It's official, GOD was a space alien, and NOT our real creator

Originally posted by believer74
reply to post by itsthetooth

 

yeah.. sounds that way doesn't it.. maybe your theory on us being 'rescued' to this planet and having to adapt is better than mine

Well being rescued had to be a realized possibility. There was only like 4 possibility's

We were either:

Test subjects /
enslaved /
rescued /
imprisoned/

TGA was the golden goose to break this down. Honestly why would anyone erase our memory if we were being imprisoned,, or rescued.

Leaving me with us either being test subjects or slaves. At the time I didn't know about Zecaria Sitchins findings so I went with what we deal with today, which is reports of people getting abducted. I was wrong. We were slaves.

reply to post by itsthetooth


1

Originally posted by Red_xi
I'll admit after a few paragraphs I realised this was a rant the length of a book and stopped reading.

Had you provided me some links I might have been inclined to carry on

I'm sorry, I couldn't possibly have provided you with thousands of links to support my findings, but I can see why you might ask.

reply to post by itsthetooth

Agreed, I'm sure something could be amiss in the translation, I don't speak or read Hebrew.

There are plenty of sources out there for original texts with translation guides by people who actually researched the language instead of translators with a religious agenda who are trying to "modernize" the text for mass consumption.

Agree again, and see that even all of that could apply to the bible as there is no proof either.

Excellent.

I'm sorry but if the bible, scientific DNA, charlatans, and my 3 decades of paranormal study all point to the same direction, I don't know of any other way to get proof.

Your interpretation of the Bible, based on imperfect translations… your interpretation of DNA evidence, where it's already been shown that you were mistaken regarding… your reliance on the work of three of the most well-known pseudoscientists and fraudsters of the last century… and you're unsourced, uncited study into something which, by its very nature, is unscientific… lead you to a "scientific" conclusion. Do you see the problem here?

In fact I think the new DNA findings outweigh any proof we have had up until now.
Anyone can call someone a charlatan, Eric was on the right track for sure. I know he got busted on some small thing in explanation but I don't think it totally dismisses his entire direction.

Except the new DNA findings don't support your arguments in the slightest. Again, not knowing something doesn't mean that aliens did it. You have to provide positive evidence that aliens have done the things you're claiming. And von Däniken didn't get busted on "some small thing"… he admitted to falsifying evidence and repeatedly lying about where he got his information! And you're using him as part of the foundation for your thesis. Do you see the problem here?

Well here is the funny thing about your claim in this. You can call them frauds, I don't see them as such and whats really funny here is they all have different directions. So you could be right but your outnumbered in some things.

You don't see someone who has admitted to falsifying evidence as a fraud? You don't see someone who repeatedly lies about mechanisms of genetics as a fraud? You don't find someone who's translations of ancient texts are repeatedly found to be in error as a fraud? And science isn't about how many people believe in something or don't believe in something. Science is a tyranny of evidence. And those three fraudsters don't have it.

Our genes have been gene spliced, and evidence is in ALL of our genes. It's only possible in a LAB. In addition those sections are inverted, and reinserted and the direction of the twist in the chain also happens to be inverted in the same sections where the color is different. It's more than obvious someone altered our DNA. This doesn't happen in natural life. And even if Pye is wrong in that statement, which your saying he is, then we are the ONLY thing on this planet that has those differences. 5 million species, of which we have probably tested about 1/4 million. I think the odds are against you on this.

OK, so you're making an assertion upon which you're basing a significant amount of your thesis, then admitting that the person who's research you used may be wrong, and you don't see how this calls into serious question your interpretation of the DNA evidence? Seriously? Yes, Pye is very very wrong about which mechanisms are found in nature. Since the foundation for his assertions are wrong, his conclusions are wrong. And this isn't a statistical exercise where the odds are against me. Until all the results are in, all of your speculation is just that… speculation. Not proof.

Vestigial organs are in fact just the opposite. It's proof that in fact they didn't evolve, because they kept things they didn't need. I'm sorry but evolution makes no sense.

Except that they are the exact opposite of what you describe. Whales have femurs. They evolved from a land-dwelling animal. Just because you don't understand evolution doesn't mean it makes no sense. It just makes no sense to you. You could always try learning about it, or you can continue to make wild assertions that are based on scientific inaccuracies.

Like thinking we evolved. With all of our sickness and how we don't nothing but adapt to survive. Honestly, if we did evolve, we would be much better off going back to being primates, and that's a fact.

With this statement, you're making it abundantly clear that you don't understand what evolution and adaptation are.

Everytime I opne the bible and read a new page, it agrees with my direction. I'm sorry, I'm not getting questions, I'm getting more answers and I'm not digging to find them.

Your getting your answers from a book of fairy tales written 2kya.

I don't believe in imaginary friends or evolution and Pye also ruled that out in the DNA. We came into life all of a sudden 200,000 years ago and the DNA tells us so.
I have never had the urge to hang in trees, or throw poo. There are to many holes in the idea, sorry, I have looked at it in depth, and found nothing but people patching holes, patching holes with the most ridiculious ideas.

Your argument from personal incredulity is hardly a sound argument when the evidence says otherwise.

What about gene splicing?

Define the mechanism of gene splicing as you understand it.

Ok, I'll explain again. I live in the year 2011. From what I can tell there was only a few thousand years to the BC timeline. That's it. I'm missing a couple of decimals of my lineage here.

Maybe if you go by the timeline presented in a 2kya book of fairy tales. We have evidence of humans being on this planet for longer than 8ky.

Let me ask you, how much study have you don't on aliens. What if anything can you tell me about them, that you know or have heard?

I'm supposed to do research on something for which no positive evidence exists?

No that was only because I thought I was refering to DNA which is different.

No, you claimed that DNA is made up of four proteins. That is a factually incorrect statement.

And again, even if your right, how come we are the only life every knowing to have these marks of altered genes?

There's no evidence to show that they were altered. Inserting "it was altered" because we don't know exactly how it evolved at this point isn't evidence. It's a gap in our knowledge. That's all.

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by itsthetooth

 

Sorry, didn't see that you double replied to my post and added more…
NP.

I didn't know EVD was considered a charlatan. I found his direction to be interesting.

I find lots of fiction interesting. I've just learned not to use fiction as a foundation for making scientific assertions.
Well I think that sometimes those authors are forced into a certain catagory, going against their personal beliefs in the issue.
Such is the case with mine being in the highly speculative category.
I'm so sure on this that I would be my life on it, yet I'm pushed into this category. It's more an issue of others beliefs.
I believe the same things that are in the bible, they were just obviously taken out of context.
It's not even an issue of assuming that, I'm beyond that, I'm actually trying to figure out how and why it was out of context to begin with and I'm also getting answers there as well. It's meaning appears to simply have been lost, and mind control is obviously used when contact is made.

The whole idea of god speaking to us, yet never showing his face raised serious questions, along with hiding behind technology. The fact that the ark of the covenant was so Moses could talk to god, raised the biggest question of all. And while EVD explained this to be a radio device, he never dove into the fact that it seemed to create a contradiction.
Something was amiss. I believe that people don't lie, the person lies. There were simply to many people involved in the bible, we must be missing something.

All this time no one has realized that the word spirit was used to indicated conversation through telepathic means. Of course I confirmed this possibility by asking a hardcore christian, avid non believer of aliens in a simple test.

I asked her how she would describe hearing voices and she actually used the words spirit and ghost. Is it possible we have missed the true meaning of this in the bible. I'm sure we have.
You see, I'm agreeing with everyones findings in general except for evolution. Your telling me you don't believe in any of it. I tend to lean on the fact that someone must be on a correct path.

I wonder if you have overlooked the biggest thing in all of this, like most of us have?
Did it ever occur to you that if we did know who or how we were created, we probably wouldn't have all of this uncertainty and different religions, and proof in DNA as well as in the bible.
Probably not.
IMO we would know, and accept it as truth, backed up with a plethora of obvious proof without any question.
This would even apply to my findings with one exception, victomology.
You have understand that what has happened to us, they didn't want us to figure it out, and potentiality undo it.

I have little use for religion. I find it to be divisive and ultimately an impediment in our progress as a species. The fact that you rely on the Bible as a source for objective evidence and a foundation for your arguments shows how much damage religion has done when it's taken literally as opposed to when it's taken as metaphorical.
Well you don't believe in religion, with good reason. The purpose and original grounds were from misdirection from god.
He stumbles over his own words many times in the bible. Or did we simply take things out of context.
Did he create us in his image, or were we exiled to earth like both parts say in the bible.
Both, in my findings. He altered our DNA, and exiled us to earth.
I have cleared up the contradictions in so many ways, that not only does it now make sense, but the truth of his deceit has been revealed.
You don't like religion because of god. I assure you its only his doings that are the problem. The rest is only reporting and events as of gods implementation.
Even at that, there are many parts where it seems like god is being up front and honest with us. It's mostly just the whole reason to exile us, it makes no sense. What did we do wrong? Eat an apple. It was nothing more than a test to see if we would obey after being abducted. Thats it. And when it didn't work, he had to make changes to us so we would obey.

These alien powers only seem to work in an AOE from what I'm able to figure out. It's why god lost control. Perhaps a flaw in his plan. One alien can't mind control an entire planet. With many people scattered out and beyond, he lost his grip. Of course you don't like religion, your smart and you see though the smoke and mirrors, you just didn't know why. Many people know when things just don't add up,, but aren't always able to figure out why. I think I have done just that.

You can say I have no proof but the DNA tells it all. I can lead a horse to water but can't make him drink. Is it possible you simply don't want to understand this or believe in this? Most likely. It's a common reply to easterly accept things, and we all do it. Myself included. Because I'm not the best in explaining things, I would invite you to search out what I have found, and try to prove it wrong. Here is the best part. Even thought I have DNA backed up with scriptures from both the bible and findings by Zecharia Sitchin, I could say the DNA at least in some aspects is proof.

The facts of the DNA evidence are clear, they just don't say what you want them to say. There's a difference between fact and interpretation. It's a fact that we have segments of our DNA that aren't found in any other species on Earth. And that's about where your factual information ends. Anything beyond that is wild speculation on your part, especially when you assert that because we don't know why those particular differences exist, aliens must have done it. The intellectually honest path is to simply say that we don't know and keep looking. Well your missing the simply fact that there must be a reason behind it, and several supporting things IMO answer it.

I peeked on a few things about whales in general. They are saying the brains are surprisingly similar to humans, which is not the case with most other life.

Who is "they"? Need a citation here.
www.google.com... #sclient=psy&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=8r0&rlz=1R0GGLL_enUS425&channel=s&biw=1067&bih=726&source=hp&q=how+much+does+a+whales+brain+weigh&aq=f&aqi=g-l1 &aql=f&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=e4d813b43c7d221c
Several pages you can look at.

I'm so confident about my findings in this big picture that with almost each view of a page in the bible, it actually makes sense now.

You can believe in the most convoluted explanation of the most misused book of pretty poetry created by goat herders in the history of mankind, but don't sit there and tell me that it's good science or should be taken literally.
Well this didn't make front page in the paper, if thats what you mean, and I can see how most people wouldn't accept anything but.
I'm sorry if you feel none of this is correct. The only difference in what I believe and everyone else is there is the DNA to back it up. From the bible alone we had nothing. So you can choose to believe in something that at least has things to back it up, or things without. I'm sorry, but its the only things that makes sense. If you choose to believe in things that are full of holes and convoluted with dead end theory's, you will get nothing but more questions and more holes. I get nothing but answers, so what does that tell you?

I understand your questioning all this but I'm sorry to say, I think your wrong.
While you may not feel I have proof, I would hardly consider DNA pseudoscience. And if you do, I wonder how you feel about the accuracy of that same DNA proving who your kids / parents are, much less murders proving people guilty from DNA.

DNA isn't pseudoscience. Your assertions regarding DNA evidence based on Pye doesn't even qualify as pseudoscience, they're much much worse. Your just creating a new religion based on malevolent aliens instead of a benevolent creator. If you knew anything about the DNA evidence behind your assertions then you'd know that we're related to every other species on this planet.

Only through the proteins, and probably the same creator, but that's it.
You are wrong about the findings not being conclusive that our DNA is altered. I'm wondering if you watched the correct video.....

www.youtube.com...

Did you understand that MtDNA does not match with our alleged creation in the bible?
Did you understand that we are missing 2 decimals of our lineage?
Did you understand that Gene splicing is a process that is only occurring in a LAB?
Did you understand that not only do we have 6 segments inverted, but the spirals are reversed making obvious someone altered our DNA?
Did you understand that these findings appear to date or predate our existence on earth?
Did you not understand that gene fusing is also a LAB technique and also only possible in a LAB?

Even if you did understand all these, it would appear you might not understand what it means.
It means we are much older than thought, god is not our creator, and we were not whole upon our placement here.
I don't have to prove it's disabled powers, its common sense that something is disabled, and with all the things that support it, it looks like powers. Even if I"m wrong, why would someone alter our DNA? Again its common sense, to control us.

Have you ever looked up and studied what vestigial organs we have?

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by itsthetooth

 

One request before we continue - please learn to use the quote function properly. It would make it easier to see where your replied begin within the large block of quoted text. Thanks.

First of all I don't need to speculate we are not from this earth, the bible quotes we were exiled to earth. I take it just the way it was written.

If you're using the Bible as objective evidence to make your assertions, then you're on shaky ground to begin with. Again, go back and read the original texts with a Hebrew lexicon handy and see if you feel as though you can make the same assertions.

The difference is there have been over 4 million reports of people claiming to have this same hallucination.
I don't know how many people claim to see vampires. If any were honest, I wouldn't rule out life beyond.

I've asked for some kind of citation where these 4M reports can be viewed in previous replies in this thread and you've directed me to Youtube videos. Youtube may be appropriate for general explanations, but citations are required for the kind of claims you're making. Also, there's a reason why eyewitness accounts don't count for much in the legal world - they recognize that they're inherently flawed and unreliable. The scientific world requires and even greater burden of proof than the legal, so eyewitness accounts don't cut it.

Nope, EVD was only a small part of my understanding in all this. It did however set the understanding to something much bigger. How is it our MtDNA claims we are 200,000 years old and we are so primitive in comparison to reports of other life that visits us. Sodom and Gomorrah was an eye opener to the fact that our supposed creator is evil and controlling.

IMO our real creator would need no control or explanation.
All I know about Sitchen is his findings in the scriptures that there is much evidence we were an enslaved race. It's a small part to once again a very large picture.

The fact that you're taking any of your understanding from van Däniken, Sitchin, or Pye (as well as the Bible) calls into question the whole of your thesis. Three frauds and a books of allegories do not a solid foundation make.

First off we know not all life here on earth is ingeniousness. Yet none of the DNA is altered.

This is predicated on your unproven speculation that it's been altered. God of the gaps. We have unique DNA, as does every species on Earth, yet you're making the leap to "God did it" without any sort of objective evidence.

Second, I haven't studied whales so I can't apply the same theory, Have you? It does raise concern however, it is possible they are not from here, as hard as that is to believe.

So you invoking an "aliens did it" model for our vestigial organs, but not for any other species on the planet? Occam's razor says you're overreaching. Especially given that vestigial organs are a fantastic source of evidence for common descent.

It proves that God was not our creator and backs up the findings in the ezekiel chapter with him appearing to make mutated life. Not even our scientist today make four headed creatures from other existing life. It was yet another clue, because its existing life, not new made life from a real creator.

I agree that God is not our creator, I just don't see the need to complicate things by replacing God with aliens when we have well substantiated naturalistic explanations. And literal interpretations of the Bible are spurious at best unless you have some kind of way of objective substantiating the claims therein.

Gene fusing is NOT natural, neither is gene splicing, from anything I have been able to find. Again I'm not a geneticist, but it sounds like you are.

Then you haven't looked very hard. Gene fusion is extremely common in nature: pigs, goats, sheep, cattle, rats, mice, fish, lizards, planipapillus, leafhoppers, grasshoppers, and butterflies all display gene fusion.

I'm going by the timeline in the bible. You can use the same DNA findings that show we are 200,000 years old. That figure alone doesn't tell us we lived those years here on earth.

Yet we have an overwhelming amount of evidence that shows that we did live those years on Earth. And, again, you need to show how the Bible should be taken as an objective source of evidence before you can use it to make the assertions you're making.

Well now your agreeing with me. It's obvious how it happened and my whole OP explains it.

No, I'm showing you why your assertion based on "I don't know" = "aliens did it" is ludicrous.

Methylation is NOT natural and in fact I have said this a dozen times in this post how cute it is that we are the ONLY thing here on earth that has tampered DNA. Methylation is only possible in a LAB people. Yours, mine, all human life on earth has altered DNA. It was in fact the last of my findings. So if I'm all wrong, the DNA says I'm right.

Except you are completely and totally wrong on this point. There's an entire class of enzymes called methyltransferase that exists in every single kingdom of life on this planet that does nothing but methylation. Seriously, your understanding of fundamental biochemistry and genetics is incredibly flawed. I saw you referring to single amino acids as proteins, which is also completely wrong.

We aren't even suppose to talk with our mouths. We eat and breath with our mouths. Talking was an adaptation because our telepathy is disabled. Don't even look at them as powers, they are simply senses just like eyesight, or hearing, or feeling.

Evidence?

Well I would ask you the same thing.
I have several things saying this is the case.
Do you have anything that says its wrong?

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by itsthetooth

 

Agreed, I'm sure something could be amiss in the translation, I don't speak or read Hebrew.

There are plenty of sources out there for original texts with translation guides by people who actually researched the language instead of translators with a religious agenda who are trying to "modernize" the text for mass consumption.

Agree again, and see that even all of that could apply to the bible as there is no proof either.

Excellent.

I'm sorry but if the bible, scientific DNA, charlatans, and my 3 decades of paranormal study all point to the same direction, I don't know of any other way to get proof.

Your interpretation of the Bible, based on imperfect translations… your interpretation of DNA evidence, where it's already been shown that you were mistaken regarding… your reliance on the work of three of the most well-known pseudoscientists and fraudsters of the last century… and you're unsourced, uncited study into something which, by its very nature, is unscientific… lead you to a "scientific" conclusion. Do you see the problem here?

In fact I think the new DNA findings outweigh any proof we have had up until now.
Anyone can call someone a charlatan, Eric was on the right track for sure. I know he got busted on some small thing in explanation but I don't think it totally dismisses his entire direction.

Except the new DNA findings don't support your arguments in the slightest. Again, not knowing something doesn't mean that aliens did it. You have to provide positive evidence that aliens have done the things you're claiming. And von Däniken didn't get busted on "some small thing"… he admitted to falsifying evidence and repeatedly lying about where he got his information! And you're using him as part of the foundation for your thesis. Do you see the problem here?

Well here is the funny thing about your claim in this. You can call them frauds, I don't see them as such and whats really funny here is they all have different directions. So you could be right but your outnumbered in some things.

You don't see someone who has admitted to falsifying evidence as a fraud? You don't see someone who repeatedly lies about mechanisms of genetics as a fraud? You don't find someone who's translations of ancient texts are repeatedly found to be in error as a fraud? And science isn't about how many people believe in something or don't believe in something. Science is a tyranny of evidence. And those three fraudsters don't have it.

Our genes have been gene spliced, and evidence is in ALL of our genes. It's only possible in a LAB. In addition those sections are inverted, and reinserted and the direction of the twist in the chain also happens to be inverted in the same sections where the color is different. It's more than obvious someone altered our DNA. This doesn't happen in natural life. And even if Pye is wrong in that statement, which your saying he is, then we are the ONLY thing on this planet that has those differences. 5 million species, of which we have probably tested about 1/4 million. I think the odds are against you on this.

OK, so you're making an assertion upon which you're basing a significant amount of your thesis, then admitting that the person who's research you used may be wrong, and you don't see how this calls into serious question your interpretation of the DNA evidence? Seriously? Yes, Pye is very very wrong about which mechanisms are found in nature. Since the foundation for his assertions are wrong, his conclusions are wrong. And this isn't a statistical exercise where the odds are against me. Until all the results are in, all of your speculation is just that… speculation. Not proof.

Vestigial organs are in fact just the opposite. It's proof that in fact they didn't evolve, because they kept things they didn't need. I'm sorry but evolution makes no sense.

Except that they are the exact opposite of what you describe. Whales have femurs. They evolved from a land-dwelling animal. Just because you don't understand evolution doesn't mean it makes no sense. It just makes no sense to you. You could always try learning about it, or you can continue to make wild assertions that are based on scientific inaccuracies.

Like thinking we evolved. With all of our sickness and how we don't nothing but adapt to survive. Honestly, if we did evolve, we would be much better off going back to being primates, and that's a fact.

With this statement, you're making it abundantly clear that you don't understand what evolution and adaptation are.

Everytime I opne the bible and read a new page, it agrees with my direction. I'm sorry, I'm not getting questions, I'm getting more answers and I'm not digging to find them.

Your getting your answers from a book of fairy tales written 2kya.

I don't believe in imaginary friends or evolution and Pye also ruled that out in the DNA. We came into life all of a sudden 200,000 years ago and the DNA tells us so.
I have never had the urge to hang in trees, or throw poo. There are to many holes in the idea, sorry, I have looked at it in depth, and found nothing but people patching holes, patching holes with the most ridiculious ideas.

Your argument from personal incredulity is hardly a sound argument when the evidence says otherwise.

What about gene splicing?

Define the mechanism of gene splicing as you understand it.

Ok, I'll explain again. I live in the year 2011. From what I can tell there was only a few thousand years to the BC timeline. That's it. I'm missing a couple of decimals of my lineage here.

Maybe if you go by the timeline presented in a 2kya book of fairy tales. We have evidence of humans being on this planet for longer than 8ky.

Let me ask you, how much study have you don't on aliens. What if anything can you tell me about them, that you know or have heard?

I'm supposed to do research on something for which no positive evidence exists?

No that was only because I thought I was refering to DNA which is different.

No, you claimed that DNA is made up of four proteins. That is a factually incorrect statement.

And again, even if your right, how come we are the only life every knowing to have these marks of altered genes?

There's no evidence to show that they were altered. Inserting "it was altered" because we don't know exactly how it evolved at this point isn't evidence. It's a gap in our knowledge. That's all.

Ya I see the problem here, everyone else is wrong and your right.

Quote......There's no evidence to show that they were altered. Inserting "it was altered" because we don't know exactly how it evolved at this point isn't evidence. It's a gap in our knowledge. That's all.



How can you blame me for pseudoscience, then you come back with way off assumptions about the DNA being an unknown?
Gene splicing changes the color of the laminate. It's odd how Pye says its fact, and you for some reason say it's not. Ok, I know that Pye has dealt with many LABS, do you have more experience then he does? show me one person that claims its not fact.
You think those changes in the DNA are from evolution. So no other life here on earth has those changes, so another words we are the ONLY thing on this planet that has evolved.

Makes no sense to me, reminds me of the convo with my GF mother about telepathy and aliens.
She is an AVID non believer in aliens and legalistic christian. When I asked her what she thought about voices entering her mind she thought it could be a spirit or a ghost.
The argument deepened to the Ezekiel chapter telling us that god visited us in a space ship.
Space ship wasn't the exact text, but she claims her findings were that it was a chariot and not a ufo.
So another words as the sky's open up and the clouds part, she is claiming that horses and a sleigh are coming down from the skies.
I think she confused Ezekiel with Santa clause.
Some people tell me, no it was a plane. So god was flying around on this earth? So he was from earth?
Your assertions on the DNA strike me in the same manner. I wanna know why you believe it's not any indicaiton.

It's some of these people that are scared #less, and for a good reason, because those people KNOW what it means. I have to admit, it scares me too.

reply to post by itsthetooth

Well I think that sometimes those authors are forced into a certain catagory, going against their personal beliefs in the issue.
Such is the case with mine being in the highly speculative category.
I'm so sure on this that I would be my life on it, yet I'm pushed into this category. It's more an issue of others beliefs.
I believe the same things that are in the bible, they were just obviously taken out of context.
It's not even an issue of assuming that, I'm beyond that, I'm actually trying to figure out how and why it was out of context to begin with and I'm also getting answers there as well. It's meaning appears to simply have been lost, and mind control is obviously used when contact is made.

Pushed into what category? The work of von Däniken has been repeatedly shown to be a fabrication, so I classify it as fiction, albeit unintentional fiction. If anyone "pushed him into a category", it was himself.

The whole idea of god speaking to us, yet never showing his face raised serious questions, along with hiding behind technology. The fact that the ark of the covenant was so Moses could talk to god, raised the biggest question of all. And while EVD explained this to be a radio device, he never dove into the fact that it seemed to create a contradiction.
Something was amiss. I believe that people don't lie, the person lies. There were simply to many people involved in the bible, we must be missing something.

A scientific theory isn't more or less valid based on the number of people that subscribe to it. It's validity is based on the weight of evidence. There is no objective evidence for aliens in the Bible, so it doesn't matter how many people were involved in it's fabrication.

All this time no one has realized that the word spirit was used to indicated conversation through telepathic means. Of course I confirmed this possibility by asking a hardcore christian, avid non believer of aliens in a simple test.

Except that's not how the word spirit is used in the original text. Feel free to keep taking things out of context without understanding the original material upon which the translations you're using as "proof" are based, but it undermines the credibility of your assertions.

You see, I'm agreeing with everyones findings in general except for evolution. Your telling me you don't believe in any of it. I tend to lean on the fact that someone must be on a correct path.

So you're agreeing with all of the anecdotal "evidence" that can be manipulated to say whatever you want it to, but your ignoring the scientific theory that has over 150 years of objective evidence supporting it?

Well you don't believe in religion, with good reason. The purpose and original grounds were from misdirection from god.
He stumbles over his own words many times in the bible. Or did we simply take things out of context.
Did he create us in his image, or were we exiled to earth like both parts say in the bible.
Both, in my findings. He altered our DNA, and exiled us to earth.
I have cleared up the contradictions in so many ways, that not only does it now make sense, but the truth of his deceit has been revealed.
You don't like religion because of god. I assure you its only his doings that are the problem. The rest is only reporting and events as of gods implementation.
Even at that, there are many parts where it seems like god is being up front and honest with us. It's mostly just the whole reason to exile us, it makes no sense. What did we do wrong? Eat an apple. It was nothing more than a test to see if we would obey after being abducted. Thats it. And when it didn't work, he had to make changes to us so we would obey.

No, I don't like religion because, as I've pointed out, it does more harm than good. I'm an atheist, so not liking an imaginary being seems kind of silly to me.

You can say I have no proof but the DNA tells it all. I can lead a horse to water but can't make him drink. Is it possible you simply don't want to understand this or believe in this? Most likely. It's a common reply to easterly accept things, and we all do it. Myself included. Because I'm not the best in explaining things, I would invite you to search out what I have found, and try to prove it wrong. Here is the best part. Even thought I have DNA backed up with scriptures from both the bible and findings by Zecharia Sitchin, I could say the DNA at least in some aspects is proof.

It's neither a matter of lack of understanding or lack of desire to believe on my part. I've pointed out several times where you've been mistaken regarding what is and is not possible with DNA, so I think I have a better understanding of the DNA evidence than you do. So if the foundations of your argument with respect to DNA evidence are wrong, I don't understand how you can continue to draw the same conclusions from it. It's bad science to pick your conclusion and tailor your interpretation of the data to fit that conclusion. And, again, a fraudster and a book of fairy tales is hardly a solid foundation to begin with.

Well your missing the simply fact that there must be a reason behind it, and several supporting things IMO answer it.

No, because it having a "reason" is predicated on the involvement of aliens, for which you still haven't provided objective evidence.

Well this didn't make front page in the paper, if thats what you mean, and I can see how most people wouldn't accept anything but.
I'm sorry if you feel none of this is correct. The only difference in what I believe and everyone else is there is the DNA to back it up. From the bible alone we had nothing. So you can choose to believe in something that at least has things to back it up, or things without. I'm sorry, but its the only things that makes sense. If you choose to believe in things that are full of holes and convoluted with dead end theory's, you will get nothing but more questions and more holes. I get nothing but answers, so what does that tell you?

Your interpretation of the DNA evidence has been show to be based on faulty assumptions already. That invalidates your conclusions based on the DNA evidence. I don't know how much clearer I can possible make it.

Only through the proteins, and probably the same creator, but that's it.
You are wrong about the findings not being conclusive that our DNA is altered. I'm wondering if you watched the correct video…

If you're looking to Youtube for objective scientific fact, you're barking up the wrong tree. I don't need to watch a video. I get my scientific information from things that have either been peer-reviewed directly or from sources that are based on peer-reviewed materials.

Did you understand that MtDNA does not match with our alleged creation in the bible?

You're begging the question by assuming that the Bible must be correct instead of all of the evidence we've gathered.

Did you understand that we are missing 2 decimals of our lineage?

Only if you take the Bible literally, regardless of the fact that it's in direct conflict with the evidence gathered to date.

Did you understand that Gene splicing is a process that is only occurring in a LAB?

You still haven't defined gene splicing as you understand it. I'm pretty sure that I can show you a naturally occurring genetic process that you would view as gene splicing.

Did you understand that not only do we have 6 segments inverted, but the spirals are reversed making obvious someone altered our DNA?

And? We're not the only species that have Z-DNA and, like everything else you've pointed, there's a completely natural explanation for it that doesn't involved some kind of sinister plot perpetrated by evil aliens.

Did you understand that these findings appear to date or predate our existence on earth?

Only if you take the Bible literally.

Did you not understand that gene fusing is also a LAB technique and also only possible in a LAB?

You don't seem to understand, even thought I've said it twice before and provided exampled, that gene fusion occurs in nature.

Even if you did understand all these, it would appear you might not understand what it means.
It means we are much older than thought, god is not our creator, and we were not whole upon our placement here.
I don't have to prove it's disabled powers, its common sense that something is disabled, and with all the things that support it, it looks like powers. Even if I"m wrong, why would someone alter our DNA? Again its common sense, to control us.

Except that all of your claims are based on factual inaccuracies.

reply to post by itsthetooth

Well I would ask you the same thing.
I have several things saying this is the case.
Do you have anything that says its wrong?

I have no idea which part of my post you're referring to here since you slapped this in at the end and didn't use the quote function properly.

reply to post by itsthetooth

Ya I see the problem here, everyone else is wrong and your right.

Everyone? No, just those that base their work on a book of fairy tales, three fraudsters, and a boatload of scientific inaccuracies.

reply to post by itsthetooth

How can you blame me for pseudoscience, then you come back with way off assumptions about the DNA being an unknown?

I didn't say that the DNA evidence was unknown, I said that the origin of the unique portions of our DNA is unknown. Big difference. Further, the intellectually honest path when something is unknown is to say that it's unknown. Not insert aliens or God or a giant pink unicorn into the equation when there's no objective evidence for it.

Gene splicing changes the color of the laminate. It's odd how Pye says its fact, and you for some reason say it's not. Ok, I know that Pye has dealt with many LABS, do you have more experience then he does? show me one person that claims its not fact.

Show me a substantiated citation with references that makes the same claim. You're making an extraordinary claim and you're backing it with Youtube videos. Sorry, but there's an extraordinary burden of proof to be met and you're simply not providing it.

You think those changes in the DNA are from evolution. So no other life here on earth has those changes, so another words we are the ONLY thing on this planet that has evolved.

The fact that you make this statement displays a lack of understanding of the evolutionary process.

Makes no sense to me, reminds me of the convo with my GF mother about telepathy and aliens.
She is an AVID non believer in aliens and legalistic christian. When I asked her what she thought about voices entering her mind she thought it could be a spirit or a ghost.
The argument deepened to the Ezekiel chapter telling us that god visited us in a space ship.
Space ship wasn't the exact text, but she claims her findings were that it was a chariot and not a ufo.
So another words as the sky's open up and the clouds part, she is claiming that horses and a sleigh are coming down from the skies.
I think she confused Ezekiel with Santa clause.
Some people tell me, no it was a plane. So god was flying around on this earth? So he was from earth?

And I think you're confusing a book of fairy tales written a few millennia ago with factual information.

Your assertions on the DNA strike me in the same manner. I wanna know why you believe it's not any indication.

Because "we don't know yet" isn't the same thing as "evil aliens manipulated our DNA". We have a process for explaining differences in DNA between species, it's called evolution. We can and have observed evolution occurring, so why do you feel the need to insert some external malevolent guiding force as a cause and apparently only for our species? is it because we have unique portions to our DNA? Every species on this planet has some segment of its genetic code that is unique to that species. Why isn't it an indication? Because other evidence refutes all of the assumptions you're making to arrive at your conclusion, therefore your conclusion requires extraordinary proof. And you haven't provided it.

It's some of these people that are scared #less, and for a good reason, because those people KNOW what it means. I have to admit, it scares me too.

I find it hard to be scared of something that doesn't exist.

reply to post by thecrazydude11


It does actually say something about it in the bible. One thing you need to consider is that the bible is not the only and final word of God. There is truth in nearly all religions. You just need a spiritual eye to preceive the truth within each. But if you are stuck in the idea that only the bible contains info about God then consider this passage:

John 14:2 - Jesus said, "In my Father's house (universe) there are many mansions (planets).

John 10:16 - Jesus said, "I have sheep (people) not of this fold (planet).

Remember he had to speak to them in terms they could understand.

Another thing to consider is in the time of human existance (nearly 1 million years) the bible is realitively new. It is said that the oldest passages from psalms could be 7000 years old and that is still pretty new considering the whole of human history. So no one can say what we've known and then forgot over the millenia. We take for granted the passing on of knowledge. In the days before printing is was very difficult for knowledge to last. Within a few generations it is either lost or badly distorted.

I think you should check out the info in The Urantia Book ( www.urantia.org... ) as it has a very plausible story for creation.

reply to post by itsthetooth

I must admit that I have not read all 30+ pages of your post, so if you've explained who you believe is pretending to be our creator I apologize for asking, who is pretending to be our creator?

In my opinion, logical thinking will take you back to one creator. One uncaused cause. All life and existance sprang from this First Source and Center that we call God.

The Universal Father is the God of all creation, the First Source and Center of all things and beings. First think of God as a creator, then as a controller, and lastly as an infinite upholder. The truth about the Universal Father had begun to dawn upon mankind when the prophet said: “You, God, are alone; there is none beside you. You have created the heaven and the heaven of heavens, with all their hosts; you preserve and control them. By the Sons of God were the universes made. The Creator covers himself with light as with a garment and stretches out the heavens as a curtain.” Only the concept of the Universal Father — one God in the place of many gods — enabled mortal man to comprehend the Father as divine creator and infinite controller.

The myriads of planetary systems were all made to be eventually inhabited by many different types of intelligent creatures, beings who could know God, receive the divine affection, and love him in return. The universe of universes is the work of God and the dwelling place of his diverse creatures. “God created the heavens and formed the earth; he established the universe and created this world not in vain; he formed it to be inhabited.”

There certainly could be many people who believe in and love God for selfish reasons, but I would not say that is true for everyone. Wholehearted belief in and love for God brings a peace that passes all human understanding. There are no words to express the souls attitude of thanksgiving.

Many people say, "You can't prove God exists" and I say to these people "You can't prove he doesn't exist!" To me it's obvious that there is Intelligent design in everything.

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by itsthetooth

 

Well I think that sometimes those authors are forced into a certain catagory, going against their personal beliefs in the issue.
Such is the case with mine being in the highly speculative category.
I'm so sure on this that I would be my life on it, yet I'm pushed into this category. It's more an issue of others beliefs.
I believe the same things that are in the bible, they were just obviously taken out of context.
It's not even an issue of assuming that, I'm beyond that, I'm actually trying to figure out how and why it was out of context to begin with and I'm also getting answers there as well. It's meaning appears to simply have been lost, and mind control is obviously used when contact is made.

Pushed into what category? The work of von Däniken has been repeatedly shown to be a fabrication, so I classify it as fiction, albeit unintentional fiction. If anyone "pushed him into a category", it was himself.

The whole idea of god speaking to us, yet never showing his face raised serious questions, along with hiding behind technology. The fact that the ark of the covenant was so Moses could talk to god, raised the biggest question of all. And while EVD explained this to be a radio device, he never dove into the fact that it seemed to create a contradiction.
Something was amiss. I believe that people don't lie, the person lies. There were simply to many people involved in the bible, we must be missing something.

A scientific theory isn't more or less valid based on the number of people that subscribe to it. It's validity is based on the weight of evidence. There is no objective evidence for aliens in the Bible, so it doesn't matter how many people were involved in it's fabrication.

All this time no one has realized that the word spirit was used to indicated conversation through telepathic means. Of course I confirmed this possibility by asking a hardcore christian, avid non believer of aliens in a simple test.

Except that's not how the word spirit is used in the original text. Feel free to keep taking things out of context without understanding the original material upon which the translations you're using as "proof" are based, but it undermines the credibility of your assertions.

You see, I'm agreeing with everyones findings in general except for evolution. Your telling me you don't believe in any of it. I tend to lean on the fact that someone must be on a correct path.

So you're agreeing with all of the anecdotal "evidence" that can be manipulated to say whatever you want it to, but your ignoring the scientific theory that has over 150 years of objective evidence supporting it?

Well you don't believe in religion, with good reason. The purpose and original grounds were from misdirection from god.
He stumbles over his own words many times in the bible. Or did we simply take things out of context.
Did he create us in his image, or were we exiled to earth like both parts say in the bible.
Both, in my findings. He altered our DNA, and exiled us to earth.
I have cleared up the contradictions in so many ways, that not only does it now make sense, but the truth of his deceit has been revealed.
You don't like religion because of god. I assure you its only his doings that are the problem. The rest is only reporting and events as of gods implementation.
Even at that, there are many parts where it seems like god is being up front and honest with us. It's mostly just the whole reason to exile us, it makes no sense. What did we do wrong? Eat an apple. It was nothing more than a test to see if we would obey after being abducted. Thats it. And when it didn't work, he had to make changes to us so we would obey.

No, I don't like religion because, as I've pointed out, it does more harm than good. I'm an atheist, so not liking an imaginary being seems kind of silly to me.

You can say I have no proof but the DNA tells it all. I can lead a horse to water but can't make him drink. Is it possible you simply don't want to understand this or believe in this? Most likely. It's a common reply to easterly accept things, and we all do it. Myself included. Because I'm not the best in explaining things, I would invite you to search out what I have found, and try to prove it wrong. Here is the best part. Even thought I have DNA backed up with scriptures from both the bible and findings by Zecharia Sitchin, I could say the DNA at least in some aspects is proof.

It's neither a matter of lack of understanding or lack of desire to believe on my part. I've pointed out several times where you've been mistaken regarding what is and is not possible with DNA, so I think I have a better understanding of the DNA evidence than you do. So if the foundations of your argument with respect to DNA evidence are wrong, I don't understand how you can continue to draw the same conclusions from it. It's bad science to pick your conclusion and tailor your interpretation of the data to fit that conclusion. And, again, a fraudster and a book of fairy tales is hardly a solid foundation to begin with.

Well your missing the simply fact that there must be a reason behind it, and several supporting things IMO answer it.

No, because it having a "reason" is predicated on the involvement of aliens, for which you still haven't provided objective evidence.

Well this didn't make front page in the paper, if thats what you mean, and I can see how most people wouldn't accept anything but.
I'm sorry if you feel none of this is correct. The only difference in what I believe and everyone else is there is the DNA to back it up. From the bible alone we had nothing. So you can choose to believe in something that at least has things to back it up, or things without. I'm sorry, but its the only things that makes sense. If you choose to believe in things that are full of holes and convoluted with dead end theory's, you will get nothing but more questions and more holes. I get nothing but answers, so what does that tell you?

Your interpretation of the DNA evidence has been show to be based on faulty assumptions already. That invalidates your conclusions based on the DNA evidence. I don't know how much clearer I can possible make it.

Only through the proteins, and probably the same creator, but that's it.
You are wrong about the findings not being conclusive that our DNA is altered. I'm wondering if you watched the correct video…

If you're looking to Youtube for objective scientific fact, you're barking up the wrong tree. I don't need to watch a video. I get my scientific information from things that have either been peer-reviewed directly or from sources that are based on peer-reviewed materials.

Did you understand that MtDNA does not match with our alleged creation in the bible?

You're begging the question by assuming that the Bible must be correct instead of all of the evidence we've gathered.

Did you understand that we are missing 2 decimals of our lineage?

Only if you take the Bible literally, regardless of the fact that it's in direct conflict with the evidence gathered to date.

Did you understand that Gene splicing is a process that is only occurring in a LAB?

You still haven't defined gene splicing as you understand it. I'm pretty sure that I can show you a naturally occurring genetic process that you would view as gene splicing.

Did you understand that not only do we have 6 segments inverted, but the spirals are reversed making obvious someone altered our DNA?

And? We're not the only species that have Z-DNA and, like everything else you've pointed, there's a completely natural explanation for it that doesn't involved some kind of sinister plot perpetrated by evil aliens.

Did you understand that these findings appear to date or predate our existence on earth?

Only if you take the Bible literally.

Did you not understand that gene fusing is also a LAB technique and also only possible in a LAB?

You don't seem to understand, even thought I've said it twice before and provided exampled, that gene fusion occurs in nature.

Even if you did understand all these, it would appear you might not understand what it means.
It means we are much older than thought, god is not our creator, and we were not whole upon our placement here.
I don't have to prove it's disabled powers, its common sense that something is disabled, and with all the things that support it, it looks like powers. Even if I"m wrong, why would someone alter our DNA? Again its common sense, to control us.

Except that all of your claims are based on factual inaccuracies.

reply to post by itsthetooth

 

Well I would ask you the same thing.
I have several things saying this is the case.
Do you have anything that says its wrong?

I have no idea which part of my post you're referring to here since you slapped this in at the end and didn't use the quote function properly.

reply to post by itsthetooth

 

Ya I see the problem here, everyone else is wrong and your right.

Everyone? No, just those that base their work on a book of fairy tales, three fraudsters, and a boatload of scientific inaccuracies.

reply to post by itsthetooth

 

How can you blame me for pseudoscience, then you come back with way off assumptions about the DNA being an unknown?

I didn't say that the DNA evidence was unknown, I said that the origin of the unique portions of our DNA is unknown. Big difference. Further, the intellectually honest path when something is unknown is to say that it's unknown. Not insert aliens or God or a giant pink unicorn into the equation when there's no objective evidence for it.

Gene splicing changes the color of the laminate. It's odd how Pye says its fact, and you for some reason say it's not. Ok, I know that Pye has dealt with many LABS, do you have more experience then he does? show me one person that claims its not fact.

Show me a substantiated citation with references that makes the same claim. You're making an extraordinary claim and you're backing it with Youtube videos. Sorry, but there's an extraordinary burden of proof to be met and you're simply not providing it.

You think those changes in the DNA are from evolution. So no other life here on earth has those changes, so another words we are the ONLY thing on this planet that has evolved.

The fact that you make this statement displays a lack of understanding of the evolutionary process.

Makes no sense to me, reminds me of the convo with my GF mother about telepathy and aliens.
She is an AVID non believer in aliens and legalistic christian. When I asked her what she thought about voices entering her mind she thought it could be a spirit or a ghost.
The argument deepened to the Ezekiel chapter telling us that god visited us in a space ship.
Space ship wasn't the exact text, but she claims her findings were that it was a chariot and not a ufo.
So another words as the sky's open up and the clouds part, she is claiming that horses and a sleigh are coming down from the skies.
I think she confused Ezekiel with Santa clause.
Some people tell me, no it was a plane. So god was flying around on this earth? So he was from earth?

And I think you're confusing a book of fairy tales written a few millennia ago with factual information.

Your assertions on the DNA strike me in the same manner. I wanna know why you believe it's not any indication.

Because "we don't know yet" isn't the same thing as "evil aliens manipulated our DNA". We have a process for explaining differences in DNA between species, it's called evolution. We can and have observed evolution occurring, so why do you feel the need to insert some external malevolent guiding force as a cause and apparently only for our species? is it because we have unique portions to our DNA? Every species on this planet has some segment of its genetic code that is unique to that species. Why isn't it an indication? Because other evidence refutes all of the assumptions you're making to arrive at your conclusion, therefore your conclusion requires extraordinary proof. And you haven't provided it.

It's some of these people that are scared #less, and for a good reason, because those people KNOW what it means. I have to admit, it scares me too.

I find it hard to be scared of something that doesn't exist.

Well I get the picture now, you simply refuse to believe in ANYTHING.
I might has some scientific facts supported with anecdotal things, yet you have presented nothing to prove me wrong.
Its one thing to object to my findings and its something completly different to prove it wrong.
Honestly, at this point I would accept anything other than you saying I don't have proof.
I think its a cop out.
I have something, and it might not be proof, at least in a complete form in regards to the whole picture.
Yet you have offered nothing in return.

What is your take on the spirit, I know I'm right, how do you know I'm wrong?

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by itsthetooth

 

Well I think that sometimes those authors are forced into a certain catagory, going against their personal beliefs in the issue.
Such is the case with mine being in the highly speculative category.
I'm so sure on this that I would be my life on it, yet I'm pushed into this category. It's more an issue of others beliefs.
I believe the same things that are in the bible, they were just obviously taken out of context.
It's not even an issue of assuming that, I'm beyond that, I'm actually trying to figure out how and why it was out of context to begin with and I'm also getting answers there as well. It's meaning appears to simply have been lost, and mind control is obviously used when contact is made.

Pushed into what category? The work of von Däniken has been repeatedly shown to be a fabrication, so I classify it as fiction, albeit unintentional fiction. If anyone "pushed him into a category", it was himself.

The whole idea of god speaking to us, yet never showing his face raised serious questions, along with hiding behind technology. The fact that the ark of the covenant was so Moses could talk to god, raised the biggest question of all. And while EVD explained this to be a radio device, he never dove into the fact that it seemed to create a contradiction.
Something was amiss. I believe that people don't lie, the person lies. There were simply to many people involved in the bible, we must be missing something.

A scientific theory isn't more or less valid based on the number of people that subscribe to it. It's validity is based on the weight of evidence. There is no objective evidence for aliens in the Bible, so it doesn't matter how many people were involved in it's fabrication.

All this time no one has realized that the word spirit was used to indicated conversation through telepathic means. Of course I confirmed this possibility by asking a hardcore christian, avid non believer of aliens in a simple test.

Except that's not how the word spirit is used in the original text. Feel free to keep taking things out of context without understanding the original material upon which the translations you're using as "proof" are based, but it undermines the credibility of your assertions.

You see, I'm agreeing with everyones findings in general except for evolution. Your telling me you don't believe in any of it. I tend to lean on the fact that someone must be on a correct path.

So you're agreeing with all of the anecdotal "evidence" that can be manipulated to say whatever you want it to, but your ignoring the scientific theory that has over 150 years of objective evidence supporting it?

Well you don't believe in religion, with good reason. The purpose and original grounds were from misdirection from god.
He stumbles over his own words many times in the bible. Or did we simply take things out of context.
Did he create us in his image, or were we exiled to earth like both parts say in the bible.
Both, in my findings. He altered our DNA, and exiled us to earth.
I have cleared up the contradictions in so many ways, that not only does it now make sense, but the truth of his deceit has been revealed.
You don't like religion because of god. I assure you its only his doings that are the problem. The rest is only reporting and events as of gods implementation.
Even at that, there are many parts where it seems like god is being up front and honest with us. It's mostly just the whole reason to exile us, it makes no sense. What did we do wrong? Eat an apple. It was nothing more than a test to see if we would obey after being abducted. Thats it. And when it didn't work, he had to make changes to us so we would obey.

No, I don't like religion because, as I've pointed out, it does more harm than good. I'm an atheist, so not liking an imaginary being seems kind of silly to me.

You can say I have no proof but the DNA tells it all. I can lead a horse to water but can't make him drink. Is it possible you simply don't want to understand this or believe in this? Most likely. It's a common reply to easterly accept things, and we all do it. Myself included. Because I'm not the best in explaining things, I would invite you to search out what I have found, and try to prove it wrong. Here is the best part. Even thought I have DNA backed up with scriptures from both the bible and findings by Zecharia Sitchin, I could say the DNA at least in some aspects is proof.

It's neither a matter of lack of understanding or lack of desire to believe on my part. I've pointed out several times where you've been mistaken regarding what is and is not possible with DNA, so I think I have a better understanding of the DNA evidence than you do. So if the foundations of your argument with respect to DNA evidence are wrong, I don't understand how you can continue to draw the same conclusions from it. It's bad science to pick your conclusion and tailor your interpretation of the data to fit that conclusion. And, again, a fraudster and a book of fairy tales is hardly a solid foundation to begin with.

Well your missing the simply fact that there must be a reason behind it, and several supporting things IMO answer it.

No, because it having a "reason" is predicated on the involvement of aliens, for which you still haven't provided objective evidence.

Well this didn't make front page in the paper, if thats what you mean, and I can see how most people wouldn't accept anything but.
I'm sorry if you feel none of this is correct. The only difference in what I believe and everyone else is there is the DNA to back it up. From the bible alone we had nothing. So you can choose to believe in something that at least has things to back it up, or things without. I'm sorry, but its the only things that makes sense. If you choose to believe in things that are full of holes and convoluted with dead end theory's, you will get nothing but more questions and more holes. I get nothing but answers, so what does that tell you?

Your interpretation of the DNA evidence has been show to be based on faulty assumptions already. That invalidates your conclusions based on the DNA evidence. I don't know how much clearer I can possible make it.

Only through the proteins, and probably the same creator, but that's it.
You are wrong about the findings not being conclusive that our DNA is altered. I'm wondering if you watched the correct video…

If you're looking to Youtube for objective scientific fact, you're barking up the wrong tree. I don't need to watch a video. I get my scientific information from things that have either been peer-reviewed directly or from sources that are based on peer-reviewed materials.

Did you understand that MtDNA does not match with our alleged creation in the bible?

You're begging the question by assuming that the Bible must be correct instead of all of the evidence we've gathered.

Did you understand that we are missing 2 decimals of our lineage?

Only if you take the Bible literally, regardless of the fact that it's in direct conflict with the evidence gathered to date.

Did you understand that Gene splicing is a process that is only occurring in a LAB?

You still haven't defined gene splicing as you understand it. I'm pretty sure that I can show you a naturally occurring genetic process that you would view as gene splicing.

Did you understand that not only do we have 6 segments inverted, but the spirals are reversed making obvious someone altered our DNA?

And? We're not the only species that have Z-DNA and, like everything else you've pointed, there's a completely natural explanation for it that doesn't involved some kind of sinister plot perpetrated by evil aliens.

Did you understand that these findings appear to date or predate our existence on earth?

Only if you take the Bible literally.

Did you not understand that gene fusing is also a LAB technique and also only possible in a LAB?

You don't seem to understand, even thought I've said it twice before and provided exampled, that gene fusion occurs in nature.

Even if you did understand all these, it would appear you might not understand what it means.
It means we are much older than thought, god is not our creator, and we were not whole upon our placement here.
I don't have to prove it's disabled powers, its common sense that something is disabled, and with all the things that support it, it looks like powers. Even if I"m wrong, why would someone alter our DNA? Again its common sense, to control us.

Except that all of your claims are based on factual inaccuracies.

reply to post by itsthetooth

 

Well I would ask you the same thing.
I have several things saying this is the case.
Do you have anything that says its wrong?

I have no idea which part of my post you're referring to here since you slapped this in at the end and didn't use the quote function properly.

reply to post by itsthetooth

 

Ya I see the problem here, everyone else is wrong and your right.

Everyone? No, just those that base their work on a book of fairy tales, three fraudsters, and a boatload of scientific inaccuracies.

reply to post by itsthetooth

 

How can you blame me for pseudoscience, then you come back with way off assumptions about the DNA being an unknown?

I didn't say that the DNA evidence was unknown, I said that the origin of the unique portions of our DNA is unknown. Big difference. Further, the intellectually honest path when something is unknown is to say that it's unknown. Not insert aliens or God or a giant pink unicorn into the equation when there's no objective evidence for it.

Gene splicing changes the color of the laminate. It's odd how Pye says its fact, and you for some reason say it's not. Ok, I know that Pye has dealt with many LABS, do you have more experience then he does? show me one person that claims its not fact.

Show me a substantiated citation with references that makes the same claim. You're making an extraordinary claim and you're backing it with Youtube videos. Sorry, but there's an extraordinary burden of proof to be met and you're simply not providing it.

You think those changes in the DNA are from evolution. So no other life here on earth has those changes, so another words we are the ONLY thing on this planet that has evolved.

The fact that you make this statement displays a lack of understanding of the evolutionary process.

Makes no sense to me, reminds me of the convo with my GF mother about telepathy and aliens.
She is an AVID non believer in aliens and legalistic christian. When I asked her what she thought about voices entering her mind she thought it could be a spirit or a ghost.
The argument deepened to the Ezekiel chapter telling us that god visited us in a space ship.
Space ship wasn't the exact text, but she claims her findings were that it was a chariot and not a ufo.
So another words as the sky's open up and the clouds part, she is claiming that horses and a sleigh are coming down from the skies.
I think she confused Ezekiel with Santa clause.
Some people tell me, no it was a plane. So god was flying around on this earth? So he was from earth?

And I think you're confusing a book of fairy tales written a few millennia ago with factual information.

Your assertions on the DNA strike me in the same manner. I wanna know why you believe it's not any indication.

Because "we don't know yet" isn't the same thing as "evil aliens manipulated our DNA". We have a process for explaining differences in DNA between species, it's called evolution. We can and have observed evolution occurring, so why do you feel the need to insert some external malevolent guiding force as a cause and apparently only for our species? is it because we have unique portions to our DNA? Every species on this planet has some segment of its genetic code that is unique to that species. Why isn't it an indication? Because other evidence refutes all of the assumptions you're making to arrive at your conclusion, therefore your conclusion requires extraordinary proof. And you haven't provided it.

It's some of these people that are scared #less, and for a good reason, because those people KNOW what it means. I have to admit, it scares me too.

I find it hard to be scared of something that doesn't exist.

I'm sorry, I'm not able to find a single piece of anything that says I'm wrong here.
Can you help with anything other than saying I don't have proof?

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by itsthetooth

 

Well I think that sometimes those authors are forced into a certain catagory, going against their personal beliefs in the issue.
Such is the case with mine being in the highly speculative category.
I'm so sure on this that I would be my life on it, yet I'm pushed into this category. It's more an issue of others beliefs.
I believe the same things that are in the bible, they were just obviously taken out of context.
It's not even an issue of assuming that, I'm beyond that, I'm actually trying to figure out how and why it was out of context to begin with and I'm also getting answers there as well. It's meaning appears to simply have been lost, and mind control is obviously used when contact is made.

Pushed into what category? The work of von Däniken has been repeatedly shown to be a fabrication, so I classify it as fiction, albeit unintentional fiction. If anyone "pushed him into a category", it was himself.

The whole idea of god speaking to us, yet never showing his face raised serious questions, along with hiding behind technology. The fact that the ark of the covenant was so Moses could talk to god, raised the biggest question of all. And while EVD explained this to be a radio device, he never dove into the fact that it seemed to create a contradiction.
Something was amiss. I believe that people don't lie, the person lies. There were simply to many people involved in the bible, we must be missing something.

A scientific theory isn't more or less valid based on the number of people that subscribe to it. It's validity is based on the weight of evidence. There is no objective evidence for aliens in the Bible, so it doesn't matter how many people were involved in it's fabrication.

All this time no one has realized that the word spirit was used to indicated conversation through telepathic means. Of course I confirmed this possibility by asking a hardcore christian, avid non believer of aliens in a simple test.

Except that's not how the word spirit is used in the original text. Feel free to keep taking things out of context without understanding the original material upon which the translations you're using as "proof" are based, but it undermines the credibility of your assertions.

You see, I'm agreeing with everyones findings in general except for evolution. Your telling me you don't believe in any of it. I tend to lean on the fact that someone must be on a correct path.

So you're agreeing with all of the anecdotal "evidence" that can be manipulated to say whatever you want it to, but your ignoring the scientific theory that has over 150 years of objective evidence supporting it?

Well you don't believe in religion, with good reason. The purpose and original grounds were from misdirection from god.
He stumbles over his own words many times in the bible. Or did we simply take things out of context.
Did he create us in his image, or were we exiled to earth like both parts say in the bible.
Both, in my findings. He altered our DNA, and exiled us to earth.
I have cleared up the contradictions in so many ways, that not only does it now make sense, but the truth of his deceit has been revealed.
You don't like religion because of god. I assure you its only his doings that are the problem. The rest is only reporting and events as of gods implementation.
Even at that, there are many parts where it seems like god is being up front and honest with us. It's mostly just the whole reason to exile us, it makes no sense. What did we do wrong? Eat an apple. It was nothing more than a test to see if we would obey after being abducted. Thats it. And when it didn't work, he had to make changes to us so we would obey.

No, I don't like religion because, as I've pointed out, it does more harm than good. I'm an atheist, so not liking an imaginary being seems kind of silly to me.

You can say I have no proof but the DNA tells it all. I can lead a horse to water but can't make him drink. Is it possible you simply don't want to understand this or believe in this? Most likely. It's a common reply to easterly accept things, and we all do it. Myself included. Because I'm not the best in explaining things, I would invite you to search out what I have found, and try to prove it wrong. Here is the best part. Even thought I have DNA backed up with scriptures from both the bible and findings by Zecharia Sitchin, I could say the DNA at least in some aspects is proof.

It's neither a matter of lack of understanding or lack of desire to believe on my part. I've pointed out several times where you've been mistaken regarding what is and is not possible with DNA, so I think I have a better understanding of the DNA evidence than you do. So if the foundations of your argument with respect to DNA evidence are wrong, I don't understand how you can continue to draw the same conclusions from it. It's bad science to pick your conclusion and tailor your interpretation of the data to fit that conclusion. And, again, a fraudster and a book of fairy tales is hardly a solid foundation to begin with.

Well your missing the simply fact that there must be a reason behind it, and several supporting things IMO answer it.

No, because it having a "reason" is predicated on the involvement of aliens, for which you still haven't provided objective evidence.

Well this didn't make front page in the paper, if thats what you mean, and I can see how most people wouldn't accept anything but.
I'm sorry if you feel none of this is correct. The only difference in what I believe and everyone else is there is the DNA to back it up. From the bible alone we had nothing. So you can choose to believe in something that at least has things to back it up, or things without. I'm sorry, but its the only things that makes sense. If you choose to believe in things that are full of holes and convoluted with dead end theory's, you will get nothing but more questions and more holes. I get nothing but answers, so what does that tell you?

Your interpretation of the DNA evidence has been show to be based on faulty assumptions already. That invalidates your conclusions based on the DNA evidence. I don't know how much clearer I can possible make it.

Only through the proteins, and probably the same creator, but that's it.
You are wrong about the findings not being conclusive that our DNA is altered. I'm wondering if you watched the correct video…

If you're looking to Youtube for objective scientific fact, you're barking up the wrong tree. I don't need to watch a video. I get my scientific information from things that have either been peer-reviewed directly or from sources that are based on peer-reviewed materials.

Did you understand that MtDNA does not match with our alleged creation in the bible?

You're begging the question by assuming that the Bible must be correct instead of all of the evidence we've gathered.

Did you understand that we are missing 2 decimals of our lineage?

Only if you take the Bible literally, regardless of the fact that it's in direct conflict with the evidence gathered to date.

Did you understand that Gene splicing is a process that is only occurring in a LAB?

You still haven't defined gene splicing as you understand it. I'm pretty sure that I can show you a naturally occurring genetic process that you would view as gene splicing.

Did you understand that not only do we have 6 segments inverted, but the spirals are reversed making obvious someone altered our DNA?

And? We're not the only species that have Z-DNA and, like everything else you've pointed, there's a completely natural explanation for it that doesn't involved some kind of sinister plot perpetrated by evil aliens.

Did you understand that these findings appear to date or predate our existence on earth?

Only if you take the Bible literally.

Did you not understand that gene fusing is also a LAB technique and also only possible in a LAB?

You don't seem to understand, even thought I've said it twice before and provided exampled, that gene fusion occurs in nature.

Even if you did understand all these, it would appear you might not understand what it means.
It means we are much older than thought, god is not our creator, and we were not whole upon our placement here.
I don't have to prove it's disabled powers, its common sense that something is disabled, and with all the things that support it, it looks like powers. Even if I"m wrong, why would someone alter our DNA? Again its common sense, to control us.

Except that all of your claims are based on factual inaccuracies.

reply to post by itsthetooth

 

Well I would ask you the same thing.
I have several things saying this is the case.
Do you have anything that says its wrong?

I have no idea which part of my post you're referring to here since you slapped this in at the end and didn't use the quote function properly.

reply to post by itsthetooth

 

Ya I see the problem here, everyone else is wrong and your right.

Everyone? No, just those that base their work on a book of fairy tales, three fraudsters, and a boatload of scientific inaccuracies.

reply to post by itsthetooth

 

How can you blame me for pseudoscience, then you come back with way off assumptions about the DNA being an unknown?

I didn't say that the DNA evidence was unknown, I said that the origin of the unique portions of our DNA is unknown. Big difference. Further, the intellectually honest path when something is unknown is to say that it's unknown. Not insert aliens or God or a giant pink unicorn into the equation when there's no objective evidence for it.

Gene splicing changes the color of the laminate. It's odd how Pye says its fact, and you for some reason say it's not. Ok, I know that Pye has dealt with many LABS, do you have more experience then he does? show me one person that claims its not fact.

Show me a substantiated citation with references that makes the same claim. You're making an extraordinary claim and you're backing it with Youtube videos. Sorry, but there's an extraordinary burden of proof to be met and you're simply not providing it.

You think those changes in the DNA are from evolution. So no other life here on earth has those changes, so another words we are the ONLY thing on this planet that has evolved.

The fact that you make this statement displays a lack of understanding of the evolutionary process.

Makes no sense to me, reminds me of the convo with my GF mother about telepathy and aliens.
She is an AVID non believer in aliens and legalistic christian. When I asked her what she thought about voices entering her mind she thought it could be a spirit or a ghost.
The argument deepened to the Ezekiel chapter telling us that god visited us in a space ship.
Space ship wasn't the exact text, but she claims her findings were that it was a chariot and not a ufo.
So another words as the sky's open up and the clouds part, she is claiming that horses and a sleigh are coming down from the skies.
I think she confused Ezekiel with Santa clause.
Some people tell me, no it was a plane. So god was flying around on this earth? So he was from earth?

And I think you're confusing a book of fairy tales written a few millennia ago with factual information.

Your assertions on the DNA strike me in the same manner. I wanna know why you believe it's not any indication.

Because "we don't know yet" isn't the same thing as "evil aliens manipulated our DNA". We have a process for explaining differences in DNA between species, it's called evolution. We can and have observed evolution occurring, so why do you feel the need to insert some external malevolent guiding force as a cause and apparently only for our species? is it because we have unique portions to our DNA? Every species on this planet has some segment of its genetic code that is unique to that species. Why isn't it an indication? Because other evidence refutes all of the assumptions you're making to arrive at your conclusion, therefore your conclusion requires extraordinary proof. And you haven't provided it.

It's some of these people that are scared #less, and for a good reason, because those people KNOW what it means. I have to admit, it scares me too.

I find it hard to be scared of something that doesn't exist.

Where did you get an idea that I inserted aliens into this? It's in the bible, but just because YOU don't believe in that doesn't mean its wrong.
Honestly your making your self look pretty bad here making assumptions like that.
You actually believe that all those people in the bible lied?

Originally posted by UB2120
reply to post by thecrazydude11

 

It does actually say something about it in the bible. One thing you need to consider is that the bible is not the only and final word of God. There is truth in nearly all religions. You just need a spiritual eye to preceive the truth within each. But if you are stuck in the idea that only the bible contains info about God then consider this passage:

John 14:2 - Jesus said, "In my Father's house (universe) there are many mansions (planets).

John 10:16 - Jesus said, "I have sheep (people) not of this fold (planet).

Remember he had to speak to them in terms they could understand.

Another thing to consider is in the time of human existance (nearly 1 million years) the bible is realitively new. It is said that the oldest passages from psalms could be 7000 years old and that is still pretty new considering the whole of human history. So no one can say what we've known and then forgot over the millenia. We take for granted the passing on of knowledge. In the days before printing is was very difficult for knowledge to last. Within a few generations it is either lost or badly distorted.

I think you should check out the info in The Urantia Book ( www.urantia.org... ) as it has a very plausible story for creation.

I will at some point and TY.

Originally posted by UB2120
reply to post by itsthetooth

 

I must admit that I have not read all 30+ pages of your post, so if you've explained who you believe is pretending to be our creator I apologize for asking, who is pretending to be our creator?

In my opinion, logical thinking will take you back to one creator. One uncaused cause. All life and existance sprang from this First Source and Center that we call God.

The Universal Father is the God of all creation, the First Source and Center of all things and beings. First think of God as a creator, then as a controller, and lastly as an infinite upholder. The truth about the Universal Father had begun to dawn upon mankind when the prophet said: “You, God, are alone; there is none beside you. You have created the heaven and the heaven of heavens, with all their hosts; you preserve and control them. By the Sons of God were the universes made. The Creator covers himself with light as with a garment and stretches out the heavens as a curtain.” Only the concept of the Universal Father — one God in the place of many gods — enabled mortal man to comprehend the Father as divine creator and infinite controller.

The myriads of planetary systems were all made to be eventually inhabited by many different types of intelligent creatures, beings who could know God, receive the divine affection, and love him in return. The universe of universes is the work of God and the dwelling place of his diverse creatures. “God created the heavens and formed the earth; he established the universe and created this world not in vain; he formed it to be inhabited.”

There certainly could be many people who believe in and love God for selfish reasons, but I would not say that is true for everyone. Wholehearted belief in and love for God brings a peace that passes all human understanding. There are no words to express the souls attitude of thanksgiving.

Many people say, "You can't prove God exists" and I say to these people "You can't prove he doesn't exist!" To me it's obvious that there is Intelligent design in everything.

I was referring to god as not our real creator.
Without any specific guidance I have found a plethora of both scientific evidence that proves it, and a plethora of anecdotal evidence as well.

We were tricked, and enslaved.
It's hard to imagine but with the powers of forced amnesia, (TGA) interstellar travel, the ability to abduct people, and mind control make it so easy to do.
You can even see mind control all through out the bible. I could never understand how god could kill mass amounts of people and simultaneously have people believe and love him.

It reminds me of the common abduction stories where people claim to be mind controlled, taken in will, and have painful experiments done on them. After some time, if they do get their memory back, they feel good about the experience and claim it was all done for good reasons yet have nothing positive to say about the experience itself.

Even FEMA has chapter 13 to prepare response crews on how to handle extraterrestrial encounters and incidents.
It's the scariest thing I have ever heard.
Your light might stop working.
The car engine could stall and not start.
You could lose radio contact with the dispatcher.

WOW.
It sounds like something from a movie, but its real.

reply to post by itsthetooth


I have no doubt that people from other worlds have visited our planet. I also find it plausible that these said people could have abducted some people, similar to what we do to animals. To say these people are our creators does not make sense. For one, why? Why create beings on a distance planet and hide your existance as their creators? The scientific evidence you speak of is easily explanible using the account of our creation in The Urantia Book. Because the spiritual administration of this planet was disrupted due to the Lucifer rebellion, which made this planet and the other 36 involved isolated, we have not progressed as we could have. It is my belief that the beings visiting our planet are from these other isolated worlds. I say that because on a "normal" planet space travel would not be needed. We would have grown up knowing of life in the universe. There is a limited amount of inter-planetary communication that happens as well. So there would be no reason to want to explore outer-space because we would know that we will in the life to come. These other worlds that were isolated are in a similar boat, but some are apparently more advanced since they can travel here.

To me the existance of other alien races only adds fuel to the fire that God does exist and created us. I think that is the reason disclosure hasn't happened yet, it would stake too many peoples faith of all religions.

reply to post by itsthetooth

Well I get the picture now, you simply refuse to believe in ANYTHING.

Excellent strawman attack. No, I just don’t believe in your conclusions based on a book of fairy tales, three fraudsters, and your repeated scientific errors.

I might has some scientific facts supported with anecdotal things, yet you have presented nothing to prove me wrong.

If they’re supported anecdotally, they’re not facts. Present objective evidence supporting your anecdotes and we’ll talk. You’re the one making the extraordinary claims, it’s up to you to provide the extraordinary proof. I’ve already pointed out, multiple times, where your assertions are based on fraudulent claims. This calls into question your assertions. I can’t make that any simpler or clearer.

Its one thing to object to my findings and its something completly different to prove it wrong.

Again, the burden of proof lies with you, as you’re the one making the claims.

Honestly, at this point I would accept anything other than you saying I don't have proof.

You don’t have proof. You have your fallacious interpretations of scientific evidence, belief in a book of fairy tales written a couple of millennia ago, and misplaced trust that three fraudsters are right.

I think its a cop out.

You’ve failed to address any point I’ve raised regarding the scientific inaccuracies of your claims.

I have something, and it might not be proof, at least in a complete form in regards to the whole picture.

You have all of the things I’ve listed above, which is really really really far from being “proof” of anything other than gullibility and a great imagination.

Yet you have offered nothing in return.

I’ve offered corrections to the inaccurate statements you’ve made. You’ve just ignored them. I’m not sure what else you want?

What is your take on the spirit, I know I'm right, how do you know I'm wrong?

It’s not up to me to prove you wrong. You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding about how science works.

reply to post by itsthetooth

I'm sorry, I'm not able to find a single piece of anything that says I'm wrong here.
Can you help with anything other than saying I don't have proof?

You mean like when you claimed that genetic fusion only happens in the lab?

reply to post by itsthetooth

Where did you get an idea that I inserted aliens into this?

From your OP:

If Adam and Eve, or any others, were abducted and brought to earth, it surly fits the description of what aliens do, they abduct people. Adam and Eve not realizing what has happened to them also fits the third most common element known about aliens, they erase memory (TGA).

Seems pretty clear to me.

It's in the bible, but just because YOU don't believe in that doesn't mean its wrong.

No, it’s in your interpretation of the Bible. Unless, that is, you can show me objective evidence of aliens in the Bible. Here’s a hint: you can’t – the Bible is inherently non-objective. In my opinion, it’s the worst source of “factual” information that’s openly touted as such by its adherents.

Honestly your making your self look pretty bad here making assumptions like that.

You’re making yourself look pretty bad here by not remembering that you invoked aliens in your original post in this thread.

You actually believe that all those people in the bible lied?

How can I believe that people that didn’t exist lie?

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by itsthetooth

 

Well I get the picture now, you simply refuse to believe in ANYTHING.

Excellent strawman attack. No, I just don’t believe in your conclusions based on a book of fairy tales, three fraudsters, and your repeated scientific errors.

I might has some scientific facts supported with anecdotal things, yet you have presented nothing to prove me wrong.

If they’re supported anecdotally, they’re not facts. Present objective evidence supporting your anecdotes and we’ll talk. You’re the one making the extraordinary claims, it’s up to you to provide the extraordinary proof. I’ve already pointed out, multiple times, where your assertions are based on fraudulent claims. This calls into question your assertions. I can’t make that any simpler or clearer.

Its one thing to object to my findings and its something completly different to prove it wrong.

Again, the burden of proof lies with you, as you’re the one making the claims.

Honestly, at this point I would accept anything other than you saying I don't have proof.

You don’t have proof. You have your fallacious interpretations of scientific evidence, belief in a book of fairy tales written a couple of millennia ago, and misplaced trust that three fraudsters are right.

I think its a cop out.

You’ve failed to address any point I’ve raised regarding the scientific inaccuracies of your claims.

I have something, and it might not be proof, at least in a complete form in regards to the whole picture.

You have all of the things I’ve listed above, which is really really really far from being “proof” of anything other than gullibility and a great imagination.

Yet you have offered nothing in return.

I’ve offered corrections to the inaccurate statements you’ve made. You’ve just ignored them. I’m not sure what else you want?

What is your take on the spirit, I know I'm right, how do you know I'm wrong?

It’s not up to me to prove you wrong. You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding about how science works.

reply to post by itsthetooth

 

I'm sorry, I'm not able to find a single piece of anything that says I'm wrong here.
Can you help with anything other than saying I don't have proof?

You mean like when you claimed that genetic fusion only happens in the lab?

reply to post by itsthetooth

 

Where did you get an idea that I inserted aliens into this?

From your OP:

If Adam and Eve, or any others, were abducted and brought to earth, it surly fits the description of what aliens do, they abduct people. Adam and Eve not realizing what has happened to them also fits the third most common element known about aliens, they erase memory (TGA).

Seems pretty clear to me.

It's in the bible, but just because YOU don't believe in that doesn't mean its wrong.

No, it’s in your interpretation of the Bible. Unless, that is, you can show me objective evidence of aliens in the Bible. Here’s a hint: you can’t – the Bible is inherently non-objective. In my opinion, it’s the worst source of “factual” information that’s openly touted as such by its adherents.

Honestly your making your self look pretty bad here making assumptions like that.

You’re making yourself look pretty bad here by not remembering that you invoked aliens in your original post in this thread.

You actually believe that all those people in the bible lied?

How can I believe that people that didn’t exist lie?

Well I guess your entitled to your opinion but I must say this.... it's to hard for me to dismiss so easiely with the DNA being the last thing I looked at and Zecaria sitchins work as well.
Its so odd how everything points in the same direction, and while your calling them fraudsters and fairytales, they are all from different times on this earth all with different findings and different directions, yet parts of of their and from what I can tell so far, the bible is right on.

Of course if choose to not understand it, it becomes frustrating.
I myself don't believe in magic or the unexplainable.
I think my findings speak for itself.

I don't think the bible was meant to be a fairy tale. However I will agree that how it is accepted and viewed by most today, that is a dead on analogy.
I have gone as deep as explaining why people look at it as such, but again, without an open mind, you would never get it.
I"m sorry I couldn't post all of my links on here, I have over three decades of study into the paranormal.

It appears you have chosen to believe in nothing, and that is your choice.
I see things from a different angle, if you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything. Out of all the possibilities we have come up with, evolution came in last IMO.

I think its also important to note that your just aren't claiming our bible is fake, but that all and all religions.
It's a pretty bold statement, I would trust you have something to support your belief other than you not feeling jesus in your heart.

Originally posted by UB2120
reply to post by itsthetooth

 

I have no doubt that people from other worlds have visited our planet. I also find it plausible that these said people could have abducted some people, similar to what we do to animals. To say these people are our creators does not make sense. For one, why? Why create beings on a distance planet and hide your existance as their creators? The scientific evidence you speak of is easily explanible using the account of our creation in The Urantia Book. Because the spiritual administration of this planet was disrupted due to the Lucifer rebellion, which made this planet and the other 36 involved isolated, we have not progressed as we could have. It is my belief that the beings visiting our planet are from these other isolated worlds. I say that because on a "normal" planet space travel would not be needed. We would have grown up knowing of life in the universe. There is a limited amount of inter-planetary communication that happens as well. So there would be no reason to want to explore outer-space because we would know that we will in the life to come. These other worlds that were isolated are in a similar boat, but some are apparently more advanced since they can travel here.

To me the existance of other alien races only adds fuel to the fire that God does exist and created us. I think that is the reason disclosure hasn't happened yet, it would stake too many peoples faith of all religions.

Well I agree up to the point of the person that presented himself to us as god, pretending to be our creator. It is hard to imagine life without a creator, but its also possible, like one reply I got that it's Trevor the giant celestial squid. It's scary, very scary.