Stephen Hawking says Aliens exist

reply to post by thomas_

Originally posted by thomas_
1. There is no transitional links whatsoever between the skeletons collected and used as proof. Something that can't be explained without considered hard core mutations. And mutations them selves are unpredictable and completely random in nature as far as I understand.

Wrong.
The fossil record is extremely detailed and well recorded. That and the very concept of a "missing link" is rather misguided - there were no "this animal morphed into this animal" jumps at all. Every single "step" was no more drastic than the difference between you and your father. Over the course of hundreds of thousands of generations, major changes are apparent between generation 1 and generation n, but there were zero leaps. You should also bear in mind pretty much every single animal on the planet has vestigial traces of its ancestry, such as the human tailbone or the fact whales have fingers. Also, mutation IS completely random, and is almost always harmful, sometimes neutral, and occasionally beneficial. You don't seem to be able to grasp what 3 billion years of trillions of individual life forms reproducing at any given moment really entails.

2. Some of the parts collected sometimes are nothing more than skull cap, a femur or maxilla and yet are use to justify their argument. They use their own imagination to reconstruct a full skeleton of that single bit and present it to the public as another part of that puzzle they are creating.

This is supposed to be an argument against evolution how? a skull fragment is more than enough to notice things such as sharing characteristics with two known human ancestors and placing it either in one of those groups or between them. All scientific theory is based upon the fragment itself and not the reconstruction - reconstruction is merely an estimation used as a visual aid.

3. The divergences and unexplainable inconsistencies in the strata while collecting these "parts" make this whole thing even tricker.

What divergences and inconsistencies? If you're referring to fossils being found in strata that is counterintuitive, this pretty much exclusively happens in locations where it makes sense, such as peat bogs. You should also bear in mind that carbon dating is exceptionally reliable when you cannot count on strata alone to place an age on any organic material.

4. It goes against the law of natural selection

No, it doesn't. At ALL. It is the logical conclusion of observing natural selection and expanding it to the scale of all life on earth, from the beginning until now.

5. It goes against the law of bio-genesis

First, evolution specifically refers to the process of adaptation through selection. It does not attempt to explain the origin of life because how life originated does not influence it in any way, shape or form. You have beef with abiogenesis. Feel free to educate yourself:

en.wikipedia.org...

Now they argue that these "specimens" all evolved in tandem which does make more sense in a way, but the interbreed part and some genetic differences still far from clear from what I understand. And since for what I know ~97% of our DNA is still considered junk and those differences are already pretty significant in the remaining "meaningful" bits (~3%) it makes you think.

Specially since the so called "pre-zygotic reproductive isolating mechanisms" would make interbreed impossible in some situations and the chances of survival of hybrid newborn would be pretty thin in several ways.

Separate species cannot interbreed in virtually all cases. In fact that is the primary marker for defining speciation - two populations become classified as separate species once reproduction between them is impossible.

Originally posted by Karma_Chameleon
Wrong. I know exactly what the PTB are thinking.

You are one of those that thinks you can use big words such as "caricature" to make others think that you are smart.

I'm not fooled in the least bit.

The only comments that you ever seem to add to threads are smart alec/snide opposing comments to other posters. The things you type are rarely productive.

Don't start with me Doomsdayrex, I'll show you how smart you are not.

- Karma

I think you're confusing critical thinking and logic with "smart alec/snide opposing comments".

The things he types are USUALLY productive. Short, simple, calling out logical fallacies virtually every time. Without people like him these things would run rampant and unchecked.

reply to post by FoxMulder91


just had to weigh in on this and say that I'm currently reading about the rise of Sumer and the many tablets and stories the Sumerians left behind of the |gods| who were here, who gave them civilization and knowledge, who ruled over them... and I say the aliens were here even before we were

the ancient civilizations, the truly ancient, prehistoric, appear to me to have been alien in nature and not human

but what do I know

Hawkins is a fake, the reason being that he's English yet speaks with an American accent, I couldn't trust him knowing this.

reply to post by Hawkwind.


I hope this is a joke

Originally posted by Hawkwind.
Hawkins is a fake, the reason being that he's English yet speaks with an American accent, I couldn't trust him knowing this.

I'm pretty sure his accent is more Binary then American.

have been off for some time (disillusioned with life I guess) ... this is the first thread i've read, and i found so many things to respond to. my thoughts are

1. there's a lot of personification going on here, but the whole concept of aliens is that they will be alien, and their history, motivations, intentions, will not necessarily in ANY way mirror ours

2. the idea that an "advanced" civilization, i.e. able to travel from their home to ours, would be peacable or more advanced spiritually is flawed. case in point, look at what the "advanced" peoples of europe etc. did to the native populations of north and south america et al (of course this statement is somewhat opposed to my first, as I myself am now personifying!)

3. at some point there was a creation, and I do personally believe in a hierarchy, meaning that there HAS to be a top, an apex so to speak. the most high.... yes, that would be God.

4. from what I am currently studying, it seems that there were aliens among us at the beginning of civilization. how do I know? Sumerian tablets tell us there were "gods" here on earth that not only created men as workers (MU.MU), but also who ruled over them and granted them the knowledge of metallurgy, agriculture, astronomy, government, etc... the Bible correlates this, if you read between the lines as well as the "non-Biblical" books. and yes, I am a Christian, but I am 100% against religion and formalized ritualized churches, and I'm sorry to my fellow beleivers for this, but I can't stand that "personal relationship with JEEEEEEZus" crap. anyways, call them aliens, angels, nefilim, whatever... but it appears they were really here long ago, and I wonder if they ever really left.

5. we announced our presence long ago, so it's a little late to be sticking our heads in the sand and hope no one notices we're here, while we are crouched over with our asses in the air

"Like I said it's a no brainer that extraterrestrials exist based on recent scientific discoveries."



Are you kidding me? Scientific discoveries? Lights in the sky, blurry photos, does not mean anything. Some scientists saying they do exist, does not mean anything. You people who watch this evidence from you tube, and believe someone just because they say there is life out there. All of these "UFO" chasers never have a solid piece of evidence, just because everything coincidentally matches does not mean its true. The government wants you to believe in extraterrestrials, so that their secret test flights and technologies are being hidden and not be researched. You really think if all this is true the Feds would let this site run? No...they would delete any website containing anything if it was all true....the only way to prove extraterrestrials exists is if they physically landed here on earth in front of millions of people.

reply to post by DoomsdayRex


......some people are closed minded...because they dont believe blurry photos and videos, and lights in the sky....is enough evidence....that means they are sane...

Originally posted by TravisT

Originally posted by Hawkwind.
Hawkins is a fake, the reason being that he's English yet speaks with an American accent, I couldn't trust him knowing this.

I'm pretty sure his accent is more Binary then American.

Actually, his voice synthesizer was designed with an American accent, albeit a traditional Robo-American accent.

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by TravisT

Originally posted by Hawkwind.
Hawkins is a fake, the reason being that he's English yet speaks with an American accent, I couldn't trust him knowing this.

I'm pretty sure his accent is more Binary then American.

Actually, his voice synthesizer was designed with an American accent, albeit a traditional Robo-American accent.

It was a joke.

Originally posted by people=oooo
"Like I said it's a no brainer that extraterrestrials exist based on recent scientific discoveries."



Are you kidding me? Scientific discoveries? Lights in the sky, blurry photos, does not mean anything. Some scientists saying they do exist, does not mean anything. You people who watch this evidence from you tube, and believe someone just because they say there is life out there. All of these "UFO" chasers never have a solid piece of evidence, just because everything coincidentally matches does not mean its true. The government wants you to believe in extraterrestrials, so that their secret test flights and technologies are being hidden and not be researched. You really think if all this is true the Feds would let this site run? No...they would delete any website containing anything if it was all true....the only way to prove extraterrestrials exists is if they physically landed here on earth in front of millions of people.

Every time you go into a Matrix thread, just get used to them script over and over again. If a theoretical physicist says that he thinks aliens exist, is proof enough for her. Apparently, "theoretical" means absolute truth.

reply to post by Matrix Rising


To Matrix's computer,

Your human interface's reply to my post wasn't coherent, I suspect something is wrong with it's reasoning function. Please contact your local administrator for a solution on this issue.

Sincerly,

Cripmeister

[edit on 25-4-2010 by cripmeister]

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by Karma_Chameleon
Wrong. I know exactly what the PTB are thinking.

And you know this, how?

Originally posted by Karma_Chameleon
Don't start with me Doomsdayrex, I'll show you how smart you are not.

You're no daisy.

I know this because I know the true power behind them like the back of my hand.

I'm no daisy? You would know this how? You shouldn't be so quick to pass judgement on those that you don't even know.

Your assumptions are going to wind up getting you into trouble if your not careful.

- Karma

reply to post by Godweed


Thats very interesting, im not exactly that familar on that exact subject, however I know a bit about the theories of aliens being here before humans, etc.

Ill try and look into this further.
Thanks for the response.

Cheers

Sorry did'nt go through whole thread. But does any one know when the documentary is going to air on television in England?

thanks

Originally posted by JScytale

Originally posted by Karma_Chameleon
Wrong. I know exactly what the PTB are thinking.

You are one of those that thinks you can use big words such as "caricature" to make others think that you are smart.

I'm not fooled in the least bit.

The only comments that you ever seem to add to threads are smart alec/snide opposing comments to other posters. The things you type are rarely productive.

Don't start with me Doomsdayrex, I'll show you how smart you are not.

- Karma

I think you're confusing critical thinking and logic with "smart alec/snide opposing comments".

The things he types are USUALLY productive. Short, simple, calling out logical fallacies virtually every time. Without people like him these things would run rampant and unchecked.

If he chose to leave out the disrepectful rhetoric toward other posters I might also be inclined to believe this too.

Until then, what he offers will be looked upon as nothing more than "hot air" by the mass majority.

Mainly by this daisy.

- Karma

Originally posted by Karma_Chameleon

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by Karma_Chameleon
Wrong. I know exactly what the PTB are thinking.

And you know this, how?

Originally posted by Karma_Chameleon
Don't start with me Doomsdayrex, I'll show you how smart you are not.

You're no daisy.

I know this because I know the true power behind them like the back of my hand.

I'm no daisy? You would know this how? You shouldn't be so quick to pass judgement on those that you don't even know.

Your assumptions are going to wind up getting you into trouble if your not careful.

- Karma

Kids take note of the threat above made by Karma_Chameleon. If you try this you will probably get banned from ATS.

reply to post by Antor

Much appreciation for your comment and post!!! Hopefully things will get better within the scientific community soon.

Originally posted by cripmeister

Originally posted by Karma_Chameleon

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by Karma_Chameleon
Wrong. I know exactly what the PTB are thinking.

And you know this, how?

Originally posted by Karma_Chameleon
Don't start with me Doomsdayrex, I'll show you how smart you are not.

You're no daisy.

I know this because I know the true power behind them like the back of my hand.

I'm no daisy? You would know this how? You shouldn't be so quick to pass judgement on those that you don't even know.

Your assumptions are going to wind up getting you into trouble if your not careful.

- Karma

Kids take note of the threat above made by Karma_Chameleon. If you try this you will probably get banned from ATS.

I made no threats. Where did you get that? What I said meant with anyone in general not necessarily with me.

Quit taking what I type out of context.

I type: " Your assumptions are going to wind up getting you into trouble if your not careful."

And you see this and are trying to get others to see this as a threat such as the "kids"? Therfore, you think I should be banned?

Whatever.

- Karma