THE COLLAPSE OF EVOLUTION video download

A open mind and a critical eye is my motto when it comes to the evolutionary teachings that surrounds human evolution in that sentence that we all have evolved from our neighbour Mr chimpanzee. Yes I have been partialy interested in the evolutionary questions when it comes to the human being. The big lizards that was patrooling this earth through Precambrian era to the Quaternary period, I thought a lot about that when I was a kid. Let me explain the way I look at humans as we are today, and in considaration we take the explanation that we -the humans-have evolved, wich is the theory we and everybody else learns at school today -it may be explaind like this:

Science today assume that the earth have been existing in approximatly 4 billion years. 500 million years they claim there have been "life" on this planet. This may sound like alot of time but in a greater scale if you look at the whole planets history it is a rather short time. I will try to explain this as simple as I can. Lets pretend that the earth has only existed for 24 hours. That is all time from earths birth to today, only 24 hours. We start at 1200 hours am, earth is "borned" 12 hours later the first life begin to excist in the prehistoric ocean. The time stops - the lifeforms in the prehistoric ocean evolves into fishes and other animals untill 10 am in the morning, then the first lifeforms crawls up on land. Approximately 1100 hours in the morning the Dinosaurs begin to take shape, in our watch those 500 million years of life is only the 3 last hours of a 24-hour period of time. Of these three hours we the humans as we know them has only been excisting for 2 seconds. *LoL* Well this may sound strange but it is true if you use sciense in a a easy way to explain life on earth as we know it. Well as you say aussiejohn this is 100% bullet proof and I agree with you too 120%

One misconception about a scientific theory. For one to be accepted you do not need 100% proof. If a hypothesis is backed up by enough evidence then on statistical probability it can be accepted and a theory made. This is the scientific method (a very basic explanation!!).
Click to expand...

This is why I do question this basic professional performance of our own evolution, if there was no one that did that we would probably never get any closer than 99,9% to an accurate answer I believe. Well what makes me to question the whole issue is that as early as October 2004 they found a tiny little "women" 1 meter tall and with a head big as a grapefruite adressed as Homo floresiensis in Indonesia. This lady is 12.000 years old and among´s the remnants they found stone tools and other artifacts that shows that this little lady was not a dumbass If I may expres myselfe like that. The brain was 4 decilitre to compare with a modern human brain that is approximately 1,4 litre.

But today we bloody well know that intelligence has nothing to do with how big a brain is. However this lady have been evolved on a isolated island and they who found miss floresiensis say that there may be even more unknown ancestors to our race the Homo sapiens. I did say race yes it is true - the scientists are also talking about different races and even different evolutionary ancestors wich in my book of the open mind can mean that the scientists may be partialy right on this theory that we are from the apes. Not all people but some of us may be from the apes. What we teach today can be history tomorrow and that is the way science and history works I think. :)

Most Sincerly:
Doc.S
:viking:
 
I think most people who believe in evolution will agree that we did not come FROM chimpanzees etc. but it's almost certain we had a common ancestor. Even primates come in highly varied types such as Chimpanzees, Gibbons, Gorillas, Orangutans etc etc. The human being though was the most successful of these designs.
still looking for that common ancestor though. But archeology really is like trying to understand a city while looking straight down from a standing position through a straw. Really tough.
 
I agree and yes as I told before this is not my expert subject :lol:

Thinking yes - critical eye yes and a opend mind yes it probably the best tools when you want to confront this part of our own evolutionary question. And as aussiejohn did say quote down stairs my personal theory in this question is to much sci-fi or if I put it like this, it has no scientific value yet even if there are some proof´s out there in the nature that could back my theorys up if there would be more exclusively science put in to those ancient remains that still are out there but dont have any scientific values yet because they are still a "mystery" that no established researcher dares to put up on their agenda because it would question the evolutionary questions even more then they are today. It needs more time and time is what I got. (Rolling Stones - TIME IS ON MY SIDE lyrics for more information.) ;)


If further evidence tends to weaken this theory then it may be changed or possibly rejected
Click to expand...

With Regards:
Doc.S
:viking:
 
I was watching the History Channel last night and they were talking about alien abductions. I find it funny how people find aliens so similiar in form to the way we are. So I was thinking, is our next form of evolution towards one of those familiar alien shapes? Most of them discribed an enlarged cranium and shorter stature. But of course there were other types like 3ft tall green men with large hands and big eyes. I was more concerned over those that resembled the human shape more closely. Like a hybrid almost. I don't believe in most of those abduction stories, but it made for an interesting evolutionary question in my head.
 
I think that if we do evolve, it will largely be internal. The brain doesn't need to be bigger, after all, we have lots of unused portions anyway. But perhaps it'll be better at organizing itself... which is more of an upgrade than a real evolution because evolution means that it actually undergoes such a radical design change that in many cases, will refuse to mix genetically with a group that hasn't evolved or has evolved a different direction.

But my personal opinion is that the human being's design is so successful that an obvious change in physical design will not come about. For such dramatic things to happen, there must be something fundamentally WRONG about the physical design that the species would not survive in its current form. This means it involves a heck of a lot of dying.
 
If the evolutionary theory is wrong, give me some diffinitive proof of otherwise. 100% proof. Otherwise I will stay a believer that we are beings of evolutionary progression. We didn't grow from chimps... We evolved from a long line of Homo-beings (erectus, sapien etc). Chimps etc evolved along their own paths.

As for the claim that there are no examples of benificial mutation, tell me why do we now stand upright, why do giraffes have long necks, why do whales have a hole in the head...... They didn't suddenly appear like that.
 
egoz wrote:
was watching the History Channel last night and they were talking about alien abductions. I find it funny how people find aliens so similiar in form to the way we are. So I was thinking, is our next form of evolution towards one of those familiar alien shapes? Most of them discribed an enlarged cranium and shorter stature.
Click to expand...

I believe there was something about that in illustrated sciense magazine some years ago, I think that human was called Homo Futurus? :)

A major natural catastrophe or human made disaster could probably change humans or a giraffe to survive in its new enviroment too. :?:

If there are Aliens? Well do the sun rise everyday? I think that is my answer on that one. I dont think it is impossible at all that there are more lifeforms then humans, I find it quite ridiculous that we should be the only intelligent lifeforms in this whole universe. If they have been visiting us down here? Well as the poster say. I want to believe :lol:

Cheers:
Doc.S
:viking:
 
A major natural catastrophe or human made disaster could probably change humans or a giraffe to survive in its new enviroment too.
Click to expand...

That is basically what mutation is. What your talking about is adaptation. Mutation means that for example there were Giraffes with long necks, and giraffes with short necks, the giraffes with the mutated long necks could reach more food and they survived during times of short food, whilst all the short neck fellas died cos they couldn't reach the high up food. That is the theory of mutation and survival of the fittest as such.

A very shabby example... But you get the idea.
 
Yes Doc. S. There must be something fundamentally wrong with our DESIGN and that will most likely lead to mutation. But remember that the catastrophe must be incredible and must last over several generations.
Evolution is the answer to a design failure, or a design gone obsolete. Either evolution takes place successfully and the former design become extinct or it'll lead directly to extinction.

I find the reason why people will not evolve now is that for every short coming, we're designing a machine or a tool that will do the evolving for us.

Example.
Group 1 gets from point A to point B in 5 days. Group 2 can top that by making that same trip in 3. Now in the natural world, Group 1 will start to starve and start dying out. Offsprings that can make the trip in 3 days or less will start to emerge from the population on a more regular basis as the parents with that ability will be the ones successfully raising children.
But in the human world... Group 1 invents a better vehicle to get from point A to point B. Or hires a company that can do it faster. Or hits an agreement with Group 2 to give other supplies in return for resources at point B.
Human tools evolve in the place of humans.

edit: not so much "lead to mutation" but usually slight differences are always present in the population. Now if only those with those slight differences could survive in the new situation, their offspring would further exaggerate these properties that make them more survivable. Over a few generations, the ones with these properties most exaggerated will dominate and eventually the genes will be far away enough from the original to make re-mixing impossible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top