It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Guy Kawasaki
That is interesting, and I can see how a conclusion could be logically derived, and cleanly, in regards to copying the Giza pyramid. However, who actually built the Giza pyramids?
Originally posted by Guy Kawasaki
Sounds good. I don't understand, though, why you are abandoning Evolution, as it seems like you are. Why Mars? Why not just 100,000 years of homosapien evolution?
As for the Hall of Records under the Sphinx, what is that all about?
Originally posted by Uncle Joe
We have sequenced the human genome, surely any alien DNA or evidence of tampering would show.
The “Head-scratching” Discovery
It was here, in tracing the vertical evolutionary record contained in the human and the other analyzed genomes, that the scientists ran into an enigma. The “head-scratching discovery by the public consortium,” as Science termed it, was that the human genome contains 223 genes that do not have the required predecessors on the genomic evolutionary tree.
How did Man acquire such a bunch of enigmatic genes?
In the evolutionary progression from bacteria to invertebrates (such as the lineages of yeast, worms, flies or mustard weed – which have been deciphered) to vertebrates (mice, chimpanzees) and finally modern humans, these 223 genes are completely missing in the invertebrate phase. Therefore, the scientists can explain their presence in the human genome by a “rather recent” (in evolutionary time scales) “probable horizontal transfer from bacteria.”
In other words: At a relatively recent time as Evolution goes, modern humans acquired an extra 223 genes not through gradual evolution, not vertically on the Tree of Life, but horizontally, as a sideways insertion of genetic material from bacteria…
...“It is not clear whether the transfer was from bacteria to human or from human to bacteria,” Science quoted Robert Waterson, co-director of Washington University’s Genome Sequencing Center, as saying.
But if Man gave those genes to bacteria, where did Man acquire those genes to begin with?
Link
Originally posted by Guy Kawasaki
I just read an interesting blurb about a mutation that a researcher(s) has discovered that codes for "smarter" individuals. He noticed this gene has populated us rapidly and maybe responsible for the next step in our evolution in terms of intelligence. He stated that the black population do not have it in such abundance.
Originally posted by kiliker30i think youll find it impossible to tell me we evolved from apes to what we are now...it would take far to long to be where we are today...
if it were true..id say we should be around the roman age by now
Originally posted by Byrd
Once we get those, we do have the leisure time to sit around and admire our opposable thumbs but most of us get cracking studying inventions and history and science and making new stuff.
It is certain, on the one hand, that the sterility of various species when crossed is so different in degree and graduates away so insensibly, and, on the other hand, that the fertility of pure species is so easily affected by various circumstances, that for all practical purposes it is most difficult to say where perfect fertility ends and sterility begins. I think no better evidence of this can be required than that the two most experienced observers who have ever lived, namely, Kolreuter and Gartner, should have arrived at diametrically opposite conclusions in regard to the very same species. It is also most instructive to compare--but I have not space here to enter on details--the evidence advanced by our best botanists on the question whether certain doubtful forms should be ranked as species or varieties, with the evidence from fertility adduced by different hybridisers, or by the same author, from experiments made during different years. It can thus be shown that neither sterility nor fertility affords any clear distinction between species and varieties; but that the evidence from this source graduates away, and is doubtful in the same degree as is the evidence derived from other constitutional and structural differences.