Are We An Alien Social Experiment

Originally posted by Darth Logan

And that common ancestor is.............. what? And you just said it was'nt apes. I was just curious to know what it is.

Have you ever looked closely at ourselves, and of the animals and made the connection to our environment and how evolution shaped us? We are perfectly suited to live on earth. No we don't have furry coats to protect from the cold, we are not as element hardy as the animals, we don't have sharp claws to protect ourselves with either, but we have one thing they don't. And that is extra mental capacity.

Our brains allow us to cover ourselves when we are cold, allow us to fashion weapons to be used like claws, but better. Our brains are our evolutionary advantage. And we did not come from the animal kingdom. That is my OP.

bahahahaha, don't tell me i stumbled accross a freaking creationist.

en.wikipedia.org...
should be a good read. of course the common ancestors were apes as well - but not the same apes around today. how hard is that to understand?

you might also be interested to know that every single animal will cover itself when cold or cuddle up against another member of its own species... and we are *far* from the only animals capable of creating tools. Pretty much all the apes do, and yes *crows* can create simple tools by breaking twigs to be exactly as long as they need in order to reach into a box, for example.

[edit on 19-6-2009 by JScytale]

Originally posted by Picollo30
While playing the new Sims 3 i started thinking about an alien playing a computer game, a simulation game, and i among other people was one of the protagonists.

Is it possible that we are living beings trapped inside a virtual world, an invention created by a superior race? And all that we see or hear are holograms?

Could we be like a form of entertainment for those aliens? Is it possible to break the code, to create a glitch in the program and by crashing it the truth reveals itself?

Yeah maybe i'm seeing to much Matrix and playing too much Sims but just think about it, don't you guys get the feeling that something is not right with the world but you can't explain yet you work to find the answers for your doubts? A feeling that doesn't go away instead it starts growing and growing along with all your questions without answer....

I too have the Sims 3 and it is awesome (I have an entire Planet Express crew of 7 people from Futurama.)

I have heard that some smart guy made some equasion or formula that proved there was a high possibility if not probability that we are all in fact Sims.

I do not know whether this is true nor do I specifically care; it's so realistic that I feel it is real and if I were to find it were fake, I would be fake too, therefore it would still be as real as me, or I would be as fake as it would.

But allow me to say, I doubt if we "break the code" and create a "glitch in the program," I doubt the truth would be revealed. When you computer crashes truth isn't revealed, the whole damn thing just instantly dies and shuts off. That would not be good.

Please don't break the code sir. I don't know how to reboot.

ahhhhh yes........one of my favorite South Park Episodes.....'Earth', the reality show.

These things do not seem so very far-fetched anymore now do they? I doubt it's anything that cut and dry but the possibility that we serve as an experiment for a higher species is not hard to believe.

Originally posted by JScytale

en.wikipedia.org...
should be a good read. of course the common ancestors were apes as well - but not the same apes around today. how hard is that to understand?

you might also be interested to know that every single animal will cover itself when cold or cuddle up against another member of its own species... and we are *far* from the only animals capable of creating tools. Pretty much all the apes do, and yes *crows* can create simple tools by breaking twigs to be exactly as long as they need in order to reach into a box, for example.

[edit on 19-6-2009 by JScytale]

So true.

I used to always hear as a kid how we were superior because only we made tools to solve our problems.

I would say that would mean we are INferior, and NEED to make tools to solve our problems. A #ing tiger does not need tools to accomplish anything. It therefore does not make tools. That does not necessarily make it less advanced than us, it just simply was born a ninja and has no need for tools.

Those animals which need tools such as apes, who make tools to dig for bugs; or birds, who make tools.. to.. dig... for bugs..., make tools. I have now seen several animals make tools and the internet and Google are very useful for finding animals making tools.

I decided the idea that we are different because we make tools is ignorance and must be purged from the books. I thought one thing that made us different was style.

My theory is that we are different since we are the only animals who specifically and deliberately create our own style and do it because we like it and think we are cool.

That is, it WAS my theory, until I saw an America's Funniest Home Videos with a bird which was cutting off long strips of a green piece of construction paper TO CREATE NEW LONG GREEN FEATHERS which it then placed and wove into it's own feathers. So animals have tools and style.

We are animals and we always have been. That is the truth. We're not different, we just simply evolved a bigger brain to deal with our problems instead of evolving awesome fangs or claws or poison.

Except for me. I am Godzilla.

[edit on 19-6-2009 by BaronVonGodzilla]

Well thats just it. It's not hard to understand evolution, but you could'nt make up your mind on how or if humans evolved from apes or not.
Evolution is just a theory, unless you know something the scientists don't.

For evolution to happen you need a stable environment for Billions of years. Science has proven that we have not had billions of years of a stable environment. Its quite the opposite. And there is a hughe gap in the fossil records.
So I can stand by my statement, until evolution becomes Fact!

Originally posted by Darth Logan
Well thats just it. It's not hard to understand evolution, but you could'nt make up your mind on how or if humans evolved from apes or not.
Evolution is just a theory, unless you know something the scientists don't.

For evolution to happen you need a stable environment for Billions of years. Science has proven that we have not had billions of years of a stable environment. Its quite the opposite. And there is a hughe gap in the fossil records.
So I can stand by my statement, until evolution becomes Fact!

no, i stated pretty clearly. you seemed to assume we evolved from the same apes around today. i said no, it was a common ancestor. said common ancestor was also an ape, but i didnt use that term in the first reply because you would have misunderstood it.

evolution *is* a fact. its observable, and takes anywhere from months to millions of years depending on the rate of reproduction and hostility of the environment - *not* billions. otherwise, what is your explanation for bacteria becoming immune to antibiotics? it is rather simple. antibiotics kill most of the bacteria. a few are lucky and are resistant / immune by chance genetic mutation. only they survive, and reproduce. result: all the new bacteria are resistant / immune. it is very easy to observe in their case because their rate of reproduction allows them to adapt very, very quickly, as opposed to the hundreds of thousands to millions of years it takes for larger animals.

not to mention, evolution occurs fastest in *unstable* environments. when a species is becoming wiped out, only a few members of it will survive due to whatever traits allowed them to. it could be resistance to a disease, it could be a thicker coat during an ice age, it could be stronger legs allowing them to outrun their primary predator... but by becoming all that is left of the gene pool, all of their offspring are going to have the same trait. imagine if the sun started pumping out a lot more radiation, or the ozone layer was completely destroyed and lethal skin cancers started becoming extremely widespread. lighter-skinned people, having less melanin, would be a lot more susceptible and would be afflicted at a *much* higher rate. fast forward a few thousand years, and i can guarantee almost every single person on the planet would have very dark skin.

it is actually rather obvious we came from the animal kingdom, as well - and we're still a part of it, even if some of us like to think of us as separate. we are about as different from a bonobo or a chimpanzee as a bonobo or a chimpanzee is from a gorilla. we all share common traits. we are all large-brained, intelligent apex predators with almost identical physical makeup. we all have opposable thumbs to varying degrees. we are all problem-solving, social hunters.

[edit on 19-6-2009 by JScytale]

reply to post by JScytale


The Theory of Evolution is NOT a scientific law or a law of biology. A scientific law must be 100% correct. Failure to meet only one challenge proves the law is wrong.Theory of Evolution fails many challenges, not simply one. The Theory of Evolution will never become a law of science because it is so many errors. This is why it is called a Theory, instead of a Law.

The process of natural selection is not an evolutionary process. The DNA in plants and animals allows selective breeding to achieve desired results. Dogs are a good example of selective breeding. The DNA in all dogs has many recessive traits. A desired trait can be produced in dogs by selecting dogs with a particular trait to produce offspring with that trait. This specialized selective breeding can continue for generation after generation until a breed of dog is developed. This is the same as the "survival of the fittest" theory of the evolutionists. Many different types of dogs can be developed this way, but they can never develop a cat by selectively breeding dogs. Natural selection can never extend outside of the DNA limit. DNA Cannot be changed into a new species by natural selection. The same process of selective breeding is done with flowers, fruits and vegetables. New variations of the species are possible, but a new species has never been developed by science. In fact, the most modern laboratories are unable to produce a left-hand protein as found in humans and animals. Evolutionist fail to admit that no species has ever been proven to have evolved in any way. Evolution is simply pie-in-the-sky conjecture without scientific proof.

Evolution is a theory not fact. Although this is fun debating, I think its along the line of derailing the OP's thread so this will be my last post!

Thanks for the input JS!

Originally posted by Darth Logan
reply to post by JScytale

 

The Theory of Evolution is NOT a scientific law or a law of biology. A scientific law must be 100% correct. Failure to meet only one challenge proves the law is wrong.Theory of Evolution fails many challenges, not simply one. The Theory of Evolution will never become a law of science because it is so many errors. This is why it is called a Theory, instead of a Law.

nothing in science is absolute certainty. natural laws are, by your book, a "theory" as well. newton's laws are reliable but far from the truths we realize now. evolution is just the same. it is plainly observable and reliable. is it 100% accurate? no, just like ANY scientific theory it is a very close approximation to reality that advances as time goes by. is it reliable and demonstrable? yes.

The process of natural selection is not an evolutionary process. The DNA in plants and animals allows selective breeding to achieve desired results. Dogs are a good example of selective breeding. The DNA in all dogs has many recessive traits. A desired trait can be produced in dogs by selecting dogs with a particular trait to produce offspring with that trait. This specialized selective breeding can continue for generation after generation until a breed of dog is developed. This is the same as the "survival of the fittest" theory of the evolutionists. Many different types of dogs can be developed this way, but they can never develop a cat by selectively breeding dogs. Natural selection can never extend outside of the DNA limit. DNA Cannot be changed into a new species by natural selection. The same process of selective breeding is done with flowers, fruits and vegetables. New variations of the species are possible, but a new species has never been developed by science. In fact, the most modern laboratories are unable to produce a left-hand protein as found in humans and animals. Evolutionist fail to admit that no species has ever been proven to have evolved in any way. Evolution is simply pie-in-the-sky conjecture without scientific proof.

Evolution is a theory not fact. Although this is fun debating, I think its along the line of derailing the OP's thread so this will be my last post!

Thanks for the input JS!

see, i don't understand your logic here. you can't accept natural selection and deny evolution, natural selection *is* evolution in action. also, a dog won't ever become a cat for many reasons. first off, they are *very* far separated from their common ancestor and went down two extremely different paths. second off, they are both successful in their own respective niches, and have different methods of attaining the same results so that won't change. if a dolphin can swim with its tail, it isn't going to alter its method of swimming to be like, say a jellyfish undulating its body. it can already swim. down the road, changes would happen to say, the shape of a dolphins tail, or the musculature in it, to allow it to swim better, but it isn't going to change its method when said method works and it's so far down the road.

and what do you mean evolutionists cannot prove anything has evolved? there is a long fossil record with obvious adaptations from one species to the next. also, natural selection easily creates a new species. though differentiating between subspecies, breed, etc is a very fuzzy line - one of the most commonly used markers for two animals being different species is when they are no longer able to successfully mate with each other, thereby isolating both gene pools. there are plenty of animals, especially on islands, that are obviously related to counterparts on the mainland with adaptations to live in their new environment. i highly recommend visiting the galapagos. there is a reason darwin made such big advances with his theory there - its plainly obvious.

also, regarding dogs and "DNA's limitations", you *cannot* genetically modify a pug and by only making certain genes active and others inactive, get a german sheperd. their DNA is significantly different, but not so different they cannot mate with each other - thus they are the same species, but not the same breed.

[edit on 19-6-2009 by JScytale]

reply to post by JScytale


oh, and i thought i'd drop in some pretty damning evidence for people who believe only humans are able to create tools, with the exception of a few apes.



notice how the crow realizes the straight stick won't grab the object he is after, so he jams it into the base and pulls it around to form a hook? he doesn't do this immediately, so you can tell it isn't conditioned and that he realizes his current method won't work. he also pulls the stick around with great determination - puts it in, bends it, removes it, immediately uses it - it is not accidental.

[edit on 19-6-2009 by JScytale]