WE ARE STAR PEOPLE: Scientific proof we were created by aliens

reply to post by Freedom_is_Slavery


CANNOT BE EXPLAINED BY MODERN SCIENCE WHICH IS CONSTANTLY GROWING AND CHANGING?!
ALIENS! IT'S THE ONLY EXPLANATION!

Edit: As for all of this star-people BS... Yes, we all come from the stars. ALL of the elements were created in the cores of high-mass stars. All of the iron in your blood was created BILLIONS of years ago. Reality is even more interesting than this extremely speculative sci-fi crap.

reply to post by HairlessApe


Your body is made of elements. These elements could have come from the core of a star or from "big bang" - the speculative origin of the universe.

That does not remove God's hand from scheme of things.

There is no viable explanation of why this world even exists; how it holds together; or other processes that you see everyday if you remove God from the equation.

Originally posted by Freedom_is_Slavery
reply to post by thedoctorswife

 

I searched but obviously not with the correct words here is a thread covering the same thing

Chiming in here not to comment on the subject (other than to say it's a bunch of hooey,) but for instructional purposes.

I've given up on the search function here.

Now, I use google to search this site thusly:
in the searchbox at google, type in your search terms, followed by - site:abovetopsecret.com

Like this sample search I ran:

link to sample search using the search term "Harte"


Try it. You'll like it.

Harte

Originally posted by GargIndia




There is no viable explanation of why this world even exists; how it holds together; or other processes that you see everyday if you remove God from the equation.

"no viable explanation" for you, that is. the fact that it "just is" is viable for me. are there self-organizing forces at work here or a thing with its own intentions like some god? I guess the first step to understanding one another would be to define what "God" means to each of us. or better yet what is the difference between big "G" god and just plain old little "g" god? can you explain that?

reply to post by bottleslingguy


As per my view, there are no 'gods'. There is only one single 'God' who created the Universe and sustains it.

There is no alien creator of earth humans. I do not consider "God" as alien as this God is everywhere.

Any race on another planet can be no different from races on Earth. All life is bound by the same rules.

Every human must be recognized as creation of the same "God" and respected for that.

reply to post by bottleslingguy


What self-organizing force? You are merely observing the forces of nature created by God. There is a definite structure in the Universe which we explain by our sciences. However this science is because of the Universe and not vice versa.

I can give you thousands of reasons why God exists. But ATS is not a place for such discussion.

This is the link to what they are all talking about:

arxiv.org...

Not an April Fool either, although choosing to release it on April 1st is hardly a smart thing to do.

Here's their aknowledgements and they are serious about it.

Acknowledgments Partially the study was financed by the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The research was appreciably promoted by Professor Bakytzhan T. Zhumagulov from the National Engineering Academy of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Part of the research was made during V.I.S.’ stay at Max-Planck - Institut für biophysikalische Chemie (Göttingen, Germany) on kind invitation of Professor Manfred Eigen. V.I.S. expresses special thanks to Ruthild Winkler-Oswatitsch for her valuable help...

reply to post by WatchRider


Why should we attach so much importance to this?
It is just a conclusion of one person. People have all kind of theories and go great lengths to prove.

Originally posted by GargIndia
reply to post by WatchRider

 

Why should we attach so much importance to this?
It is just a conclusion of one person. People have all kind of theories and go great lengths to prove.

You should attach importance to it if it is true. So the question should be 'is this true?'. I'd say you'd have to have a pretty good knowledge of genetics and mathematics to reason about the truth of this theory. You can't dismiss it with only the reasoning 'lots of people have theories'. It shouldn't be dismissed only because one does not have the requisite knowledge to assess it.

I know nothing about genetics, but I do know that current theories about the functions of the genome are completely lacking an overall framework which describes the informational processes taking place (lots of data, very little theory). Therefore any synthesis which attempts to explain the layout of the genome seems worth considering?

Thanks for posting the paper Watchrider.

reply to post by yampa


The "research" makes two points:

1. There is a hidden code in the human genome.
2. The hidden code is inserted by aliens.

How is point 1 related to point 2.

I agree I am no expert on human genome. But I can see the weakness in argument.

Originally posted by GargIndia
reply to post by yampa

 

The "research" makes two points:

1. There is a hidden code in the human genome.
2. The hidden code is inserted by aliens.

How is point 1 related to point 2.

I agree I am no expert on human genome. But I can see the weakness in argument.

I don't think they ever said it was only present in the human genome, nor that anything was inserted in the human genome. The paper only discusses 'genomic DNA'. The theory relates to panspermia, which proposes life on earth was seeded via diatoms (or alike) contained in meteorites.

Also, you say:

Humans have existed on this planet for billions of years. The technology develops and vanishes with time but humans have seen it all.

was that a mistake? Not billions, surely?

reply to post by Freedom_is_Slavery


While I do believe in an Ultimate Creator, I must say it's been my gut feeling for some time now that we were very likely created by these star people...

How long before this will be accepted..?
How will it be twisted?or will it ever be accepted...??



tom

reply to post by yampa


I stand by what I say.

You have your beliefs. I have mine.

Originally posted by GargIndia
reply to post by yampa

 

I stand by what I say.

You have your beliefs. I have mine.

Yes, I have beliefs based on data and scientific reasoning and an attempt at an increasingly solid perception of the true sequence of events in the world using the repetitive constants which apply to everyone.

This paper is also an attempt to establish real physical constants which apply to us all. You seem to be taking the opposite approach to that and saying 'all beliefs are equal'? Sounds like you might need to spend a bit of time clarifying the water instead of muddying it up and saying 'look, no one can see'.

reply to post by yampa


What scientific reasoning you are talking about?

Your quote : "which proposes life on earth was seeded via diatoms (or alike) contained in meteorites"

And why life cannot originate on this Earth itself??

A meteorite that is transiting through cold and airless environment for a long time can carry life; but a wonderful warm planet cannot be the origin? This is scientific thinking.

What else reasoning do you have. Let us see?

Originally posted by GargIndia
reply to post by yampa

 

What scientific reasoning you are talking about?

Your quote : "which proposes life on earth was seeded via diatoms (or alike) contained in meteorites"

And why life cannot originate on this Earth itself??

What else reasoning do you have. Let us see?

Life could originate on Earth itself (although likely not exclusively on earth), I'm not against that idea. But panspermia is a pretty interesting idea too, I don't rule out either. The mathematical field of the universe applies everywhere, so if that field contains some form of intelligent design, then you would expect to see signs of that field in organisms which evolved in the mathematical field. It doesn't require any direct intervention from gods or aliens.

I do rule out the idea that humans have been walking around on Earth for billions of years though, because there is no evidence to support that. I don't consider the Vedas a very good source for origins theory since they were written by peasants with no data or methodology (even if they were divinely inspired). There is also the fact that the Vedas are likely laced with code too, like most of those ancient religious works, and that many of the stories were never supposed to be taken literally.

reply to post by yampa


Your quote:

"I do rule out the idea that humans have been walking around on Earth for billions of years though, because there is no evidence to support that. I don't consider the Vedas a very good source for origins theory since they were written by peasants with no data or methodology (even if they were divinely inspired). There is also the fact that the Vedas are likely laced with code too, like most of those ancient religious works, and that many of the stories were never supposed to be taken literally."

See you are talking about something you do not know about and making it up as you go. How scientific is that.

Earth is a unique planet. It has the conditions for a wide variety of life to flourish- a optimum blend of elements and weather conditions. Whatever is true today was true 1 billion years before as well. The Earth is estimated to be about 4 billion years old by "science".

The earth has active geological processes which convert and reprocess objects. You would not find remains of a house or a body of a human that existed millions of years ago? However you have petroleum and coal today because there was animal and plant life 100s of millions of years before today. If animal and plant life existed 100s of million years before; what is it that rules out humans?

Originally posted by GargIndia

See you are talking about something you do not know about and making it up as you go. How scientific is that.

Earth is a unique planet. It has the conditions for a wide variety of life to flourish- a optimum blend of elements and weather conditions. Whatever is true today was true 1 billion years before as well. The Earth is estimated to be about 4 billion years old by "science".

If animal and plant life existed 100s of million years before; what is it that rules out humans?

What am I making up as I go along, specifically?

You do not know that Earth is unique planet, since you have no information about other planets outside out solar system. But we do have a very long fossil record which stretches back billions of years. What we see across those years in something science calls 'evolution' - you've heard of that? That isn't just my theory, correct?

The fossil record changes, from simple organisms, to more complex organisms. At no point in this fossil record do we see very complex organisms like humans arising then disappearing. That simply isn't supported by evidence.

Hence, fossils range in age from the youngest at the start of the Holocene Epoch to the oldest from the Archaean Eon, up to 3.4 billion years old.[2] The observation that certain fossils were associated with certain rock strata led early geologists to recognize a geological timescale in the 19th century. The development of radiometric dating techniques in the early 20th century allowed geologists to determine the numerical or "absolute" age of the various strata and thereby the included fossils.

The oldest know vertebrate fossils are about 450 million years old. That is, before those fossils, there is no sign of any animals that even had a backbone, let alone animals as complex as a mammal. We're talking about proto-fish here, not mammals.

Discovery of the skull of a shrewlike animal the size of a paper clip pushes back the origin of mammals, including humans, to 195 million years ago. Found in China, the tiny skull shows evidence that the first mammals evolved from reptiles 45 million years earlier than widely believed.
"Previously, the remains of the first true mammals were only found in deposits 150 million years old," significantly younger than the newly discovered skull, notes Alfred Crompton, Fisher Research Professor of Natural History at Harvard University.

This stuff is really easy to study if you are willing. It has been a science for 200 years and I'm not going to get into an extensive debate about whether evolution is a real thing or not if you are not even going to acknowledge the postulates of current science.

"What am I making up as I go along, specifically?"
You have no knowledge about Veda. You talk about that. You come face to face to me and talk about Veda. I shall listen.

Of all the planets that science knows about, Earth is a unique planet. It is unique in terms of the ideal conditions for life. If you know about another planet like Earth, please let me know.

Science is evolving regarding knowledge of our past. A lot is known, but a lot is yet to be discovered.

Fossils are only one piece of the puzzle.

Western science has gone from "creationism" (that supposedly happened 5000 years before) to billions of years in a couple of hundred years. That is quite a leap.

Now we are stuck in Darwinism - supposed evolution from simple micro-organism to successively more complex life forms. Even this will change with time.

Following links may be useful:
www.ehow.com...
creationtruthministries.org...

You can search for objects found in coal and embedded in stones by searching on the Internet.

Do not assume that I have not read what you are pointing out. I am presenting an alternative view.

Originally posted by GargIndia
"What am I making up as I go along, specifically?"
You have no knowledge about Veda. You talk about that. You come face to face to me and talk about Veda. I shall listen.

I know about Dharma. Perhaps study that concept harder? A solid picture of reality is considered essential for mental well-being.

There are countless threads here debunking the links you have posted.