be it in a supernatural God, or Aliens. Religion.


Now through DNA they find whales are related to hippopotamus - there seems to be a basic "muffin mix" used with variations between here and there.
I agree that life seems to be using what it finds successful over and over again and that there are many variations based on templates, but show me where the Aliens are in all this. I find this topic facinating and I have been following the human genome project, but we just don't know do we. That is why we believe in "outside causes", be they "gods" or "aliens".
Your arguements are identical to Intelligent Design arguements in the Origins Conspiracy forum. You really should have a look in that forum.


The thing is, I had a gut feeling since I can remember that aliens have something to do with this - after thirty plus years of reading books, talking to authors and researchers and channelers, etc. (Yep, I ran the new age gammut too) - and it was when I read the Terra Papers everything else I'd read or learned that didn't make sense, now did.
Good for you. I have read similar sentiments amongst born again Christians and converts to the Islamic Tradition that are weary of western Ideals etc



I think our souls have been trapped, that's my concern

Add a worthy one to be concerned over, especially because it is evident you care about all our souls collectively. Fundamentally though this is a spiritual one dealt with mainly by traditional religious beliefs.


I presume the ultimate truth is we are all part of "Creation of All That Is" and so everything in between is distortions, separations from that.
We cannot be seperate from the universe, I agree with you. We are fundamentally part of a much greater existence that, being finite visceral humans, perhaps limits our ability to truely grasp it entirely.


I haven't stopped looking for answers, I just have different questions now.
I know where you are at.


Could Robert have been lied to by Bek Ti? Absolutely! Could Robert be lying? Absolutely! I just haven't found anything better to explain this mess we're in.

Fair enough. I find that I understand these topic as being religious in nature, and that helps me explain things too.


Thanks for your reply, I enjoyed your honest responses and appreciate the time you took to reply to my post.
Cheers.



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amaterasu
reply to post by Elepheagle
 


Thank you for your response. I suspect that until we are shown the truth, none of us can say for sure that we have the truth. I am merely saying that one can make a very strong case for much of this being true.

My issue with the poster who I was addressing was that there was almost a passion about this subject specifically, and, whereas most merely were content to say, "Not enough evidence," that poster was...less than fully civil and eager to make sure my speculations and associations were stomped, rather than questioned.

When, on this single question, such a vehement effort is made, I am highly curious WHY.

Thanks again.


I don't think we ever know the truth, but I'll admit it's sure a hell of a lot of fun to search for. As an objective observer with no serious interest in disproving or proving the Terra Papers, I would cautiously say that though someone could make a strong case for their authenticity, one can make a strong case as to why they are not true. If one weighs up all of the responses and "evidence" in this thread, it would seem that the Terra Papers should not be given much weight.

However, that doesn't necessarily describe the resonance it had with you or others who were moved by the Terra Papers.

I think when you post something like this, and invite others to speculate, you really need to take a backseat approach. No offense to you, but many times you came across as a champion of the Terra Papers (and maybe you are), but that doesn't make them right for everyone, and that is totally OK. To come out and say that you have the story behind our existence is something that is much more difficult to prove than someone coming along and given the task to disprove it.

As exciting as it would be to hold the truth in one's hands, it's also a bit dangerous. Because you can't actually know, in the end. I know many human beings are in a race to figure things out.

I don't question the responses that you felt were attacks; intellectual challenge is good and necessary for our evolution as individuals and as a whole. I think those folks who you felt were abrasive are simply as passionate about "truth" as you are. You just rest in different camps right now. Personally, I float.

Anyway, I think it's easier to take on new beliefs than it is to let go of long-held ones. I suppose, in the end, those two notions are tied together.

To close, dismay not if you haven't yet found the truth, or if you're idea of the truth changes. Life would be pretty damn boring if we knew it all.



posted on Jun, 24 2009 @ 10:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by kidflash2008
reply to post by kshaund
 


Graham Hancock is mentioned by you to have written about extraterrestrial intervention in us humans. I have read his books, and Mr Graham does not mention any ETs. His theory is that human civilization is much older than we currently believe. He brings up ruins underwater to show that there may have been an ancient sea faring race of people that were destroyed by several catastrophic floods over 12,000 years ago.

Mr Hancock has never written about aliens playing with our DNA, or even building our monuments. He believes mankind is intelligent enough to have built them ourselves.


Hi there - I could be confusing Hancock with Bauvel (I often confuse them) - I remember sitting in his lecture in Zurich and talking about aliens and that if we're good they're coming back at which point I totally remember rolling my eyes..... My apologies, memory error :-) It would be Bauvel then I meant to refer to.



posted on Jun, 24 2009 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by atlasastro
 




Generally speaking - I believe Sitchin's work is more right than wrong - and I would think it would take a greater mind than his to dismantle his lifetime of writing and work. Not that it can't be done, but I've seen how easily someone can say "wrong" and it sticks - the baby gets thrown out with the bathwater as the saying goes.

Darwin's Black Box - yes I know he likens it to "god". I liken "god" to genetic scientist.

I still don't possibly how you equate any of this to religion unless we have a different understand of what religion is - to me it's a "dogma intended to teach anything but the real truth and don't anyone dare question it." So by my definition, I would still disagree I see aliens as religious


What about Gods of Eden by William Bramley, have you read that book and if so what did you think of his research? He was a lawyer doing research on history as his pet hobby was looking at what actually caused wars and found out aliens were always present throughout history.

You could argue alien presence doesn't equate to aliens as being our creators - that could be possible but to me unlikely - it 'supports' the premise that they're here, they've always been here and in many ways are probably more native here than we are -

Look how conveniently all religions do not include extraterrestrial possibilities? Look how conveniently those who believe in them or claim to have first hand experience with them are ridiculed? Because they're wrong? Or because they're right?

Six digit DNA is dominant over five digit DNA. Just a little human anomaly.

When I spoke of races leave and starting, I was meaning there times in history where races have "appeared" out of nowhere after a previous race was extinct. To me that's just trying out a new muffin mix because the old one didn't turn out so well.

I have a chart here that I hunted down that shows in millions of years where our 'ancestors' started and stopped and there are several "?" at the beginning of several species meaning they have no idea where they came from, only know that the last one disappeared. That, to me, supports alien intervention as it's not a continuous lineage we have, it jumps all over the place - whereas - reptiles do not, another aspect to the alien agenda (in my opinion). Crocodiles and such haven't changed in millions of years because they are near perfect in their design - we on the other hand keep changing - by evolution only??? I don't think so - evolution absolutely has a part in it - but when there's such disparity between human races over the millions of years, a logical explanation to me is like I said, a new muffin mix. Throw out (destroy) the bad ones. Make a new batch and see how they fare. Nope, that batch didn't work out so good either - too stupid to take orders - try a different combination - voila - hey, that works, can work AND take orders...



Will look to see if I can refind article talking about different human DNA's... It was a few years back.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join