My signature... the explanation..

Not that I'm an extroardinary jerk but it's dark where I am and I thought i was editing instead of posting replies like was actually happening. No offense but I said your incredulousness was stressing me a little. I like your posts but I guess I'm being to direct :smt083

 

lol... you did it like 12 times... :smt043

 

YOU JUST CALLED OVER 80 PERCENT OF THE PLANET NUTS FOR THEIR BELIEFS...over 80 percent of the planet believes in a religious god or gods...your entitled to you beliefs but don't trash others beliefs because it suits you...finding one bible/koran/religious books story/parable/analogy to be false doesn't destroy the entire books lessons....people find meanings of things based in fact according to what period they live in....every word of the story doesn't have to be proven to still offer a truthful essence or basis....I wouldn't reccomend attacking and calling nuts all those who believe the way they do....discredits you and makes you sound closeminded like those you call NUTS...

 

Apparently it's not so easy to find everyone suddenly thinks same and will dive into flambouyant free conversation.

 

Sorry to burst your bubble there people, but Mitochondrial DNA pretty much proved that human beings evolved from Homo Erectus, and that the first "Human" was a woman, a "Mitochondrial Eve." This took place in Africa about 500,000 years ago or so, and by following the dispersal patterns and ages of fossils they've (when I say "They," I mean the greater Anthropological community) have been able to determine that human beings emigrated out of Africa in waves (more specifically South Africa,) begining about 150,000 years ago, first into Europe (where they displaced Neanderthals) then into Asia, and the last wave into the Americas over the Bering Strait. The campsites go all along the African coasts into Europe, The middle east, India, and China. All the other primates (including several species of more physcially powerful Austrolopithicies) were wiped out as soon as Homo Sapens arrived.

Now, is this what actually happened? Who knows, but it's what fits the availible evidence. I wouldn't be adverse to thinking that maybe sometime in the ancient past there was some alien contact.(actually, I'm quite convinced it did happen. Take the Dongo tribe in Africa that knows about the existance of the star Sirius B along with it's orbit, which is invisible to the naked eye.) I also wouldn't doubt that perhaps some of these vistors had meddled in our genetics a bit, maybe boosting the size of our brains, maybe weeding out some of the stupider ones, maybe transplanting people around the globe. But, there really is no reason to think that aliens "created" us, not when you put all the fossils side by side and compare them. There really are no distinguishing characteristics humans posses that have no precedent in the fossil record.

One thing you hear about (especially from Pseduo-scientific Christian creationist fools, sorry, not meaning to offend anyone) is "gaps" in the fossil record, which may be true if you're talking about a deep sea oyster. But it's certainly not true when you're talking about human beings, which problably has the most complete and researched fossil record out there. Why? Becasue they're the most interesting to us, we being human and all. Of course there are "gaps," and people like to use that to say shit like "Oh see! There's no 'Missing Link!" Yes, there is no missing link. They found it already.

Aliens as "God," yeah I saw Aliens Vs. Preadator too. :smt042 Serisouly though, I wouldn't doubt it. All the Gods in the ancient religions come from the sky, they all fly around, have strange powers, etc. Any of you guys ever read "Chariots of the Gods" by Von Danniken? Basically he looks at the pyrimids, the easter island Rongo-rongo heads, all the monuments that required advanced engineering skills and tries to decipher ancient alien contact. Interesting, but he fails to mention that people back then were essentially as smart as we are today. There's no reason people in ancient Egypt, Iran, Easter Island, or Mexico couldn't have built those monuments. I think the theological arugement sounds a lot more convincing though.

See, you really do learn stuff in college, even the piece of crap college I went to. Anyway....


De-evolution has some basis in scientific fact, it basically means any organisim that evolves along a path that does not lead to survival. Like there's this Moose that had a 12 foot antler span, basically it's antlers grew so large that the animal couldn't survive. So it's not really a highly advanced being de-evolving into a rodent or something.

Take for example, genes that cause myopia (short or nearsightedness.) Ten thousand years ago a person with myopia that got bad enough problably would not be able to survive. But today we give the person a pair of glasses, problem solved. But the genes that cause myopia get passed onto another generation, hence "de-evolution."

Which is not to say that all people with glasses are mutants or something. Everyone in my family wears glasses (excpet me that is. He he he)

 

thats irrelevant.... so how did mitochondrial eve come about?? from a seed?

 

what do you think of this?? :-D :-D .... there ya go... if your not following all this technical jargon, thats all you gotta know..

 

We're all DEVO.

 

whooch! wippit good!

 

And before Homo erectus was discovered who did they think we evolved from? That cycle isn't responsible enough for determining the concrete evidence it purports. And, Mitochondiral DNA isn't it only traceable from mom's side anyway?

This part is for ryan. This isn't my best reasoning but I'll speak in terms you guys should have no problem understanding. Say a Homo Erectus female mates or is raped by a neanderthal male, then they have a hybrid child. That hybrid I guess is form of degeneration from the Homo Erectus form and not de-evolution. The hybrids then would have then combined with the genepool of the Homo Erectus in that manner as well. Now the races today are so spanking close today that differences are not the same as thos between the different species of hominids so don't go calling mixed ethnicities degenerates because we simply don't know that. But anyway those are the parallels and maybe I'm speaking to you on som subconcious level since you're not clicking well the incredulous reaction I was getting.

 

Actually, the leading theory is that Mitochondrial DNA (which was considered "junk DNA," until they found out what it really was used for) was actually two organisms that joined together in a symbiotic relationship, like say, the bird that picks the teeth of a crocodile.

Okay, that was a bad example. But you see what I mean.

It is this DNA that seperates us from the rest of the primates. Now, did aliens cause this to happen? Who knows. We can't rule that out. But, there is no reason to think it couldn't have happened without outside intervention.

 

Yes, mitochondrial DNA is only traceable in women. They can trace it back all the way to the first "woman," and thus get a rough estimate about how old the human race is.

This is all info that's in any newer college anthropology textbook. I find the whole subject pretty fascinating myself.

Now, I would say that looking at the strange images found in cave art (and the art of native peoples around the world) that some of them look and awful lot like aliens.

Actually Arsnel, if two members of different species do have a child, the kid is usually sterile. Like when they mate a Lion and a Tiger, the "Lyger" is sterile. Or mules, the offspring of horses and donkeys.

 

and let me try and dumb this down for you... there would be no homo erectus and neanderthal in existance AT THE SAME TIME... for this to happen... Did you read my post about the squirel?

 

I want to continue but I need think scratch the surface here and peer into the rabbit hole:

Fossils could fill gaps in human evolution
Remains from Ethiopia date back 4.5 million years
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6843721

 

No I missed the squirrel, but did you miss Hwanja's post where Human Beings (obviously Homo something or other) emigrated out of southern africa (according to records) and displaced the Neanderthals population? GO check it out.

 

i dont get the relevance...

 

But there were Homo Sapiens and Neanderthals in existance at the same time. There's even evidence of trade among the two species.

There's evidence that Neandethals tried to copy the advanced toolmaking of Homo Sapiens, but were unable to. Which is what problably lead to thier extinction (as Humans took over more land the Neaderthals were pushed out of the good hunting grounds. remember also that this happened in Europe during the ice age and food was very scarce.)

 

That's maybe because that was in reply to Hawanja. The post afterwards was addressed to ryangassxx actually.

 

ok yea, your right... my bad,.... homo erectus was indeed in existance at the same time as neanderthals... Now remind me why this is relevant again??