Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No you don't 'getit' for you obviously believe all the tripe you see on TV or read on the internet.
I would seem only natural that as we grew older one would be able to discern just how igorant/lazy blanket statements are but obviously some have manage to completely and repeatedly bypass this mile-stone.
Predictable^. Same ole rubber stamp to anything that does not highlight evolution and it's supposed 'epitomized' prize.
Wrong. I think it is more feasible that aliens visited planet Earth than some deity instantly generating things into creation. That being said, I don't necessarily find it likely at all given the evidence. Not to mention, the very premise of your statement requires a ton of explanation - absolutely none of which has been ever proved beyond a few crackpot wish-thinkers on a TV show.
The main curiosity I have when I read a statement like this is how many babies you're willing to throw out with the bathwater. So, let's boil down the fact that every single living organism that we've ever found on planet Earth is comprised of DNA. Are you saying that an alien spaceship flew at warp speed through the universe loaded with every single animal we now see - in a type of intergalactic Noah's Ark, and therefore evolution is untrue?
Or, are you suggesting that aliens, in a kind of panspermia, dropped off the first living cell on planet Earth and let things evolve from there?
I'm really interested in what you have to say about DNA, why every living creature on Earth has it, and how it does not fit into the picture of evolution. I would also appreciate it if you could provide actual scientific documentation (the peer reviewed type) that DNA is somehow not consistent amongst the broad spectrum of life and that it somehow debunks evolution while supporting the alien mythos.
Since you're not going to be able to provide any of that, then I have to ask why you made the statement in the first place. Are you just poisoning the well so as to make your opinion look better in your own mind? Or are you hoping to throw out a few red herrings in hopes that people who know the topics won't catch on?
The fact of the matter is that even if you come up with some elaborate decorum of fanciful twists and turns of history, you still have to explain by what process the aliens came from. Were they too the product of some alien panspermia? And, if so, where did those aliens come from? Considering the Earth is about 4.5 billion years old, life on Earth is 3.5 billion years old, and the universe is about 14.5 billion years old, my guess is you're eventually going to run out of time by saying that aliens just kept producing more aliens.
To those that say they want more evidence. I would ask you to consider this. If we were to travel to a distant planet, land, study the indigenous people/animals but didn't want to interfere too much, do you think we would leave anything behind?
Say we did meet the indigenous people/animals, we suddenly advanced their knowledge/technologies. But, we realized that it all went wrong and that it would be used for the wrong reason. I believe we would take away the tech or knowledge.
Who knows. But, they make a good point, that the earth is young and tiny compared to the rest of the universe. To think that there is no life out there that is more technologically advanced then us, makes me think whomever thinks this has some ego issues.
My mind is wide open to facts, but the source has to be credible. A for profit TV production company or anonymous people on the internet ain't credible.
My apologies then, if your remark was only aimed at the material presented in "Ancient Astronauts", rather than a commentary on the whole subject.
Wrong. I think it is more feasible that aliens visited planet Earth than some deity instantly generating things into creation. That being said, I don't necessarily find it likely at all given the evidence. Not to mention, the very premise of your statement requires a ton of explanation - absolutely none of which has been ever proved beyond a few crackpot wish-thinkers on a TV show.
The main curiosity I have when I read a statement like this is how many babies you're willing to throw out with the bathwater. So, let's boil down the fact that every single living organism that we've ever found on planet Earth is comprised of DNA. Are you saying that an alien spaceship flew at warp speed through the universe loaded with every single animal we now see - in a type of intergalactic Noah's Ark, and therefore evolution is untrue?
Or, are you suggesting that aliens, in a kind of panspermia, dropped off the first living cell on planet Earth and let things evolve from there?
I'm really interested in what you have to say about DNA, why every living creature on Earth has it, and how it does not fit into the picture of evolution. I would also appreciate it if you could provide actual scientific documentation (the peer reviewed type) that DNA is somehow not consistent amongst the broad spectrum of life and that it somehow debunks evolution while supporting the alien mythos.
Since you're not going to be able to provide any of that, then I have to ask why you made the statement in the first place. Are you just poisoning the well so as to make your opinion look better in your own mind? Or are you hoping to throw out a few red herrings in hopes that people who know the topics won't catch on?
The fact of the matter is that even if you come up with some elaborate decorum of fanciful twists and turns of history, you still have to explain by what process the aliens came from. Were they too the product of some alien panspermia? And, if so, where did those aliens come from? Considering the Earth is about 4.5 billion years old, life on Earth is 3.5 billion years old, and the universe is about 14.5 billion years old, my guess is you're eventually going to run out of time by saying that aliens just kept producing more aliens.
o.k. obviously you used me as straw-man so that you could say some things that you have been wanting to say to someone somewhere (and quite possibly to get some love from your buds/like-minds...oh aw ugh). I do not fit into any pigeon hole you are trying to place me in.
Wrong. I think it is more feasible that aliens visited planet Earth than some deity instantly generating things into creation. That being said, I don't necessarily find it likely at all given the evidence. Not to mention, the very premise of your statement requires a ton of explanation - absolutely none of which has been ever proved beyond a few crackpot wish-thinkers on a TV show.
Here is one of the other arguments that has been tossed around. It is rather long (and still unproven), but it will at least give you some background as to why some folks question evolution.
FWIW, this gentleman is not the only one who has presented a similar argument against our currently accepted evolution theory.
I'm really interested in what you have to say about DNA, why every living creature on Earth has it, and how it does not fit into the picture of evolution. I would also appreciate it if you could provide actual scientific documentation (the peer reviewed type) that DNA is somehow not consistent amongst the broad spectrum of life and that it somehow debunks evolution while supporting the alien mythos.
To those that say they want more evidence. I would ask you to consider this. If we were to travel to a distant planet, land, study the indigenous people/animals but didn't want to interfere too much, do you think we would leave anything behind?
Say we did meet the indigenous people/animals, we suddenly advanced their knowledge/technologies. But, we realized that it all went wrong and that it would be used for the wrong reason. I believe we would take away the tech or knowledge.
Who knows. But, they make a good point, that the earth is young and tiny compared to the rest of the universe. To think that there is no life out there that is more technologically advanced then us, makes me think whomever thinks this has some ego issues.
We don't want MORE evidence - we just want evidence.
You can't provide MORE of something that does not exist.
Or do I have the definition of 'evidence' all messed up?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
