It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

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

page: 36
160
<< 33  34  35    37  38  39 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 25 2011 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


I believe Gregg Braden claims that DNA has what he calls the God code ie using Hebrew and Arabic he believes he has found a way of translating DNA into a workable alphabet/language. He also states that DNA can repair itself.

Now he may or may not be on the wrong track but if he is correct would not the DNA present in all of us be able to supply this missing DNA from its memory, or are you saying that the missing DNA strands prevent that from happening. If so have you any idea what those missing strands may represent and would there be a way of reproducing them.

I understand that the third eye has attrophied is this one of the missing DNA strands?

Why are you so convinced that we are from elsewhere rather than the fact that whoever altered our DNA did so to our ancestors here on earth.

Obviously many people have esp skills is there a link with DNA and psi abilities. Does the spirit assuming we have one have DNA?

What is the purpose of DNA other than to propagate the species.

I read somewhere that bacteria have memories and are good repositeries of information ie you could put information from a computor into bacteria who multiply and pass it down through the generations and you can then get the bacteria and reassemble your information. Has anyone examined the bacteria that live on our DNA.




posted on May, 25 2011 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth

Originally posted by Butterbone

Originally posted by itsthetooth

Originally posted by Butterbone

Originally posted by itsthetooth
Give me one example of evolution or adaptation in comparison to humans. Just one, even if it's only a small percentage, I'll take it.


You'll have to explain that request. In comparison to humans? You mean evolution in humans? Animals compared to humans?

I'm not sure what you mean by that.


Well darwin claims we started from primates, give me some other examples of other such mutations of other species.


It really doesn't take much lay research to find these examples.
I don't understand how this information is in question.

Dinosaurs to birds.

Amphibians to reptiles.

Platypus from echidnas.

Hitchhikers thumb in humans.

Red Hair in humans.

Whales, Dolphins, manatees. 3 species that

Turtles.

Coelacanths and bony fish.

Water fleas and the parasitic mites that feed on them.

Cymothoa exigua, or the tongue-eating louse.

The range of environment dependent trait disparity in Darwin's own Finches.

Eurasian Doves.

Mockingbirds.

Marsupials.


Do any amount of research you want on these simple examples. I'm of the opinion, you won't. Because you already know "your truth".

Good luck with that.


Well as most that I already know about, there will be mixed sites on it.
Platypus from echidnas... while they appear to be common ancestors, it doesn't mean anything.
As with all of them including primates to humans.
Are we related, or did we evolve.
Here is the way I see it, see if you agree.
Probably one of the most important ability's with any life is the ability to reproduce.
I mean after all, life must go on right?
If these ancestors ever severed their mating ability's due to your belief of stages of evolution, then the breed would cease. to be able to intermix with the once was version.
The day I can have sex with a primate and make a baby is the day your theory is correct.
And how exactly would that work. One step could mate with the other as long as they weren't more than 2 steps away from each other?
There would have to be mass evolution being careful to not mate with each other as well.
You simply can't start a human race from Adam and Eve, and if you do thats incest. Oddly enough our genes support the idea that this might have actually happened.
While it opens up the possibility of evolution being a possibility, It doesn't explain the absence of the bible.
Our race bottle-necked right about our placement here on earth. What a coincidence.
Of course we were already 192,000 years at that point.
Even if you were correct in your assumptions of evolution with no bones or proof of stages, I don't see the significant changes needed to match, being able to occur in that time frame.

I don't think there would be any change, but I'm trying to be lenient and look at this. The sad part is we are in very bad shape if we evolved. We have over 1000% our share of gene defects by comparison to other life. We are very sickly on this planet compared to other life as well. All we do is redundantly adapt, just to survive.

Have you ever taken a look at the process for milk?
Homogenized, Pasteurized, Fortified, and optionally in lactose as well. It's redundant adaptation in an obvious form. Most would miss whats going on, but there is something much deeper going on here.
We need milk, this is why we go though this trouble. Some say we can suffice with orange juice. So why don't we? It's because the supply doesn't meet the demand so it's industrialized so we can use milk.
Same with OJ, there simply isn't enough to satisfy our overall needs in calcium.

Now we could all suck milk straight from the cows teat every day, but I don't think our creator intended each of us to own our own cow.

The reason this is what it is, is because there is something lacking on earth in diet that we need, and milk is the closest thing we can use to substitute that need.

We can even eat toilet paper, we can even add flavor to it, it doesn't mean it was our intended diet.
Trust me, if your creator was smart enough to make you, then he is smart enough to make a planet that also has the correct food for you.

Just like most of the other life on this planet. I say most, because on a rare occasion some things may not be indigenous to earth other than us.

What has happened to us is complex, cruel and cold. It's also pretty deep to see and realize. God was only interested in getting what he wanted from this planet and if it meant a few trips with abductions, food supply start up, and a little direction, so be it. If it meant using and abusing another race, he had the ability to make it happen.

His faith in our ability to preform the task was worth its weight in gold.
As you know Zecharia claims we have proof written of being enslaved. What a coincidence that the bible says we were to serve god, or was it gold.

The purpose falls true using victimology.
You have to accept the fact that there is a lot of other life out there.
You have to realize you can't see and understand them all. More importantly you probably can't trust any of them by my 3 decades of research.
They have their reasons to use and abuse anything they want to get whatever they want. In a lot of ways, we do the same thing with other life on earth. So don't be so shocked about it, it seems to be normal in the game of life.

My findings explain the misunderstandings in religion, atheists, and excludes evolution because we not only have to many things telling us it didn't happen that way, but we also have to many things telling us how it happened.

People choose to not believe in God because they think that also means you believe in the religion and faith.
That's not true, as in my case as well. It's a loaded question when peeps ask me if I believe in God. He was a real person, in a real time. Is he still alive, I highly doubt it. He would also appear to be who placed us here, and NOT our real creator. He did however give us direction which I must admit was nice.

Understanding this, its nothing more than history as far as I'm concerned. My interests pre date the bible, and I think I did a pretty good job getting to the bottom of it.


You are using assumptions, as your proof that other so called assumptions are evidence of a lack of feasibility.

Calcium as proof?? No. You forget or ignore that dietary uniformity is a fallacy, and has been since it's inception.
There is no required amount of a calcium per day or a person will be sickly. Human physiology allows for multiple ranges of items to be used, stored, and called on intermittently. Cravings that people have are proof that evolution builds systems into the overall that can drive the creature to seek what it needs, through trial and error and then through memory even if you aren't sure why you want to eat that thing so badly. Cravings are part of the instinct system, instincts are stored genetic memory, just like in other animals.

The idea that our evolution was poor or non existant because we are a sickly species that must modify it's surroundings to survive is in my opinion a big part of the proof that evolution is real.

As societies grow and as particular customs and habits put people in new situations that they must adapt to, our bodies change over time to deal with those changes. Tibetans can withstand much colder tempuratures and function their slow twitch muscles much more efficiently in low oxygen than caucasians can.

Tribal people in India can eat cobra venom raw because 120 generations or so of their people have adapted to it.
Skin pigmentation differences for UV protection.

Your examples of people being sickly are anecdotal. That means they aren't based on real data. Those examples are simple observations without consideration or proof of the mechanisms driving what is being observed.

In Fact I'll use your own examples, as proof of evolution. Since evolution is adaptation and change based on stimulus inside of a system either internal or external.

There is proof that the application of science to daily life has caused harm to the human species in the form that being part of a closed system we are closing ourselves off from the system even more. Once we isolate ourselves from the bacterias, and viruses, that evolve WITH us since we are all interdependent, then we become more prone to lapsing out of phase with the rest of the planet and the creatures on it. when that happens we no longer have immunity to the mutated and or evolved versions of bacteria and viruses that became harmless to us in the past. Sound Familiar???

If you live in a sterile environment for 10 years, and then go outside and roll around in the dirt for an hour, you will be terribly ill, or dead, very soon without massive amounts of medical treatment. Because your body has become out of tune with the adaptation and change happening around you. As Darwin predicted, you have removed yourself from the system and became too specialized to deal with the changes happening around you, so the system as a whole will phase you out.
Or you change the system SO much that the system cannot adapt to YOU quickly enough, and you break the system. But without a back up plan or way to generate all the things you needed from that system you just broke, you are going to suffer losses, or adapt to the lack of the system.

See.

People have become so disconnected from the natural system of interconnectedness in this Closed System planet, that without the scientific ability to correct things mechanically, we would have died off already probably.

Lactose intolerance and all of that junk happens as a result of generations of people drinking too much milk, because it was a luxery that became common place during industrialization. Pastuerizing and all that, including using enormous amounts of bovine hormones to get the cows to produce more milk, for the sake of artificial financial profits can also be seen to work together with SO many other elements of modified human existance that we now have in the span of 3 generations of humans, introduced literally Dozens of new and artificial detractors into nearly every part of the system that was once much more natural and direct.

But knowing this, we all still assume that things are harmless because we can't see any "long term" harm done in 6 and 8 month studies for products, chemicals and processes that will be working on generations of people spanning hundreds of years.

8 months is not long enough to know whether a food coloring will create a neurological reaction in feverish children that could emulate encephalitis and kill them. Obviously it isn't. Or we would not have had children Dying from Red Dye #7 in the mid 90's until that dye was banned.

But instead of looking at the reality of the science and the long term proof that is already available. You choose aliens, and god, and a bible.

It's ridiculous. And honestly it's lazy. You want to assign blame or fame to an imaginary thing instead of looking around and realizing that our own greed, our own short sightedness, and our own ignorance are to blame for 100% of the actual problems, attrocities, and issues we feel are placed on our shoulders by the invisible magic Good man or the invisible magic Bad man.

You go one step further and try to imply that the problems are the result of not even being from this world.

There is actual proof. I've laid it out in two posts. You are choosing to ignore it and apply your own anecdotal "evidence" as proof you are right. Well again, good luck with that. Maybe you can achieve so high as to be the next L Ron Hubbard. Though, he's already beaten you to these conclusions, made a fortune, died and left a whole religion behind that is ultimately more complex, but just as crazy as the ideas you are spouting here.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


There is no gap in knowledge, as you say, its explained in my findings.

You’re confusing a hypothesis for evidence. The giant pink unicorn hypothesis has the same amount of objective evidence for it as yours at this point. Which is to say, none. Therefore, there is a gap.


4 million people aren't claiming to see pink unicorns, they are claiming to have ET contacts.

You can keep saying it’s 4M people that have confirmed sightings of “aliens” until your fingers fall off from typing it. Until you can provide objective evidence for it, I smell feces.


Good question. After all we don't have memories of pink unicorns.

People claim to see cryptids all the time.


Thats a valid statement. And what exactly did they get out of it?

The attention seekers get attention, the others get validation in their minds.


Altered genes showing proof by the change of the laminate color and inverted sections. Please explain, I'm all eyes (:

I just did – the naturally occurring genetic mechanisms of duplication, insertion, translocation, and inversion all match up with what Pye calls “gene splicing” i.e. it doesn’t only occur in a lab setting.


I didn't know this. I thought this whole time is was a question of proving aliens exist but your saying its been proven they don't exist. Can you please explain the galactic voyages we have taken to visit other planets and knock on other doors?

Straw man argument. I’ve pointed out which specific “facts” of Sitchin’s have been found to be incorrect, and mentioned nothing about his claims of the existence of aliens. It’s up to the person making the positive claim, i.e. “aliens exist”, to prove their claim.


I look at this as though they are simply teaching wrong. It's sad.

The objective evidence says otherwise.


Any links or examples I can google ??????????

Sure, even though you’ve strenuously avoided giving any kind of evidence that supports your hypothesis, I’ll give you some…


This damage can be the result of endogenous processes such as errors in replication of DNA, the intrinsic chemical instability of certain DNA bases or from attack by free radicals generated during metabolism.

In this context, mutations are being referred to as damage, even though not all mutations are harmful. Some are beneficial, some are neutral.


Integrative and conjugative elements (ICEs) are self-transmissible mobile genetic elements that are increasingly recognized to contribute to lateral gene flow in prokaryotes.

This one describes horizontal gene transfer.


Ok I can do that, but are you saying that only the truthful findings get into books?

I’m saying that evidence presented that hasn’t at the very least been presented for scrutiny via peer-review is suspect at best. I’m going to use a little poetic license and hyperbole here, but the essence of it is correct: Keep in mind that, at the end of the day, deep down, every scientist hates every other scientist because they’re afraid of getting one-upped or not being the first to find something. Peer-review ensures that only the strongest data, and therefore the hypotheses that are built on that data, are going to survive.


Well you said it yourself, it never made it out of the idea of a theory. I know not everything is easy to prove, but come on. This should be easy guys and there is simply no valid excuse. At least aliens erase memory, hide proof and don't live here.

You just exposed the fact that you have no idea what constitutes a scientific theory. Lucky for you, I happen to keep a little statement handy to copy/paste in situations where I see someone make the same mistake:

From the US National Academy of Sciences:

The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence. Many scientific theories are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially. For example, no new evidence will demonstrate that the Earth does not orbit around the sun (heliocentric theory), or that living things are not made of cells (cell theory), that matter is not composed of atoms, or that the surface of the Earth is not divided into solid plates that have moved over geological timescales (the theory of plate tectonics). One of the most useful properties of scientific theories is that they can be used to make predictions about natural events or phenomena that have not yet been observed.

And from the American Association for the Advancement of Science:

A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world. The theory of biological evolution is more than "just a theory." It is as factual an explanation of the universe as the atomic theory of matter or the germ theory of disease. Our understanding of gravity is still a work in progress. But the phenomenon of gravity, like evolution, is an accepted fact.



It was just a metaphor. I have yet to find anything related to DNA that changes its own species.

No, you said that “DNA in my understanding is digital”. No metaphor there. No air quotes around digital. You were just trying to sound like you know what you’re talking about when it comes to DNA even though it’s been abundantly clear that you don’t from your posts thus far. You’ve already claimed that fusion and splicing can only be performed by a guiding force when both have been observed to happen naturally.


No I'm saying we should be sick about as often and frequently as the others. Imagine your first day here on earth with no shots or medical attention. And the rest of your life without medical attention. Honestly, would you still be alive? Be honest.

And you have some data that shows that we get sick more frequently than animals? And I’m sure that you also have data that shows that animals that get sick have a much lower mortality rate than humans that get sick?


It's adaptation, and it's so obvious I don't understand how you don't see it. But you thing we evolved to this. Come on man. We de evolved if we did.

It’s exceedingly clear that your understanding of evolution is deficient.


And I look at the ideas of evolution as such as well.

Except if I send a team of archeologists or paleontologists out to find evidence of evolution, they will.

And I’ll repost this from the end of my last reply to you, in case you missed it:

It's pretty clear at this point that you don't understand what constitutes objective evidence, that you're not willing to post the evidence that you claim to have, that your understanding of evolution and science in general is sorely lacking, that your understanding of genetics is solely based on the work of Pye and therefore suspect because his claims of what can only happen in a lab are just plain wrong, and that you'd rather believe in an attractive lie because it supports your hypothesis. I don't see a reason to continue this conversation until you post some of your supposed "research" on the subject for people to review.

edit on 25/5/2011 by iterationzero because: (no reason given)


Well like I said if you would like me to start posting 3 decades of study of the paranormal, I can do that for you.

Start here.

www.youtube.com...

Matched stories from people that don't even know each other but were abducted in the same event. And no unicorns either.

www.youtube.com...

An abduction captured on security camera. Other links its hosted by Jonathon Frakes.

www.youtube.com...

Excellent capture in this one and the sound puts chills up your spine. She doesn't realize whats in the sky at first because she is looking through the viewer, took her off guard.

www.youtube.com...

The only possible friendly contact I have seen in 3 decades. It would appear they are trying to communicate. What were we suppose to do especially when we aren't prepared and told to not believe in these things. It could have been chalked up to imagination but witnessed by thousands and was followed up minutes later by another craft. independent footage is rampant over the net. The military tried to squash this by recreating it with flares, it was an epic fail.
ET wants to talk but we are told they aren't real. IMO this doesn't mean their intentions are good.

www.youtube.com...

A weird one that just cant be explained.

How about the guy that is able to summon UFO's. You have to see it to believe it.

www.youtube.com...


This is only about an hours worth but it's a good start. Hey send me some links too on evolution !!!!!!!!!
Let the debunking begin.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth

Originally posted by thecrazydude11

Originally posted by itsthetooth

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


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.

I'm sorry that you don't have the ability to dismiss a lie, regardless of how attractive it is, even when it's been shown to be a lie. When you make that lie one of the foundations for your assertions, it automatically calls into questions the means by which you arrived at them.

Well what exactly are you calling the lie? The DNA? The bible? Pye's work? Eric's work? My assertions from my 3 decades of paranormal study? Or the fact that they all proved points in my findings?


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.

Sitchin, von Däniken, and Pye are all from essentially the same time. All of their work is essentially based on a very loose interpretation of the Bible that substitutes "aliens" for "God". You're trying to act like these are all somehow independent pieces of evidence when three of them are based on the fourth. It doesn't take an enormous amount of critical thinking skill to understand why they all "point in the same direction".

Well I honestly didn't know they did in full detail until now, but thanks for confirming it.


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.

Except they don't and I've clearly explained why.


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.

Until you can show objectively (i.e. not via interpretation) how the events depicted in the Bible are factually accurate, all interpretations carry the same weight of evidence. And your research is worthless unless you're willing to present it in a way that it can be scrutinized and peer-reviewed. I've seen you claim that you've been investigating this for 30 years. It's time for you to put up or shut up.

Np, google ufos / aliens / abductions / real footage / and watch as many videos as you can, read as many books as you can. Then make your claim.


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.

Again with the strawman attack… I should send you a book on logical fallacies. I believe in plenty of things, just not the wild speculation you're engaging in based on a book of fairy tales, three fraudsters, and assertions that are scientifically and factually incorrect. Evolution doesn't care what your opinion is - it has the overwhelming weight of evidence behind it. Real, objective, observable, testable, factual evidence. The fact that you choose to ignore it in favor of things that have been shown to be lies is astonishing.

Where is the proof of us transcending from primates? Where is proof that explains why we lost our hair and started wearing clothing? Why didn't they all evolve? Why did the mid stages disappear and leave no trace? Assuming we did evolve, how come primates are so much better off in so many ways than humans?
Please pull your head out on this. Your trying to tell me we went from swinging on trees to isolating ourselves in buildings with heat and AC because we could no longer endure the natural elements. We didn't evolve, it looks more like we de evolved. Just look at the medical issues we are all face with on a day to day basis, I would even venture your on medication or have been like most others have. How much medication is primates on? I'm sorry its the stupidest thing I have ever heard. And if you think the elements are fine in certain parts of the world you are correct but your also saying we were only suppose to live there. Another words we weren't suppose to grow.
It's not our planet, get it?


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.

Again, your reasoning is backwards - I don't have to prove all religions wrong. It is up to adherents to those religions to provide evidence that they are factually correct. None have.


Agreed, only based on the fact that it has been taken out of context.
edit on 24-5-2011 by itsthetooth because: added


I hate to agree with iterationzero but in away he's right, you can't take the bible literally, you got to remember that the bible was written in riddles and also the vetican have tons of bible pages that they still have hidden deep in that place, so you got to consider that you maybe wrong about this theory, it may seem like your right but it's unlikely, although for the past few days iv'e talked about this subject with pastors and they agreed that heaven might actually be a planet, so your right on that topic


Ok and what do you think is the most likely means to get from planet to another?
Car / bus / train / plane, ufo?

Well they said god lol



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


There is no gap in knowledge, as you say, its explained in my findings.

You’re confusing a hypothesis for evidence. The giant pink unicorn hypothesis has the same amount of objective evidence for it as yours at this point. Which is to say, none. Therefore, there is a gap.

Some polls suggest that up to 20 million Americans have seen a UFO and four million claim to actually have been abducted by aliens.
creation.com...


4 million people aren't claiming to see pink unicorns, they are claiming to have ET contacts.

You can keep saying it’s 4M people that have confirmed sightings of “aliens” until your fingers fall off from typing it. Until you can provide objective evidence for it, I smell feces.

Oh the confirmed sightings are way more than 4 million, gasp, suggestions are around 20 million. I even seen one myself just a few weeks ago for the first time in over 3 decades of interest. A little secrete I'll let you in on.... if you never look up, you wont see them. LOL.


Good question. After all we don't have memories of pink unicorns.

People claim to see cryptids all the time.

Where, how many, and how often? It could be a species missed.


Thats a valid statement. And what exactly did they get out of it?

The attention seekers get attention, the others get validation in their minds.
So that people like yourself can look at them like they are crazy. Honestly, come on.


Altered genes showing proof by the change of the laminate color and inverted sections. Please explain, I'm all eyes (:

I just did – the naturally occurring genetic mechanisms of duplication, insertion, translocation, and inversion all match up with what Pye calls “gene splicing” i.e. it doesn’t only occur in a lab setting.
Give me a link please.


I didn't know this. I thought this whole time is was a question of proving aliens exist but your saying its been proven they don't exist. Can you please explain the galactic voyages we have taken to visit other planets and knock on other doors?

Straw man argument. I’ve pointed out which specific “facts” of Sitchin’s have been found to be incorrect, and mentioned nothing about his claims of the existence of aliens. It’s up to the person making the positive claim, i.e. “aliens exist”, to prove their claim.
Understandable but you don't know enough about them, and whats involved to consider the possibilities as to why we don't have proof. They simply don't want us to. Sometimes we do have proof and scientists will never say it's an alien, again because they have to have something to compare it to. Would you know if its an alien and which planet its from and that in fact its not from earth?



I look at this as though they are simply teaching wrong. It's sad.

The objective evidence says otherwise.
But there is no evidence. Plastic mach ups is not evidence, sorry. If I only needed a plastic alien to prove you wrong I would have been done long ago.



Any links or examples I can google ??????????

Sure, even though you’ve strenuously avoided giving any kind of evidence that supports your hypothesis, I’ll give you some…


This damage can be the result of endogenous processes such as errors in replication of DNA, the intrinsic chemical instability of certain DNA bases or from attack by free radicals generated during metabolism.

In this context, mutations are being referred to as damage, even though not all mutations are harmful. Some are beneficial, some are neutral.

Ok and without proof of stages this all happened to many at the same time ??? I see incest here.


Integrative and conjugative elements (ICEs) are self-transmissible mobile genetic elements that are increasingly recognized to contribute to lateral gene flow in prokaryotes.

This one describes horizontal gene transfer.

And again this all still doesn't explain the MASS changes in such a short time, and leaving vestigial organs, and leaving no trace of transgression, and not occurring to all of them. No proof, no proof, no proof. I'm sorry but I didn't build my findings on this type of looseness.


Ok I can do that, but are you saying that only the truthful findings get into books?

I’m saying that evidence presented that hasn’t at the very least been presented for scrutiny via peer-review is suspect at best. I’m going to use a little poetic license and hyperbole here, but the essence of it is correct: Keep in mind that, at the end of the day, deep down, every scientist hates every other scientist because they’re afraid of getting one-upped or not being the first to find something. Peer-review ensures that only the strongest data, and therefore the hypotheses that are built on that data, are going to survive.

Which is how I looked at my findings as well. Of course what I consider strong with my background could differ from others.


Well you said it yourself, it never made it out of the idea of a theory. I know not everything is easy to prove, but come on. This should be easy guys and there is simply no valid excuse. At least aliens erase memory, hide proof and don't live here.

You just exposed the fact that you have no idea what constitutes a scientific theory. Lucky for you, I happen to keep a little statement handy to copy/paste in situations where I see someone make the same mistake:

From the US National Academy of Sciences:

The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence. Many scientific theories are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially. For example, no new evidence will demonstrate that the Earth does not orbit around the sun (heliocentric theory), or that living things are not made of cells (cell theory), that matter is not composed of atoms, or that the surface of the Earth is not divided into solid plates that have moved over geological timescales (the theory of plate tectonics). One of the most useful properties of scientific theories is that they can be used to make predictions about natural events or phenomena that have not yet been observed.


And like I explained (you called a stawman argument) scientists will never say anything is proof untill we have gone to their planet and compared DNA, and that is a fact. So its a catch 22 here, but at least I have a reason to not have accepted proof.
Whats yours?

And from the American Association for the Advancement of Science:

A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world. The theory of biological evolution is more than "just a theory." It is as factual an explanation of the universe as the atomic theory of matter or the germ theory of disease. Our understanding of gravity is still a work in progress. But the phenomenon of gravity, like evolution, is an accepted fact.



It was just a metaphor. I have yet to find anything related to DNA that changes its own species.

No, you said that “DNA in my understanding is digital”. No metaphor there. No air quotes around digital. You were just trying to sound like you know what you’re talking about when it comes to DNA even though it’s been abundantly clear that you don’t from your posts thus far. You’ve already claimed that fusion and splicing can only be performed by a guiding force when both have been observed to happen naturally.

Ya, it doesn't change in nature. Show me some that does????


No I'm saying we should be sick about as often and frequently as the others. Imagine your first day here on earth with no shots or medical attention. And the rest of your life without medical attention. Honestly, would you still be alive? Be honest.

And you have some data that shows that we get sick more frequently than animals? And I’m sure that you also have data that shows that animals that get sick have a much lower mortality rate than humans that get sick?

Well its so obvious I assumed you can see the obvious.
I"m sure its not hard to see, if you honestly think about it.


It's adaptation, and it's so obvious I don't understand how you don't see it. But you thing we evolved to this. Come on man. We de evolved if we did.

It’s exceedingly clear that your understanding of evolution is deficient.

No we both know what it is, you just don't understand that there is not one single reason you can give me that supports a reason WHY we would have evolved.


And I look at the ideas of evolution as such as well.

Except if I send a team of archeologists or paleontologists out to find evidence of evolution, they will.

Well then you would be the first.

And I’ll repost this from the end of my last reply to you, in case you missed it:

It's pretty clear at this point that you don't understand what constitutes objective evidence, that you're not willing to post the evidence that you claim to have, that your understanding of evolution and science in general is sorely lacking, that your understanding of genetics is solely based on the work of Pye and therefore suspect because his claims of what can only happen in a lab are just plain wrong, and that you'd rather believe in an attractive lie because it supports your hypothesis. I don't see a reason to continue this conversation until you post some of your supposed "research" on the subject for people to review.

edit on 25/5/2011 by iterationzero because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 

This is what you call research? Seriously? I give you peer-reviewed research with methodology, data, and conclusions and you give me Youtube videos of sensationalist tabloid TV shows? Come back when you have research to share actually qualifies as research.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Some polls suggest that up to 20 million Americans have seen a UFO and four million claim to actually have been abducted by aliens.
creation.com...

Great, a link to an article with no citations. I can make a website with numbers I pulled out of my rectum as well. Please tell me that someone actually published the methodology used in that survey? Or that the results are published somewhere other than as a bullet point on a creationist website? Any corroboration? At all?


Oh the confirmed sightings are way more than 4 million, gasp, suggestions are around 20 million. I even seen one myself just a few weeks ago for the first time in over 3 decades of interest. A little secrete I'll let you in on.... if you never look up, you wont see them. LOL.

See above.


Give me a link please.

I gave you two. Go read them.


Understandable but you don't know enough about them, and whats involved to consider the possibilities as to why we don't have proof. They simply don't want us to. Sometimes we do have proof and scientists will never say it's an alien, again because they have to have something to compare it to. Would you know if its an alien and which planet its from and that in fact its not from earth?

So you're telling me that objective evidence doesn't exist. Good to know.


But there is no evidence. Plastic mach ups is not evidence, sorry. If I only needed a plastic alien to prove you wrong I would have been done long ago.

Already been provided. You chose not to read it.


Ok and without proof of stages this all happened to many at the same time ??? I see incest here.

Nice job moving the goalposts. So first you claim that it can't happen outside of a lab. Now that I've show you it can happen in nature, you want to claim that mutations can't accumulate over time. You are being incredible intellectually dishonest here.


And again this all still doesn't explain the MASS changes in such a short time, and leaving vestigial organs, and leaving no trace of transgression, and not occurring to all of them. No proof, no proof, no proof. I'm sorry but I didn't build my findings on this type of looseness.

To which changes are you referring and in how short a time do you assume they happened? I offer you peer-reviewed research that provides methodology, data, and conclusions so that the work can be repeated and verified. You claim that this is too loose for you and that the evidence for your "research", which isn't really research at all since it's just Youtube videos of unsubstantiated eyewitness accounts, is somehow more relevant. The evidence that you got from the work of three frauds and a book of fairy tales, none of which have ever been held up to peer-review. You are ridiculous.


Which is how I looked at my findings as well. Of course what I consider strong with my background could differ from others.

Really? So which parts of your faux-research have been peer-reviewed and verified? Oh, right… non of it! Because you've never published your "research".


And like I explained (you called a stawman argument) scientists will never say anything is proof untill we have gone to their planet and compared DNA, and that is a fact. So its a catch 22 here, but at least I have a reason to not have accepted proof.
Whats yours?

Compared DNA with what? The aliens that you not only can't provide objective proof of, but claim that objective proof doesn't exist for? Gotcha.


Ya, it doesn't change in nature. Show me some that does????

You commented on two articles I linked showing that it occurs in nature. Guess your reading comprehension skills are about as good as your understanding of science.


Well its so obvious I assumed you can see the obvious.
I"m sure its not hard to see, if you honestly think about it.

Nice cop-out. So what you're saying is you've never actually gathered that kind of data, or even seen that data gathered by someone else. So you're just making things up to support your case at this point. Hey, keep it up! Maybe you can finally compile your "research" into a book and have Lloyd Pye sell it on his website for you. You'll be right at home there with the other frauds.

Seriously, you're really bad at this game. Can you give me a single peer-reviewed piece of research that corroborates anything you're claiming? I'm just asking for one. I mean, if the evidence is as clear and irrefutable as you claim, then someone must have passed the peer-review process somewhere, right? So lay it on me. I'm sure you have troves of articles from reputable journals which clearly show that our DNA was manipulated by aliens, right? Right?



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by keldas
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


I believe Gregg Braden claims that DNA has what he calls the God code ie using Hebrew and Arabic he believes he has found a way of translating DNA into a workable alphabet/language. He also states that DNA can repair itself.

Well I'm not a pro here, but from what I understand, if specific changes are attempted, and certain rules are not observed, it will reset. This is exactly why our 6 inverted sections are very suspicious to me, and it looks like a way to make it stick.

Now he may or may not be on the wrong track but if he is correct would not the DNA present in all of us be able to supply this missing DNA from its memory, or are you saying that the missing DNA strands prevent that from happening. If so have you any idea what those missing strands may represent and would there be a way of reproducing them.

Damn good quesiton. I'm guessing they simply inverted those sections. The fact is, they could have been recoded as well, leaving us screwed. The scary part is the fused section. We could be missing mass amounts of genes that could mean anything. Of course this fusing also makes us appear closer to primates which seems to be throwing a lot of peeps off. The fact is primates actually have more than us. Figure that one out. So if we evolved, we de evolved.

I understand that the third eye has atrophied is this one of the missing DNA strands?

Probably one of the inverted ones. Good question again I"m not a pro on this but can give my ideas here.
It could be the pineal gland that is disabled which some call the third eye, and yes its a vestigial organ, so you are thinking on the right path here. The problem here, as in my argument with peeps on evolution is that those altered sections of DNA could only have happened in a LAB. Some argue that evolution can do this but the fact is, off research I did shows that very strict circumstances must be present with temperature and those needed would not and could not allow us to live. So, its got to be a very tricky process to make it work. Not that it's impossible. However I have no problem saying it's only possible through manipulation in a LAB as in nature, death would stop the life.So sings of LAB tampering being believed by evolutionists to be natural, is a lie. Further more, HUMANS are the only ones found with these 7 sections of tampering. Real nice.


Why are you so convinced that we are from elsewhere rather than the fact that whoever altered our DNA did so to our ancestors here on earth.

All we do is adapt, to fit this planet. We are sickly, and dying here. From your birth, you had to recieve shots to live, or you had a good chance at dying at an early age. This is not our home. Name one other species that goes through what we go through simply to eat a meal. What cracks me up is when peeps think we evolved to obtain this mass work and confusion. If it was true, we were better off the other way. Even with clothing, and shoes. If your creator wanted you to have clothing, he would have afixed them to your body. We are a virus on earth. Soap, shampoo, deodorant, heat, AC, and so many things are adaptation. Even cooking food is a form of adaptation.

Some might say we don't need meat, but we need the protein. We need it so bad we breed animals so we can eat. We have to, or die. You might miss the big picture however. This all happens only because something from our needed diet is missing, something from another planet.

Obviously many people have esp skills is there a link with DNA and psi abilities. Does the spirit assuming we have one have DNA?

Good questions,,,,, Spirit as we think of I dunno. Spirit in the bible refers to telepathy used to communicate with people (my find btw) it's rampant in the bible. That and holds, paralysis, and mind control from what I can tell have a limited range. Unlike how we think of these powers, they are obvious and breath taking.

What is the purpose of DNA other than to propagate the species.

It's the programming that makes up the coding of life. All life that we know of has blue laminate, and if we make changes using chemicals, it turns orange. Check out Lloyd Pys's vid....

www.youtube.com...

I read somewhere that bacteria have memories and are good repositories of information ie you could put information from a computor into bacteria who multiply and pass it down through the generations and you can then get the bacteria and reassemble your information. Has anyone examined the bacteria that live on our DNA.


Dunno, good question.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 09:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by itsthetooth
 

This is what you call research? Seriously? I give you peer-reviewed research with methodology, data, and conclusions and you give me Youtube videos of sensationalist tabloid TV shows? Come back when you have research to share actually qualifies as research.


I can tell you this person will never have actual research. Not even detailed lay research. Read through the thread again. This person and this persons supporters are feeding each other. More than likely this is a rigged thread. I'm getting the impression there is a "false" discussion taking place. Any instance of actual science being discussed is blindly overwritten with link dumps of gibberish.
This thread is a trap. A trap for dumb people. I said before that I felt dumber for having read it, and I feel dumber still for making any attempt to discuss it. It's my own fault.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 02:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Butterbone

Originally posted by itsthetooth

Originally posted by Butterbone

Originally posted by itsthetooth

Originally posted by Butterbone

Originally posted by itsthetooth
Give me one example of evolution or adaptation in comparison to humans. Just one, even if it's only a small percentage, I'll take it.


You'll have to explain that request. In comparison to humans? You mean evolution in humans? Animals compared to humans?

I'm not sure what you mean by that.


Well darwin claims we started from primates, give me some other examples of other such mutations of other species.


It really doesn't take much lay research to find these examples.
I don't understand how this information is in question.

Dinosaurs to birds.

Amphibians to reptiles.

Platypus from echidnas.

Hitchhikers thumb in humans.

Red Hair in humans.

Whales, Dolphins, manatees. 3 species that

Turtles.

Coelacanths and bony fish.

Water fleas and the parasitic mites that feed on them.

Cymothoa exigua, or the tongue-eating louse.

The range of environment dependent trait disparity in Darwin's own Finches.

Eurasian Doves.

Mockingbirds.

Marsupials.


Do any amount of research you want on these simple examples. I'm of the opinion, you won't. Because you already know "your truth".

Good luck with that.


Well as most that I already know about, there will be mixed sites on it.
Platypus from echidnas... while they appear to be common ancestors, it doesn't mean anything.
As with all of them including primates to humans.
Are we related, or did we evolve.
Here is the way I see it, see if you agree.
Probably one of the most important ability's with any life is the ability to reproduce.
I mean after all, life must go on right?
If these ancestors ever severed their mating ability's due to your belief of stages of evolution, then the breed would cease. to be able to intermix with the once was version.
The day I can have sex with a primate and make a baby is the day your theory is correct.
And how exactly would that work. One step could mate with the other as long as they weren't more than 2 steps away from each other?
There would have to be mass evolution being careful to not mate with each other as well.
You simply can't start a human race from Adam and Eve, and if you do thats incest. Oddly enough our genes support the idea that this might have actually happened.
While it opens up the possibility of evolution being a possibility, It doesn't explain the absence of the bible.
Our race bottle-necked right about our placement here on earth. What a coincidence.
Of course we were already 192,000 years at that point.
Even if you were correct in your assumptions of evolution with no bones or proof of stages, I don't see the significant changes needed to match, being able to occur in that time frame.

I don't think there would be any change, but I'm trying to be lenient and look at this. The sad part is we are in very bad shape if we evolved. We have over 1000% our share of gene defects by comparison to other life. We are very sickly on this planet compared to other life as well. All we do is redundantly adapt, just to survive.

Have you ever taken a look at the process for milk?
Homogenized, Pasteurized, Fortified, and optionally in lactose as well. It's redundant adaptation in an obvious form. Most would miss whats going on, but there is something much deeper going on here.
We need milk, this is why we go though this trouble. Some say we can suffice with orange juice. So why don't we? It's because the supply doesn't meet the demand so it's industrialized so we can use milk.
Same with OJ, there simply isn't enough to satisfy our overall needs in calcium.

Now we could all suck milk straight from the cows teat every day, but I don't think our creator intended each of us to own our own cow.

The reason this is what it is, is because there is something lacking on earth in diet that we need, and milk is the closest thing we can use to substitute that need.

We can even eat toilet paper, we can even add flavor to it, it doesn't mean it was our intended diet.
Trust me, if your creator was smart enough to make you, then he is smart enough to make a planet that also has the correct food for you.

Just like most of the other life on this planet. I say most, because on a rare occasion some things may not be indigenous to earth other than us.

What has happened to us is complex, cruel and cold. It's also pretty deep to see and realize. God was only interested in getting what he wanted from this planet and if it meant a few trips with abductions, food supply start up, and a little direction, so be it. If it meant using and abusing another race, he had the ability to make it happen.

His faith in our ability to preform the task was worth its weight in gold.
As you know Zecharia claims we have proof written of being enslaved. What a coincidence that the bible says we were to serve god, or was it gold.

The purpose falls true using victimology.
You have to accept the fact that there is a lot of other life out there.
You have to realize you can't see and understand them all. More importantly you probably can't trust any of them by my 3 decades of research.
They have their reasons to use and abuse anything they want to get whatever they want. In a lot of ways, we do the same thing with other life on earth. So don't be so shocked about it, it seems to be normal in the game of life.

My findings explain the misunderstandings in religion, atheists, and excludes evolution because we not only have to many things telling us it didn't happen that way, but we also have to many things telling us how it happened.

People choose to not believe in God because they think that also means you believe in the religion and faith.
That's not true, as in my case as well. It's a loaded question when peeps ask me if I believe in God. He was a real person, in a real time. Is he still alive, I highly doubt it. He would also appear to be who placed us here, and NOT our real creator. He did however give us direction which I must admit was nice.

Understanding this, its nothing more than history as far as I'm concerned. My interests pre date the bible, and I think I did a pretty good job getting to the bottom of it.


You are using assumptions, as your proof that other so called assumptions are evidence of a lack of feasibility.

Calcium as proof?? No. You forget or ignore that dietary uniformity is a fallacy, and has been since it's inception.
There is no required amount of a calcium per day or a person will be sickly. Human physiology allows for multiple ranges of items to be used, stored, and called on intermittently. Cravings that people have are proof that evolution builds systems into the overall that can drive the creature to seek what it needs, through trial and error and then through memory even if you aren't sure why you want to eat that thing so badly. Cravings are part of the instinct system, instincts are stored genetic memory, just like in other animals.

The idea that our evolution was poor or non existant because we are a sickly species that must modify it's surroundings to survive is in my opinion a big part of the proof that evolution is real.

As societies grow and as particular customs and habits put people in new situations that they must adapt to, our bodies change over time to deal with those changes. Tibetans can withstand much colder tempuratures and function their slow twitch muscles much more efficiently in low oxygen than caucasians can.

Tribal people in India can eat cobra venom raw because 120 generations or so of their people have adapted to it.
Skin pigmentation differences for UV protection.

Your examples of people being sickly are anecdotal. That means they aren't based on real data. Those examples are simple observations without consideration or proof of the mechanisms driving what is being observed.

In Fact I'll use your own examples, as proof of evolution. Since evolution is adaptation and change based on stimulus inside of a system either internal or external.

There is proof that the application of science to daily life has caused harm to the human species in the form that being part of a closed system we are closing ourselves off from the system even more. Once we isolate ourselves from the bacterias, and viruses, that evolve WITH us since we are all interdependent, then we become more prone to lapsing out of phase with the rest of the planet and the creatures on it. when that happens we no longer have immunity to the mutated and or evolved versions of bacteria and viruses that became harmless to us in the past. Sound Familiar???

If you live in a sterile environment for 10 years, and then go outside and roll around in the dirt for an hour, you will be terribly ill, or dead, very soon without massive amounts of medical treatment. Because your body has become out of tune with the adaptation and change happening around you. As Darwin predicted, you have removed yourself from the system and became too specialized to deal with the changes happening around you, so the system as a whole will phase you out.
Or you change the system SO much that the system cannot adapt to YOU quickly enough, and you break the system. But without a back up plan or way to generate all the things you needed from that system you just broke, you are going to suffer losses, or adapt to the lack of the system.

See.

People have become so disconnected from the natural system of interconnectedness in this Closed System planet, that without the scientific ability to correct things mechanically, we would have died off already probably.

Lactose intolerance and all of that junk happens as a result of generations of people drinking too much milk, because it was a luxery that became common place during industrialization. Pastuerizing and all that, including using enormous amounts of bovine hormones to get the cows to produce more milk, for the sake of artificial financial profits can also be seen to work together with SO many other elements of modified human existance that we now have in the span of 3 generations of humans, introduced literally Dozens of new and artificial detractors into nearly every part of the system that was once much more natural and direct.

But knowing this, we all still assume that things are harmless because we can't see any "long term" harm done in 6 and 8 month studies for products, chemicals and processes that will be working on generations of people spanning hundreds of years.

8 months is not long enough to know whether a food coloring will create a neurological reaction in feverish children that could emulate encephalitis and kill them. Obviously it isn't. Or we would not have had children Dying from Red Dye #7 in the mid 90's until that dye was banned.

But instead of looking at the reality of the science and the long term proof that is already available. You choose aliens, and god, and a bible.

It's ridiculous. And honestly it's lazy. You want to assign blame or fame to an imaginary thing instead of looking around and realizing that our own greed, our own short sightedness, and our own ignorance are to blame for 100% of the actual problems, attrocities, and issues we feel are placed on our shoulders by the invisible magic Good man or the invisible magic Bad man.

You go one step further and try to imply that the problems are the result of not even being from this world.

There is actual proof. I've laid it out in two posts. You are choosing to ignore it and apply your own anecdotal "evidence" as proof you are right. Well again, good luck with that. Maybe you can achieve so high as to be the next L Ron Hubbard. Though, he's already beaten you to these conclusions, made a fortune, died and left a whole religion behind that is ultimately more complex, but just as crazy as the ideas you are spouting here.


Your idea of repercussions as a result of us adapting is incorrect.
Your overlooking the whole reason why we were adapting to begin with.
ANYTIME you adapt, you most likely don't belong. We are just so used to it, that we are blind to it. compare our adaptations to other life. Your only seeing the options we accept. We are stuck here.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 02:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by thecrazydude11

Originally posted by itsthetooth

Originally posted by thecrazydude11

Originally posted by itsthetooth

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


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.

I'm sorry that you don't have the ability to dismiss a lie, regardless of how attractive it is, even when it's been shown to be a lie. When you make that lie one of the foundations for your assertions, it automatically calls into questions the means by which you arrived at them.

Well what exactly are you calling the lie? The DNA? The bible? Pye's work? Eric's work? My assertions from my 3 decades of paranormal study? Or the fact that they all proved points in my findings?


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.

Sitchin, von Däniken, and Pye are all from essentially the same time. All of their work is essentially based on a very loose interpretation of the Bible that substitutes "aliens" for "God". You're trying to act like these are all somehow independent pieces of evidence when three of them are based on the fourth. It doesn't take an enormous amount of critical thinking skill to understand why they all "point in the same direction".

Well I honestly didn't know they did in full detail until now, but thanks for confirming it.


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.

Except they don't and I've clearly explained why.


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.

Until you can show objectively (i.e. not via interpretation) how the events depicted in the Bible are factually accurate, all interpretations carry the same weight of evidence. And your research is worthless unless you're willing to present it in a way that it can be scrutinized and peer-reviewed. I've seen you claim that you've been investigating this for 30 years. It's time for you to put up or shut up.

Np, google ufos / aliens / abductions / real footage / and watch as many videos as you can, read as many books as you can. Then make your claim.


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.

Again with the strawman attack… I should send you a book on logical fallacies. I believe in plenty of things, just not the wild speculation you're engaging in based on a book of fairy tales, three fraudsters, and assertions that are scientifically and factually incorrect. Evolution doesn't care what your opinion is - it has the overwhelming weight of evidence behind it. Real, objective, observable, testable, factual evidence. The fact that you choose to ignore it in favor of things that have been shown to be lies is astonishing.

Where is the proof of us transcending from primates? Where is proof that explains why we lost our hair and started wearing clothing? Why didn't they all evolve? Why did the mid stages disappear and leave no trace? Assuming we did evolve, how come primates are so much better off in so many ways than humans?
Please pull your head out on this. Your trying to tell me we went from swinging on trees to isolating ourselves in buildings with heat and AC because we could no longer endure the natural elements. We didn't evolve, it looks more like we de evolved. Just look at the medical issues we are all face with on a day to day basis, I would even venture your on medication or have been like most others have. How much medication is primates on? I'm sorry its the stupidest thing I have ever heard. And if you think the elements are fine in certain parts of the world you are correct but your also saying we were only suppose to live there. Another words we weren't suppose to grow.
It's not our planet, get it?


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.

Again, your reasoning is backwards - I don't have to prove all religions wrong. It is up to adherents to those religions to provide evidence that they are factually correct. None have.


Agreed, only based on the fact that it has been taken out of context.
edit on 24-5-2011 by itsthetooth because: added


I hate to agree with iterationzero but in away he's right, you can't take the bible literally, you got to remember that the bible was written in riddles and also the vetican have tons of bible pages that they still have hidden deep in that place, so you got to consider that you maybe wrong about this theory, it may seem like your right but it's unlikely, although for the past few days iv'e talked about this subject with pastors and they agreed that heaven might actually be a planet, so your right on that topic


Ok and what do you think is the most likely means to get from planet to another?
Car / bus / train / plane, ufo?

Well they said god lol


Well I'm not getting those riddles any longer.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 02:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Some polls suggest that up to 20 million Americans have seen a UFO and four million claim to actually have been abducted by aliens.
creation.com...

Great, a link to an article with no citations. I can make a website with numbers I pulled out of my rectum as well. Please tell me that someone actually published the methodology used in that survey? Or that the results are published somewhere other than as a bullet point on a creationist website? Any corroboration? At all?


Oh the confirmed sightings are way more than 4 million, gasp, suggestions are around 20 million. I even seen one myself just a few weeks ago for the first time in over 3 decades of interest. A little secrete I'll let you in on.... if you never look up, you wont see them. LOL.

See above.


Give me a link please.

I gave you two. Go read them.


Understandable but you don't know enough about them, and whats involved to consider the possibilities as to why we don't have proof. They simply don't want us to. Sometimes we do have proof and scientists will never say it's an alien, again because they have to have something to compare it to. Would you know if its an alien and which planet its from and that in fact its not from earth?

So you're telling me that objective evidence doesn't exist. Good to know.


But there is no evidence. Plastic mach ups is not evidence, sorry. If I only needed a plastic alien to prove you wrong I would have been done long ago.

Already been provided. You chose not to read it.


Ok and without proof of stages this all happened to many at the same time ??? I see incest here.

Nice job moving the goalposts. So first you claim that it can't happen outside of a lab. Now that I've show you it can happen in nature, you want to claim that mutations can't accumulate over time. You are being incredible intellectually dishonest here.


And again this all still doesn't explain the MASS changes in such a short time, and leaving vestigial organs, and leaving no trace of transgression, and not occurring to all of them. No proof, no proof, no proof. I'm sorry but I didn't build my findings on this type of looseness.

To which changes are you referring and in how short a time do you assume they happened? I offer you peer-reviewed research that provides methodology, data, and conclusions so that the work can be repeated and verified. You claim that this is too loose for you and that the evidence for your "research", which isn't really research at all since it's just Youtube videos of unsubstantiated eyewitness accounts, is somehow more relevant. The evidence that you got from the work of three frauds and a book of fairy tales, none of which have ever been held up to peer-review. You are ridiculous.


Which is how I looked at my findings as well. Of course what I consider strong with my background could differ from others.

Really? So which parts of your faux-research have been peer-reviewed and verified? Oh, right… non of it! Because you've never published your "research".


And like I explained (you called a stawman argument) scientists will never say anything is proof untill we have gone to their planet and compared DNA, and that is a fact. So its a catch 22 here, but at least I have a reason to not have accepted proof.
Whats yours?

Compared DNA with what? The aliens that you not only can't provide objective proof of, but claim that objective proof doesn't exist for? Gotcha.


Ya, it doesn't change in nature. Show me some that does????

You commented on two articles I linked showing that it occurs in nature. Guess your reading comprehension skills are about as good as your understanding of science.


Well its so obvious I assumed you can see the obvious.
I"m sure its not hard to see, if you honestly think about it.

Nice cop-out. So what you're saying is you've never actually gathered that kind of data, or even seen that data gathered by someone else. So you're just making things up to support your case at this point. Hey, keep it up! Maybe you can finally compile your "research" into a book and have Lloyd Pye sell it on his website for you. You'll be right at home there with the other frauds.

Seriously, you're really bad at this game. Can you give me a single peer-reviewed piece of research that corroborates anything you're claiming? I'm just asking for one. I mean, if the evidence is as clear and irrefutable as you claim, then someone must have passed the peer-review process somewhere, right? So lay it on me. I'm sure you have troves of articles from reputable journals which clearly show that our DNA was manipulated by aliens, right? Right?
Apparently I already have, you told me Pye and Sitchen were in my same belief.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 02:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Butterbone

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by itsthetooth
 

This is what you call research? Seriously? I give you peer-reviewed research with methodology, data, and conclusions and you give me Youtube videos of sensationalist tabloid TV shows? Come back when you have research to share actually qualifies as research.


I can tell you this person will never have actual research. Not even detailed lay research. Read through the thread again. This person and this persons supporters are feeding each other. More than likely this is a rigged thread. I'm getting the impression there is a "false" discussion taking place. Any instance of actual science being discussed is blindly overwritten with link dumps of gibberish.
This thread is a trap. A trap for dumb people. I said before that I felt dumber for having read it, and I feel dumber still for making any attempt to discuss it. It's my own fault.


DNA is proof. You don't believe those findings. If an alien slapped you in the face or abducted you, it sounds like you would spend the next 50 years calling it a dream. No one can make you believe anything. I'm not impressed either way. If you feel my direction is wrong, you need to consider the multiple points of reference that say you are wrong. Anyone can be called a fraud, anyone can be called a fraudster. Even Darwin has been labeled wrong.

The only difference on my side is scientists aren't quick to claim alien life, without DNA to compare it to. In your case we should have evolution proof as this is the same planet we are on. I think your pissy because you know there is no proof of evolution and so many people have told you that, but no one likes to be told they are wrong.

At least I have excuses why there is little to know proof.
Whats yours?



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 05:50 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 

Really? That means you can provide links to peer-reviewed research by Pye and Sitchin, right?



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 10:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth

Originally posted by Butterbone

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by itsthetooth
 

This is what you call research? Seriously? I give you peer-reviewed research with methodology, data, and conclusions and you give me Youtube videos of sensationalist tabloid TV shows? Come back when you have research to share actually qualifies as research.


I can tell you this person will never have actual research. Not even detailed lay research. Read through the thread again. This person and this persons supporters are feeding each other. More than likely this is a rigged thread. I'm getting the impression there is a "false" discussion taking place. Any instance of actual science being discussed is blindly overwritten with link dumps of gibberish.
This thread is a trap. A trap for dumb people. I said before that I felt dumber for having read it, and I feel dumber still for making any attempt to discuss it. It's my own fault.


DNA is proof. You don't believe those findings. If an alien slapped you in the face or abducted you, it sounds like you would spend the next 50 years calling it a dream. No one can make you believe anything. I'm not impressed either way. If you feel my direction is wrong, you need to consider the multiple points of reference that say you are wrong. Anyone can be called a fraud, anyone can be called a fraudster. Even Darwin has been labeled wrong.

The only difference on my side is scientists aren't quick to claim alien life, without DNA to compare it to. In your case we should have evolution proof as this is the same planet we are on. I think your pissy because you know there is no proof of evolution and so many people have told you that, but no one likes to be told they are wrong.

At least I have excuses why there is little to know proof.
Whats yours?


I have no issues being told I am wrong. When I am wrong. That's how we learn.

And proof of evolution has been provided to you. It's been provided to everyone in the world at this point.
You just refuse to accept it. For whatever reason you prefer the idea that there are aliens who did all this.
You, have decided that you are right, based on how right you already think you are.

You are delusional. And I'm done with this crazy person thread. Best of luck with your alien theory.
Be careful how you spread this idea though. You could very easily be sued for copyright infringement by Scientology.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Holy mother of god
that was one long reading
BUT i loved it. Well done job there.

Just to add something here. We human beings is also an ET race per definition.

And a story according to archaeologist findings through old egyptian runes.

The Annanuki,wich were the ones from the heavens came or the princes of the royal seed ALSO believed there was a god. They according to runes didnt either understand what GOD was,they simply didnt have knowledge of it,but they believed that GOD whatever that might be did exist.

There are 5 documented ET races per today that are known for scientists (+historiansarchaelogists wich has worked on the subject)

1:Humans
2:Gray
3:Annanuki
4:?
5:?
edit on 26-5-2011 by Archirvion because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by itsthetooth
 

Really? That means you can provide links to peer-reviewed research by Pye and Sitchin, right?


Again scientists don't admit things without proof. We have no alien DNA to compare it to. It becomes an unknown. You can say it's not proof, but look at star child. Is that skull really from here?



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Archirvion
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Holy mother of god
that was one long reading
BUT i loved it. Well done job there.

Just to add something here. We human beings is also an ET race per definition.

And a story according to archaeologist findings through old egyptian runes.

The Annanuki,wich were the ones from the heavens came or the princes of the royal seed ALSO believed there was a god. They according to runes didnt either understand what GOD was,they simply didnt have knowledge of it,but they believed that GOD whatever that might be did exist.

There are 5 documented ET races per today that are known for scientists (+historiansarchaelogists wich has worked on the subject)

1:Humans
2:Gray
3:Annanuki
4:?
5:?
edit on 26-5-2011 by Archirvion because: (no reason given)


Very nice and thank you.

Here is an interesting link just for giggles.
Some farmer found it alive, stuck in his trap, freaked out and tossed it in the water thinking it was a devil (I would too). Later retrieved it and had it analyzed. It's DNA does not appear to be from this earth. Notice the size, a very small alien.

www.google.com...://drvenom.webs.com/Mexican%2520alien.jpg&imgrefurl=http://drvenom.webs.com/drvenomfiles.htm&usg=__DbBJDEr9ZbN fwWgx2P9nuaXo1x8=&h=394&w=554&sz=84&hl=en&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=jUmZie8WJ5HdRM:&tbnh=131&tbnw=165&ei=f5zeTZyPGqvPiAL24_3zCg&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dalien%2B caught%2Bin%2Btrap%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rlz%3D1R0GGLL_enUS425%26channel%3Ds%26biw%3D1067%26bih%3D726%26tbm%3Disch&um=1&itbs=1&iac t=hc&vpx=759&vpy=86&dur=4673&hovh=189&hovw=266&tx=173&ty=89&page=1&ndsp=20&ved=1t:429,r:4,s:0&biw=1067&bih=726



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth

Originally posted by Butterbone

Originally posted by itsthetooth

Originally posted by Butterbone

Originally posted by itsthetooth
Give me one example of evolution or adaptation in comparison to humans. Just one, even if it's only a small percentage, I'll take it.


You'll have to explain that request. In comparison to humans? You mean evolution in humans? Animals compared to humans?

I'm not sure what you mean by that.


Well darwin claims we started from primates, give me some other examples of other such mutations of other species.


It really doesn't take much lay research to find these examples.
I don't understand how this information is in question.

Dinosaurs to birds.
Your kidding, I can't even see this one. Do we have ANY bones or anything supporting stages of evolution between these species?
Amphibians to reptiles.
Do we have ANY bones or anything supporting stages of evolution between these species?
Platypus from echidnas.
Do we have ANY bones or anything supporting stages of evolution between these species?
Hitchhikers thumb in humans.

Red Hair in humans.

Whales, Dolphins, manatees. 3 species that

Turtles.

Coelacanths and bony fish.

Water fleas and the parasitic mites that feed on them.

Cymothoa exigua, or the tongue-eating louse.

The range of environment dependent trait disparity in Darwin's own Finches.

Eurasian Doves.

Mockingbirds.

Marsupials.


Do any amount of research you want on these simple examples. I'm of the opinion, you won't. Because you already know "your truth".

Good luck with that.


I have done gobbs of research. There are no proof of stages.

Just like humans, all of a sudden there we are.


Can you say greys?? They were manipulating various species for the E-l*th who love a diverse and interesting animal population on their 'vacation' worlds long before they accidentally created humanity.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by iterationzero
*snip for brevity*
Nice cop-out. So what you're saying is you've never actually gathered that kind of data, or even seen that data gathered by someone else. So you're just making things up to support your case at this point. Hey, keep it up! Maybe you can finally compile your "research" into a book and have Lloyd Pye sell it on his website for you. You'll be right at home there with the other frauds.

Seriously, you're really bad at this game. Can you give me a single peer-reviewed piece of research that corroborates anything you're claiming? I'm just asking for one. I mean, if the evidence is as clear and irrefutable as you claim, then someone must have passed the peer-review process somewhere, right? So lay it on me. I'm sure you have troves of articles from reputable journals which clearly show that our DNA was manipulated by aliens, right? Right?


Does it ever occur to you that your beloved religion, 'science' is also just another control tool being used to control and manipulate you, just like every other version of their created religions?? So NO, you aren't going to find any proof for things that the Jue-sah/Illuminati/NWO bunch don't want you to know about.

This includes the true history of the world (it so casts them in a BAD light and would make us much harder to control), the actual nature AND existence of the spirit realm along with what should be our natural abilities to work at that level of awareness (psychic abilities, telepathy, manipulating raw energy to move or build things and so on) and the fact that we, as spirits, do indeed reincarnate (and not as bugs or cattle).

It would pull the rug out from under all of their efforts to trick us into being enslaved to them (and as long as the E-l*th are keeping them to the contract, that is the only way they can enslave us). And being stuck in the small, small box of 'provable' phenomenon and history, is total mind enslavement. You are completely out of touch with your higher self which would give you the 'knowingness' to be discerning without anyone else having to agree with you aka 'prove' it.

Keeping us humans deaf, dumb, and blind to the spirit realm and our higher self is critical for their plans to work. Already, too many of us are awake.. maybe not sure what to do about it, but awake and not fooled anymore, although there are sadly many who should be awake but aren't, fooled as they are by the limiting and limited knowledge allowed thru their beloved version of the NWO's more recently created control tool, 'science'.

All of those things will NEVER be allowed to be documented and researched, and anyone who tries will either be totally ignored (aka not published) or belittled and insulted by the mainstream (NWO-owned) media and made out to be a total whacko conspiracy nut case. Oh, the Jue-sah have been working on this stuff for several hundred thousand years, and while they aren't that bright, it's given them enough time to figure out how to make themselves 'invisible' and the stuff of 'conspiracy theories', and what information they need to keep suppressed and how to go about it.

edit on 26-5-2011 by DragonriderGal because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
160
<< 33  34  35    37  38  39 >>

log in

join