Human dna has alien dna waiting to activated

Originally posted by NightDweller
If you'd do your research you'd know that we do not use one hundred percent of our brains. If we did we could move solid objects around the room.
Don't try to act knowledgable when you have no idea what your going on about in the first place.

If you are so knowledgable, then please show me some proof on how we are able to do telekinesis if we used our brain '100%'.

It's a shame how that old 'we only use X% of our brain' thing, is still going rounds.. It just so laughable. This link should sum it up quite quickly.

I gotta love people discussing DNA, having absolutely no knowledge on how it works.. And 'our DNA has alien DNA in it'? Nice, please show me some alien DNA and tell me how they got it, and then I'll believe you.

I didn't know DNA had a quality that allowed for "activation," or manipulation from any outside source. It's not a piece of software, you know. Furthermore, there's no reason to readily believe that the same amino acids that make up life on this planet, also make up life on others.

Furthermore, there's no Planet Nibiru. A planet that only approached the sun every few thousand years could not support life, it would be too cold.

But please, by all means, keep trying to scare me. I like it.

had me interested until you mentioned nibiru/planet x, have there not been enough threads about this for people to realise its a myth???? it is like a certain parrot it has ceased to be, it is an ex theory!!

reply to post by red 5


You are correct. We only use approximately 30% of our brain at once.

This is equivalent to having a car with all the options, but only using the A/C, sunroof, power brakes and trunk-release at one time. If you want to use the accelerator then you have to stop using the sunroof and trunk-release, but first the power seats and head lights turn on before you're able to start accelerating.

Our brains are massively complex and vastly superior to anything that mankind is capable of creating currently. We can design machines that operate at 100% efficiency, yet we can't seem to break the 30% capability when understanding brain function. Who knows, maybe if the brain was capable of using 100% of its functions at one time, maybe it would act similar to a computer processor and just shut down from an over-load or over-heating?

But, I tend to believe that we just haven't yet reached that evolutionary development. I think at some point in time, humans will use 100% (or at least up to 95%) of the brains capacity at any one given time, but I think it'll take hundreds of thousands of years to reach this development ... that is - if we're not, yet again genetically altered (only reasonable explanation IMO), like humans seem to have been 40,000 years ago with the "Great Leap Forward."

Originally posted by nicholaswa
A planet that only approached the sun every few thousand years could not support life, it would be too cold.

I've seen a lot of information on the theory of Planet X or Nibiru, but I don't think I've ever come across a theory that suggested it supported life. If you've got any links to one of these theories, please provide it. I'd very much be interested in hearing such an outlandish theory.

reply to post by truthseekerpeacemaker


We share about 95% of our DNA with chimps.

Isn't it amazing what Pam Anders can do with her 5%

reply to post by Gorman91


When ever someone says something doesnt exist they make them selves look like fools. Everyone deserves their own opinion and every body needs to realise anything any 1 person says and believes in what they are saying is in reality thier own opinion and not universal truth. ON this plane of existence we can never speak,see or hear a universal truth because our opinions are our truths.

Originally posted by tyranny22


I've seen a lot of information on the theory of Planet X or Nibiru, but I don't think I've ever come across a theory that suggested it supported life. If you've got any links to one of these theories, please provide it. I'd very much be interested in hearing such an outlandish theory.

I'd very much like to see some confirmation that such a planet exists. There was some hoax thing on youtube, but most astronomers say no such planet exist. I'd certainly like to believe it, but there is nothing credible to support it.

Whatever it is, is. Textbook thumpers to me are just as deluded as those with with their own theories. I recall a college professor who was teaching summer school history that informed us that most textbooks are lies to some extent. So, more than likely, the elite have their own advanced knowledge. Feel free to argue all you wish, it doesn't change the facts eventually either. Time will prove the truth either way.

Keeping in mind that there was an alleged report that stated a frogs dna was altered into another species just by using a laser.

Here's an interesting youtube link.
uk.youtube.com...

reply to post by truthseekerpeacemaker



About 8 years ago, I think I saw a program on public television. It was related to mapping of the human genome. I remember a man talking about the DNA and that they do not know what 99% of it was for. He also said that they discovered something in it that they could not explain. This stuff (as I think is the term he used) appears to move through out the DNA structure through out the body. They had no idea what it was, it's purpose or it's origin. As it was nothing that had ever been encountered before. I believe he fell short of calling it not being of this earth.

Does anyone remember this?

reply to post by mapsurfer_


You are absolutely correct. But, you have to remember: lack of evidence is the point of classification for "theory".

There are millions theories about the universe. Many of them are based on physical anomalies like the asteroid belt, such as in some of the Planet X theories. Many of them are based on mathematical data, such as Hawking's Radiation in the Micro Black Holes theory. The lack of solid evidence is what classifies these things as theories.

Regardless of the evidence - it doesn't change my interest in the subject.

reply to post by KaginD

Humans have 23 Chromosomes. We are all taught that we evolved from the ape, right?? Well if that was the case, then why do apes have 24 chromosomes??? How did we evolve from them if they have one MORE chromosome then we do???

Actually we have 46 while Apes have 48. What you're referring to is chromosome pairs. Anyhow, the reason for this shortage is because Chromosome #2 in humans is a fusion of two previously separate primate chromosomes. It's nothing supernatural or extraterrestrial in origin. We know they are fused, because we have found Telomeres in the center of the Chromosome, when they normally are only at the very ends. Chromosome #2 also has 2 Centromeres - one located on either side of the telomere division - however one of them is inactive.

Here it is as explained by a Christian scientist Ken Miller who you might remember from Kitzmiller vs. Dover.

reply to post by tyranny22

But, you have to remember: lack of evidence is the point of classification for "theory".

No. A theory is not a lack of evidence. A theory (in science anyhow) is a comprehensive explanation for how phenomena in the universe operates and interacts based on the available evidence (facts). Gravity is a theory. Atoms are a theory. Germs are a theory. Evolution is a theory. All of which make accurate predictions, are testable, reproducible, verifiable, and potentially falsifiable. (if it's not falsifiable, it's not science)

In contrast, you have theories on ATS which are more like you describe. They are loose ideas that often do not conform to known facts, hallmarked by a lack of evidence, and attempts to resolve the lack of evidence issue leads to the inevitable Them covertly covering up and hiding the evidence to subvert and dominate humanity in grand over-reaching conspiracies.

Theory can have different meanings depending on the context in which it's used.

Wikipedia: Theory

[edit on 26-8-2008 by Lasheic]

reply to post by The dragon is taking over


I Robot is another example of imaginary thinking.

How can a robot kill if you only program it to move around with scientific tools? Probs do not resemble the beings that made them. Where is the logic in this? And advanced robot could study us perfectly fine from space, maybe releasing the occasional lander to examine life with a camera.

simply put, if it's not programed, it won't happen. Sure a few errors may persist, but a mistake in 1 or 0 won't make "examine" into "KILLTHEMEARTHSUN'SOFBITCHES!"

reply to post by thefreepatriot


Of course not. They detect it and then give them hell.

[edit on 26-8-2008 by Gorman91]

reply to post by tyranny22

Our brains are massively complex and vastly superior to anything that mankind is capable of creating currently.

Not really. You have to remember that the brain is a self-organizing system that brings forth amazing complexity based on very simple interactions. However, we understand the basics of the Genome and our knowledge of it is increasing exponentially. The actual parts of our genetic code which are responsible for the formation of the brain are extremely simple compared to the brain itself. The same way that the mathematics which create a fractal are extremely simply in comparison to the fractal itself.

But, I tend to believe that we just haven't yet reached that evolutionary development. I think at some point in time, humans will use 100% (or at least up to 95%) of the brains capacity at any one given time, but I think it'll take hundreds of thousands of years to reach this development

Evolution isn't a process by which creatures become arbitrarily smarter, faster, stronger, etc. There is no apex of evolution. It only makes creatures more well adapted to their environments. We are not evolving towards any certain point.

Secondly, I don't think it's possible to use 100% of the brain 100% of the time. Our brain just isn't built for that function, and even so, the human brain is already the single most energy expensive organ our bodies contain. It uses 1/4th of the calories we ingest just to keep it operating. Not only would trying to stimulate it to 100% kill likely overload your nervous system and kill you, but you'd quickly starve to death as your body simply wouldn't be able to keep up with the processing of food and nutrients to keep it running.

Besides, long - LONG - before we ever have to wait on Evolution to possibly, maybe, somehow make us "smarter" - we'll have augmented our intelligence far more powerfully though technology than evolution could within the span of the existence of the human species. Computers already far outstrip the human brain in terms of sheer processing speed. The brain's only real advantage is it's power of redundancy and parallel processing. Yet we've already created a super computer which has broken the Petaflop barrier, and by most estimates it is in the petaflop range in which the human brain operates. If processing speed and power continue to double every 18 months (and there's no reason to believe they won't) then it will only be a few short years before computers are more powerful than a human brain. A few short more years after than when a computer will have processing capabilities greater than that of every human mind on Earth combined.

In terms of pure number crunching and solving equations, computers have already achieved this. However, it's only an example of highlighting the different strengths and weaknesses between the brain and a CPU. Computers were designed to solve complex mathematical problems extremely fast right from their very outset. Our brains weren't, because math wasn't an environmental pressure. Instead, our brains are ruthlessly good at pattern recognition (audio, visual, etc), which is something that computers are still struggling with.

(Edit: Clarification. When I say it's not possible to use 100% of the brain 100% of the time, I'm not referring to the mere presence of synaptic firing. If you look at the MRI scan of a healthy brain, you'll see no dark spots such as you do with those who suffer brain damage. However, levels of activity in certain sections of the brain fluctuate to provide more or less activity depending on the stimulus. This is helpful in mapping which sections of the brain do what, and are vital to BCI's. So when I say I don't think it's possible to use 100% of your brain 100% of the time, I mean it's not possible for the brain to operate at it's absolute maximum capacity in all areas all of the time. I'm not exactly sure what % of the brain's capacity is used at any given time.)

[edit on 26-8-2008 by Lasheic]

A lot of our DNA seems to be in other things too, daffodils, bananas !!

www.dailymail.co.uk...

and the last paragraph of this:

www.icr.org...

Originally posted by Lasheic
reply to post by KaginD

 

Humans have 23 Chromosomes. We are all taught that we evolved from the ape, right?? Well if that was the case, then why do apes have 24 chromosomes??? How did we evolve from them if they have one MORE chromosome then we do???

Actually we have 46 while Apes have 48. What you're referring to is chromosome pairs. Anyhow, the reason for this shortage is because Chromosome #2 in humans is a fusion of two previously separate primate chromosomes. It's nothing supernatural or extraterrestrial in origin. We know they are fused, because we have found Telomeres in the center of the Chromosome, when they normally are only at the very ends. Chromosome #2 also has 2 Centromeres - one located on either side of the telomere division - however one of them is inactive.

Also, it is clear that KaginD has no understanding of DNA, because then he wouldnt also be surprised by the fact that plants can have way more chromosomes, yet we are still evolutionary linked to them. For instance, the plant genus Ophioglossum has aproximately 1.500 chromosomes in its genome.

Originally posted by Here Now
Op is indeed on to something. Many E.T. Beings are actually born here on this world in human form. In order to carry over memory of themselves they utilize the higher mind frequencies and energetic manipulation from the outside to help. Re-organizing it's D.N.A.

Can you prove that?

reply to post by tyranny22


I'm saying that such a planet could not support life. You're asking, who says it would?

My familiarity with the concept of "Nibiru" comes from reading Sitchin, who claims it is inhabited by our creators.

Originally posted by Thain Esh Kelch

Originally posted by Lasheic
reply to post by KaginD

 

Humans have 23 Chromosomes. We are all taught that we evolved from the ape, right?? Well if that was the case, then why do apes have 24 chromosomes??? How did we evolve from them if they have one MORE chromosome then we do???

Actually we have 46 while Apes have 48. What you're referring to is chromosome pairs. Anyhow, the reason for this shortage is because Chromosome #2 in humans is a fusion of two previously separate primate chromosomes. It's nothing supernatural or extraterrestrial in origin. We know they are fused, because we have found Telomeres in the center of the Chromosome, when they normally are only at the very ends. Chromosome #2 also has 2 Centromeres - one located on either side of the telomere division - however one of them is inactive.

Also, it is clear that KaginD has no understanding of DNA, because then he wouldnt also be surprised by the fact that plants can have way more chromosomes, yet we are still evolutionary linked to them. For instance, the plant genus Ophioglossum has aproximately 1.500 chromosomes in its genome.

Aren't there some diseases that are caused by an abnormal number of chromosomes, I think downs syndrome is one of them, I think that shows the amount of chromosomes doesn't mean an evolutionary path can't be followed.

Kudos to Thain Esh Kelch