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.


Alien Origins of our DNA and the Creation of Man (a must read!!!)

page: 8
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 08:50 PM
reply to post by WingedBull

Originally posted by PerfectPerception
I believe you misunderstand what I was trying to convey when I posted

Originally posted by WingedBull-[I understand what you are trying to say but you failed to show how it is "irrefutable".]

I have already stated in my last reply to this question.I stated for the record that 1.) it was MY opinion & belief it was irrefutable,never did I offer proof. 2.)I also admitted that the word "irrefutable" was not the ideal word I should of used.

Originally posted by PerfectPerception
1.)If such findings truly are depictions of "aliens" the msm would never air the you not think that to be the probable case?
[Originally posted by WingedBull-
You are engaging in circular reasoning, more or less appealing to phantom evidence]

I am not engaging in circular reasoning,I have clearly postulated that my belief is that their is evidence & information and that is is being hidden and suppressed form the masses.

[Originally posted by PerfectPerception
The ant people in the depictions do not look like the ants me & you would call ants today...]

[Originally posted by WingedBull-I doubt that you actually read the links provided...then you would have seen that how the ant-people look today and what they looked like in the time the legend describes are very different, the legend itself states they changed. ]

I did read the article you posted,what you still fail to realize is that I was referring to the glyph depictions,not the original hopi creation myths,no where did I see pictures of the actual change?

do you have a link to that? you linked to Google books for the snake story and the other indian site did not have any pictures depicting a change or modern themed pictures of the ant people.
so you have failed to convey that point.sorry.I referenced the images and how they resembled "aliens/star beings" within the glyphs themselves.

edit on 9-2-2011 by PerfectPerception because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by PerfectPerception
same goes for the snake people,I find it very interesting how they speak of the snake village and the snake "gods" abilities to shift from spirit to human(shape-shifters etc Anasazi.)

[Originally posted by WingedBull-
And that means what?

Shapeshifting is not an uncommon thing cited in legends across the world.

It means I find it of interest.Never said ti was not common,that is the whole point.

While I was reading the story of the silent one,the offerings to the supernatural etc. I find it interesting where the boy wanted to meet the "gods" and how they lived beneath the earth.How they could materialize from spirit to human!?
(maybe they were interdimensional in nature?)
these topics and points alone are thread worthy,just wanted to relay my interest involving the link,you gave.Thanks

edit on 9-2-2011 by PerfectPerception because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 09:25 PM
reply to post by Wolfenz

Thank you for the links & info.
You make some good points.

I have heard of an alien race that resemble felines-called the lion people.Also referred as 'Lyrians' and responsible for seeding life on many different planets.

"lyrian is the mother race of off all intellegent races. Lyrians were around well before other races, and were responsible for the seeding of many many cultures and races."
here is a link for some speculative information-

I have always been interested in werewolves in folklore & fiction.
very fascinating creatures and ideas surrounding their lore.

Also,cannot forget all the Indian legends involving skin-walkers.
edit on 9-2-2011 by PerfectPerception because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 09:53 PM

Originally posted by WingedBull

Originally posted by PerfectPerception
What I can say for sure in regards to 'abiogenesis' is I do not believe it one bit. I just cannot except the notion of inanimate matter suddenly without cause ( chemical reaction bah humbug ),springing to life.

That is quite interesting. You claim it to be without cause, then dismiss the cause without thought, citing no reason you are "humbugging" it.

I mentioned the hypothetical explanation of abiogenesis' cause.Never did I once state that I believed that to be the case or even possible.I personally do not believe it to be the singular explanation of life as we know has never been observed in nature happening and until there is absolute proof,I will remain jaded,open-minded to other theories and skeptical.

note:I am not against the notion or theory that an "intelligence" couldn't be the behind the actual creation of DNA in it's self.then being planted here to "evolve" or in some fashion modified over many different periods. it could of been directly seeded through experimentation or sent here on accident.who knows.
I will remain open minded and believe what I choose until further discovery and information surfaces.
until then,I still believe not one of us know for sure.scientist or laymen a like.

posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 10:01 PM
reply to post by woodwytch

Thank you for your comments and the link to your work!
I will take a look at your web page when I get the chance,looking forward to reading your theories

I also agree that many people are starting to question their origins,the world as we know it and the underlineing mysteries that are embedded everywhere.
It is a great thing to question what we have been told is the truth.We must think for ourselves.
we must remain open minded to any possibility.the alternative is ignorance in it's purest form.

posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 10:07 PM
reply to post by Topato

I believe the evidence we desire is not far off or that far down the line from being proven by science ( at the least to be recognized as an actually theory and hypothesis )

The continuing of exploration of space,the planets and cosmos could possibly shed light on a number of unknown,mysterious subjects.

I think we will have the proof of "alien" intelligence very soon,much sooner than many realize.

here is a very good article on panspermia I recommend checking out Here

another very interesting article on how humans very well could share DNA with aliens -Aliens and Humans might share DNA roots
edit on 9-2-2011 by PerfectPerception because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 10 2011 @ 09:01 AM

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Wolfenz

Ah but you see. you used subjective terms. I could just as easily do the same to your beliefs and then we would have no beliefs.

The indo-european pantheon, after all, is a collection of men and women who aren't really men and women but gods who for some reason look just like men and women and for some reason call themselves gods even though for all intensive purposes they are indifferent to men and that they are immortal even though they really aren't immortal but rather the rape and incest retarded offspring of older gods whom, like their retarded offspring of rape and incest, are immortal but not really immortal and gods but not really gods, but rather just normal folks acting like normal folks, only they have nature.

See? If you use subjective terminology, you can pretty much make anything look as retarded as it truly is.

So yea, holod back your ignorance, and don't pull crap like that.

We are clearly not aliens, considering that our evolution comes from earthly creatures.

And no, my avatar is of humans who got left behind on a half terraformed Mars and evolved to live on it. Difference to humans on Earth? They had no evolutionary history on mars. We do here on Earth. So don't try to tell me what I mean by my own artwork when you clearly failed basic biology.

I hope you realize that humanity is only 300 years ahead of where the Minoans were when they collapsed. We have not gotten very far in a few hundred years. We RECOVERED what we lost in the last hundred years. In fact, if you want to go by myth = true, clearly we are a failtacular species that keeps blowing ourselves up and rebuilding, begging to question the necessity to regard these people as better, when in fact their failures lead to our current situation.

What does slaves have to do with anything? Do you realize the total lack of connection of your random spewing of nonsense? Everyone has been a slave to everyone at some point in time. What this proves is furthermore that humanity is a failure.

Yes. Every religion is theory and faith. Not provable fact. So don't come prancing up with a bunch of incoherent statements with unrelated things and videos acting like you know everything. You don't

There is no proof for anything you have stated. There is only theory. And to parade that as fact is nothing short of ignorance.

Stop that at once.

Now i know your delusional getting upset did i hit a nerve ? Ignorance ?
Failed Basic biology what do you mean by this ?
Im not the one hiding behind Faith

Where do get the IDEA that a God
has to be Non Human or Should I say NON Bipedal with no Resemblance of an Human ? Tell Me..
You know Something That the Rest US Dont ? at least tell me his Bipedal ... Anyways
Let me Guess you saw God and you know what he Looks Like ?
Does he Look like a Draconian.. Something like Talking Serpent that paid a Visit to Eve?
Thread it ! I love to see it ..

Isnt Jesus/God in the Flesh Alll in one one for all
And Really if Jesus is a Hybrid Gods Son why does he still look like Human .. well the Outside at least...
dosent that contradict yourself ? well According to the Council of Nicaea

Obvious you don't bother to watch Videos that People Post... here !

And I just Knew you Would not get about the Slave and Slaver Owner I just knew it !
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----------
Plantation Owner (White Caucasian) that thinks His Slave's (Black & Brown Negro's) is not a Man but Animal as he uses the Slave like he uses Live Stock on the plantation AKA. Farm Equipment
Both Races are Human but are Slightly Different Genetically But There is One is not so Advance ( Civilized/Up Bringing ) as the Other The Word Man may of been another Word for Slave!! ( do you get it Now ?)

How is that for Spewing nonsense ! ?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -----------

So Link me, Tell me, Prove it to Me ! The Facts !!

Theory yeah as your Spew is All Theory !
I have Already mention once ! Religion is a Theory

What i see here is someone getting Upset their Faith of a Theoretical Mythical Religion Exploited..

But in all we may not be Hybrids of god except for Jesus and the Angels in which by the way Mated with Woman of MAN! and created Offspring ! HYBRIDS According to the Book of Genesis !

But we Sure in Hell are Chimeras of God !
well at least 3 to 4 percent of it anyways! Unless you can tell me what those 3-4 percent of DNA is
Something like those Mice Experiments with human cells!

LOL God I love Talking to you Gorman91

Please go back a couple of threads and watch Animal Farm Genetic Engineering ! No i insist go back

posted on Feb, 10 2011 @ 10:14 AM
reply to post by Wolfenz

Not upset. Attempting to relieve you of your dependency on myth.

yes, I would argue I saw God. And I saw nothing. No form. No anything. At most, a light that "wasn't really light" to put it simply.

And yes, I would argue I know more than you. Though no, no the "rest" of you, considering it seems you stand alone. God would not have a physical form. he wouldn't even walk on two legs. he wouldn't even have legs. he'd be nothingness. The darkness and the light. God would not be physical. Maybe he would take on a human form here and there, and that's Jesus in my book. But God would not be some mere humanoid form.

Jesus is not a human hybrid. He is not two halves. He is fully human, and has the the soul of God, fully God. He is both. Hybrid implies halves. To which he is not. In the physical world, he is fully human. His DNA would be that of an ordinary man from the middle east. His genes filled with the same evolutionary mutations and errors as the rest of us. His flesh fully ordinary to the maximum ability to call it ordinary. His soul, however, would be God's. He would not have the shattered mind we all have, with a conflicting conscious and subconscious, and thoughts that stray from God's will. For how can God's own will stray against himself.

Hybrid is a term invented because of an inability to comprehend the separation between reality and what lies beyond. The world that cannot be observed and has no proof. only faith.

I watch plenty of videos. And I judge them. The fact that you can post a video has no relationship to you being correct. it means you know how to copy a link and past it in the right format.

Also your slave argument is flawed, considering that both the black man and white man are not that different at all. Nor is one more or less civilized. The only difference is the one holding the whip and the one holding the chain. They are both as civilized as they choose to be. They are both as intelligent as they choose to be. They are both as "human" as they choose to be. The only difference between each other is who has the whip and who has the chain. The possessors of which have changed places all throughout history.

There are no facts for religion. There is no proof. There is nothing you nor I can do to prove each other's point. What I can tell you is this. You are stuck in the physical world. Your gods must exist in understandable terms. They must follow human reasoning for demand and desire. Your gods are no different than man. Mine is. My God doesn't want anything but to love him. My God doesn't follow human logic. My God is not stuck in human comprehensible terms. My God is not dependent on humanity, nor is his thoughts and desires like man's.
edit on 10-2-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-2-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 10 2011 @ 10:17 AM
I completle agree with this, as in somewhere I've read, "what better place to leave a message without worrying about the wearing and tearing, than the DNA itself" (It didn't said exactly that, but you get the point)
And as I always recommend, try to watch the Ancient Aliens series, talks a lot about that, and it's very interesting.

posted on Feb, 10 2011 @ 10:32 AM
reply to post by Aprch

The microwave background of the universe? And message left in DNA will become unreadable in a few generations. only a few hearty bacterium know how to reproduce and cancel out evolution.

Also, there's no message there. Just immunities to viruses.

posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 12:56 AM
Here is a very interesting article I stumbled across a bit ago that I think has some relevance to the Op.
Relating to evolution and recent a discovery.

Professor Max Telford, from the UCL Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment, and joint leader of the research said: "Because the simple Xenacoelomorpha are descended from the same ancestor that gave rise to complex groups such as vertebrates, echinoderms and hemichordates, these simple worms must have lost a lot of the complexity that they originally possessed."

Professor Telford said: "We can no longer consider the acoelomorphs as an intermediate between simple groups such as jelly fish and the rest of the animals. This means that we have no living representative of this stage of evolution: the missing link has gone missing!"

Check it out-Link

Hmmm...Go figure.

This is an interesting find no matter your personal outlook on origins of life on Earth and mankind.

posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 01:29 AM
reply to post by PerfectPerception

This is an incorrect statement. There is no missing link. The complexity that we see today was gained after. They were not as complex. Not to mention jelly fish have no bones for which fossils could be left behind from. So it's really really really wrong.

posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 02:41 AM
reply to post by Gorman91

well I would have to say that is purely your opinion my friend.
I am only the messenger,that is what the researchers are claiming,not I.
you will have to take it up with them,of course,"them" being scientists and all

posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 02:54 AM
reply to post by Gorman91

Why don't monkeys walk out of the jungle and start talking ? We are the only species advanced from how many species ? Why not other animals. can you count the other species on this earth.

This is an incorrect statement. There is no missing link.

Can you prove this with a valid source please.

edit on 11-2-2011 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 03:33 AM
reply to post by PerfectPerception

But you are talking about a period of life that quite literally has nothing. How can you have no missing link when you have no species on either end to have the missing link fill in?

Being a scientist doesn't make you qualified nor right in your claims. In fact many scientists are wrong on a number of issues. This is why there are scientists who believe in creationism and scientists whom believe in evolution. Scientist, as a title, just means you know how to do science. It does not make you right. Arguably I am a scientist. And I am not necessarily right. Science in and of itself is a never ending debate to what has proof and what does not. Your claim shave no proof. Mine do.

reply to post by pepsi78

Because evolution has no set goal or direction. Evolution is water being poured onto of a crack road. What fits into the road stays, what doesn't dies. Intelligence is not the goal of evolution. Intelligence is the result of having to compete with increasingly more complex forms.

Simply put, a monkey would not walk out of the jungle and start talking because there is no benefit for that in its current niche. And, to continue with that, we did not come out of the jungle and start talking either. In fact, for roughly 1.5 million years we pretty much were humans living like animals. The fact that we build cities today and have all we have is not because of evolution. It's because we were in the right place at the right time. In fact, humanity is not the only species capable of these things. The "hardware" of dolphins, whales, and some would even argue crows is perfectly open to the potential to do the same if they were in the same position as ourselves. In fact, apes are not our 2nd place winners. They went a different direction all together. Dolphins and crows are more intelligent than apes.

Some 5 million years ago a bunch of hominids started coming down from trees to fetch more food. Between that time and 2 million years ago, their form adjusted for this new learned trait. Not because they wanted to. because the form we have today was the best for their specific situation. You don't have to walk upright on two legs with a big brain to be intelligent nor to build cities and have technology. In fact, we were no smarter than dolphins when we evolved the human form. The human form as we use it today has existed for 200,000 or so years. but our species has only existed for 50,000 years. Clearly, having a human intellect does not necessitate a human form And a human form does not necessitate a human intellect. It simply comes naturally to any form that needs it. We became opportunistic hunter-gatherers. From the form we had entering that niche, the one we have now is the best one. had a dinosaur entered the same nich, it would not become a reptilian humanoid. More than likely it would become this:

Credit to Nemo Ramjet.

So thus, to answer why apes don't do the same, it's simple. They're not hunter gatherers. nor are their opportunistic. They eat ants and are at a stable position on their niche. There is no need to gain intelligence. No benefit to their survival. There is no benefit to talking nor evolving into humans. They are either stationary consumers like Gorillas, or mobile arboreal fruit eaters, like apes. That is why they have those forms. Because it's what they do in their niche.

Valid source? Jelly fish have no bones. That's all you need to know.

edit on 11-2-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-2-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-2-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 04:47 AM

Simply put, a monkey would not walk out of the jungle and start talking because there is no benefit for that in its current niche.

But it had milions and milions of years, it's still in the jungle, we are the only advenced species.

The fact that we build cities today and have all we have is not because of evolution. It's because we were in the right place at the right time.

How conviniant, that we were the only ones from how many species. So from all the monkeys in africa we decided to throw rocks and then later read books.

Something happened and here is the evidence.
The missing link, is the fused chromosone, geneticly fused, no other species on this planet fused chromosones, we are the only ones, you are probaly going to say that the fused chromosone is just evolution, but no other species has merged chromosones.

Here is evolution for you, out of almost 2 milion species on this planet were the only ones to advance.
Not saying that evolution does not play a part but that something happened / was altered, modified and as a result we merged.

posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 05:22 AM
reply to post by pepsi78

All species had billions of years to get to intelligence. The direction of one species has no indication of the advancement of another. The fact that Dinosaurs advanced to turn β-keratins into interlocking geometries that we call feathers has no relationship to the fact that Mammals failed to turn α-keratins into the same homologous structure yet. A species has a direction. Intelligence is only one of many directions a species can go. It is not the one it has to go to.

Out of +100 million species, we are 1 of about +12 or so with higher intelligence. And out of those, about 5 or so were sentient.

Want to know what happened to the others? We slaughtered them. We are not the only intelligent species on Earth because we're the only ones whom got here. We are here because once we and our relatives learned tools, we began killing each other. We were all smart. We as humans just made better weapons.

You're here and alone because your ancestors killed of H. sapiens idaltu, H. rhodesiensis, H. neanderthalensis, H. heidelbergensis, H. floresiensis, and maybe Homo cepranensis.

You weren't always alone. You were one of many humanoids whom evolved from a common ancestor. The fact that you evolved intelligence just made you better at competing with each other. You then systematically slaughtered the rest of your brothers.

Want to know why we were better at it? Ironically, art. We drew pictures. We had exponential growth. We had imagination.

The fused chromosome came long long before that.

Also, we are not the only species. in fact, mammals are unique in that we don't have AS MANY fused. Most organisms on this planet have microchromosomes. Bits and chunks of genetic material not coherently put to form. Species like Chickens have as many as 60, even though they only have 8 chromosomes. This is clear proof contrary to your statement. Early life forms had chunks of genetic material, like Trypanosoma brucei. These fused together into more efficient operators like chromosomes. Clearly fusing chromosomes is more efficient spatially.

Care to elaborate on your supposed proof now?

yes, it is indeed evolution. We are simply the more complex operation of what many species have been doing for eons.
edit on 11-2-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-2-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-2-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-2-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-2-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 05:23 AM
reply to post by Gorman91

I don't think you are being as accurate as you think Gorman, i.e.:

If verified, these connections would suggest that jellies either evolved into their current, complex form very quickly around 500 million years ago, or they evolved slowly and have existed much longer than has been estimated.

National Geographic

posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 05:27 AM
reply to post by Allred5923

That's not really a fossil though. That's an imprint. A shadow. Great for basic understanding of the form. horrible for complex internal evolution like nervous systems and other things.

Like your own quote says, jurry is still out on either or. And with two contrary possibilities you can't go assuming aliens came down and made jellyfish better. That statement in and of itself sounds absolutely ridiculous.

But yes, I did not know they actually had some kind of left overs.

Still, as you can see, they're not really all that for or against any proof for any thing.
edit on 11-2-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 05:30 AM
reply to post by Gorman91

Fossils (from Latin fossus, literally "having been dug up") are the preserved remains or traces of animals, plants, and other organisms from the remote past. ...

Seems as if they do have relevance to further understanding of such evolutionary creatures.
edit on 052828p://0274 by Allred5923 because: Screwed up post

posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 05:33 AM
reply to post by Allred5923

Dead link. But I can give a gander by what you mean.

A fossil has to have bones in order to be taken serious for anatomical linkage of species. In as much as we cannot assume plant evolution from form alone, and due to their lack of bones, we are kind of at a loss for their evolution. Only similar forms close to each other time-wise can be a semi-sure guess.

That's for a simple reason. Bones tend to evolve a lot slower than the actual species itself in terms of organs and external looks.
edit on 11-2-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in