Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Origin of Man


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Origin of Man Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Origin of Man - 5/11/2010 2:58:34 AM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline 		Spawned off a near argument, and remember I do not argue with idiots, came some postulations.

Now, assuming the homo sapiens actually developed in different places in the world, at or near the same time, consider the following.

What allowed the human race to thrive was the innate diversity of the species. That our differences strengthened us biologically against whatever microbes and what have you. The results of inbreeding are well evidenced by the incidence of hemophilia in some of the inbred Royal families of the world.

However I can't even guess whether that trait is caused by the inbreeding or it's just a trait they have trouble getting rid of due to inbreeding. While diversity is the name of the game when it comes to long term survival, it eventually kills itself. That's right. Because eventually everyone is so interbred that we really are all the same under the skin, which is not yet true. Once it eventually becomes true a microbe that could kill one of us would probably kill all of us in short order. But I didn't want to engage in portent here.

This is about the origin of Man. Now, as said, let's just accept the possibility that it did indeed develop in different parts of the world. Why ? Now my buddy asserts that aliens of some sort were here long ago and we pondered their abilities, and if they could get here back then that the human race is still in it's infancy. We also expounded that beings with these abilities would be seen as Gods and could possibly explain some of the mythology of this planet.

But the key to my question is this, what afforded the reproductive compatibility to let this happen ? Could it have been aliens who analysed the DNA of the highest of the lower primates and injected a compatible DNA somehow ? Remember we are talking about a species who can get here, yet we can't get there. We have no way of guaging their level of technology. Even if they stopped back after homo sapiens appeared, they would be viewed as Gods.

While we agree that if there is one true God, it is the God of everything and all universes. But what do primitive people call those who can manipulate matter and energy at will, possibly even time ?

I am simply putting forth the idea, this is not an assertion of any kind. But the theory of it does fit, make quite a few things fall into place. How exactly it matters now I do not know, but it beats Bush or Obama bashing.

And what if it is true ? Is there a proscribed date on which they will return. There weren't even calendars back then, last time, well maybe.

Expounding on that discussion earlier, I asserted that if true, the introduced DNA was progressive, somewhat like a virus. Then it went to religious suppression of science. But all these things fall into place with this theory. Though all this does not prove it correct, it makes it pretty damn hard to prove incorrect.

Comments ?

T
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Origin of Man - 5/11/2010 6:26:12 AM   
pahunkboy


Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline 		I doubt it was aliens.

but i do think some knowledge is suppressed.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Origin of Man - 5/11/2010 7:17:16 AM   
thatsub


Posts: 176
Joined: 5/3/2010
Status: offline 		What if it was an accident (as opposed to design) that was caused by mutation? If 2-headed man mates with 3-legged woman, who is going to be born? I surely, don't know.

Do Google image search for something simple as "two headed fish" and you can see a lot freaky mutated wild life even now.

(in reply to pahunkboy)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Origin of Man - 5/11/2010 10:20:04 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or
Now, assuming the homo sapiens actually developed in different places in the world, at or near the same time, consider the following.

Not true. The entire species is derived from a single root population that arose from an earlier hominid population in east Africa.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Origin of Man - 5/12/2010 9:51:27 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline 		Ken, I am not going to ask for proof that I might not accept. You could probably bring in pages of anthropoligical data which is not the trouble. It's the sheer time in reading and assimilating it.

If what you said is true, then certain things must follow, one is that to form the "races" of today there had to be a hell of alot of evolution involved in between time. I don't mean races necessrily confined to national boundaries. I am talking about the real differences that can be discovered from one's skeletal remains. They can determine these differences, but not having complete records of Man's migration throughout the world the results vary.

In other words who built the boats, or, did this all happen in the supposed supercontinent of Pangea before it split up ? (if we accept that theory). Those are valid questions to which none of us will have the answers to anytime soon. Also, I believe that the single point source of all humanity is promoted by those who do not wish to contradict religious theory. They thwart the issue by the fact that we can't rerally be sure just where this supposed garden of Eden was located. It's called culpable denialbility.

On the other side however, we had this story about some of the old mariners having maps, which of course they did. One of them was in possesion of a mariner which predated the maps of the time and accurately depicted the land mass of Antarctica. Now if true, this means there were mariners long before current recorded history starts. It also suppots the theory that every once in a while the crust of the Earth shifts, most likely due to the mass of the ice at the poles. That theory is also evidenced by differences in the orientation (magnetically) of lodestones found in the ground, untouched by Man to that point. The only other explainaton I could think of is massive electrical storms the degree of which are well beyond our conprehension. This would require massive EMP(s), but then there were no electronics around to fry out back then.

Any evidence, geological or anthropolical can be considered crucial or anciallry. Even irrelevant. It is all in who does the considering. As such, I question everything.

T

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Origin of Man - 5/12/2010 10:17:51 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline 		Your premise is incorrect. You cannot determine a person's ancestry or "race" based on simpe examination of the skeleton. You've been shown these facts before (in threads with roughly the same name as this one as a matter of fact).

The poles do flip occasionally. we have undeniable evidence of such. It has nothing to do with ice weight or anything of the sort. Also no ancient map actually has an accurate rendering of the coast of Antarctica. You seem to be mangling the claims of Menzies about the Piri Reis map which in reality simply shows parts of South America wrapped around the bottom of the parchment to fit.

As to how H sapiens spread out of east Africa, they mostly walked. certainly that's how they got to Asia and Europe. We can even track the spread with older sites being only found closer to the starting point. They may have also walked right into the Americas as well. There was a landbridge connecting Alaska and Siberia during the last glaciation. We know the Polynesians spread throughout the Pacific islands by boats of their own construction. This likely also explains how Australia was settled.

I don't 'promote' the fact of the single point of origin of Man for any religious reason. I'm an atheist who finds all religions to be at best laughable. The facts are simply the facts. We find the first H sapiens fossils in east Africa. We've studied the genome of humans all over the world and have found that outside of East Africa our genetic diversity is nearly nil while in east Africa the genetic diversity of H sapiens is many times that of the rest of us. That pretty clearly indicates the species began there and small groups spread out from there.

As to your supposed open mind it seems to be mostly a smokescreen for your racist beliefs. You've trotted out these same claims before and had many people spend a great deal of time explaining that the evidence directly contradicts your beliefs but instead of accepting those facts as a truly open minded person would here you are again.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Origin of Man - 5/12/2010 10:30:33 PM   
juliaoceania


Posts: 21383
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Status: offline
quote:

This is about the origin of Man. Now, as said, let's just accept the possibility that it did indeed develop in different parts of the world. Why ? Now my buddy asserts that aliens of some sort were here long ago and we pondered their abilities, and if they could get here back then that the human race is still in it's infancy. We also expounded that beings with these abilities would be seen as Gods and could possibly explain some of the mythology of this planet.


The out of africa hypothesis is much more accepted than the view that human beings developed into a species in different regions independently.

quote:

But the key to my question is this, what afforded the reproductive compatibility to let this happen ? Could it have been aliens who analysed the DNA of the highest of the lower primates and injected a compatible DNA somehow ? Remember we are talking about a species who can get here, yet we can't get there. We have no way of guaging their level of technology. Even if they stopped back after homo sapiens appeared, they would be viewed as Gods.


This view has very little to substantiate it, and presenting it in the form of a question does not negate that it is highly unlikely.


I have RH negative blood, and I will admit it is a highly maladaptive trait, one which my professors never explained to me, but still, I don't think aliens are the reason I have this trait, just sayin


_____________________________

Once you label me, you negate me ~ Soren Kierkegaard

Reality has a well known Liberal Bias ~ Stephen Colbert

Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Origin of Man - 5/12/2010 10:58:00 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania
I have RH negative blood, and I will admit it is a highly maladaptive trait, one which my professors never explained to me, but still, I don't think aliens are the reason I have this trait, just sayin

Rh negative usually means negative for the Rh D antigen.

The last study I saw showed that Rh D positive was protective against toxoplasmosis but had poorer pyshomotor reaction times. So the risk of getting the parasite balanced against better reaction times controlled the spread of the gene for the D antigen. Thoe gene was less common in Europeans because they had very few wild cats which was the primary vector of infection prior to the widespread keeping of the domestic cat.

(in reply to juliaoceania)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Origin of Man - 5/12/2010 11:04:29 PM   
juliaoceania


Posts: 21383
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania
I have RH negative blood, and I will admit it is a highly maladaptive trait, one which my professors never explained to me, but still, I don't think aliens are the reason I have this trait, just sayin

Rh negative usually means negative for the Rh D antigen.

The last study I saw showed that Rh D positive was protective against toxoplasmosis but had poorer pyshomotor reaction times. So the risk of getting the parasite balanced against better reaction times controlled the spread of the gene for the D antigen. Thoe gene was less common in Europeans because they had very few wild cats which was the primary vector of infection prior to the widespread keeping of the domestic cat.


RH negative means I lack a certain antigen in my blood that 85% of other people have. Women with this negative blood have trouble carrying positive babies to term (at least until they develop a shot that prevents negative women from miscarrying positive babies). I say it is maladaptive because women with negative blood reject positive babies... my body would attack a positive blood baby without a shot.


_____________________________

Once you label me, you negate me ~ Soren Kierkegaard

Reality has a well known Liberal Bias ~ Stephen Colbert

Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Origin of Man - 5/12/2010 11:24:20 PM   
unDEAD


Posts: 41
Joined: 5/4/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Your premise is incorrect. You cannot determine a person's ancestry or "race" based on simpe examination of the skeleton.


I may be understanding this incorrectly, but are you really saying there's no differences in the skeletal remains of an human of African descent as compared to one of nordic descent?  Police forensics, while not always correct, often relies on  these specific differences to identify (or at least begin to) a victim. 


_____________________________

"This is MY body. This is MY blood. Happy are they who come to MY supper..."

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Origin of Man - 5/12/2010 11:49:47 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: unDEAD

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Your premise is incorrect. You cannot determine a person's ancestry or "race" based on simpe examination of the skeleton.


I may be understanding this incorrectly, but are you really saying there's no differences in the skeletal remains of an human of African descent as compared to one of nordic descent?  Police forensics, while not always correct, often relies on  these specific differences to identify (or at least begin to) a victim. 

We're all of African descent.

Police forensics makes guesses based on averages but it is never 100%. No morphology is truly diagnostic of ethnic origin or "race."

(in reply to unDEAD)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Origin of Man - 5/12/2010 11:54:01 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania
I have RH negative blood, and I will admit it is a highly maladaptive trait, one which my professors never explained to me, but still, I don't think aliens are the reason I have this trait, just sayin

Rh negative usually means negative for the Rh D antigen.

The last study I saw showed that Rh D positive was protective against toxoplasmosis but had poorer pyshomotor reaction times. So the risk of getting the parasite balanced against better reaction times controlled the spread of the gene for the D antigen. Thoe gene was less common in Europeans because they had very few wild cats which was the primary vector of infection prior to the widespread keeping of the domestic cat.


RH negative means I lack a certain antigen in my blood that 85% of other people have. Women with this negative blood have trouble carrying positive babies to term (at least until they develop a shot that prevents negative women from miscarrying positive babies). I say it is maladaptive because women with negative blood reject positive babies... my body would attack a positive blood baby without a shot.


Actually Rh type is much more than a single antigen. The primary one is Rh D but there are others.

(in reply to juliaoceania)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Origin of Man - 5/13/2010 4:03:00 AM   
Rule


Posts: 10479
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or
my buddy asserts that aliens of some sort were here long ago and we pondered their abilities, and if they could get here back then that the human race is still in it's infancy. We also expounded that beings with these abilities would be seen as Gods and could possibly explain some of the mythology of this planet.

The pagan gods were human.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Origin of Man - 5/13/2010 4:29:49 AM   
tigreetsa


Posts: 132
Joined: 4/30/2010
From: SW London
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

Now, assuming the homo sapiens actually developed in different places in the world, at or near the same time, consider the following.



Our roots are in Africa and we evolved from a group of insectivore primates or apes.


_____________________________

'There are many here among us who feel that life is but a joke
But you and I we've been through that
And that is not our fate
So let us not talk falsely now, the hour is getting late.'
All Along The Watchtower (Bob Dylan)

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Origin of Man - 5/13/2010 4:45:52 AM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline 		"The pagan gods were human. "

Sorry, I can't accept that as having much substance. Such a blanket statement would seem to claim that Odin, The Norns, Zeus, Apollo and those statues down in Egypt of the past were human. Or are they not considered pagan ?

Need some clarification here before delving into that. The second line of wiki's definition says the exact meaning may vary. Apparently some take it as simply meaning non-Abrahamic.

T

(in reply to Rule)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Origin of Man - 5/13/2010 5:07:37 AM   
kittinSol


Posts: 16926
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or
Now, assuming the homo sapiens actually developed in different places in the world, at or near the same time, consider the following.

Not true. The entire species is derived from a single root population that arose from an earlier hominid population in east Africa.



He can't accept the truth because he's a racist who hates the idea that his roots are on that continent, so he makes up fabulations and fantasies about aliens landing instead. It's very, very sad.



_____________________________



(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Origin of Man - 5/13/2010 6:10:21 AM   
LatexCrusade


Posts: 4
Joined: 5/28/2008
Status: offline 		I've skipped through this a bit, but just want to add my tuppence worth here.

Humans migrated out of Africa after the continents had split up, but that doesn't mean they are similar to what you think of them as now. The whole geography of the planet is forever moving; for example, the Indian tetonic plate is constantly moving up into, I believe, the central asian plate, and these 2 plates rubbing and folding is what causes the Himalaya's to be formed. This is not a static process, these plates are still moving, at the same speed as your fingernails grow, which is an extraordinarily fast rate in my mind.
Now, taking into account these constant geographical changes, it is fairly easy to see how humans could populate the entire world, without the use of "alien" technology. Firstly we have Africa, Europe and Asia without so much as a large river in the way. The closest challenge we have here is the British Isles, which, at the time, was a very different shape, namely there was a massive patch of land to the North east, that is now under the North Sea, and the Channel hadn't formed yet, so all which sepererating France and England was a little stream.
The next biggy then is the jump from Eurasia to the America's. Dreg up some current affairs, and it is evident to see how the North- West passage (linking the Pacific and the Atlantic) is becoming more and more of an important shipping lane as the ice melts, only a hundred years ago it was effectivly a suicide mission sending ships that way; now its relativly easy.  Taking into account the weather was alot colder then, again another fact, it is perfectly acceptable hypothesis, to assume that the first american's were those who walked across the frozen Bering Straights, from Russia. Now the only bit we cannot explain is how did we get to Australia, which I will leave to my more learned friends here.

Just a point on morphology, DomKen is right. Forensics can use certain characteristics of the body structure to identify their origins, but this is at best a good possibility they will fit. Everyone is different; just because my old sports teacher had a brooding eyes and a scowl, doesn't make him a Neanderthal, it gives a possibility, but to say he was just on that basis is wrong.

I also became really interested in the idea that the "pagan gods are human". According to most mythologies, that I read anyway, there was a lot of interbreeding between the gods and humans, creating demi gods and the such, so that much could be true, and in comparrison to the religions of the book, pagan Gods were alot more human in a moralistic way; they never claimed to  be benevolant and all powerful; they had tantrums and strops and got their ass handed to them once in a while, so they deffinatly had human characterstics. While this interesting I can't see it having much impact on the argument, as it relies too much on one faith in their existance which cannot be irrefutably proven.

That's just my tuppence anyway, back to the real heavyweights who can debate this with some gravitas.
.





(in reply to kittinSol)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: Origin of Man - 5/13/2010 6:14:34 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azvwkrB4_ls 

Having researched this thoroughly, two ameobas got their ovipositors reversed, and in the ensuing melee ones ovipositor was stuck in the mouthparts of the other. 

Immediatly, the one with the ovipositor said 'BRILLIANT!!!!!!!!!!  Good Girl'.

The rest?  History, muchacho----history.

LeakeyLouie

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to LatexCrusade)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: Origin of Man - 5/13/2010 6:16:05 AM   
Rule


Posts: 10479
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or
I can't accept that

That is unfortunate - but that is the fate of your choice.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: Origin of Man - 5/13/2010 6:16:31 AM   
tigreetsa


Posts: 132
Joined: 4/30/2010
From: SW London
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

Comments ?



Why don't you just fess up and admit to being the missing link?


_____________________________

'There are many here among us who feel that life is but a joke
But you and I we've been through that
And that is not our fate
So let us not talk falsely now, the hour is getting late.'
All Along The Watchtower (Bob Dylan)

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Origin of Man Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.093