Evolution is a farce: Evidence

a reply to: josehelps

And I do have a question out of pure interest. It seems as though you and itsthetooth presented very similar ideas. Did you two collaborate? Or is it just total coincidence?

a reply to: kayej1188

Why do you have so much trouble accepting and admitting that everything you have claimed over the past 5 years on this site are your beliefs, your theories? It's very troubling that you are unable and unwilling to recognize this, and it would do wonders for your credibility and chance of being taken seriously if you did. I think by this point, the actual content of your theories have been discussed ad nauseam. The fact remains that everything you claim are based on a couple fundamental assumptions. Namely, that 1) god exists, 2) aliens exist, and that 3) everything in the bible is true. Before you can successfully create a comprehensive theory based on these things, you need to prove they are true. The fact remains that you have no provided ONE piece of indisputable proof that any 1 of these 3 assumptions are true. I invite you to do so, but you have no done so to this point.

Well actually I have, but I'll do it again, but that still doesn't make it a theory or a belief. You see if you knew and understood the definition of both.... Well I'll post them..

the·o·ry
ˈTHēərē/
noun
noun: theory; plural noun: theories

a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained.
"Darwin's theory of evolution"
synonyms: hypothesis, thesis, conjecture, supposition, speculation, postulation, postulate, proposition, premise, surmise, assumption, presupposition; More
opinion, view, belief, contention
"I reckon that confirms my theory"
principles, ideas, concepts;
philosophy, ideology, system of ideas, science
"modern economic theory"
a set of principles on which the practice of an activity is based.
"a theory of education"
an idea used to account for a situation or justify a course of action.
"my theory would be that the place has been seriously mismanaged"

While it's entirely possible to end up with an idea from facts, there comes a certain point where it's no longer just an idea. Even more so if the entire result is strictly from unanimous facts. So we will start with square one.

Adam and Eve experienced two out of eight of the publicly published list of the abduction scenario. From wiki.


#1 Capture. The abductee is somehow rendered incapable of resisting, and taken from terrestrial surroundings to an apparent alien spacecraft.
#2 Examination and Procedures. Invasive physiological and psychological procedures, and on occasion simulated behavioral situations, training & testing, or sexual liaisons.
#3 Conference. The abductors communicate with the abductee or direct them to interact with specific individuals for some purpose, typically telepathically but sometimes using the abductee's native language.
#4 Tour. The abductees are given a tour of their captors' vessel, though this is disputed by some researchers who consider this definition a confabulation of intent when just apparently being taken around to multiple places inside the ship.
#5 Loss of Time. Abductees often rapidly forget the majority of their experience, either as a result of fear, medical intervention, or both.
#6 Return. The abductees are returned to earth, occasionally in a different location from where they were allegedly taken or with new injuries or disheveled clothing.
#7 Theophany. Coinciding with their immediate return, abductees may have a profound sense of love, a "high" similar to those induced by certain drugs, or a "mystical experience", accompanied by a feeling of oneness with God, the universe, or their abductors. Whether this is the result of a metaphysical change, Stockholm syndrome, or prior medical tampering is often not scrutinized by the abductees at the time.
#8 Aftermath. The abductee must cope with the psychological, physical, and social effects of the experience.

So it's clear from this point that coming to the conclusion that Adam and Eve were abducted is not a theory, is not a belief, it's a documented fact, and I didn't write those facts, I only identified them. Now you are free to try to come up with as many explanations as you possibly can (Especially since Christianity doesn't seem to have a good one) that could otherwise explain what happened here, but you have to keep in mind that two people appearing from what seems to be out of no where, already grown, and knowing how to communicate, while getting memory back after eating from the tree of forbidden fruit, at THE SAME time, is pretty damning as far as whats going on here. You shouldn't have to be a detective to figure this one out. Now I'm sure Adam and Eve went through the rest of the scenario however the person documenting this portion may not have been in the presence of those events.

Of course I'm welcome to the hilarious attempts people try to make out of their own definition for this section. There are no metaphors, and you have to follow the rules. The bible is prefaced as dealing with supernatural events, and guess what, this happens to possibly be the most important one of all to realize.

Now if you hate the bible, or cringe at the thought of anyone believing that it has any truth to it, you need to ask yourself this one simple fact. I presented this to you, which before hand, you had no idea about. Isn't it clear that you just don't understand the events correctly? How can you have an opinion against things you couldn't possibly understand?

It is your belief that everything in the bible is true. You have stated this numerous times. It logically follows from this that everything theory you base this on is also a belief. You cannot label something as an "understanding" or a "truth" simply because you think you've linked a few things to one another using your own interpretations of things. You interpret the bible as being about the supernatural--Lines like "god came down from heaven," You interpret heaven as another planet. But how can you possibly independently verify this to be true? Your main response is that it coincides with things we see today in science. But you need to realize that you have searched through the science to specifically fit to your theory. There is certainly plenty of science that conflicts with these ideas, and many of us have provided evidence to show that. But that is exactly what a debate is, it's backing up your belief or theory with evidence. What makes your theory correct and our theory incorrect? You cannot validly claim that there is no evidence for evolution. There is 150 years of research. You claim that proponents of evolution are reaching to come to their conclusions. But you refuse to acknowledge that you are doing the same exact thing.

Of course not, this is nothing like Evolution. Evolution is structure on fact, connected to theory, connected to another fact, connected to another theory, and so on. This is nothing like that. It's all fact. It's going to be pretty hard for you to just dismiss nothing but facts. These facts BTW all point to the same thing time after time after time.
God was NOT our real creator, he was an alien race, he lied to us and wanted us to believe he was our creator and be submissive. Anytime we weren't we were punished. From the best I can figure, God used DNA manipulation to control us. Ultimately removing our supernatural abilities, and in essence we are a different species.

a reply to: kayej1188

It is your belief that everything in the bible is true. You have stated this numerous times. It logically follows from this that everything theory you base this on is also a belief. You cannot label something as an "understanding" or a "truth" simply because you think you've linked a few things to one another using your own interpretations of things. You interpret the bible as being about the supernatural--Lines like "god came down from heaven," You interpret heaven as another planet. But how can you possibly independently verify this to be true? Your main response is that it coincides with things we see today in science. But you need to realize that you have searched through the science to specifically fit to your theory. There is certainly plenty of science that conflicts with these ideas, and many of us have provided evidence to show that. But that is exactly what a debate is, it's backing up your belief or theory with evidence. What makes your theory correct and our theory incorrect? You cannot validly claim that there is no evidence for evolution. There is 150 years of research. You claim that proponents of evolution are reaching to come to their conclusions. But you refuse to acknowledge that you are doing the same exact thing.

be·lief
bəˈlēf/
noun
noun: belief; plural noun: beliefs

1.
an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.
"his belief in the value of hard work"
something one accepts as true or real; a firmly held opinion or conviction.
"contrary to popular belief, Aramaic is a living language"
synonyms: opinion, view, conviction, judgment, thinking, way of thinking, idea, impression, theory, conclusion, notion
"it's my belief that age is irrelevant"
a religious conviction.
"Christian beliefs"
synonyms: ideology, principle, ethic, tenet, canon; More
doctrine, teaching, dogma, article of faith, creed, credo
"traditional beliefs"
2.
trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something.
"a belief in democratic politics"
synonyms: faith, trust, reliance, confidence, credence
"belief in the value of hard work"

It would appear that probably whats more in question here, is my accuracy and ability to correctly identify what the bible is saying. I can totally respect that based on the fact that you wouldn't understand heads from tales about this. I'm not going to tell you I feel Jesus in my heart, because I don't, all I can say is that it's pretty impossible to try to explain how it is you have learned something that has occurred over the course of 34 years.

I have no benefit in believing God was a space alien that abducted Adam and Eve. I have no golden casket waiting for me up in the afterlife. And to answer your other question about how I know the bible is referring to planets and not something else, I already posted.

Faith Produces Action (Faithfulness) (vv. 4-12)

The key question in our messes, brokenness, discouragement, and exile, and in our successes, blessings, celebrations, and joys needs to be, “What is God doing and how can I be a part of that?” That is faithfulness. And that comes out of the hearts and hands of people who realize that earth is not our home.[sic]

In case you missed it again, I highlighted it this time. Perhaps you have your own definition of what they are talking about here? I think it's pretty straight forward actually. Again this isn't Evolution so I never sought anything out to fit this. After reading and reading, I realized there is a lot more evidence than anyone else could imagine. And just to prove to you that I'm on the right track about God using DNA to control us...

I believe that Azazel is a biologically immortal, physical being that came from the heavens in some form of space ship. He may not require air or food as sustenance and may live on the energy of space itself. In future years we may be able to keep our bodies alive without sustenance whereby our bodies cells are recycled with 100% efficiency through technology. Based on our mythology, it is obvious that they have advanced control over DNA and genes and that is how they engineered our species from the natural hominids that existed on this planet.
www.thejesusalien.com...

www.dailymail.co.uk...
Don't take my word for all this though, try listening to an Ecologist/ Dr. Ellis SIlver.

Please explain to me how I only found his publication about 6 months ago, yet I have been telling my friends and family for years that if this was our sun, it wouldn't burn us, it wouldn't give us cancer, and now this guy is quoting me verbatim. There are only three possibilities here. Either he is a mind reader, or I am, or we know each other but we don't, or we are both correct.

No they are wrong, it's not full of metaphors, they just assumed that since it didn't make any sense to them. It's actually the easiest understanding you could imagine, you just have to have that education is all, and sorry to say, they don't.

First of all proof of alien existence will NEVER be accepted by most people. I actually know people that believe we have never even been to the moon. If we had proof by alien body, people would dismiss it as a hoax. If we had alien DNA from something people would dismiss it as how can you prove it's alien. If we had aircraft's doing things impossible by our standards, people would dismiss it somehow. It's a bug, it's garbage in the sky.

People are SoOOO incredulous that one person actually told me that the UFO in the bible that God descended from the sky in, doesn't mean he's an alien. Which of course is an oxymoron. That's how people are. but if you're that incredulous, again, it would probably help if you educated yourself a little bit with the profound effect aliens have on our planet. Here is a good place to start..

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

www.greatdreams.com...

The intense power outages just tell it all.

a reply to: kayej1188

Finally, it would do you a great deal of good to gain a better understanding of science. I don't mean this in a confrontational way, because I actually feel sad for the amount of time and effort you've put into this, but a lot of the things you say when you're talking about scientific concepts are not correct. This was most visible during your discussion of DNA in relations to the Starchild. You truly butchered the analysis and interpretations of the DNA analysis. A lot of what you said were things you made up. Your understanding of the human brain also leaves a lot to be desired. You make all these claims about things like the Pineal gland, action potentials and electrical activity of the brain, and specific neurological experiments, but you don't explain how these things relate to any of your claims. It's clear that you do not have a firm grasp on our current understanding of the nervous system.

The claims were simple. There is only one reason why certain experiments are able to get the brain to perform much better in specific conditions, because it can. That tells you everything you need to know, to see what's been done to us. We have been altered to the point that our performance is degraded.

Your best proof for everything you've ever said comes from 1) the bible and 2) subjective testimony (abductions, supernatural abilities). If you even cared to learn the theory of evolution, you'd very quickly realize that there's a whole heck of a lot more evidence for evolution. How would you respond if somebody told you that all greek mythology was true, and they based their belief on 1) The Odyssey and 2) testominy from people over the years claiming to have witnessed greek gods. Would you believe them?

Well I think you have to take things from a common sense understanding. Is there something that gives you reason to believe you SHOULDN'T believe in these claims? Or are you just normally incredulous? Are there reasons to believe some of the claims? Probably. So, just like the bible, even though you couldn't understand it, you need to keep in mind that it's a wealth of information for someone with my background. You just need a special decoder ring is all.
Most important, don't mock what you couldn't possibly understand. I don't see you as an idiot just because you don't understand. I don't make prejudice assumptions just because I was a lucky one to study this field. You could probably say the same thing about me and DNA assuming I'm not understanding it correctly anyhow.

I want people to know what has happened to us, I want people to be educated, I want people to know we can fix this and crawl out of our box and get back on our feet and join the race of life again, and just possibly rejoin with our actual family. Our brain needs like 20% of our fuel intake. Why so much? Is there more than we realize?

There is no Evidence for Evolution. No one has ever witnessed macro Evolution, There isn't any conclusive evidence proving we Evolved from Primates, and it would actually appear in the opposite direction if anything. The two fused chromosomes have been identified as not even being close by comparison, and that was from an Evolutionist.

Speciation is NOT any form of proof of the beginning stages of Evolution. No human female has ever not been able to not get pregnant and be told my her doctor that it's because she's Evolving. LOL.

I'm going to post my conclusion here first, just to make sure you don't miss it: Sorry bud, your entire theory has been debunked. Turns out you were wrong about everything. I feel bad since you've put so much time into it, but no matter what you say, it's a documented fact that we have proven each and every aspect of your theory wrong. There is absolutely nothing you can say or do to change this fact. Unfortunately every single last one of your claims has been refuted by redundant facts. So, since that's over with, either we can speak about evolution, or you can start a new thread about your *officially debunked* beliefs, hopes, and faiths. If you decide to respond to this message, then I'll assume that you have indeed given up and accept that you were wrong all alone, no matter what you say. Sorry again. Now, to the meat.

Once again, you fail to acknowledge the crux of my argument. You base everything on your interpretation of what's written in the bible, and you've done everything except address my questions, because you know you cannot. All I have to do to prove your ENTIRE theory wrong, is claim that Adam and Eve never existed in the way the bible portrayed them. They were merely metaphors for our ancestors. There is evidence to back this claim up: www.huffingtonpost.com...:

The findings, detailed today (Aug. 1) in the journal Science, come from the most complete analysis of the male sex chromosome, or the Y chromosome, to date. The results overturn earlier research, which suggested that men's most recent common ancestor lived just 50,000 to 60,000 years ago.

...

Despite their overlap in time, ancient "Adam" and ancient "Eve" probably didn't even live near each other, let alone mate.

"Those two people didn't know each other," said Melissa Wilson Sayres, a geneticist at the University of California, Berkeley, who was not involved in the study.

I'm sorry but just this singular piece of scientific research completely rips apart your entire theory. These are experts in the field of DNA analysis. There is nothing you can say or do to prove this wrong. The difference here is that while I'm posting credible scientific research, you post blogs and opinions. I'd love for you to try and provide me just one piece of evidence to throw doubt on evolutionary theory. You claim there's no proof for macro-evolution. Well, here it is: Evidence of Macro-Evolution --And I DARE you to bring up that load of BS about our DNA not being pure, and having inversions and fusions. You have no idea what that even means, and you have not provided one piece of evidence to support it.

Regarding the quote you posted about Azazel and the Ecologist Ellis Silver--Just because somebody else happens to believe the same thing as you does NOT mean you were on the right track. That's an illogical claim. Blogs also don't go through any type of peer-review system or fact-checking that over 100 years of evolutionary research has been subject to. The same applies to your claim about Ellis Silver. You really think that since you and he have similar beliefs, it means you're right? You claimed that there are 3 options, either him/you are a mind reader, you know each other, or you're correct. Those are not the only options. There a 4th option, that you were both wrong. If you want to be taken seriously, you have to consider that option.

You cannot claim that PhD-trained theologians are wrong. There's just no merit to this statement. You think that they just assumed the bible was full of metaphors because they couldn't understand it? But you do, right? I'm sorry but that's a false statement. You do not need any knowledge of the supernatural to interpret any religious text. You just think you do.

What we have here is you showing once again that you simply cannot provide one piece of reliable evidence that backs up the most fundamental claims of you theory. That 1) god exists, 2)aliens exist, 3) the bible is true, and 4) supernatural powers exist. Congrats, 0/4.

a reply to: TechUnique

To the OP, I suggest you lock or shut down this thread, because a fork has been stuck in it. There is nothing productive left to talk about. The trolls were revealed, the evidence was presented, and the thread has officially become a dead end. Please do so before any more bandwidth gets wasted.

a reply to: kayej1188

I'm going to post my conclusion here first, just to make sure you don't miss it: Sorry bud, your entire theory has been debunked. Turns out you were wrong about everything. I feel bad since you've put so much time into it, but no matter what you say, it's a documented fact that we have proven each and every aspect of your theory wrong. There is absolutely nothing you can say or do to change this fact. Unfortunately every single last one of your claims has been refuted by redundant facts. So, since that's over with, either we can speak about evolution, or you can start a new thread about your *officially debunked* beliefs, hopes, and faiths. If you decide to respond to this message, then I'll assume that you have indeed given up and accept that you were wrong all alone, no matter what you say. Sorry again. Now, to the meat.

I'm going to reject your uneducated reply and ask you for the multitude points of debunking you have provided. Because at this point I haven't seen zilch.

You might be lost on this do to the fact you keep thinking I have a theory when I have clearly proven that's not the case. I'm not going to re-post how you were proven wrong on both claims of me presenting a theory or a belief. Evolution is a theory, meaning there is some pretend in there somewhere. I don't have any pretend in what I'm presenting.

Once again, you fail to acknowledge the crux of my argument. You base everything on your interpretation of what's written in the bible, and you've done everything except address my questions, because you know you cannot. All I have to do to prove your ENTIRE theory wrong, is claim that Adam and Eve never existed in the way the bible portrayed them. They were merely metaphors for our ancestors. There is evidence to back this claim up:

And this would also be the reason why you have so easily taken a belief like Evolution. Here is a quote from the link you provided.

Researchers believe that modern humans left Africa between 60,000 and 200,000 years ago, and that the mother of all women likely emerged from East Africa. But beyond that, the details get fuzzy.

By assuming a mutation rate anchored to archaeological events (such as the migration of people across the Bering Strait), the team concluded that all males in their global sample shared a single male ancestor in Africa roughly 125,000 to 156,000 years ago. In addition, mitochondrial DNA from the men, as well as similar samples from 24 women, revealed that all women on the planet trace back to a mitochondrial Eve, who lived in Africa between 99,000 and 148,000 years ago — almost the same time period during which the Y-chromosome Adam lived.

As you can see, you are basing your argument on points that use words like "believe" and "Assuming." Clearly there is more theory here than you believe. It's once again held together by pretend sections, in other words they are unsure.

I'm well aware that the claim Adam and Eve are not the same Adam and Eve we know in the bible. However it's common sense she had to have someone to mate with, or have you proven me wrong on this as well? Just because the two MRCA time lines don't match, doesn't mean there weren't male and female to create offspring. The point where all females descent is ONLY offspring through Eve, is proof she was separated from her contemporaries, or in this case abducted. If a Y chromosome Adam who had connections with much more offspring aka MRCA appears to have lived in a different time line, all that means is he had more breeding connections than the one we came to know as Adam, which means you are WRONG. There was still an Adam, no ands ifs or butts. Just because someone else was more popular and had more family doesn't mean there wasn't an Adam. Sorry bud. Common sense tells us from this that obviously there were more family through the Y chromosome Adam, despite our inbreeding and non stop growth up to this day. What this means in English is our family was LARGE before we got to Earth.

I'm sorry but just this singular piece of scientific research completely rips apart your entire theory. These are experts in the field of DNA analysis. There is nothing you can say or do to prove this wrong. The difference here is that while I'm posting credible scientific research, you post blogs and opinions. I'd love for you to try and provide me just one piece of evidence to throw doubt on evolutionary theory. You claim there's no proof for macro-evolution. Well, here it is: Evidence of Macro-Evolution --And I DARE you to bring up that load of BS about our DNA not being pure, and having inversions and fusions. You have no idea what that even means, and you have not provided one piece of evidence to support it.

Well sure, because your assuming they have pin pointed Adam simply based on DNA. Ya like they know all about our lineage prior to being on Earth. Heck they aren't even acknowledging it yet.

I'm sorry but just this singular piece of scientific research completely rips apart your entire theory. These are experts in the field of DNA analysis. There is nothing you can say or do to prove this wrong. The difference here is that while I'm posting credible scientific research, you post blogs and opinions. I'd love for you to try and provide me just one piece of evidence to throw doubt on evolutionary theory. You claim there's no proof for macro-evolution. Well, here it is: Evidence of Macro-Evolution --And I DARE you to bring up that load of BS about our DNA not being pure, and having inversions and fusions. You have no idea what that even means, and you have not provided one piece of evidence to support it.

I already posted Pye's link about human genetics clearly proving that fused chromosomes don't happen naturally. Now this obviously comes from the DNA lab technicians and the plethora of others that he dealt with during his paid time. And of course I'm going to take the word from DNA lab technicians over any of the non qualified references you have since they are not credible in that department.

Regarding the quote you posted about Azazel and the Ecologist Ellis Silver--Just because somebody else happens to believe the same thing as you does NOT mean you were on the right track. That's an illogical claim. Blogs also don't go through any type of peer-review system or fact-checking that over 100 years of evolutionary research has been subject to. The same applies to your claim about Ellis Silver. You really think that since you and he have similar beliefs, it means you're right? You claimed that there are 3 options, either him/you are a mind reader, you know each other, or you're correct. Those are not the only options. There a 4th option, that you were both wrong. If you want to be taken seriously, you have to consider that option.

You know, I would totally agree with you 100% if the subject was related to something like "Bad beds knock your bakc our of alignment" or "Scientists determine that blue M&M's can reverse back damage" But humans are not from Earth, Ya, good luck on that one buddy. Especially when he was quoting me verbatim.

You cannot claim that PhD-trained theologians are wrong. There's just no merit to this statement. You think that they just assumed the bible was full of metaphors because they couldn't understand it? But you do, right? I'm sorry but that's a false statement. You do not need any knowledge of the supernatural to interpret any religious text. You just think you do.

a reply to: kayej1188

No of course not, they just warrned you in the preface that the book deals with supernatural events because they thought it would be funny. I guess it worked, HA HA, they Fooled you didn't they?

Of course I can claim that phD theologians are wrong. Haven't you ever heard of a Dr. being wrong? Haven't you ever heard of people wanting a second opinion? Haven't you ever heard of a doctor treating someone incorrectly for years? Haven't you ever heard of doctors even killing people on a rare occasion? They simply were looking in the wrong direction, that's all. It's just a slight oversight, and I happen to be educated in that field, and I happen to catch it.


Yes OP lock or shut it down, Evolutionists hate to be proven wrong and backed into a corner. They have run out of excuses to the point that they even tried to label me as a different poster that has similar posts. I think the REAL trolls have been revealed. The trolls of theory and belief known as Evolution.

originally posted by: kayej1188
a reply to: TechUnique

To the OP, I suggest you lock or shut down this thread, because a fork has been stuck in it. There is nothing productive left to talk about. The trolls were revealed, the evidence was presented, and the thread has officially become a dead end. Please do so before any more bandwidth gets wasted.

Bro just stop responding to itsthetooth and the thread will simply fade away. They have been full of nonsense since page one the thread will never die if you keep feeding the trolls. I am certainly not reading any more responces here I am sure many others are doing the same.

Please don't keep going with this or it will wind up like the 500 plus page thread about target foods.

The internet is a free country dude. People can keep posting in this thread as long as they like about whatever they like. Whether they agree or reach a conclusion or not. That's the whole point of this site?

If it has gone on this long then there is still obviously something to talk about. Maybe you guys will realise how wrong you are one day and you can look through this thread to address your past ignorance and arrogance.

Just a thought.

Double.

a reply to: Grimpachi

I must have done something right as he's not replying to me anymore We are a long way from evolution debate with this smegger now however.

a reply to: TechUnique

Could you perhaps say the same? You have been debunked up one side, and down the other by many of us, yet refuse t acknowledge this. I thus wonder if you might one day become aware enough to get how wrong you are

originally posted by: TechUnique
Maybe you guys will realise how wrong you are one day and you can look through this thread to address your past ignorance and arrogance.

Maybe one day you will finally make an attempt at understanding the other side instead of making outlandish claims and refusing to engage people in discussion on the subject? Perhaps you'll leave your ignorance behind you one of these days and break open some real truth. Perhaps you can drop the arrogance you sometimes show when being a hypocrite and expecting readers of your threads to hear you out and watch your videos before they comment, but not showing them the same courtesy? Is it too much to ask people to have an informed opinion?

Step down off that pedestal like you've got all the answers.

You don't.

I've been debunked? I won't look into the other side?

Dude. I was fully on board with you guys but a mere 3 years ago. Don't be so ignorant to think I haven't ever looked into the theory of evolution. I don't agree with your theory, get over it.

It's a theory.

Don't expect me to try and combat your faulty science when the tools used to back it up are often fraudulent or simply not science. You guys gobble it all up because it's all based on a false premise you hold dear. Whatever you hear that backs it up you'll love it, whatever you hear that proves it wrong you'll bitterly fight against it using your false tools to try and win your battle of who is right.

Really you are battling with yourselves, because deep down you know evolution theory FAR from answers the mysteries surrounding the origin of our species. Giants exsisted whether you believe it or not. Don't be so naive.

The funny thing is, if I am right, you guys would indeed be clueless. I'm sure at least a few of you will realise one day. I hope so at least

a reply to: TechUnique

Giants exsisted whether you believe it or not. Don't be so naive.

As well as dragons, unicorns, elves, hobbits, fairies, and goblins lets not forget the dwarfs. Oh some also believe what is known as god is actually an alien.

Sounds legit.

a reply to: TechUnique

One only needs to read your posts in this thread, and your old evolution thread to see your intellectual honesty.

"Don't expect me to try and combat your faulty science when the tools used to back it up are often fraudulent or simply not science"

Dude, it's been a month since I first heard you make those claims and I'm still waiting for you to prove, or support that position.

The attitudes you project on others are merely your own.

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: TechUnique

Could you perhaps say the same? You have been debunked up one side, and down the other by many of us, yet refuse t acknowledge this. I thus wonder if you might one day become aware enough to get how wrong you are

You're getting extremely creative with that smile icon. I love how patronising you are trying to be. It's actually pathetic to watch, I feel sorry for you.

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer
a reply to: TechUnique

One only needs to read your posts in this thread, and your old evolution thread to see your intellectual honesty.

"Don't expect me to try and combat your faulty science when the tools used to back it up are often fraudulent or simply not science"

Dude, it's been a month since I first heard you make those claims and I'm still waiting for you to prove, or support that position.

The attitudes you project on others are merely your own.

Prove or support that position how? It wouldn't matter what I showed you guys, (I already have showed you plenty, so have others, but you automatically disregard in a haughty manner, boasting an argument coined from someone else usually). Plenty of people in the threads you are talking about have given you real accounts of proof, in varying types .. don't act dumb.

Why should I bang my head against a brick wall? I know when someone is a lost cause. Some of you guys are lost causes, unfortunately.

If you really want to carry on this nonsense we can, but I will be going to bed soon. It is nearly 8 in the morning. I'm sure you will all have something extremely smart and witty for when I wake up. Maybe one of you will surprise me with something I haven't already heard before.

Let’s be open minded and accept for a while some of the ideas from so called pseudo scientists like Erich von Däniken and his followers, but also from Sitchin and so on: There once was a civilization on earth that knew already everything about the things that our geniuses are inventing at this very moment.
Nanotechnology, genetic engineering, and all other technologies we probably will hear about soon. Also about paranormal contacts between humans, reading of mind frequencies etc.

Let’s accept there once was a civilization on earth that is completely perished but that left us some knowledge only a few people know about. Of course that few people are highly gifted and know very well how to use the hidden knowledge. They give some geniuses some pieces of that knowledge and let them do their thing. (The story would be too long to continue on this issue.)

If you want to know what I believe read www.evawaseerst.be... (the red dots are in English). And especially read the chapter about human engineering in ancient times.

But to go further and don’t forget to be open minded (if you’re not, please give it a try only for a while): don’t you think that Jurassic park really could have existed? Steven Spielberg maybe also is one of the geniuses that got a little knowledge from our real rulers. With a film you can reach the great mass. And once we will have to know the truth. So maybe it’s better to do it with a great film.

To make a long story short (you can always read the site above): Genetic engineering existed long ago. Making dinosaurs could not have been a great problem for our creators. Yes creators, because we are created. Creationism is the only explanation for a living creature like the human being.