|
Post by zendancer on Oct 1, 2019 6:15:24 GMT -5
Right on the chimp thing. The point was tangential. Apparently there are precisely 0 bones in hominids that also appear in the modern human skeleton. And exactly 0 transitional fossils from hominids to humans. Archaeologists call this the missing link. I mean to write more and respond to Andrew and laffy when I regain computer access. Chimps are from what I recall our closest dna match, which is sometimes used as proof that there is a common ancestor or that evolution is actual. But my understanding is that the missing link is still missing. Well, that's an interesting way to look at it. We could also say, for example, that there are zero cobblestones on I-95. Personally, I see it as a fallacy. Lucy looks more like a human than she does a gorilla. She has what's recognizable as a ribcage, pelvis, shins, thighs, etc. Yes, and the fossil evidence has expanded rapidly over the last year or so, and paleontologists are beginning to get a much clearer picture of how the australopithicines migrated out of Africa and what happened to the various species sequentially. When I get a chance, I'll post some of the recent discoveries and some of the websites where up-to-date info can be found.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Oct 1, 2019 7:19:35 GMT -5
I think there's a human danger of assuming that our current civilization is the most advanced, or evolved, to have ever lived on the planet. We're talking hundreds of millions of years here. The time is inconceivably vast and the record is patchy. Finding fossils really just confirms that a particular species existed at the time. I am glad that the chimp theory has been undermined but i hope the new theory isn't too arrogant (i.e that we are the peak of civilization after a long period of growth). We can't even explain the pyramids, let alone describe clearly what was happening between...say... 1 million years ago and 1.1 million years ago (100,000 years!). There's an interesting idea that an unevolved species leaves no decent markers, and a highly evolved species leaves no markers. It's the destructive toddler stage that creates a mess, which then gets cleared up, as they mature. I would say we are at that toddler stage. This was an interesting read www.amazon.co.uk/Hidden-Science-Lost-Civilisations-Investigations/dp/0285640887m.facebook.com/notes/fans-of-the-seth-material-jane-roberts/lumanians-from-seth-speaks/10154448571671484/
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 1, 2019 8:11:24 GMT -5
Well, that's an interesting way to look at it. We could also say, for example, that there are zero cobblestones on I-95. Personally, I see it as a fallacy. Lucy looks more like a human than she does a gorilla. She has what's recognizable as a ribcage, pelvis, shins, thighs, etc. Yes, and the fossil evidence has expanded rapidly over the last year or so, and paleontologists are beginning to get a much clearer picture of how the australopithicines migrated out of Africa and what happened to the various species sequentially. When I get a chance, I'll post some of the recent discoveries and some of the websites where up-to-date info can be found. Oh, that's interesting. I'd imagine that some of the newer sat imaging and ground penetrating radar tech had something to do with this. Two other less recent developments I found fascinating were both the reversal of the prior incorrect consensus that Homo Sapiens never interbred with "Neanderthal's", and also the discovery of the "Denisovan's". When you consider that "mitochondrial Eve" and "y-chromosome Adam" lived among populations that apparently have no direct living descendant's, the Denisovan discovery shouldn't have surprised anyone. It's likely only gonna' get more interestinger as time goes on, and I'm reminded of the car koan.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 1, 2019 8:18:44 GMT -5
I think there's a human danger of assuming that our current civilization is the most advanced, or evolved, to have ever lived on the planet. We're talking hundreds of millions of years here. The time is inconceivably vast and the record is patchy. Finding fossils really just confirms that a particular species existed at the time. I am glad that the chimp theory has been undermined but i hope the new theory isn't too arrogant (i.e that we are the peak of civilization after a long period of growth). We can't even explain the pyramids, let alone describe clearly what was happening between...say... 1 million years ago and 1.1 million years ago (100,000 years!). There's an interesting idea that an unevolved species leaves no decent markers, and a highly evolved species leaves no markers. It's the destructive toddler stage that creates a mess, which then gets cleared up, as they mature. I would say we are at that toddler stage. This was an interesting read www.amazon.co.uk/Hidden-Science-Lost-Civilisations-Investigations/dp/0285640887m.facebook.com/notes/fans-of-the-seth-material-jane-roberts/lumanians-from-seth-speaks/10154448571671484/Well, as far as some of the alt archaeology goes, I have to opine that there are no shortage of naked monarchs for them to point out. The erosion of the sphinx, the fact that coastlines during the ice age were hundreds of miles out from where they are now and even more recent examples like ancient Greek analog computers and that iron tower in India that they can't explain why it doesn't rust. Even in modern times there are examples. It costs a fortune to build a watch like they used to in the 19th century these days, and the cost of re-creating even some Victorian houses and buildings or some of the old steam trains or boats would be outrageous because the industries that produced them were made obsolete. So yeah, this notion that we forget the past is right out there in plain sight. But just because the mainstream is wrong about alot doesn't mean that all the alt guys are necessarily right about all their theories, either.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Oct 1, 2019 8:57:27 GMT -5
Yes, and the fossil evidence has expanded rapidly over the last year or so, and paleontologists are beginning to get a much clearer picture of how the australopithicines migrated out of Africa and what happened to the various species sequentially. When I get a chance, I'll post some of the recent discoveries and some of the websites where up-to-date info can be found. Oh, that's interesting. I'd imagine that some of the newer sat imaging and ground penetrating radar tech had something to do with this. Two other less recent developments I found fascinating were both the reversal of the prior incorrect consensus that Homo Sapiens never interbred with "Neanderthal's", and also the discovery of the "Denisovan's". When you consider that "mitochondrial Eve" and "y-chromosome Adam" lived among populations that apparently have no direct living descendant's, the Denisovan discovery shouldn't have surprised anyone. It's likely only gonna' get more interestinger as time goes on, and I'm reminded of the car koan. Probably because paleontology was my major field of interest for a long time I tend to read any articles about new discoveries, but I often fail to write down the sources, so it may take a while to locate them. When I was majoring in geology in the dark ages, almost no one believed in plate tectonics, but today everyone accepts that the continents drift around on a molten core much like the skim that forms on heated tomato soup. ITSW, lots of interesting stuff has been discovered about hominids quite recently. The new fossil hominid found in the Philipines, the Denisovan finger, the arrowheads from Florida that have been accurately dated to 14,000 years ago (3000 years older than folsom points), etc. immediately come too mind. There's also a complete fossil skull found recently that's blown everyone's mind and several lines of evidence pointing to extremely early hominids walking upright (the fossil footprints, the early skull showing a vertical spinal column, etc). Yes, the neanderthal story is fascinating, and virtually all humans other than africans, have 2 to 4% neanderthal dna in their genomes. It appears that not only did homo sapiens breed with neanderthals, homo sapiens eventually wiped them out (along with a lot of other animals). Neanderthals were in Europe long before H.s, but big brains were obviously too much for them to successfully compete against.
|
|
|
Post by lopezcabellero on Oct 1, 2019 9:01:20 GMT -5
Right on the chimp thing. The point was tangential. Apparently there are precisely 0 bones in hominids that also appear in the modern human skeleton. And exactly 0 transitional fossils from hominids to humans. Archaeologists call this the missing link. I mean to write more and respond to Andrew and laffy when I regain computer access. Chimps are from what I recall our closest dna match, which is sometimes used as proof that there is a common ancestor or that evolution is actual. But my understanding is that the missing link is still missing. Well, that's an interesting way to look at it. We could also say, for example, that there are zero cobblestones on I-95. Personally, I see it as a fallacy. Lucy looks more like a human than she does a gorilla. She has what's recognizable as a ribcage, pelvis, shins, thighs, etc. Sure, but if you look at the early drawings of the Anunaki from our earliest known human ancestors, we could say we look more like them than Lucy. The absence of transitional fossils means just that, no human bones in the hominid species. As far as what differentiates Lucy’s shin from ours, I’ll have to check the sacred texts. But maybe you’re right, maybe the Anunaki folk are splitting hairs. Most such folk date their arrival and departure to be around 400 to 200,000 years ago. Most of my Mark viewing is 2-3 years in the rear view, so I’m certainly not the best person to make the case. But bulk of the evidence comes from the Sumerian texts, which basically posits hybridization and humans having masters, which is an interesting story for them to just make up. Which is why the best way to tackle a collective delusion, if it is one, may be through a two prong approach including ancient psychology and modern archaeology, not to mention that fusion of chromosome 2 that some experts claim cannot happen without an intervening cause. Write back in a few days...
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Oct 1, 2019 9:03:29 GMT -5
I think there's a human danger of assuming that our current civilization is the most advanced, or evolved, to have ever lived on the planet. We're talking hundreds of millions of years here. The time is inconceivably vast and the record is patchy. Finding fossils really just confirms that a particular species existed at the time. I am glad that the chimp theory has been undermined but i hope the new theory isn't too arrogant (i.e that we are the peak of civilization after a long period of growth). We can't even explain the pyramids, let alone describe clearly what was happening between...say... 1 million years ago and 1.1 million years ago (100,000 years!). There's an interesting idea that an unevolved species leaves no decent markers, and a highly evolved species leaves no markers. It's the destructive toddler stage that creates a mess, which then gets cleared up, as they mature. I would say we are at that toddler stage. This was an interesting read www.amazon.co.uk/Hidden-Science-Lost-Civilisations-Investigations/dp/0285640887m.facebook.com/notes/fans-of-the-seth-material-jane-roberts/lumanians-from-seth-speaks/10154448571671484/Well, as far as some of the alt archaeology goes, I have to opine that there are no shortage of naked monarchs for them to point out. The erosion of the sphinx, the fact that coastlines during the ice age were hundreds of miles out from where they are now and even more recent examples like ancient Greek analog computers and that iron tower in India that they can't explain why it doesn't rust. Even in modern times there are examples. It costs a fortune to build a watch like they used to in the 19th century these days, and the cost of re-creating even some Victorian houses and buildings or some of the old steam trains or boats would be outrageous because the industries that produced them were made obsolete. So yeah, this notion that we forget the past is right out there in plain sight. But just because the mainstream is wrong about alot doesn't mean that all the alt guys are necessarily right about all their theories, either. aye. That's partly why it doesn't tend to get my attention these days. Even though I have a personal sense of what's true, I maintain a position of 'necessary doubt' which I find becomes a tedious position. Also why I have been more drawn to non-duality forums over the years, where oddly, there's a greater scope for me to discuss.
|
|
|
Post by lopezcabellero on Oct 1, 2019 9:06:59 GMT -5
Right on the chimp thing. The point was tangential. Apparently there are precisely 0 bones in hominids that also appear in the modern human skeleton. And exactly 0 transitional fossils from hominids to humans. Archaeologists call this the missing link. I mean to write more and respond to Andrew and laffy when I regain computer access. Chimps are from what I recall our closest dna match, which is sometimes used as proof that there is a common ancestor or that evolution is actual. But my understanding is that the missing link is still missing. Well, that's an interesting way to look at it. We could also say, for example, that there are zero cobblestones on I-95. Personally, I see it as a fallacy. Lucy looks more like a human than she does a gorilla. She has what's recognizable as a ribcage, pelvis, shins, thighs, etc. Point being that Anunaki folk claim Lucy or a hominid was fused with Anunaki genes to make humans. Watching my son age from 2 into his 3s I cannot deny he is a little 🐵 monkey. Anyway, going on quick vacay for few days Andrew gotta discuss these channeling very interesting phenomenon once heard the Plaedians are 6th dimensional human spirits that sometimes say their from a different world but will discuss later
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Oct 1, 2019 9:24:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Oct 1, 2019 9:26:10 GMT -5
Chimps are from what I recall our closest dna match, which is sometimes used as proof that there is a common ancestor or that evolution is actual. But my understanding is that the missing link is still missing. That's been my understanding as well. I actually thought Darwin's theory has been sufficiently debunked by now. Just think of the Haeckel drawings controversy!
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 1, 2019 9:33:40 GMT -5
Well, that's an interesting way to look at it. We could also say, for example, that there are zero cobblestones on I-95. Personally, I see it as a fallacy. Lucy looks more like a human than she does a gorilla. She has what's recognizable as a ribcage, pelvis, shins, thighs, etc. Sure, but if you look at the early drawings of the Anunaki from our earliest known human ancestors, we could say we look more like them than Lucy. The absence of transitional fossils means just that, no human bones in the hominid species. As far as what differentiates Lucy’s shin from ours, I’ll have to check the sacred texts. But maybe you’re right, maybe the Anunaki folk are splitting hairs. Most such folk date their arrival and departure to be around 400 to 200,000 years ago. Most of my Mark viewing is 2-3 years in the rear view, so I’m certainly not the best person to make the case. But bulk of the evidence comes from the Sumerian texts, which basically posits hybridization and humans having masters, which is an interesting story for them to just make up. Which is why the best way to tackle a collective delusion, if it is one, may be through a two prong approach including ancient psychology and modern archaeology, not to mention that fusion of chromosome 2 that some experts claim cannot happen without an intervening cause. Write back in a few days... Starfish dude. Explain me away the 5-thingy before I read Sumerian texts. Just because Lucy's finger isn't exactly Home Sapien, the fact that her spine is unlike any ape's but more like an H.S. is proof enough for me of the likely relationship -- though of course, I don't own a time machine. Neither do the Anunaki proponents. If you're happy with "channeled" interpretations of ancient texts as supportive of their position, that's fine, but I can certainly understand why they don't accept that in academia.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 1, 2019 9:35:55 GMT -5
Well, as far as some of the alt archaeology goes, I have to opine that there are no shortage of naked monarchs for them to point out. The erosion of the sphinx, the fact that coastlines during the ice age were hundreds of miles out from where they are now and even more recent examples like ancient Greek analog computers and that iron tower in India that they can't explain why it doesn't rust. Even in modern times there are examples. It costs a fortune to build a watch like they used to in the 19th century these days, and the cost of re-creating even some Victorian houses and buildings or some of the old steam trains or boats would be outrageous because the industries that produced them were made obsolete. So yeah, this notion that we forget the past is right out there in plain sight. But just because the mainstream is wrong about alot doesn't mean that all the alt guys are necessarily right about all their theories, either. aye. That's partly why it doesn't tend to get my attention these days. Even though I have a personal sense of what's true, I maintain a position of 'necessary doubt' which I find becomes a tedious position. Also why I have been more drawn to non-duality forums over the years, where oddly, there's a greater scope for me to discuss. Is that because, ultimately, the stories of human origin, are just .. well .. you know .. stories?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 1, 2019 9:40:36 GMT -5
Oh, that's interesting. I'd imagine that some of the newer sat imaging and ground penetrating radar tech had something to do with this. Two other less recent developments I found fascinating were both the reversal of the prior incorrect consensus that Homo Sapiens never interbred with "Neanderthal's", and also the discovery of the "Denisovan's". When you consider that "mitochondrial Eve" and "y-chromosome Adam" lived among populations that apparently have no direct living descendant's, the Denisovan discovery shouldn't have surprised anyone. It's likely only gonna' get more interestinger as time goes on, and I'm reminded of the car koan. Probably because paleontology was my major field of interest for a long time I tend to read any articles about new discoveries, but I often fail to write down the sources, so it may take a while to locate them. When I was majoring in geology in the dark ages, almost no one believed in plate tectonics, but today everyone accepts that the continents drift around on a molten core much like the skim that forms on heated tomato soup. ITSW, lots of interesting stuff has been discovered about hominids quite recently. The new fossil hominid found in the Philipines, the Denisovan finger, the arrowheads from Florida that have been accurately dated to 14,000 years ago (3000 years older than folsom points), etc. immediately come too mind. There's also a complete fossil skull found recently that's blown everyone's mind and several lines of evidence pointing to extremely early hominids walking upright (the fossil footprints, the early skull showing a vertical spinal column, etc). Yes, the neanderthal story is fascinating, and virtually all humans other than africans, have 2 to 4% neanderthal dna in their genomes. It appears that not only did homo sapiens breed with neanderthals, homo sapiens eventually wiped them out (along with a lot of other animals). Neanderthals were in Europe long before H.s, but big brains were obviously too much for them to successfully compete against. From my casual reading I guess it seems the conclusion Neanderthal's were dumb has been challenged over the years. But they were thought to have been relatively quiet compared to H.S. Generally speaking, it seems, overspecialization is a bad long-term survival strategy, and the notion that it was us that killed them off and us that killed off the large fauna has come into question as well, as all of those species had adapted to ice-age conditions. But giant herbivores living on mile-deep sheets of ice kind of puzzles me ... and wow, plate tectonics is that new? Didn't know!
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Oct 1, 2019 9:40:53 GMT -5
aye. That's partly why it doesn't tend to get my attention these days. Even though I have a personal sense of what's true, I maintain a position of 'necessary doubt' which I find becomes a tedious position. Also why I have been more drawn to non-duality forums over the years, where oddly, there's a greater scope for me to discuss. Is that because, ultimately, the stories of human origin, are just .. well .. you know .. stories? yes partly, though that doesn't adequately explain why I engage a lot in political stories. So partly it's also about the fact that I don't have my hands in the dirt like someone like David Wilco.ck does. I can't back up the ideas that resonate with me beyond, 'well, I think it's true' lol. Whereas I can back up current political stuff to a much greater extent and depth.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Oct 1, 2019 9:42:35 GMT -5
Yes, and the fossil evidence has expanded rapidly over the last year or so, and paleontologists are beginning to get a much clearer picture of how the australopithicines migrated out of Africa and what happened to the various species sequentially. When I get a chance, I'll post some of the recent discoveries and some of the websites where up-to-date info can be found. The crux of the matter here is how to correctly date what's been excavated. Not just fossils, but also artifacts and entire cities. That's where the confusion is. I'm not claiming to have the answer, but it's pretty clear to me that lines between fact and fiction disappeared at some point and need to be redrawn.
|
|