About The Theory That We Are An Alien Race's Experiment

If you believe that we are an experiment, put on Earth by an Alien-Race to watch and see how we involve and screw things up, then go with that theory.

Or

That we was here before the Aliens/Grey's and that they have their own planet and they come to visit us as much as possible to see how we live, interact with each other (and still screw things up) then go with that theory.

But then you have a good question?


Who or what was around first in the begining of time?

Us or the Aliens?????????


(Its like asking what caame first, the chicken or the egg?????????)

[edit on 1-10-2004 by blackwidow666]

I was just having a look through some of the threads and I was a little perturbed by some people saying we only use small parts of our brains. In fact, although many believe this to be true, it is a common mistake.
PET and CAT scans of numerous people in various case studies have delivered scientists with huge amounts of data in regards to the usage of the human brain, and we do in fact use 100% of it. This can be confirmed by stroke victims who suffer very minor blood clots in terms of ratio to the human body, yet the tiny % of brain loss causes huge physical and psychological damage, such as paralysis in either side of the body and speech impediments.
Even when Brain surgeons treat epileptic sufferers, they have to carefully map and study the neurological pathways of each patient. Even the removal of very small amounts of tissue can then result in an almost lobotomised state for the patient, from which they can never recover.

As for cats and animals being psychic because they have no spoken language is fallacy. A cat does communicate with vocal inflections and sounds to display anger, fear, contentment to other cats, or to warn other animals of danger. This is true of many animals.
Cats and dogs, however, are very adept at reading body language and human vocal inflection which is often how animals appear to be psychic. Try this experiment, think only happy thoughts of your pet, and tell it with your mind that you are only going to cuddle and reward it with treats and love. Yet if you approach your pet aggressively in a dominant fashion with arms wide shouting... and you will see that it will not in fact react to you as if it is in deep contact with your mind, but to your physical and vocal aggressiveness. Even if you shout aggressively in a deep voice that you love your pet and you want it to come get a treat, it will not approach you.
I'm not ruling out any psychic abilities that people may have. I just want to dispel myths. I recently found out that many people still believe the 10% brain usage true. Although we do not understand many subconscious or unconscious brain states or abilities, it is not to say we are not using all of our brain. Use search engines on the 10% myth and "cats and dogs" and "body-language".
Here is a resource to explain further into the common myth of 10% brain function.

staff.washington.edu...

I have mentioned this elsewhere. It is not clear why the process of evolution would after 2m or so years suddenly within about 200k years lead to the evolution of Man with a brain that still has not found its limits. Why did we need such brain power 200,000 years ago?

Also, assuming that our genetics were enhanced/adjusted for some purpose then we need to think what this purpose was. Aliens could have used their technology to extract minerals etc and therefore would not need Man for manual labour. Also we don't seem to be designed for hard labour. Also whatever the purpose it seemed to requrie populating many parts of the world. It seems to me that we were enhanced to help us develop more quickly and for us to worship our "masters" or "gods". Remember, we should not expect to understand fully the motives of those that kick-started our evolution.

ok, so heres another question........

Where did the creators of the creators of the aliens came from that created us ?

you can multiply it by infinity and you still wont get anywhere.

Better is where did the stuff that made up the universe come from ?
I mean when I think about it, A shiver goes down my spine because all of
human history and anything that could happen in the future pales in comparison to that simple thought. The fact we are here is amazing in itself.


[edit on 27-3-2006 by imbalanced]

Better is where did the stuff that made up the universe come from ?
I mean when I think about it, A shiver goes down my spine because all of
human history and anything that could happen in the future pales in comparison to that simple thought. The fact we are here is amazing in itself.

That is a good question, but it really has nothing to do with the topic.

If we can think about our own origins, and leave the universe alone for a minute, it is odd that parts of our genome have no apparent origin in our closest ancestors. The way I see it, that does point to some kind of outside influence.

From a PURE Fictional stand point, this topic is very interesting.
Keeping in mind the subject is not based on concrete proof or tangible evidence, the sky is the limit.
There simply are no rules to imaginative theoretical thinking. Therefore that can really be no real wrong assertions. Of course when people stretch/distort historical facts and real science to fit their theories or stories things tend to fall apart real fast.

Originally posted by twitchy
I forget the exact number but there are something in the neighborhood of 30 human genomes that have no genetic predecessor whatseover. Hence the search for our evolutionary gap as a 'missing link'. Also interesting to note is the sumerian and other early mythology. I have read the works of Sitchin, and I find alot of his work hard to swallow and it comes across as conjecture at times, but he has an angle I find intriguing none-the-less. There is no doubt that human evolution got a major kick in the butt from somewhere, and given the lack of genetic precursors in our chromosomal make up, and theological commonalities of our creation by a higher being, this theory has yet to be seriously examined and I think carries a great deal of weight. Another interesting angle is man kind's intrinisic value they have placed on certain things like gold, jewels, amber, etc. all of which have unique electromagnetic properties.

I also think Sitchin's work is hard to swallow. If one does a search on eMule for his name one will find a list of translation errors that could possibly skew the results of his study. I do not have the technical know-how to determine if Sitchin truly did err when translating the original texts but it is interesting nonetheless.

The unique genes you mention number 25 as far as I am aware. There is a total of 223 genes that have no required predecessors on the genomic evolutionary tree. 113 of the genes are commonly found in bacteria though they are not found in vertebrates or invertebrates. 35 of the genes were identified and studied and it was found that 25 of them were completely unique to humans. These genes can be traced back all the way to "Eve." In other words, nearly 2/3 of the difference between humans and chimpanzees may have been present in the very first human to walk this Earth! That would be one massive leap! It is hypothesized that bacteria may have inserted the genes into humans but only 113 of the 223 genes have been identified in bacteria. That still leaves 110 genes completely unaccounted for! So even if this hypothesis is correct it still leaves nearly half of the genes that separate us from chimpanzees totally unaccounted for and to expect the other genes to be the act of a mutation would be absurd as DNA does not mutate that quickly. The other hypothesis is that humans gave the genes to bacteria but that still leaves the question "where did we get the genes from?" To be honest, genetic experimentation is the only explanation that seems to fit the evidence. I think the easy dismissal of the genetic experimentation hypothesis is absurd because we may have hard, smoking gun, DNA evidence of such a thing occurring.

Like you mentioned, there was quite a leap for humanity. Others are quick to point out the growth of the population as being a factor for our advancements. I agree to a certain extent; however, one must not forget what happened before the explosion of our population. Humanity seemingly appeared out of nowhere alongside Cro-Magnon man. When humanity appeared it already obtained mental faculties far beyond the Cro-Magnon man as indicated by our ability to outhunt them and survive where they did not. Our advancements beyond that time may be the result of our population exponentially increasing but the mental faculties that made our advancements possible came near the very moment modern humanity came onto the scene. What is interesting about this insight is that speciation, the development of new species through evolutionary means, typically occurs because groups of a species become isolated from one another. What, I must ask, could isolate two highly-mobile and intelligent life forms in or around Africa where it all started?

Indeed, the hypotheses that don’t involve a more intelligent species seem very fragile. One hypothesis is that for some inexplicable reason humanity diverged into two separate species and the very first modern human was genetically altered by bacteria that couldn’t possibly know where it could insert genetic information without destroying the life form and that this genetic information has been passed down ever since. Without over 30,000 genes in modern humanity's DNA the possibility of a successful alteration is roughly 1 out of 29,700 attempts! If the possibility of speciation without isolation were taken into account the possibility of this being true is nearly 1 out of 1,000,000 or more. Add in the odds of that alteration making us more intelligent and the odds are even less likely. Another hypothesis is that for some inexplicable reason humanity diverged into two separate species as the act of some kind of massive mutation that coincidentally made us very intelligent and that we somehow gave our mutated genes to bacteria. The odds of this happening are even less likely than the first hypothesis! The only other hypothesis is that an intelligent race modified Cro-Magnon man to create humanity by mixing its own DNA, bacterial DNA, and Cro-Magnon DNA to create “Adam” and “Eve” like our ancestors have told us. The odds on this possibility are incalculable but nothing seems to indicate it being less likely than either of the two aforementioned hypotheses. None of them seem likely to have happened but intelligent alteration of DNA seems to fit the evidence better than the others.

Of course we are slaves, look how easily the elites enslave us now and they are not even aliens. We need to start waking up and doing something about the situation that we are in.