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 biggest logical hole in alien influence of ancient society.

page: 5
10
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


higher forms of beings perceive everything through the eyes of past-present-future, meaning every teaching from a spiritual point of being is for our welfare even if us in this stage of evolution morally can't understand having also "elite" that do in lower levels.

geomancy, for future events not be so disruptive. acupuncture for the planet for future scale movements within our system.




posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Condemned0625
 


How is it absurd? Take a look at our own history. tens of millions dead in S America, millions more dead in Africa. And we even have cases of cultures being very similar with the same thing happened. Hell, even the Huns, who allowed the locals to do their own thing when they conquered them, ultimately could not maintain it. Intervention never works. To think yourself a god with the right to go down and make a people as you want them to be is not only primitive thinking, but also down right dangerous. You have no idea how they will adapt to it. They might take your intervention, and make themselves kings of their own people, killing any who stand against them.

To quote a sci fi series, again,


You cannot make DNA difficult to unlock and decode. We simply think it's immoral. Believe me, if morals did not exist, we would have unlocked what each code does by 2005. And you cannot hide it. You would have to literally redesign an entire ecosystem and the species every 1000 years to mask it. And If you're going to do that, you might as well delete all fossils and do it live, because it's far more efficient. There is no scientific disagreement. You either say evolution did or you're wrong. I repeat. There are no gaps, no jumps, no missing parts of human evolution. No missing links, no anything. What you are arguing is like what I saw in futurama, where they kept asking for a missing link, and the guy showed him one, and he asked for one before that, and he kept on showing him the missing link to that, all the way back to something that was basically an ape with a little less fur.

Please understand. In the 5 million years since our species broke off from apes, there is no room for aliens. There are species that failed, and species that succeeded, and they have common ancestors, and they have common ancestors to other failures, going back to that tangent species. No gaps. No room for intervention.

There are no numerousness facts missing from human evolution. It's a closed subject. We've finished researching it. That's why we have moved on past looking for new species, and moved into reconstructing their genes so we can clone them and begin observing their behaviors. We've not interested in knowing about how they looked. Now we are interested in knowing in their life cycle and genes so we can physically observe them.

You're left behind, in the dust. science has moved past what you know. This is why you may think I know everything, but in actuality I only know as much as has been discovered, and what has been discovered is so overwhelmingly beyond what you're preaching that it looks like everything, but it is not. It is just a crap ton that you have not yet learned.

In fact, I welcome you to go through the various hominid species and show me one that shows a sudden jump. Where is your proof, however remotely it is, of genetic tampering?

If one man is your proof, you don't know how science works. Claims do not work with one piece of proof nor one claim. Science operates by a hypothesis with numerous pieces of proofs being compared and contrasts, and a conclusion being reached. 5 million years of fossil evidence is > one man's words. Got it?



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:45 PM
link   
reply to post by AlexIR
 


Both of those don't stack up well to reality. Life isn't nice. And there will always be people interested in not good things. There's no such thing as one species all having the same idea, philosophy, etc etc. This simply does not work. So yea maybe one group of an aliens wants to go around jump starting species, but you know what that does? That makes a lot of species very likely developing a superiority complex thinking they're the most unique species out there, IE, Earth now. And you know what happens when dozens of species with this mentality start to find each other? Well. You know what happened when a bunch of nations with that mentality started interacting on Earth? World War. Your positive becomes a negative. Thanks aliens. You really helped us all... to destroy ourselves.

And no, they would not be the very first. The very first life forms probably started popping up with the very first stable galaxies billions of years ago.

reply to post by riktus
 


Then why aren't we as smart as elephants or apes or crows that can do work but not get smarter?

reply to post by Lagrimas
 


Non the the monuments we see today were impossible to have been built by man. Now if you can find a super-strong carbon fiber-diamond building standing a mile tall, then you would have your proof. But not the pyramids, nor megalithic stuff.


reply to post by VonDoomen
 


No. That's based on planet Earth. And what happens on planet Earth is what happens to us. You give a cave man a gun and he's liable to shoot his enemies and become king. You give a scottman fighting the Englishmen a nuke and he's liable to blow up London rather than make nuclear power. Primitive people do not take kindly to intervention nor help. Not at all in Earth's history. What, because the ones helping are aliens they're going to do it right? Maybe. But our way is not the right way, and if we cannot handle it, they would know, and leave. Judging that any advanced culture on Earth has always abused its power, I'd say it's a poor idea to help.

reply to post by mamelukkikala
 


Id they mixed their DNA with ours, then they would have have to miraculously evolved into something compatible with our DNA and also manage to miraculously find us. I'd say that assumption is bigger than the universe. And to have sex with us? Ah, so on a planet completely different than ours and an evolution completely different than ours, somehow they manages to have the right chromosomes, the right DNA structure, and the right eggs and sperm to successfully mate? Can a banana mate with a monkey? No. Because more then 1000X less probable is what you are talking about.

Stories, my good sir, are made by people. That's why they are stories.

Actually, people "in the know" have no need for Sex, because they can use mental stimulants or simply not have emotions at all, as that's an unneeded compromise to advancement.

Not yet, but it's more or less a century away. No offense, but if we're talking about aliens only a century ahead of is, and they still use the same ufos and technology pictured in ancient stories, I'd say they're a stagnant people dieing off. And that may create a need to share technology so you survive somehow, but I'd argue that a better way of doing that is creating a recording of you knowledge and leaving it somewhere that they could only get to if they were advanced enough to earn it. Mars or something would do.

Robots having problems can be turned off. Humans having problems can't. Not without having to go in there and kill them yourselves. A robot? Master off switch. Humans don't have that. And which is deadlier, a robot with a stick, or a human with a stick? A robot may not have the programming of how to use it. A human does. Why can we fight back? Why do we know how to make weapons? Why are we this smart? Seems like THAT's unneeded for slaves and workers. We can train a dolphin to do the same and that thing wouldn't rebel unless you stopped feeding him.

Yes, you could grow humans to their 20s. And give hims kills. But why would you grow a human with the knowledge to rebel and dream and create? That's your flaw. We're not build to be slaves. We're built to be kings. That's a bit against work flow me thinks. What happens when th humans start taking for themselves from your factories. I'd give it a century before they realize you're not there and they can take what's in your factories and keep it for themselves.

The problem with your idea is this. If you know how to make humans as you say, you also know how to make robots with the same skills and that don't break down. Humans break down faster than machines. It's that simple. And a machine made to be just like a human, only without intelligence, free will, dreams, and other such things, is far better. In the end, a human IS a robot. It's a machine that requires an enormous amount of food for it's massive brain. Take a look at us. This planet can barely sustain us at our current technological state. How would it sustain the needed billions of workers mining everything at a level of technology interested only in you're profits? Look at our own slave labor in 3rd world nations, how effective are they? Tell me, how much guns, manpower, and force do you need to keep people in line? All that could be done away with with a good machine.

And yes, you're gray goo is going to do that a lot more faster, and it will have a kill switch. It doesn't evolve, it doesn't make up its mind, it doesn't rebel. It does what you say it to do. It's not going to turn on you either. Programming problems are far more likely to kill the robot than you.

And of course, you said nothing on planet cracking. Which beats both of those ideas all together. Bam, suck up the whole mountain, eat up what's needed, return what's not. Done. Faster than nanites, faster than humans. Faster than anything. And cheaper. And now, it doesn't break down.

reply to post by m3lh4d0
 


Can you speak english please?
edit on 9-1-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:48 PM
link   
reply to post by MrsBlonde
 


No. it has been proven. We just don't have the tech to do it. Now I'm assuming this aliens powerful enough to go to the stars and engineer entire societies should be powerful enough to make nanites yes. But if we, a mere less-than type 1 civilization are already entering the nano age, then I think if they can't at their scale, then they are simply retarded aliens with no place in this universe and nothing to look up to.



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


yup that's my conclusion they are not all that and a bag of chips

we can take 'em and we should they have issues and pathological mental disorders
they need to go ,and remember just because they got they got here doesn't mean they have the end limit of technology or wisdom or spirituallity.

they don't clearly



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   
Not sure as to why yet another thread popped up about the same thing unless the topic starter was merely hoping to avoid all of the reasons posted in those earlier threads.
the hole in the ancient alien theory
ancient artifacts prove alien influence

and I'll leave you with the post I put in both of those threads.

Yes, I do believe we were visited sometime in our past by beings of greater technology. Yes, I think they helped our evolution along, thus the reason science can not find a "missing link". I also feel that there was more than one type or faction of beings on the planet in our past. I can not "prove" these things beyond all doubt, I guess the same way millions of Christians can not "prove" God exists, yet still believe. I've followed the ancient aliens show on the History channel, and while some of the stuff is compelling evidence, at other times I feel embarrassed by what the "experts" list as their reasoning behind certain ideas. I take into account the biggest thing, no pun intended, but the megaliths. These 200 ton structures that we are supposed to believe were built with vine ropes, wooden pulleys, and brute strength. I feel there has to be some type of technology behind their creation. I look at the advance in our evolutionary history, how we went from spears and cave paintings to building advanced structures and carving ornate designs. The fact science can follow the genetic footprint of our ancestors to a point on the evolutionary chart, then poof we become more advanced. I look at the symbolism used in the many carvings that do depict flying vehicles, people in "spacesuits", alienesque humanoids, the books of ancient texts speaking of "gods" flying, fighting, flying battles, crafts. I even look at the ancient artifacts that have been brought to our attention in this thread and through out our civilized search for answers from the past "archaeology". While, the fact that the model builders took the artifact that most resembled a modern day aircraft to replicate to prove aerodynamics doesn't prove much as i also feel that aerodynamics wasn't a major factor on alien crafts, but that the design was used by them merely for planetary travel "on world". I also hear a lot of people mentioning anti-gravity, which is really a hard thing to follow based on physics. However, an anti-gravity like effect can be duplicated through the use of electro magnetism. By using the natural magnetism found on our planet and a bit of advanced technology, I'm sure traveling via this method would not be very hard. Also, by exploiting the electric part to create charged particles one can create a field that can either attract or repel. This might explain why ancient pottery batteries have been discovered. If the aliens were here to, most likely harvest the earth of important minerals, these large stone structures were probably holding areas where the workers delivered the materials. Once the "aliens" left with their minerals stating they would return "supposedly" The people of the day tried to continue building and working as they had been taught. Over generations as the oral history became slightly skewed, these places became temples and the people brought gifts or offerings to the temples, because they knew this is where their ancestors brought the items the "gods" wanted. Over time as with anything the memories faded and the reality distorted, but these carvings and relics remained. Stories, based on the history, still passed on, but with less understanding. The skills of the people to use technology, erased through bloodshed, conquering, disease, etc.. take your pic. The aliens when they returned to their ships most likely would have taken all their original equipment. I do construction and when I'm done building something I take my tools. Maybe, they were going to another "planet" to mine further. Maybe there is a "galactic federation of planets" that states no interferences and limited use of other world resources, I do not know. Some theories are very far fetched. Almost I would say to the ridiculous or ludicrous. However, there is evidence, that can be looked at both way. I'm not saying I'm right or that you are wrong, I'm saying there is evidence that can support both sides of the argument. I believe my grass is greener, but who knows. Sorry, this is a bit long, but I just wanted to be heard in a forum of my peers. Thanks for your time.



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by eyeoftruth
 


Yea, and I'll repeat. They found the missing link. And the missing link to that missing link, and the missing link to that missing link. In fact, it's safe to say there no longer is a missing link. But again, I welcome you to show me any gaps.

Megaliths? People still move them today:




Aliens spacesuits? Or ghosts and heaven. We can't tell the difference. I too believe we were observed, but not visited. We're an interesting solar system. However, we need only look at our own history to see what physical contacted would have done. Not to mention humanoid aliens are preposterousness. I'd say proof of observation buy humanoid machines aliens built so they wouldn't kill them.

My good sir, any shape and item can be made to fly given the right technology. Most modern fighters cannot fly, but technology allows them to. SO if something looks like a plane, that does not mean it was one at one time or made to look like one they saw. It means something is in the shape of a bird or something that does fly. Not to mention a technological species would not build planes to observe a society, nor travel. They Would have any shape they wanted. Again, technology makes form useless. You can make whatever you like.

Antigravity? If you beam light together and create gravity, it can suspend time, and in doing so, your craft can levitate on that slowed down time zone. This is not that complicated, but primitive people did not use that. As the picture above shows, they used what they had.

Most of the rest of that is boring fallacies. More or less, the community of believers in this stuff have had a fun time inventing history which science now has the ability to show how wrong it is. Thanks for your time.

edit on 9-1-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


Yes, I know you saw they found the missing link on an animated cartoon, but many main stream scientist still believe that there is a missing link. This may not be a fossil record of this change. This may be as simple as the insertion of 1 gene into our DNA. I believe the HAR1 gene is the most logical gene that may have been implanted, as it is the one having to do with our thinking and intellect. I also stated in my post that "airplane" or "aerodynamic" shaped wouldn't be needed by a civilization harnessing anti-gravity or electromagnetism as a means of transportation. You also state that we still move megaliths today. It would take over 20 industrial heavy duty cranes to move some of the blocks used in some of the construction of these megaliths. How even with the principles of leverage, with ropes, pulleys, rollers, did ancient man manage to not only move these blocks miles from where they could have been quarried, but to cut them with such precision as well. Heck, even looking at their age, "man" didn't have the materials at his disposal to cut into granite in this fashion, but here it is. Science has theories on what, how, why, but no facts. I still state that many of the facts are and will be debated until such time that evidence is 100% one way or the other. So I'll repeat I'm not saying I'm right or that you're wrong. It's an equation without enough information, you put in no for x, I put in yes for x and they both work, because we both have missing information.



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by eyeoftruth
 


No, many main stream scientists say there is no missing link because we've found it. What was on the animated cartoon was that very joke.

Let's review. A species long ago started evolving into primates. The best representations of this species are Plesiadapis and Notharctus. Eventually this species evolved into a primate like species known as Proconsul nyanzae, as well as Proconsul heseloni. These species already had the basic ape form and larger skulls. Sahelanthropus and Orrorin tugenensis eventually evolved out of those ancestors, and this was the first edging off from the primates that began our species. At some point there after, we broke of. This was around the time of some environmental shifts. Larger mammals were dieing off and the ice age was coming along. New areas were opened up, so just like when the dinosaurs went extinct, some mammals left the trees. Now these primates already had proper legs like we have, so a minor modification of their pelvis enables species like Ardipithecus Ramidus and Ardipithecus Kadabba to begin walking upright. These ere tiny changes. Little stuff. They didn;t even have proper thumbs yet. They mere could come down to look for food from the trees. bathe, etc etc. This was 5 million years ago. And the ones before those two species were 30 million years ago. Small changes. Long time. But now species were dieing off. and thus evolution accelerated. As we adjusted for life out of the trees, our skulls grew wider and stronger. We lost some fur, out bodies bulked up to fight for survival. We took on fat, we started making tools (however, tool use probably went back a few million years before them). Over the course of 2 million years, we flourished. Our species diversified into Australopithecus anamensis, Australopithecus afarensis, and our brains grew in species like Australopithecus sediba, and Australopithecus africanus. And for 2 million years we spread across Africa and the surrounding areas. We were going places. Nature wasn't ready for us. Minor developments occured in the Pelvis and the Skull, and our backbones went more upright. But these species were doomed. Half way through their evolution, another species broke off and became Kenyanthropus. Some speculate that this was a bigger brained Australopithecus, but either way, it was something new. THeir reign was cut short as half way through their evolution, other species started evolving out of them. By this time over 6 distinct humanoid species were living at the same time, 2-3 million years ago, including those above, and Paranthropus aethiopicus, Paranthropus boisei, and Paranthropus robustus From then onwards, we slowly evolved. But one group became Homo habilis. Homo habilis would be the closest thing to your general missing link. Homo habilis became many species, and itself can be traced to our own ancestor Homo erectus. The total species that, including itself, evolved, are numberous. Some looked very human. Others looked very apish. It gets messy, but more or less, between 2 million to 200,000 years ago, the following species occured: Homo habilis, Homo rudolfensis, Homo ergaster, Homo georgicus, Homo antecessor, Homo cepranensis, Homo erectus, Homo heidelbergensis. So many humanoids could not live all together. So the best survived. The ice age helped too, killing most of the above. Eventually Homo erectus stood alone. And just like before, it broke up into other species: Homo Sapiens, Homo neanderthalensis, Homo floresiensis, and Homo rhodesiensis. These species were all more or less human. little fur, big brains, decent intelligence, tool use, culture, etc etc. But From homo sapiens came more. Homo sapiens sapiens (us), Homo sapiens idaltu, and other archaic Homo sapiens. Homo sapiens sapiens had the cutting edge, and betwwem 50,000 years to 30,000 years, ago, we out competed or killed off everyone else until only us, Neanderthal man, and Homo floresiensis were left. Eventually, we outcompeted or killed off the other two, until roughly 12,000-20,000 years ago we were the only ones left.

No gaps. No missing links. It's all there. And by that time, we would not need any modification.

You see, the genes you described occurred AFTER homo sapiens evolved. And it was pretty clear we were sentient long before our species evolved. So thus, that leaves no room for your little insertion. It's like coming to a battle between 10,000 and 100. It's clear the 10,000 will win. So why would you give them more technology? There's no point. When a species has nothing to compete with, it rapidly diversifies to fill any gap. That's probably why your gene is there.

No gap, no room, no aliens.


Impossible to move, and yet that picture shows them moving. Precision? The stars. The movement of a star from one point to another is as precise as a laser, And yes, they did have the tech to do that. We've discovered ball and hammer devices the Egyptians used that were quite effective. Most of these sites are less than 5,000 years old. In fact, some of the more impressive ones, like the S American ones, are bordering 2,000 years old. They're not that old. And our species has been along here for a long time before they existed.

Fact is this. There's no gap. We know how the pyramids were built. We know how the stones were moved. These aren't mysteries any more. Clearly that photo I posted shows them doing it. And the relics on that Island are no different. Their techniques remain.

And then, let's just use Occam's razor. Even if we did not know anything, which is more likely. They had some primitive technology we've lost, or aliens came down and did it? The first is much more likely. The fact is that a human can pull 100 pounds. So you'd only need 100 people to pull those rocks. That's not a lot. 100x100 is 10000. Enough for most any of those rocks.
edit on 9-1-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by eyeoftruth
 


that's my theory also with a few tweeks

especially the part about the tools they had factory ships and storage ships and living quarters ships all in orbit all of world no need to leave tools behind the only tools they left behind are us

we made the replicas of fighter aircraft and so on and so forth as talismans to bring the 'GODS' back
and everything else you described temple worship etc..

I think the best evidence is the old scriptures but we are starting to look at some of the things we do have and rethinking their purpose hopefully some testable theories will come of it
it is a known fact the the space technology of the Nazis was engineered through the study of various Near Eastern manuscripts ,they believed this and they may have built a star-gate transportation prototype at the very least made anti gravity craft and our government believed them because they saw the evidence
I will avoid ranting on the truth of the Nazification of our science ,it's been covered elsewhere



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 06:43 PM
link   
reply to post by MrsBlonde
 


And again. Why permit the ability to worship, have emotions, and other things that cut productivity?



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


who says they cut productivity??? Clearly without them one has no foundation for mind control
you have to rally the slaves around something some religion some nationalistic ideal ,besides like some of us have been saying THEY function this way I don't think they made us from scratch I suggest only that they tampered with us to make us docile and susceptible to their domination

watch films of the Haj or Nazi public rallies where everyone is moving as one ,that's what I mean
and Muslim clerics have no trouble finding young men to strap a bomb on send to a group of people and kill them and the German Society under Hitler was plenty productive

don't assume anything it either happened or it didn't if it did we'll find out , if it didn't then we made our own mess I'll be just as happy either way



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by MrsBlonde
 


No you don't. Dogs work for food. Dolphins work for food. Apes work for food. Crows work for food. Horses work for food. Why should humans be any different? Could you get humans to run like horses? Animals do what they're told in exchange for food. Humans need so much more. I do assume this, because you need only look around at every other living creature on this planet.



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by eyeoftruth
 


No, many main stream scientists say there is no missing link because we've found it. What was on the animated cartoon was that very joke.

**Some scientists, not all main stream scientists.


Let's review. A species long ago started evolving into primates. The best representations of this species are Plesiadapis and Notharctus. Eventually this species evolved into a primate like species known as Proconsul nyanzae, as well as Proconsul heseloni. These species already had the basic ape form and larger skulls. Sahelanthropus and Orrorin tugenensis eventually evolved out of those ancestors, and this was the first edging off from the primates that began our species. At some point there after, we broke of. This was around the time of some environmental shifts. Larger mammals were dieing off and the ice age was coming along. New areas were opened up, so just like when the dinosaurs went extinct, some mammals left the trees. Now these primates already had proper legs like we have, so a minor modification of their pelvis enables species like Ardipithecus Ramidus and Ardipithecus Kadabba to begin walking upright. These ere tiny changes. Little stuff. They didn;t even have proper thumbs yet. They mere could come down to look for food from the trees. bathe, etc etc. This was 5 million years ago. And the ones before those two species were 30 million years ago. Small changes. Long time. But now species were dieing off. and thus evolution accelerated. As we adjusted for life out of the trees, our skulls grew wider and stronger. We lost some fur, out bodies bulked up to fight for survival. We took on fat, we started making tools (however, tool use probably went back a few million years before them). Over the course of 2 million years, we flourished. Our species diversified into Australopithecus anamensis, Australopithecus afarensis, and our brains grew in species like Australopithecus sediba, and Australopithecus africanus. And for 2 million years we spread across Africa and the surrounding areas. We were going places. Nature wasn't ready for us. Minor developments occured in the Pelvis and the Skull, and our backbones went more upright. But these species were doomed. Half way through their evolution, another species broke off and became Kenyanthropus. Some speculate that this was a bigger brained Australopithecus, but either way, it was something new. THeir reign was cut short as half way through their evolution, other species started evolving out of them. By this time over 6 distinct humanoid species were living at the same time, 2-3 million years ago, including those above, and Paranthropus aethiopicus, Paranthropus boisei, and Paranthropus robustus From then onwards, we slowly evolved. But one group became Homo habilis. Homo habilis would be the closest thing to your general missing link. Homo habilis became many species, and itself can be traced to our own ancestor Homo erectus. The total species that, including itself, evolved, are numberous. Some looked very human. Others looked very apish. It gets messy, but more or less, between 2 million to 200,000 years ago, the following species occured: Homo habilis, Homo rudolfensis, Homo ergaster, Homo georgicus, Homo antecessor, Homo cepranensis, Homo erectus, Homo heidelbergensis. So many humanoids could not live all together. So the best survived. The ice age helped too, killing most of the above. Eventually Homo erectus stood alone. And just like before, it broke up into other species: Homo Sapiens, Homo neanderthalensis, Homo floresiensis, and Homo rhodesiensis. These species were all more or less human. little fur, big brains, decent intelligence, tool use, culture, etc etc. But From homo sapiens came more. Homo sapiens sapiens (us), Homo sapiens idaltu, and other archaic Homo sapiens. Homo sapiens sapiens had the cutting edge, and betwwem 50,000 years to 30,000 years, ago, we out competed or killed off everyone else until only us, Neanderthal man, and Homo floresiensis were left. Eventually, we outcompeted or killed off the other two, until roughly 12,000-20,000 years ago we were the only ones left.

**Once again you ASSUME we killed off these off shoots, but no one knows for certain, why or how it came to be that our species homo sapien became the predominent bipedal humanoid on the planet. Please make note of your time period above, becasue it is important later.

No gaps. No missing links. It's all there. And by that time, we would not need any modification.

**Once again says who? There really would be no one to tell if a single gene was inserted into a race that was evolving normally, but was still slow and only using basic tools, much like monkeys can. It's still debatable by someone with an open mind.

You see, the genes you described occurred AFTER homo sapiens evolved.

**Wow, I just watched a documentary on the very gene I mentioned the HAR1 gene and no scientists no when or how that particular gene came about, so you must have some very good resources at your disposal.

And it was pretty clear we were sentient long before our species evolved. So thus, that leaves no room for your little insertion. It's like coming to a battle between 10,000 and 100. It's clear the 10,000 will win. So why would you give them more technology? There's no point. When a species has nothing to compete with, it rapidly diversifies to fill any gap. That's probably why your gene is there.

**Honestly, I think we were the predominent race on the planet, but still were not smart enough to grasp certain concepts. I think the aliens wanted to utilize us for mining purposes and needed us just a little smarter. i never said they did it to make us the winner or because they felt bad for us. it directly benefited them to have us just a bit smarter.

No gap, no room, no aliens.


Impossible to move, and yet that picture shows them moving. Precision? The stars. The movement of a star from one point to another is as precise as a laser, And yes, they did have the tech to do that. We've discovered ball and hammer devices the Egyptians used that were quite effective.

**Actually modern day sculptors say the precision of the tools need for most of the intricate carvings on many of the ancient places is impossible. Many places have surfaces that are within 1/100 of an inch flush, and things that would be difficult with the best diamond blades, etc.. of today.

Most of these sites are less than 5,000 years old. In fact, some of the more impressive ones, like the S American ones, are bordering 2,000 years old. They're not that old. And our species has been along here for a long time before they existed.

**Actually some of them are over 10,000 years old 11,000 yr old temple or puma punku

Fact is this. There's no gap. We know how the pyramids were built. We know how the stones were moved. These aren't mysteries any more. Clearly that photo I posted shows them doing it. And the relics on that Island are no different. Their techniques remain.

**The photo is a representation of how it might have been done, but each pyramid or temple would have taken 100s of years to build.

And then, let's just use Occam's razor. Even if we did not know anything, which is more likely. They had some primitive technology we've lost, or aliens came down and did it? The first is much more likely. The fact is that a human can pull 100 pounds. So you'd only need 100 people to pull those rocks. That's not a lot. 100x100 is 10000. Enough for most any of those rocks.

**Maybe for some of the rocks used in the pyramids, but your number is very low. The blocks at puma punku have very massive blocks that had to be hauled from miles away. You show a 5 ton rock pretty big, the biggest one at puma punku is 131 metric tons and you can say just add more men, but where the heck did we make rope that strong? Granted most of them aren't that massive only around 50 tons but that's still pretty big. Also, they have elevated stones that weigh this much also. So Occam's razor and pushing/pulling by conventional means won't cut it. The largest of these stone blocks is 7.81 meters long, 5.17 meters wide, averages 1.07 meters thick, and is estimated to weigh about 131 metric tons. The second largest stone block found within the Puma punka is 7.90 meters long, 2.50 meters wide, and averages 1.86 meters thick. Its weight has been estimated to be 85.21 metric tons. The quarry for these blocks was on the western shore of Titicaca, ten miles distant



edit on 9-1-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



Sorry not sure how to quote section of a previous post. The ** are my replies to the original posting. Please forgive the crudeness displayed as I'm still new to the site. Thank you.
edit on 9-1-2011 by eyeoftruth because: I'm new at this



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


you're making that up, animals don't do what they do in exchange for food they have just as much a sense of righteous of purpose as we do .did'nt you hear the story of the German Shepard who went for help because his owner was trapped in a fire and came back with a Sheriffs Deputy? There is a horse that belongs to some armless woman in Germany she was born without arms and this horse helps her with her handicap not for food becuase he understands that she is disabled and needs help and loves her

your argument is flawed you cannot come to correct conclusion from a false argument



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by eyeoftruth
 


Actually no. Most scientists. IE, over 90% of scientists. Now if you can find figures and present it, be my guest.

And yes, we dod kill the later offshoots. Allow us to use some logic. When observing the history of Neanderthals, we see a decently placed species living pretty decently using primitive tools. Around the time mankind arrived, we see a sudden change. We no longer see burials, we no longer see much culture. We see a sudden jump in technology. Neanderthals suddenly switch form their tools to the ones humans are using. Their caves suddenly become filled with human remains, and they no longer have evidence of their presence there. And the fossils no longer come from Eastern Europe, but only western. Towards the end, we see signs of desperation. Bodies left on the ground as they fell. Massacres with cannibalism, No more burial. We see fewer and fewer numbers. Families desperate. Until we fond the last and youngest of the fossils in Spain, where the Neanderthals finally went extinct. The presence of Neanderthal DNA in people of Gaulish decent, and the evidence above, paints a clear picture. It's one of our species absorbing, killing and out competing the Neanderthals. Their species was driven to acts of cannibalism to survive. Acts of violence to survive. Desperation that ended in their demise. This time period was between 50,000 to 30,000 years ago.

Says who on the gaps? How about this. Who says there are gaps?

The gene in particular came about naturally throughout our evolution, This is because opposable thumbs, upright walking, and bigger brains, the genes having to do with that group of genes, did not all occur at the same time.

With documentaries like Ancient aliens showing clear subjection, I'd be willing to bet that the one you watched was equally subjective on the matter. The fact is this. Those genes you mentioned are not one gene. They are many, And they did not all occur at the same time. They occurred naturally over the course of over 5 million years. Allele frequency changing over time not only gives proof to evolution, but they give proof to what we already know happened. A dramatic environmental event. The Ice age, plus a major eruption at that time period. FYI, that's enough to cause rapid allele frequency shifts. They were not simply inserted. They always were there. And a dramatic event usually causes alleles to change. This is how evolution works. So if you are going to use those genes as proof, you're going to have to learn evolution first. because you're using your proof wrong.

If they needed us smarter, than they would make us smarter in areas that they needed. I fail to see emotional and language smartness as a benefit to them. Intelligence is not one thing. it's many factors. Some species on Earth are technologically intelligent, but have no emotional nor linguistic intelligence. Crows are a good example of this. Some species have little or no technological intelligence, but have amazing emotional and linguistic intelligence. Apes and Dolphins are good examples of that. If you wanted intelligent workers, you'd make them like crows or dolphins, depending on what you need. Humans are unique in that everywhere we have intelligence, it's extremely high. Most of which compromise us as efficient labor forces. When we make robots, we don't make them smart. We make them capable. If you wanted miners with intelligence, you'd make crows that behave like ants. You wouldn't make humans.

Then you're talking to unskilled sculptors. Not to mention I honestly doubt that something with 1/100th of an inch would be preserved so well into modern day. Now if you can show me something with 1/10th of an inch carvings dating to that time period I'd be willing to revise that statement. Otherwise I'm calling BS. Because nothing that precise is going to last over 1000 years in our atmosphere and that material.

Old eh? The site is old. The structures in them are not. This is the temple you linked me to.

www.urgeschichte.org...

It's from 6-7000 BC. Not THAT advanced. In fact, I'd be willing to call it pretty epic and an achievement for its time, but still not that advanced. You see, just because a site is old, doesn't mean the buildings are as old. YOu should definably realize that some sites are thousands of years old. But the buildings built on them are not nearly as old.

www.canew.org...

Puma Punku is amazing and I'd be willing to call it the first attempt to modernist design. However, again, the structures are not as old as the site. The buildings date to 500AD.

repository.upenn.edu...

www.scielo.cl...

www.doaks.org...

I'd be willing to say that S America probably had an empire as advanced as Rome at some point in time. Have you heard of the Mississippi Valley Civilization? They build an Egyptian-like society along the Mississippi, treating it like the Nile.


en.wikipedia.org...

assets.cambridge.org...

en.wikipedia.org...(people)


No actually, each pyramid would take a decade or two to build. In fact, if we do a conservative estimate:

15 Stones an hour:
360 stones a day:
131,400 stones a year
2.62 million stones in 20 years.

And yes, you could do that. They used an exchangeable labor force everyone wasn't always working. And they used internal ramps, not th silly ones you see in books. A French architect discovered that. And yes, you could keep up that rate, because by that time, Egypt was at her prime, and you could constantly pump stones down the Nile.

Not to mention, there's 200 years of pyramid development, and yes, they likely had technology that we've lost, but that was no more advanced than what Greece or Rome had.

Look at Zoser's pyramid, and than look at the Giza Pyramid. That's how far they came in 200 years of pyramid evolution and development. The first sucks. The last is wondrous. That's called advancement.

As to Puma, the picture I showed you was of a pretty big stone. I'd say 5 tons is an understatement, considering a car of equal size would way 5 tons, and it's mostly hollow. They moved pretty big stones those folks.




mercyindonesia.com...

Perhaps not as big, yes. but like I said, Occam's razor means that they were simply a bit more advanced. it doesn't mean they were as advanced as us. it means they found the means to do it with the tools they had. And indeed, they did it. Like I said, I suspect there was a civilizations as advanced as Rome there at some point in time. And in terms of Occam's razor, it's more likely that such a society existed than aliens or some super tech did. That's a farm more easier solution than what you're saying.
edit on 9-1-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by MrsBlonde
 


No. You're fighting your own point with those examples. Clearly a less intelligent animal that's less likely to want freedom or do something violent can accomplish amazing acts that a human could. So now I have more proof that humans were not a work force. Clearly less intelligent animals can do the same for less brain power and better safety against rebellion.

Thanks dude.



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
Why would creatures with presumably warp drive technology and other cool stuff teach Humans how to cut rocks and build big stuff? Of all the stuff they have, why teach that?


Your point in the typical sense is valid to an extent, however...

Who is to to make the declaration that all advanced beings use high-tech metals, super advanced computers, mechanized technology and extreme power systems??

The truth is, we can't make that declaration, and these ancient glyphs, carvings and structures could have been something much more advanced 6000 years ago, they could have harnessed a different kind of energy, used a different kind of energy and operated on a much different realm of reality than we choose to understand.

Metaphysics, quantum physics - all this stuff we are just beginning to understand is only the TIP of the iceberg of an entire field of technology we are just beginning to understand. The rules of science are still being made, my friend, and we can't eliminate the idea that what ancient civilizations did is out of context of being something beyond our understanding.



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Revolution-2012
 


soooo. grape juice and granite can be used in technology?

How about this. What you see is what you get. And if a civilization could thought they could harness some kind of mystery energy using grape juice and granite, I'd say they're nuts.

The rules of science are, for the most part, written down. And that included that grape juice is, at best, a conductor of electricity for a primitive watch. And that Granite is, at best, a good brick.
edit on 9-1-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 09:29 PM
link   
Gorman think about it humans built the great wall of China they were conscripted from farms and kidnapped to to work until they died and they did in the thousands

we kidnapped Africans and brought them to America to work on farms and made it illegal to teach them to read and write

humans make excellent slaves even when you don't feed them and work them to death

and the great wall was not built by crows and ants or dolphins all of which make miserable slaves.The plantations of the South were not worked by trained monkeys or talking birds they were not worked for food they were worked under threat of death and annihilation by people who had been transported out of their cultural mileau and taken to a strange land and divested of their resources
humans make the best slaves ..who says so? Why other humans ! ask the ancient Romans
ask Middle Eastern Potentates today
robots are cool but they have limitations even today people who can afford them prefer human slaves
it's been that since the Aliens came and tampered with us to create a sustitute for the rebellious workers they brought with them or so it is told




top topics



 
10
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join