Ancient Aliens on Evolution

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6F_LLS_JVak"]YouTube - Ancient Aliens: Gods & Aliens pt 3/3 (Season 2: Episode 2)

Just skip too 8:00mins It talks about Darwins evolution theory and how it cant explain the missing link and how our brains have grown rapidly over the past thousands of years, something that would take millions of year according to evolution.

 

I think that the archeological evidence so far points to a large diversity in our genus/accurate term..

Incredibility: When a source changes its basis of proof from one discipline to another without explaining a damn thing ...

Using the Torah as proof of anything discredits the entire thing auto-wise imo

the likelihood is that some other animated being DOES exist outside the Earth:> Agnosticism.

History Channel Goal: Collect underpants, ...., PROFiT

 

I don't understand your point, but I think I agree with it.

 

I just think people look funny. I don't know if you can really describe it. But why did humans evolve to be less furry? You'd think fur would be beneficial. Aliens mixed with monkeys to create gold miners.

 

or we were aquatic for a while

http://blog.ted.com/2009/07/31/did_we_evolve_f/

 

:2thumbsup::2thumbsup:

 

they interviewed and ancient alien explaining evolution? why do this i doubt?

saying we came from somewhere else, far from answering anything, begs the question; ok, so how did we come into existence there?

not that i think that's really the question that matters at all.
(which is instead; how do we keep from/stop, screwing everything up for each other and everything else?)

 

Corrupt Aliens must still be held accountable before GOD.. as will all the spawn of evil..

James 5:1

5 You have lived on the earth in luxury and in pleasure; you have fattened your hearts in a day of slaughter. 6 You have condemned, you have killed the righteous man; he does not resist you."...

 

The points raised in the video are possible, but there are probably many simpler and better explanations. It is a funny thought process to say "We don't understand the evolutionary history of phenomenon X, therefor aliens probably did it." Also, before making claims about rates of evolutionary change it is probably best to extensively research the subject first.

 

"We don't understand the evolutionary history of phenomenon X...."



the concept of aliens having visited earth and tinkered a bit with the dna of its inhabitants is based on far more than this. many intelligent individuals (far more than you or me) have subscribed to this concept after their own study and research into the subject.

a couple of other areas to note in reference to this:

common mythologies spanning the globe (including the bible)
"junk dna"
more recent encounters by civilians
retired government employees coming forward with supporting info
(more specifically) astronauts coming forward with supporting info


of course, there are many alternatives, as you said, to what affected our evolution so vastly (i like terrance mckenna's) but the idea that aliens have been here is not to be simply dismissed.

 

you didnt watch the video.

 

or let alone answer some of the question the guy with crazy hair was questioning. Like how our brain has tripled so fast over a thousand years.

 

you just an animal so relax and do your job
of saving the earth from the next nasty meteor
then you'll know why what you is and why
this life created you so weird . good luck .
resist the human-centric . relating to aliens
resists it in a way .

why humans are so special is human-centric question .
well , sure , itsa good enough buggerly question but
probably the answer ain't all that sexy but

 

In the comparison of skull to dental impression of a normal size man, the bite was identical. The apparent size difference was the difference between the whole jaw bone and an impression of just teeth and gum. Silly.

 

jmt- i wasn't arguing against the video....

 

I watched the video and there isn't any evidence cited at all. All I heard in the video were vague unsubstantiated claims about evolutionary rates, and the repetition of the claim that "...genetic evidence shows that something else is going on" with no mention of what this genetic evidence is.

The claim that evolution takes a long time is true only in the most general sense. Evolutionary rates differ across species, genus, and phyla. Rates are not constant within species either. Furthermore the evolution of increasing brain size in the hominid line took place over millions of years not thousands. These are simple uncontroversial claims that can be found in any standard text on evolutionary biology. The change from nails to claws for example can occur in a single generation.

Also the 'missing link' idea is a confused idea to begin with. A group of organisms diverged from the lineage that gave rise to chimpanzees between 6 and 8 million years ago, and we have ample fossil evidence, and even some genetic evidence, of many of the organisms in this so called hominid lineage. As this lineage approaches the time at which the first biologically modern humans are found the fossils take on what we would describe as more 'human' traits such as better adaptation to bipedalism and increasing brain size. So what missing link are they talking about?

However plausible or implausible the alien idea may be this video is surely a poor representation of it, as it presents essentially no evidence. Also just because intelligent people believe something doesn't mean it is true. Intelligent people believe in the virgin birth and resurrection but that does not lend any credence to those myths. Furthermore all of the DNA in humans looks like all of the DNA we find in any organisms we care to look at. It is all written in the same code, and every particular gene examined so far fits into the evolutionary view just as predicted by early non-genetic studies. The mysteries of the poorly named 'junk DNA' are quickly being unraveled as well, and I am not aware of any facts about junk DNA that would point to an extra-terrestrial origin.

 

true, my comment about intelligent people buying into the concept has no place in this discussion. i was trying to make the point that you shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater (the bathwater being this video).

i agree that "junk dna" is a bad label-this was my point. what have they unraveled? link?

i was under the impression that the missing link referred to the vast difference between neanderthals and protohumans, but perhaps i am mistaken.

so any comments on all of the eyewitness reports from civilians and government workers alike? all bull?

 

I should make one point clear. I only posted in this thread because I saw people misrepresenting evolutionary theory. This is why I left open the plausibility or implausibility of the topic of discussion. I simply wanted to point out that the comments made about evolutionary rates in the video and in the thread were either false, or only true in the most general sense (much too general to be useful in arguing that the human brain could not have evolved naturally).

As for junk DNA much of it has been figured out. Some of it regulates the expression of other genes. Large portions of it are viruses which infected non-replicating portions of the genome, and therefor became trapped in the host's genome. The human genome is a vast graveyard of viruses. Much of the junk DNA is constructed of replication viruses, basically genetic messages which say nothing more than 'copy me.' I'm not posting citations because this is gathered from a wide range of materials, but if you have access to a search engine like Jstor you can find more articles than you would probably care to read. Also look into the work of Austin Burt, and Robert Trivers. Also, any recent book on the human genome should have entire sections devoted to what is now known about 'junk' DNA. Of course much is still not known about it, but none of the mysteries that I am aware of point to, or even make sense in light of, extra-terrestrial origins.

As for the missing link all I can say is read a modern paleontology text and you will see why the concept of a missing link is a confused concept. Furthermore Neanderthals were not our ancestors. So there shouldn't be any links between them and us except shared common ancestors. The 'missing link' concept stems from a misinterpretation of the tree of life, and probably stems ultimately from the 'Scala Natura.'

I do agree that the idea should not be dismissed, though I would like to see some real evidence.

 

If I saw ginger giants I'd kill them too.

 

amen