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.

 

New ATS Survey: Origins & Evolution

page: 7
78
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 11:09 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Yes your last paragraph put it quite well. Star.

To me, it;s a merger of sorts of both. But I tend to view it all as the difference between linear thinking, and exponential thinking.

Allow me to explain.

Two species can be equally intelligent, but think differently. Hell, this even allows for one species to be more intelligent, but slower at getting to a level of advancement than less intelligent species. It's strange, but the idea is in the data.

Basicially, Humans show up about 50,000 years ago, and then all of the sudden there's an exponeential explosion, and literally, 20,000, 10,000, 5,000, 2,500, etc etc years, something major happens.

So what I see is more or less, many intelligent humans, perhaps as intelligent as us, across the globe for hundreds of thousands of years, but they did not have exponenetial thinking. Man did, and in our conquest of the globe, I suspect we gobbled up anything compatible.

Of course, being the scientific minded person, the only way to know for sure that those traits from neanderthals and others that are in man are from crossbreeding, is that we would first have to see if the traits are in the common ancestor. I've not really seen this done so far, so I'd be happy to have data on it from you if you have it.

That's mainly the reason why I view the out of Africa theory as correct. because mankind seems to have simutaneously reached this apex of exponential thought within a few thousand years across the globe, after having been a linearly thinking creature for many eons.

BTW, this idea between exponential and linear thought has far reaching consequences if true. It means technically, aliens could be less intelligent than us. but more stable than us as a species. It means that we may meet something more intelligent than us one day, but thinks linearly, and thus still in the cave when we find them. Interesting thought.
edit on 27-8-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

It's an odd tree, and the branches don't just branch outward, sometimes they grow back together again.



Hey, I think I've met some of those folks... down in some southern trailer parks?? *lol* Teasing! It was just too good a line to pass up.



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 11:35 PM
link   
whoever put this survey together underestimates the intelligence of the average ATS user.
the questions were useless.



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 11:39 PM
link   
reply to post by TiM3LoRd
 


No need to be offensive. I thought it was fun!




posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 11:43 PM
link   
I have a feeling that the most people in this forum will be creationists and a sign to me get out of here fast



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 11:45 PM
link   
People should realize that evolution and creation are not necessarily exclusive of each other. Creation can happen first and then evolution is allowed to take place.



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 11:48 PM
link   
Evolution and "Creationism" don't have to be exclusive as long as you see the Bible as Psychological and not Physics-based. Belief lies in the realm of Psychology. Who created you? Your Father and Mother created you. Jesus forgot to teach his apostles about one of those two. Bet you can't guess which one...



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 12:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


The illustration using linear vs, exponential thinking is very appropriate. Just as "necessity is the mother of invention", competition suddenly showing up often spurs advancement in an otherwise stagnant population. They have to advance to remain competitive. It's not necessarily that one population is more intelligent than the next, it's more a matter of a difference in the way thought processes are carried out. When things are working, and have been practically forever, there's no reason to spur "advancements", to express a latent intelligence by doing things in new and novel ways. "If it works, don't fix it".

Then, when competition shows up, things get stirred up, and any latent intelligence has to come to the fore. Now, even given that, the thought processes may not be the same, but the end result often appears the same, because there are only so many ways to do things, and efficiency wins out in a competitive environment.

I don't have any data on human DNA older than Neanderthal and Denisovan, and I don't think there is any, as none of the older genomes have been mapped even in part. As a matter of fact, I've not even heard that any older human DNA has been isolated. When the day comes that it is, I bet it gets pretty interesting!



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 12:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by DragonriderGal

Originally posted by nenothtu

It's an odd tree, and the branches don't just branch outward, sometimes they grow back together again.



Hey, I think I've met some of those folks... down in some southern trailer parks?? *lol* Teasing! It was just too good a line to pass up.


A friend of mine and I have a running argument about family trees that look more like telephone poles - he just aims it at the wrong state!



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 12:25 AM
link   
I would have liked to see some questions that involved ET, just to see what the results would have been, but it was still a fun survey. I'll never understand why people get so upset about these surveys though, it's not like they count for anything. If you don't believe in creation or evolution, then answer disagree on them, no need to act like an ass because ET wasn't an option.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 12:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by blackcube
I have a feeling that the most people in this forum will be creationists and a sign to me get out of here fast


Nah, no need for a hasty evacuation - I have a soft spot in my heart for "evolutionists". They're so cute when they're little!


I hear they even pass through all the evolutionary stages on their way to becoming adults!


Seriously, there's no need to come to blows over it. We can all play nice.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 12:31 AM
link   
Creationist, Indeed!!
edit on 27-8-2011 by AboveTopZecret because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 12:35 AM
link   
Hi

Filled this survey. There was one glaring missing question

The origin of the person filling in the form as it will not jus be Americans. IMO would have added greater value.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 12:59 AM
link   
Bravo! This survey was very well put together. It even let a weirdo like me with strange mixed ideas get my two cents in



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 03:02 AM
link   
I took it and answered as honestly as the questions allowed. Pretty much agreed with the evolution sides and had a couple of neutrals.

I'm looking forward to seeing roughly how far the members lean towards the creationist perspective. I'm fairly sure those agreeing with evolution will be a minority although will it be a large or small minority? At a guess, I'd reckon atheists are outnumbered more than 20:1 on ATS. People who accept evolution are maybe 1 in 4?

Given the wide variety of beliefs on this site, it's unrealistic to expect questions that include all of them.

God recently
God billions of years ago
Gods
Spirit
Intelligent designer
Computer simulation
Annunaki
Good aliens
Bad aliens
A Universal Consciousness
Nature
Evolution
Matrix
It doesn't exist
Spaghetti Monster



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 03:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 


i vote spaghetti monster as the cause. it seems to come up quite a bit in these creationist discussions.

valid point about not including all the other options but the definition of a survey is to get an idea or what people think not what people think about your opinions.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 03:18 AM
link   
reply to post by TiM3LoRd
 
It could be a future poll to see what people believe. At the same time, I'm not sure I could cope with the statistics of fellow members' belief systems in all their clarity.

It's bad enough knowing that some guys believe the Annunaki rode spaceship Nibiru over here and created us.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 03:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 


Really?That's interesting. Personally (and i guess it all boils down to the individual here) i would like to know just how small a minority i belong to. It gives one a sense of relativity. but that's just me.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 03:45 AM
link   
I had a few neutrals too and answered honestly.


I can't wait to see the result of this.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 03:45 AM
link   
reply to post by TiM3LoRd
 
I'm English and we just don't seem to have a cultural dialogue about fundamental beliefs. If the subject of religion comes up at all, it's usually related to Muslims. Christianity only comes up at weddings, christenings and funerals.

In that sense, minority is certainly relative. Real life majority, ATS minority.



new topics

top topics



 
78
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join