Humans don't belong on earth?

reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien

Yes but those are cats and dogs who are bred.
Those animals were bred, they're not wild, im talking about wild animals, when i say cat, i mean the wild cat, the cat family excluding domesticated cats, and when i say dogs, i mean wolves, hyenas etc, not domesticated dogs. Im not going to use the scientific names, so don't be anal about it,

Getting upset with people's responses because you're being imprecise with your language is going to do anything to support your thesis.

you know you can't disprove the alien engineering .

The burden of proof is on you to prove it, as you're the one making the claim. Of course, if you're going to prove "alien engineering", you first have to objectively prove the existence of aliens. Feel free to do that at any point.

Most, animals can see well at night, and if they can't they use their whiskers, to sense since they are very sensitive.

"Many animals have better night vision than humans do, the result of one or more differences in the morphology and anatomy of their eyes. These include having a larger eyeball, a larger lens, a larger optical aperture (the pupils may expand to the physical limit of the eyelids), more rods than cones (or rods exclusively) in the retina, a tapetum lucidum."
en.wikipedia.org...

And many animals don't have better night vision than humans. Is that your benchmark for being a native species to this planet? So any animal with night vision at the same level or worse than humans must be from somewhere else?

Birds build their nests with whats around them, no don't make bricks using cement and im pretty sure there are no birds who are carpenters either for the inner placings and furniture for their nests.

How is that relevant? We used to build shelter from "whats around" us. We progressed past that point.

People CAN live outside...BUT WITH GUNS, humans can't hunt WITHOUT, guns, so it's not living in the wild, it's once again adapting nature to fit with us.

Don't tell that to indigenous peoples that hunt and prosper without guns. They entire society would collapse if someone told them that they need to use guns to hunt.

Ok so SOME animals, are born "weak" but they become stronger much quicker than a human, it takes them less than a year to become predators, it takes most, word of the day here people, most...not all..but most humans many years of religious indoctrination and false education, to become predators

They might be stronger, they might be quicker, but they aren't using tools. That's what gives us an advantage.

Animals are born in perfect balance with the ecosystem,

Yeah, that's why the whitetail deer was nearing extinction in the northeastern US until we came along and saved it.

go out on a safari or look in the wild, there are barely any with disabilities, and the ones who do have them, have them due to humans interfering and giving them those disabilities.

So… because you don't see them, they must not be there?

We may have been designed for this planet,

Yes. By nature. Because we come from here.

or have come from another.

The burden of proof for this one is on you. You're going to need better evidence than what you've presented so far.

reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien

I find it hard to believe that you're in your second year of biomedical science (unless that's a fancy name for "nursing program" these days) if you think a physical injury, like a torn meniscus, is a heritable genetic trait.

reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien


but isnt it strange that with the case of our technology boom in the 1950's alot of people think its because of the rosewell crash? Couldnt alien intervention be a possibility for our physical evolution as well as our technological one? Well of course it could be a POSSIBILITY any proof? not much, but its there.

reply to post by Chadwickus


I agree. And an easy way to say it is that the predtor can take time to get on its feet mum dad are killers and you're at the top of the food chain. The prey don't have that luxury mum and dad eat grass and don't have fangs or claws. So if one looks closely it's the ones who really need to run who are fast to get onthier feet.

reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien


ofcourse we dont belong on earth we belong on mars

reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien

You blind? Try re-reading (my opening post) again.

Why, will it become meaningful and true if I do? Will it fiddlesticks.

Your post has nothing to add, it's only confrontation based on nothing

Seven page of posts by people more patient than I have more than proved me right. What need I add, except my point: that the level of debate in this forum assumes some knowledge, or at least a well-formed belief system, on the part of the debater. You produced an effusion of lazy, flaccid, uninformed, clueless blether. It is an insult to the others who frequent this forum, irrespective of their position on the subjects discussed here.

if only you didn't live in a deluded condescending state of mind, you'd be able to figure out what the conversation was about. Thanks for proving creationism tho

, if we evolved there's be no idiots.

You showed us you know nothing about animals, nothing about genetics and nothing about evolution. Who cares what you say?

reply to post by Astyanax


Thread end.

Originally posted by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
Think about it.
Cats, dog etc, have fur, feathers, scales etc to protect them from their natural enviroment, they dont need to live in houses, they are born perfect without dissabilities, due to evolution and the survival of the fittest.
Hell horses on their first day they are born, they are running around, not that i like horses, just pointing it out.

Those animals have perfect night vision, humans can barely see in the dark.

Humans on the other hand, need houses, humans make the enviroment adapt to them, human babies are too weak on their first day of birth, they born naked, hungry etc, it takes humans at least 18 years to be somewhat self sufficient.
We need shelter to live, we can't live in the open, we'll die, wolves will kill us, predators will kill us, the cold will kill us, we can't hunt, we have to kill cattle etc.

Animals are born perfect, survival of the fittes, if they're disabled theyre left to die, humans on the other hand we have variation, some are disabled, some are smart, some are dumb, does the animals in the wild have this?

Humans aren't a natural part of this ecosystem, mother nature is not our mother, but a cold hard bitch who wants us dead.

Thoughts?

edit on 3-9-2011 by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien because: (no reason given)

All technology in existence is an extension of the human body.

But i do agree that there seems to be a lost chapter in human history... a very big.. big chapter,

According to evolution we would have lost our hair overtime. I assume that as we got smarter and started building, the need for hair would have decreased as our use of technology such as fire, shelter, clothing increased.

Though its a little weird that we would evolve in a way that would require us to put in more effort to survive... So i guess by that logic we are indeed, not of this planet.

...

I gotta say, i've never actually thought about human history in this sense and you have raised some interesting points. Great post!

We would be hairy but over the years of clothing, and wearing things we just evolved out needing fur i guess.

I think our evolution was genetically engineered by another race. It would explain the missing link between our ancestors, a lot of points the OP states, and this feeling of not belonging here.
Think about it. If we had evolved naturally, it would have taken WAY more time than... what, 4 million years? Natural evolution is really slow, and we would show a lot more similarities with our ancestors, like as the OP says, fur. A nice hypothesis to check is the Aquatic ape hypothesis:

The AAH suggests that many of the features that distinguish humans from their nearest evolutionary relatives can be explained through a period of aquatic adaptation in which protohumans spent time wading, swimming and feeding on the shores of fresh, saline or brackish waters (though there has been disagreement and modification of the theory regarding the salinity of the purported watery environment) and suggests comparisons with other aquatic or semiaquatic species with similar characteristics. Some observations include:

- Bipedalism out of water causes considerable problems for the back, knees and organs, while water would support the joints and torso and permit breathing
- Humans are relatively hairless compared to great apes, similar to the hairlessness of land-dwelling rhinoceros and elephant, which both have aquatic ancestors; what body hair humans do have also follows water flow-lines
- Increased subcutaneous fat for insulation, especially in human infants
- A descended larynx
- A hooded nose, muscular nostril aperture control and the philtrum preventing water from entering the nostrils
- Extensive coverage of the skin by sebaceous glands
- The requirement of the human brain for certain nutrients, including iodine and some essential fatty acids which are most easily found and absorbed in seafood
- Voluntary breath control which allows diving and swimming, and a more streamlined shape compared to other apes
- The mammalian diving reflex, which occurs when the head is immersed in cold water
- Vestigial webbing between the fingers
- The waxy coating found on newborns
- Certain morphological adaptations within the kidney

The theory itself might be a little off, but if you look at it thinking there was a race experimenting with our genes, the points might make more sense.

Just my 2 cents.

Countless animal species also "build houses" in trees, underground, in caves etc. Their fur, feathers, (scales?) aren't enough to protect them from the elements/predators. They would die without a home.

Humans are highly adaptable and don't necessarily need to live in houses. Just look at all the homeless people sleeping out on the street, in tents etc. But that's not exactly fun on a cold rainy night, is it? We need a house just as much as many other animals do, it's just that our intelligence led us to build houses with comfort levels slightly higher than living in a cave.

Of course, NO human needs a luxurious mansion to live in, but that's another story.

Lloyd Pye absolutely destroys and owns everyone who believes in evolution.




Watch that video, evolutionists , you've been owned.

reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien


Wonder what Richard Dawkins thinks of this; obviously not much as such a discovery would have surely crossed his path.

"Evolutionists, you've been owned"?

Hardly, evolutionary evidence is undeniable.

Originally posted by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
Think about it.
Cats, dog etc, have fur, feathers, scales etc to protect them from their natural enviroment, they dont need to live in houses, they are born perfect without dissabilities, due to evolution and the survival of the fittest.
Hell horses on their first day they are born, they are running around, not that i like horses, just pointing it out.

Those animals have perfect night vision, humans can barely see in the dark.

Humans on the other hand, need houses, humans make the enviroment adapt to them, human babies are too weak on their first day of birth, they born naked, hungry etc, it takes humans at least 18 years to be somewhat self sufficient.
We need shelter to live, we can't live in the open, we'll die, wolves will kill us, predators will kill us, the cold will kill us, we can't hunt, we have to kill cattle etc.

Animals are born perfect, survival of the fittes, if they're disabled theyre left to die, humans on the other hand we have variation, some are disabled, some are smart, some are dumb, does the animals in the wild have this?

Humans aren't a natural part of this ecosystem, mother nature is not our mother, but a cold hard bitch who wants us dead.

Thoughts?

edit on 3-9-2011 by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien because: (no reason given)

You are ignorant man. Animals are born with birth defects. Humans have 'fur' there are still some really hairy people out there and it's called SHAVING or waxing.

There are dumb animals out there they are the ones that get caught and eaten first by other animals.

We can't hunt? Look at archeology we used stone tipped spears and stone axes to kill animals and cut the meat off.

This thread is a joke.

reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien


Hate to say but i agree i have been thinking that lately i have watched how we all work and think. We are kind of out of place. I fully agree with the babies being weak, i also wonder how the hell did our species survive in the early days.

For all we know we crash landed on a ship that evaporated in dust as the milennia rolled by and the original peoples died out. Especially when you consider our science knows basically nothing of our world,solar system and galaxy, even our DNA and genomes are a mystery i think that 92% junk DNA is a pile of # (excuse my french). If it was junk why is it needed in EVERY human. I thyink Evolution happened in some way but something somewhere in that 1 million year gap pushed us along. 1 million years is more than enough time for a civilisation to rise and advance to the point where they leave this world for somewhere better and observe us.

Or we could feel out of place because we realise how frail the human body and life is, it is why i am pro H+. Ethics and liberalism has no place with me.

Originally posted by IlluminatusOculus33

Originally posted by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
Think about it.
Cats, dog etc, have fur, feathers, scales etc to protect them from their natural enviroment, they dont need to live in houses, they are born perfect without dissabilities, due to evolution and the survival of the fittest.
Hell horses on their first day they are born, they are running around, not that i like horses, just pointing it out.

Those animals have perfect night vision, humans can barely see in the dark.

Humans on the other hand, need houses, humans make the enviroment adapt to them, human babies are too weak on their first day of birth, they born naked, hungry etc, it takes humans at least 18 years to be somewhat self sufficient.
We need shelter to live, we can't live in the open, we'll die, wolves will kill us, predators will kill us, the cold will kill us, we can't hunt, we have to kill cattle etc.

Animals are born perfect, survival of the fittes, if they're disabled theyre left to die, humans on the other hand we have variation, some are disabled, some are smart, some are dumb, does the animals in the wild have this?

Humans aren't a natural part of this ecosystem, mother nature is not our mother, but a cold hard bitch who wants us dead.

Thoughts?

edit on 3-9-2011 by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien because: (no reason given)

You are ignorant man. Animals are born with birth defects. Humans have 'fur' there are still some really hairy people out there and it's called SHAVING or waxing.

There are dumb animals out there they are the ones that get caught and eaten first by other animals.

We can't hunt? Look at archeology we used stone tipped spears and stone axes to kill animals and cut the meat off.

This thread is a joke.

Lol, ignorance is bliss huh, must be nice being you .
Nope, we don't have fur......i don't....if you do, i suggest you see a Biochemist, you need help, he can treat you.
Animals born with defects, die, their parents kill them of, either that or they don't survive, and don't talk about domesticated animals, because here's the keyword....they domesticated.

Dumb animals, get killed....therefore due to them being dead, they can't breed,
We never used stone tipped spears, don't be so benighted, we never came from cave men, the first humans, in our race, were Sumerians, we never came from cave men, we never used stone tipped spears.

The evidence is there, the masses choose to ignore it.

Originally posted by NeverForget
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien

 

Wonder what Richard Dawkins thinks of this; obviously not much as such a discovery would have surely crossed his path.

"Evolutionists, you've been owned"?

Hardly, evolutionary evidence is undeniable.

Trying watching the video.
What Richard dawkins says is hardly any evidence, if anything it proves how gullible people are.

reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien


Gullibility? Isn't this somewhat hypocritical?

Richard Dawkins doesn't rely on faith to form his theories, DNA evidence is more than enough to convince people, and other scientists alike.

reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien


You wreak of teenage hormones.....Your posts are juvenile and ridiculous, I won't bother to add anything constructive because everyone else already has and you have no eyes to see and no brain to think.