It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Are Hominids really our ancestors - what about our rib-cage?

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 11:59 PM

Originally posted by kp1987
Since a little kid, I always thought that we were made by aliens. How have we never found the "missing link?" It all makes sense if you look at ancient drawings, the missing link.

It is possible we were made to be slaves. maybe we just evolved way to fast, and with our nuclear weapons and everything else, maybe they just gave up. Who knows. If were meant to be slaves, I guess I dont want to find out soon, but if we were created for another reason, It would be cool to know. Hopefully were not food either lol.

If we were designed to be slaves, then they messed up royally. For the most part the only thing we Human's are half way decent at is War. I think it is far more likely that if we where created(hypothetically) by aliens, then they wanted to breed soldiers.

Heck look at our closest living genetic species relative chimps, they tend to be very, very warlike with their neighbors of same species(and sometimes hostile towards different species). Every species that is in our branch of the mammal family on Earth would make very,very,very,very poor slaves because they can't really be fully domesticated.

If they wanted a slave species they could of easily picked a different species like a strict herbivore that would be more inclined to submit then resist.

posted on Jul, 6 2011 @ 12:09 AM

Originally posted by halfoldman
reply to post by bhornbuckle75

Fair enough, but also a question of naming: apples and pears?

It is in fact Pye who questions the assumptions of labels like "pre-humans".
What is really "human" about them?

In human evolution, how quickly can it happen?
How many intermediate species could there really be in 200 000 years?
Are there "intermediate races" right now?
That was commonly believed about the Bushmen and aborigines only a few decades ago.
But I bet nobody will actually argue that now - we are clearly all Homo Sapiens.
How far will anyone take the argument on evolving (intermediate) species when applied to humans?

Even science admits most of them hominids were dead-ends, and probably not our direct ancestors.
Or, since political correctness has invaded paleontology, they just call them our "cousins" (whatever that means).

edit on 12-6-2011 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)

The truth of the matter is, it isn't PC to talk about modern humans. If we held humanity to the same standard of classification that we hold extinct species and existing species we could only come to the conclusion that humanity as we acknowledge it doesn't exist.

The races of Humanity are more like sub-species then a singular species. And aborigines brains are greatly different then any other sub-species of humanity. If you took a Sub-Sahara Black African and painted their skin color a white-ish/pink they wouldn't look Caucasian by a long shot.

It is nothing to be ashamed of or fearful of, it just is. And the sooner closed minded people get over that fact the better. Because the notion "we are all the same" cost's lives. The different sub-species of humanity have different medical(and I wouldn't be surprised if we had slight differences in ideal diet) needs.

A pill that could treat a Caucasian American could hurt an African American(and vice versa). Besides different species can inter-mix, but most of the time the offspring is sterile. Most of the time, but not all of the time.

posted on Jul, 6 2011 @ 01:14 AM
i always wondered what is our role on this earth.

everything else has a job, basically.

what do WE do for the big picture that something else couldn't?

i guess i almost agree with him.

unless we are the ultimate parasite and there was no manipulation from anyone.

<< 1   >>

log in