Author Topic: Aliens not Evolution  (Read 52100 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Rainbow Dash

  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
  • Respect: +8
Aliens not Evolution
« on: March 20, 2014, 11:21:14 PM »
0
I tried to discuss why life on Earth was genetically engineered by extra-terrestrials as opposed to evolving from a common ancestor on both the FDR call in show and the forums. Neither were of any success, so I thought I might try discussing it here.

When Charles Darwin first proposed his theory of evolution, he predicted that we would discover several transitional fossils showing how one species gradually changes into another. It has been over 150 years since Darwin first proposed his theory of evolution and since then no such transitional fossils have been found that show a gradual change from one species to another.

Evidence that is used to support to support evolution can also be explained by genetic engineering. Computer programs have 1’s and 0’s, living organisms have DNA made up of base pairs. Both can result in complex systems and both can be manipulated by humans. Different organisms share common DNA, different computer programs share common code by importing from the same libraries. Organisms often have organs that are no longer useful (vestigial organs); Computer programs often have code that is no longer useful (deprecated methods).

Different species often contain DNA that is in reversed order from each other. Scientists refer to these reversed DNA sections as chromosomal inversions. Chromosome 9 in humans have a lot of chromosomal inversions. Scientists claim that sections of DNA can naturally become separated, rotate 180 degrees and then reattach itself and still work and that this process plays a major role in evolution. These reversed DNA sections can be better explained by genetic engineering than evolution. Scientists today are able to use chemicals to cut out DNA segments and insert them into other organism’s DNA, so it would be easy to put DNA in backwards this way. This shows that these chromosomal inversions can be better explained with genetic engineering, which is evidence for intervention theory.

The last evidence I will bring forth here is the Starchild skull. The Starchild skull is a skull with strong evidence for being the skull of an extra-terrestrial. You can learn more about the Starchild skull here:
Starchild Skull For Dummies

 and here:
 http://starchildproject.com/

Another great video on intervention theory and the flaws of evolution is
Lloyd Pye Everything You Know Is Wrong

This one is about 2 hours long but really informative.

I would love to hear your responses.

Omega

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: 0
Re: Aliens not Evolution
« Reply #1 on: March 21, 2014, 07:24:54 AM »
0
There is no way to prove if life was engineered created by god or aliens.
We can only asume evolution as most likely cause.

However if we asume that life on earth was engineered we can asume that this engineer was drunk or retarded. Life design from engineering standpoint is extremely terrible.
In fact life is engineered so badly that I would doubt if its engineer is even capable to tie his shoes.

Just for that reason we shroud discard this hypothesis and stick with more likely evolution.
And no matter if life was engineered or not evolution is still going so whatever anyone created or engineered still evolved at some degree.

also there may be another plausible explanation that whomever engineered life on earth just borrowed its genetic code from his own species without much engineering.
But in that case, life on earth still evolved on another planet, was transferred here and forgotten.

Prodigal son

  • Guest
Re: Aliens not Evolution
« Reply #2 on: March 21, 2014, 08:05:18 AM »
0
I tried to discuss why life on Earth was genetically engineered by extra-terrestrials as opposed to evolving from a common ancestor on both the FDR call in show and the forums. Neither were of any success, so I thought I might try discussing it here.

Hi Rainbow Dash
You will get no purchase in discussing such matters at FDR since they will just revert to their default assumption that you are suffering from mental illness (like anyone else who dares to harbor thoughts that did not come from Mr Molyneux and his gaudily colored "mecosystem"). Here too I am doubtful you will find many people who share your curiosity (although I am sure no one will make any hasty assumptions about your soundness of mind) because this area is generally classified as conspiracy or non-science and lacking in empiricism - it reminds me of my attempts to discuss hemp when I went to church (not to imply there is anything church-like about this forum): there is a time and place for everything and I soon discovered that a Sunday morning Pentecostal service was neither of those things.
This said, I have become very interested in these ideas. I know Lloyd Pye and his fascinating quest to validate the DNA of the Starchild skull. I approached this area of study very skeptically shortly after leaving FDR but now I am far more inclined to be open-minded. Some of the alien theories seem to tie in with the Bible and the creation myth, in which context it may or may not be worth noting that a human rib is the perfect starting point for DNA harvesting while leaving the donor almost completely unharmed. I'm sure you would enjoy this presentation by Michael Tellinger, if you have not already seen it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcD1h9DYitg

I first heard of the Annunaki and the Nephilim quite recently and I found the ideas absolutely fascinating, especially since I was studying the Old Testament at the time. I completely accept that such theories are at best unprovable and I have no interest in convincing anyone of anything, but I am disillusioned with the science paradigm as it currently stands. We have been lied to so consistently about all manner of things that I am disinclined to believe - or take at face value - any of the theories that emanate from mainstream research fields.

Rainbow Dash

  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
  • Respect: +8
Re: Aliens not Evolution
« Reply #3 on: March 22, 2014, 01:49:24 AM »
0
There is no way to prove if life was engineered created by god or aliens.
We can only asume evolution as most likely cause.

However if we asume that life on earth was engineered we can asume that this engineer was drunk or retarded. Life design from engineering standpoint is extremely terrible.
In fact life is engineered so badly that I would doubt if its engineer is even capable to tie his shoes.

Just for that reason we shroud discard this hypothesis and stick with more likely evolution.
And no matter if life was engineered or not evolution is still going so whatever anyone created or engineered still evolved at some degree.

also there may be another plausible explanation that whomever engineered life on earth just borrowed its genetic code from his own species without much engineering.
But in that case, life on earth still evolved on another planet, was transferred here and forgotten.
When you say the engineers must be drunk or retarded, you reject the idea that they could just be lazy or careless, and didn't bother to take the time to design us well. Sure they could have borrowed some genetic code from somewhere else, but it is unlikely that creatures from their planet would be perfectly adapted to live on this planet, so they would likely have to make some genetic changes to the creatures. As for there had to be some evolution to some degree, sure, certain genes in the gene pool become more or less abundant from generation to generation based on natural selection, but there are limits to how far creatures can evolve. Sure life could have evolved from another planet, it is just that after a close look at the evidence it doesn't seem plausible that life evolved here on Earth without outside intervention. Also, why do you assume evolution is the most likely cause?

phlogiston

  • FDR Aware
  • **
  • Posts: 77
  • Respect: +6
Re: Aliens not Evolution
« Reply #4 on: March 22, 2014, 07:03:04 AM »
0

 Sure life could have evolved from another planet, it is just that after a close look at the evidence it doesn't seem plausible that life evolved here on Earth without outside intervention.

Is it plausible somewhere else? What would make it so?

 The simple question did white butterfly's come from black butterfly's is non-controversial. Did mammals come from dinosaurs is much more and did life come from nothing is beyond us really.

 To me the questions that come up from this discussion are all that have importance. Conclusions are not there but weight to what certain conclusions bring do bear on what questions to ask or to seek answers to.

Omega

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: 0
Re: Aliens not Evolution
« Reply #5 on: March 22, 2014, 07:29:18 AM »
0
Being just careless does not work here, because systems of living organisms do not resemble engineering at all. when you engineer something you have much higher freedom of choice, like you can include some obscure gene from some microbe into mammal if it makes engineering easier. the way we are engineered is extremely hard and time consuming to design.

Evolution always works in same  "copy and modify" way: all genes we have arise from something we had before  by duplication and then by mutation of duplicate.
As you say, there are limits for evolution and so far no one ever gone beyond these limits.
If we had some example of life on earth which stepped beyond limits of evolution (comparable to humans engineered crops or animals) that would be strong proof for engineering. But there is no such life form on earth so far.

Another proof of evolution is paternity test, just like you can find your parents, grandparents and relatives by genetic testing you can go deeper up to the very beginning,
By such paternity test you will find your genealogy down to the dinosaurs, even without any fossil records.

Of course I cannot deny that there is theoretical possibility that some alien did all that strange engineering which perfectly resembles evolution. to create billions of species on earth for no reason and them forget everything. But I find this quite unlikely. And as i said before it does not explain anything because that alien must evolve somehow too.

Quote
but it is unlikely that creatures from their planet would be perfectly adapted to live on this planet
there is no reason why they could not live on this planet without modifications, all universe consists of exactly same materials in similar proportions. I guess almost every star must have planet similar to earth so life may evolve on all of them.
only exceptional feature of earth is this axis tilt, which makes us feel summers and winters.

In fact earth is great planet for evolving life we have very big moon which produced extreme tidal waves, our axis is tilted, and we live in quite calm area of our galaxy not to too lone not too crowded. 



Rainbow Dash

  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
  • Respect: +8
Re: Aliens not Evolution
« Reply #6 on: March 22, 2014, 12:16:02 PM »
0
Evolution always works in same  "copy and modify" way: all genes we have arise from something we had before  by duplication and then by mutation of duplicate.
As you say, there are limits for evolution and so far no one ever gone beyond these limits.
If we had some example of life on earth which stepped beyond limits of evolution (comparable to humans engineered crops or animals) that would be strong proof for engineering. But there is no such life form on earth so far.
What would evidence for genetic engineering look like to you? I think the platypus would fit this description, having a duck bill that otherwise only birds can have without transitional fossils showing that it slowly gained the duck bill over time. I think this can better be explained by aliens copy and pasting DNA from ducks to make the platypus.

Another proof of evolution is paternity test, just like you can find your parents, grandparents and relatives by genetic testing you can go deeper up to the very beginning,
By such paternity test you will find your genealogy down to the dinosaurs, even without any fossil records.
Can you please show me these paternity tests that show how I am related to dinosaurs?
« Last Edit: March 22, 2014, 12:18:33 PM by Rainbow Dash »

Omega

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: 0
Re: Aliens not Evolution
« Reply #7 on: March 22, 2014, 04:18:14 PM »
0
What would evidence for genetic engineering look like to you?

I already said this: Find any DNA sequence in one organism which does not exist in any of his ancestors, but it exists in some unrelated organism.
This is not absolute proof because viruses can transfer DNA occasionally but if such transfers were quite common it would be evidence of engineering.

platypus would not prove anything even if it has genes for bile, because we have lots of inactive genes. for example human can still grow crocodile style tooth, and there are still babies born with monkey tails.

Quote
Can you please show me these paternity tests that show how I am related to dinosaurs?
i don't know how platypus evolved, however as I know its bill is not really same as duck, neither it has any duck genes. Platypus duck is just reshaped mouth.

fossils also do not provide any definite evidence because it is quite hard to tell what species they are sometimes evolution even makes a circle and complex organism may evolve into something very primitive.

genetic testing is much more accurate.


Quote
Can you please show me these paternity tests that show how I am related to dinosaurs?

I cant provide you test which proves that you are ancestor of T-rex it is not so precise.
however it is just standard test which is used test Genealogy.
everything works in same way: you find common sequences and compare how much differences and similarities there are.

Rainbow Dash

  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
  • Respect: +8
Re: Aliens not Evolution
« Reply #8 on: March 22, 2014, 05:57:39 PM »
0
platypus would not prove anything even if it has genes for bile, because we have lots of inactive genes. for example human can still grow crocodile style tooth, and there are still babies born with monkey tails.
This is evidence against evolution for the following reasons. When an organism stops using part of its DNA, then natural selection does not apply to that section of DNA. That means nothing is stopping that section of DNA from accumulating harmful mutations because natural selection is not stopping the harmful mutations from passing down to the next generation. How can humans still have DNA still capable of creating a tail if the tail DNA has been accumulating harmful mutations that keep getting passed down from generation to generation?


I already said this: Find any DNA sequence in one organism which does not exist in any of his ancestors, but it exists in some unrelated organism.
This is not absolute proof because viruses can transfer DNA occasionally but if such transfers were quite common it would be evidence of engineering.

Given that DNA of dead organisms completely degrade over millions of years, we can't know if an organism's supposed ancestors had common DNA, thus it is impossible for such a thing to be found regardless of evolution.

Omega

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: 0
Re: Aliens not Evolution
« Reply #9 on: March 22, 2014, 06:36:08 PM »
0
This is evidence against evolution for the following reasons. When an organism stops using part of its DNA, then natural selection does not apply to that section of DNA. That means nothing is stopping that section of DNA from accumulating harmful mutations because natural selection is not stopping the harmful mutations from passing down to the next generation. How can humans still have DNA still capable of creating a tail if the tail DNA has been accumulating harmful mutations that keep getting passed down from generation to generation?

this is not evidence, it is assumption that DNA will deteriorate. But such DNA deterioration is not inescapable, and we still have lots of functional DNA from very old ancestors.
DNA for tail is not that old. and it is quite common thing when humans are born with tails.
we also have body hair which serves no function, but it is still there.
in fact humans embryo still starts with tail which disappears later.

Quote
Given that DNA of dead organisms completely degrade over millions of years, we can't know if an organism's supposed ancestors had common DNA, thus it is impossible for such a thing to be found regardless of evolution.
No, DNA will not degrade completely, it can mutate or get damaged, but it will retain most of information.  Also I am not talking about nonfunctional DNA.

lets take for example pigeon and mouse. assume then they both need to produce some chemical in their cells, so if both were designed at same time we would expect that both should have same gene which produces same chemical(why anyone would reinvent the wheel?). However usually we will find that both species will have completely different genes that perform same function
Only occasion when there is same gene used is if both species already inherited that gene from common ancestor.

Rainbow Dash

  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
  • Respect: +8
Re: Aliens not Evolution
« Reply #10 on: March 22, 2014, 07:53:47 PM »
0
Quote
Given that DNA of dead organisms completely degrade over millions of years, we can't know if an organism's supposed ancestors had common DNA, thus it is impossible for such a thing to be found regardless of evolution.

No, DNA will not degrade completely, it can mutate or get damaged, but it will retain most of information.  Also I am not talking about nonfunctional DNA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_DNA
"According to their model, mitochondrial DNA is degraded to 1 base pair after 6,830,000 years at −5 °C.[2] Nuclear DNA degrades at least twice as fast as mtDNA"


this is not evidence, it is assumption that DNA will deteriorate. But such DNA deterioration is not inescapable, and we still have lots of functional DNA from very old ancestors.
DNA for tail is not that old. and it is quite common thing when humans are born with tails.
we also have body hair which serves no function, but it is still there.
in fact humans embryo still starts with tail which disappears later.


The reason we have lots of functional DNA from ancestors is that natural selection eliminates harmful mutations from the gene pool. Natural selection doesn't apply to non-functional DNA though.

Suppose you wrote a story, and then decided to randomly replace letters in your story with other random letters. If you repeat this process enough, your story will eventually become nonsense. Random mutations deteriorate over time. For the story to be readable, it would have to have a minimal number of mutations. Evolution requires frequent mutations, so evidence for few mutations is evidence against evolution


lets take for example pigeon and mouse. assume then they both need to produce some chemical in their cells, so if both were designed at same time we would expect that both should have same gene which produces same chemical(why anyone would reinvent the wheel?). However usually we will find that both species will have completely different genes that perform same function
Only occasion when there is same gene used is if both species already inherited that gene from common ancestor.


Given that humans and bananas share over half their DNA, I think they did a good job at reusing DNA and did very little reinventing the wheel. Also can you show me the ancestor shared between humans and bananas that also has the same DNA that is shared between humans and bananas?

Omega

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: 0
Re: Aliens not Evolution
« Reply #11 on: March 22, 2014, 08:18:11 PM »
0
Quote
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_DNA

this is about dead DNA not about DNA in living cells where it is constantly repaired and maintained.

Quote
The reason we have lots of functional DNA from ancestors is that natural selection eliminates harmful mutations from the gene pool. Natural selection doesn't apply to non-functional DNA though.

Once again I am not talking about functional DNA, nonfictional severely damaged DNA is fine to.

Quote
Given that humans and bananas share over half their DNA, I think they did a good job at reusing DNA and did very little reinventing the wheel. Also can you show me the ancestor shared between humans and bananas that also has the same DNA that is shared between humans and bananas?


This ancestor is extinct long time ago, but yes humans and bananas have common ancestor, It should be some protozoa similar to amoeba I guess.

when i talk about reinventing the wheel I mean genes that evolved recently not those that exist from almost very beginning.
 look into this graph:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/12/CollapsedtreeLabels-simplified.svg

to prove enginnering you must find some gene which exists in  one species of something like acidobacteria, and one species of animals or plants but does not exist in any other species

You will not find many such examples. As i said earlier when even same functionality is required it will be done in different way. because evolution cant start from blank page and cannot obtain genes from other species (unless some retrovirus transfers them)

So you  must not compare humans and bananas, but find an example where evolution does not work as expected, where genes are transferred between species in a way that they cannot be inherited.




Rainbow Dash

  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
  • Respect: +8
Re: Aliens not Evolution
« Reply #12 on: March 22, 2014, 08:29:45 PM »
0
Quote
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_DNA

this is about dead DNA not about DNA in living cells where it is constantly repaired and maintained.

I was talking about dead DNA as mentioned in my post:
Given that DNA of dead organisms completely degrade over millions of years, we can't know if an organism's supposed ancestors had common DNA, thus it is impossible for such a thing to be found regardless of evolution.


Rainbow Dash

  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
  • Respect: +8
Re: Aliens not Evolution
« Reply #13 on: March 22, 2014, 08:44:15 PM »
0

to prove enginnering you must find some gene which exists in  one species of something like acidobacteria, and one species of animals or plants but does not exist in any other species


Why would someone create a gene, and use the gene in one species of acidobacteria, and one species plant or animal, but then never use the gene in any other species? I don't understand how this would be predicted under the assumption engineering had happened.

Omega

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: 0
Re: Aliens not Evolution
« Reply #14 on: March 22, 2014, 08:58:13 PM »
0
Quote
I was talking about dead DNA as mentioned in my post
Ok, but these dead organisms are irrelevant, here.

Quote
Why would someone create a gene, and use the gene in one species of acidobacteria, and one species plant or animal, but then never use the gene in any other species? I don't understand how this would be predicted under the assumption engineering had happened.

because these species need that functionality while another species do not need it
lest say there is light emitting bug and light emitting bacteria, they have same functionality thus they should use same genes.

another example would be if  these species need to digest same food,  they probably should use same molecular machinery.

also you are usually talking about very distant species
but we can simply compare mouse and human both have similar immune systems however mouse uses different molecule for base of antibodies.
Why? if it performs same function why it is completely diffrent?