Total Posts:46|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Evolution Tampering...

gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 12:21:36 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I have entertained a theory for many years that human beings seem to have evolved much more quickly than any other animals, and that there might have been some outside "source" for the phenomenon(not G-d). There is much evidence to support such a theory, but I would welcome thoughts from the DDO community. Was our genetic code altered somehow? What was the cause? Finally, are we an abomination?
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 12:48:34 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 12:21:36 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
I have entertained a theory for many years that human beings seem to have evolved much more quickly than any other animals,
Really? Give evidence, I doubt that claim.
and that there might have been some outside "source" for the phenomenon(not G-d). There is much evidence to support such a theory, but I would welcome thoughts from the DDO community. Was our genetic code altered somehow?
No evidence for that conclusion.
What was the cause?
Well, I doubt it's existence let alone it having a cause. Human evolution does correlate with the supposed levels of consciousness and cognitive activity seen in hominina genus so it may suggest evolution is consciously driven.
Finally, are we an abomination?
errr... in who's eyes?
'sup DDO -- july 2013
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 1:06:12 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 12:21:36 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
I have entertained a theory for many years that human beings seem to have evolved much more quickly than any other animals, and that there might have been some outside "source" for the phenomenon(not G-d). There is much evidence to support such a theory, but I would welcome thoughts from the DDO community. Was our genetic code altered somehow? What was the cause? Finally, are we an abomination?

I think this is based on the assumption that we are much greater than we are and that animals are so inferior.

Humans are simply at the top of the food chain.

Although we are immense in numbers, there are animals on this planet with larger populations. However, despite our ability to adapt, cognitively infer, and perceive, we still seem quite fragile and depend on the exploitation of ourselves to benefit an arbitrary minority privileged only by the merit of our own contrived social systems.

This is not to mention that we are screwing everything up.
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 1:38:40 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 1:06:12 PM, Ren wrote:
At 11/18/2010 12:21:36 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
I have entertained a theory for many years that human beings seem to have evolved much more quickly than any other animals, and that there might have been some outside "source" for the phenomenon(not G-d). There is much evidence to support such a theory, but I would welcome thoughts from the DDO community. Was our genetic code altered somehow? What was the cause? Finally, are we an abomination?

I think this is based on the assumption that we are much greater than we are and that animals are so inferior.

Humans are simply at the top of the food chain.

Although we are immense in numbers, there are animals on this planet with larger populations. However, despite our ability to adapt, cognitively infer, and perceive, we still seem quite fragile and depend on the exploitation of ourselves to benefit an arbitrary minority privileged only by the merit of our own contrived social systems.

This is not to mention that we are screwing everything up.

I agree that we are screwing everything up, and I believe it is because we might never have been intended at all. We are highly intelligent, but still possess primitive self preservation instincts. This combination is dangerous, and only one reason why we might be an abomination. It is hard for me to believe that WE are what G-d intended.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 1:41:33 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 1:38:40 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
I agree that we are screwing everything up, and I believe it is because we might never have been intended at all. We are highly intelligent, but still possess primitive self preservation instincts. This combination is dangerous, and only one reason why we might be an abomination. It is hard for me to believe that WE are what G-d intended.
Why is that? Animals are not better.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 1:44:56 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 1:38:40 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/18/2010 1:06:12 PM, Ren wrote:
At 11/18/2010 12:21:36 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
I have entertained a theory for many years that human beings seem to have evolved much more quickly than any other animals, and that there might have been some outside "source" for the phenomenon(not G-d). There is much evidence to support such a theory, but I would welcome thoughts from the DDO community. Was our genetic code altered somehow? What was the cause? Finally, are we an abomination?

I think this is based on the assumption that we are much greater than we are and that animals are so inferior.

Humans are simply at the top of the food chain.

Although we are immense in numbers, there are animals on this planet with larger populations. However, despite our ability to adapt, cognitively infer, and perceive, we still seem quite fragile and depend on the exploitation of ourselves to benefit an arbitrary minority privileged only by the merit of our own contrived social systems.

This is not to mention that we are screwing everything up.

I agree that we are screwing everything up, and I believe it is because we might never have been intended at all. We are highly intelligent, but still possess primitive self preservation instincts. This combination is dangerous, and only one reason why we might be an abomination. It is hard for me to believe that WE are what G-d intended.

Interestingly, that is the basis to many atheistic arguments.

The fact is that we are unable to accept the maturity that accompanies intellect because we are fundamentally selfish and greedy.

Literally, things continue exactly the way they are, because even us, who benefit every moment from blood spilled thousands of miles away and the continuous destruction of this planet's ecosystem, accept it, because the alternative includes forgoing our material attachments and recreational leisures, if only for a while.
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 1:50:22 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 1:41:33 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 11/18/2010 1:38:40 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
I agree that we are screwing everything up, and I believe it is because we might never have been intended at all. We are highly intelligent, but still possess primitive self preservation instincts. This combination is dangerous, and only one reason why we might be an abomination. It is hard for me to believe that WE are what G-d intended.
Why is that? Animals are not better.

No? I've never seen an animal conduct a ponzi scheme, or kill thousands of their own species for no logical reason.
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 1:57:08 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
This is part of the theory. What if humans were genetically engineered as slaves? Maybe we outlived our purpose, or perhaps we rebelled(more likely) and were left here to figure things out for ourselves. If this is the case, then I believe we have a lot of work to do.

http://hnn.us...
http://www.mnsu.edu...
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 2:06:34 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 1:57:08 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
This is part of the theory. What if humans were genetically engineered as slaves? Maybe we outlived our purpose, or perhaps we rebelled(more likely) and were left here to figure things out for ourselves. If this is the case, then I believe we have a lot of work to do.


http://hnn.us...
http://www.mnsu.edu...
Forced conclusions.
'sup DDO -- july 2013
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 2:14:14 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 2:06:34 PM, Zetsubou wrote:
At 11/18/2010 1:57:08 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
This is part of the theory. What if humans were genetically engineered as slaves? Maybe we outlived our purpose, or perhaps we rebelled(more likely) and were left here to figure things out for ourselves. If this is the case, then I believe we have a lot of work to do.


http://hnn.us...
http://www.mnsu.edu...
Forced conclusions.

If you have a thought, spit it out. Otherwise, let the discussion take place. I would like all to participate, but at least have something to say... You required documentation, I provided it. You don't have to agree, obviously, but don't get lazy and just say,"Forced conclusions." The ball is back in your court if you actually want to discuss this.
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 2:25:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 2:14:14 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/18/2010 2:06:34 PM, Zetsubou wrote:
At 11/18/2010 1:57:08 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
This is part of the theory. What if humans were genetically engineered as slaves? Maybe we outlived our purpose, or perhaps we rebelled(more likely) and were left here to figure things out for ourselves. If this is the case, then I believe we have a lot of work to do.


http://hnn.us...
http://www.mnsu.edu...
Forced conclusions.

If you have a thought, spit it out. Otherwise, let the discussion take place. I would like all to participate, but at least have something to say... You required documentation, I provided it. You don't have to agree, obviously, but don't get lazy and just say,"Forced conclusions." The ball is back in your court if you actually want to discuss this.

What more is there to say? All claims have evidence and in logic arguments have conclusions. All conclusions are justified by their reasons. If the reasons don't follow to your conclusions you have yourself an informal fallacy. I pointed that out--your argument is forced.
'sup DDO -- july 2013
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 2:36:09 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 2:25:07 PM, Zetsubou wrote:
At 11/18/2010 2:14:14 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/18/2010 2:06:34 PM, Zetsubou wrote:
At 11/18/2010 1:57:08 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
This is part of the theory. What if humans were genetically engineered as slaves? Maybe we outlived our purpose, or perhaps we rebelled(more likely) and were left here to figure things out for ourselves. If this is the case, then I believe we have a lot of work to do.


http://hnn.us...
http://www.mnsu.edu...
Forced conclusions.

If you have a thought, spit it out. Otherwise, let the discussion take place. I would like all to participate, but at least have something to say... You required documentation, I provided it. You don't have to agree, obviously, but don't get lazy and just say,"Forced conclusions." The ball is back in your court if you actually want to discuss this.

What more is there to say? All claims have evidence and in logic arguments have conclusions. All conclusions are justified by their reasons. If the reasons don't follow to your conclusions you have yourself an informal fallacy. I pointed that out--your argument is forced.

If you feel it is forced, don't concern yourself with it. If you want to discuss it, we can.
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 5:59:18 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 2:34:15 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
Here is the evolution timeline, showing human kind coming almost out of nowhere and then evolving at an unprecedented rate.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Even if we grant the premise that humans evolved rapidly in comparison to all other species, the burden is still yours as to *why* this *cannot* be a function of naturalistic evolution. Once that is established you have a singular premise - any conclusions are non sequitur until you support the additional premises required. Conjecture =/= evidence nor a valid premise; as such 'Alien Overlords' and the like are arbitrary claims and can be dismissed as such.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 6:20:38 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 5:59:18 PM, Puck wrote:
Even if we grant the premise that humans evolved rapidly in comparison to all other species, the burden is still yours as to *why* this *cannot* be a function of naturalistic evolution.

The real question is, why is there this peculiarity in the first place. We don't just answer it by saying "hmm, must be a function of naturalistic evolution."

as such 'Alien Overlords' and the like are arbitrary claims and can be dismissed as such.

Those aren't arbitrary claims. Those are claims backed by historical accounts of ancient extrarrestrial visitation and genetic manipulation.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 6:30:56 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 6:20:38 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 11/18/2010 5:59:18 PM, Puck wrote:
Even if we grant the premise that humans evolved rapidly in comparison to all other species, the burden is still yours as to *why* this *cannot* be a function of naturalistic evolution.

The real question is, why is there this peculiarity in the first place. We don't just answer it by saying "hmm, must be a function of naturalistic evolution."

Only if you want to gather a complete understanding of the given topic. The presumption that it is aberrant *because* it is *unnatural* is unsupported and as such can't be used as a premise until it is done so (and that's with the added benefit of granting that premise for the sake of brevity - it also needs to be supported as a premise of aberration itself). At best you can say we have an outlier we can't yet explain; one cannot draw a conclusion from that.

as such 'Alien Overlords' and the like are arbitrary claims and can be dismissed as such.

Those aren't arbitrary claims. Those are claims backed by historical accounts of ancient extrarrestrial visitation and genetic manipulation.

No: <insert rant about epistemological and historical fail>. Please point to the related peer review though.
TheAtheistAllegiance
Posts: 1,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 6:31:19 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Punctuated Equilibrium may help to explain periods of rapid evolution, along with the "bottleneck" effect, which speeds evolutionary processes up during times of harsh environmental conditions.

I doubt that human evolution was specifically targeted by an outside source. The fossil record shows clear evidence of transitional species, which trails back to the beginnings of life itself. These fossils are geographically distributed according to consistent migration patterns, and radiometric evidence coordinates with the phylogenetic tree, which matches up with genealogical and morphological patterns as well. If an alien species did spur human evolution, these creatures did a great job of covering their tracks.

Humans are not an abomination. Distinct levels of sapience and intelligence have gradually increased with evolutionary adaptations. Fish are not as mentally complex as reptiles, whom are not as mentally complex as mammals. Apes actually display discreet signs of intelligence, so the phenomenon is nothing new; it's an evolutionary process that has been at work for a few hundred million years.
TheAtheistAllegiance
Posts: 1,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 6:50:53 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 2:34:15 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
Here is the evolution timeline, showing human kind coming almost out of nowhere and then evolving at an unprecedented rate.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

The speed of human evolution wasn't unprecedented. As categoration gets more detailed with humans, the listed evolutionary changes become less significant, which requires a smaller time period.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 11:49:14 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 1:50:22 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
No? I've never seen an animal conduct a ponzi scheme, or kill thousands of their own species for no logical reason.
What humans "can" do is not the point. Humans can very well avoid killing thousands of other humans. It is about the nature of animals, which is not necessarily better than that of humans whatsoever.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2010 1:43:18 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 5:59:18 PM, Puck wrote:
At 11/18/2010 2:34:15 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
Here is the evolution timeline, showing human kind coming almost out of nowhere and then evolving at an unprecedented rate.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Even if we grant the premise that humans evolved rapidly in comparison to all other species, the burden is still yours as to *why* this *cannot* be a function of naturalistic evolution. Once that is established you have a singular premise - any conclusions are non sequitur until you support the additional premises required. Conjecture =/= evidence nor a valid premise; as such 'Alien Overlords' and the like are arbitrary claims and can be dismissed as such.

Naturalistic evolution presumes that organisms evolve due to naturally selected random mutations.

If this were the case, then, having never left the top of the food chain and no longer abiding by natural constraints, we should both devolve and evolve at random, with all manner of mutation assimilated into our genomes, because our choices for proliferation are no longer contingent on purely biological inclinations.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2010 1:49:29 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 6:31:19 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
Punctuated Equilibrium may help to explain periods of rapid evolution, along with the "bottleneck" effect, which speeds evolutionary processes up during times of harsh environmental conditions.

The bottleneck effect isn't likely, given we are no more suitable for all living conditions than we were when we first appeared on earth.

I doubt that human evolution was specifically targeted by an outside source. The fossil record shows clear evidence of transitional species, which trails back to the beginnings of life itself.

Ehhhh, not quite.

These fossils are geographically distributed according to consistent migration patterns, and radiometric evidence coordinates with the phylogenetic tree, which matches up with genealogical and morphological patterns as well. If an alien species did spur human evolution, these creatures did a great job of covering their tracks.

1. Human evolution and disambiguation is not so cut and dry. That is purely (and, quite loosely) theoretical.

2. I'm sure that any being so far advanced than our species would be more than capable of going over our heads.

Humans are not an abomination. Distinct levels of sapience and intelligence have gradually increased with evolutionary adaptations. Fish are not as mentally complex as reptiles,

?!

Manta rays and octopi will blow any reptile that exists out of the water.

whom are not as mentally complex as mammals. Apes actually display discreet signs of intelligence, so the phenomenon is nothing new; it's an evolutionary process that has been at work for a few hundred million years.

Not sure what you mean by the bolded statement.

Your argument is nothing but conjectural sweeping claims.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2010 5:14:49 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/19/2010 1:43:18 AM, Ren wrote:
At 11/18/2010 5:59:18 PM, Puck wrote:
At 11/18/2010 2:34:15 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
Here is the evolution timeline, showing human kind coming almost out of nowhere and then evolving at an unprecedented rate.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Even if we grant the premise that humans evolved rapidly in comparison to all other species, the burden is still yours as to *why* this *cannot* be a function of naturalistic evolution. Once that is established you have a singular premise - any conclusions are non sequitur until you support the additional premises required. Conjecture =/= evidence nor a valid premise; as such 'Alien Overlords' and the like are arbitrary claims and can be dismissed as such.

Naturalistic evolution presumes that organisms evolve due to naturally selected random mutations.

If this were the case, then, having never left the top of the food chain and no longer abiding by natural constraints, we should both devolve and evolve at random,

There's really no difference between the two.. but I would imagine "devolving"/becoming less robust/less intelligent... is what we are now doing...

though, I wouldn't say that's what we should've been doing 20,000 years ago....

back then it was hard to live... and I'd imagine, there was more sexual competition/less availability..

now, nearly all live for a good bit of time... and everybody's got a pretty good chance of meeting someone... regardless of whether they're a bit... broken..

with all manner of mutation assimilated into our genomes, because our choices for proliferation are no longer contingent on purely biological inclinations.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2010 5:27:03 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
and, as one of you two said in the beginning.... we are rather Frail compared to most species...

as we got more intelligent... we DO seem to have begun to lose "devolve" in the sense of Robustness.... Chimps for example simply tear people apart when they're angry (I guess all that swinging requires a good bit o' muscle... :/ )

as we got more intelligent we made tools/strategies which can serve to replace brawn.. and b/c brawn isn't such an important survival trait anymore... it begins to fade a bit.

this REINFORCES the importance of intelligence... making it an even more important trait to be selected for.

It would seem we now pretty much completely rely on knowledge/strategy...

and maybe somewhere long ago we got so smart that we really did NOT have any need to get any smarter...

our intelligence may've levelled off b/c a little bit more intelligence Didn't really serve to increase your chances of survival...

then we built cities... and are now getting dumber.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Veridas
Posts: 733
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2010 5:36:40 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 12:48:34 PM, Zetsubou wrote:
At 11/18/2010 12:21:36 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
I have entertained a theory for many years that human beings seem to have evolved much more quickly than any other animals,
Really? Give evidence, I doubt that claim.
and that there might have been some outside "source" for the phenomenon(not G-d). There is much evidence to support such a theory, but I would welcome thoughts from the DDO community. Was our genetic code altered somehow?
No evidence for that conclusion.
What was the cause?
Well, I doubt it's existence let alone it having a cause. Human evolution does correlate with the supposed levels of consciousness and cognitive activity seen in hominina genus so it may suggest evolution is consciously driven.
Finally, are we an abomination?
errr... in who's eyes?

A christian demanding evidence.

I'm sorry but that's way too funny.
What fresh dickery is the internet up to today?
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2010 8:29:34 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 5:59:18 PM, Puck wrote:
At 11/18/2010 2:34:15 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
Here is the evolution timeline, showing human kind coming almost out of nowhere and then evolving at an unprecedented rate.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Even if we grant the premise that humans evolved rapidly in comparison to all other species, the burden is still yours as to *why* this *cannot* be a function of naturalistic evolution. Once that is established you have a singular premise - any conclusions are non sequitur until you support the additional premises required. Conjecture =/= evidence nor a valid premise; as such 'Alien Overlords' and the like are arbitrary claims and can be dismissed as such.

I never said it CANNOT be a natural function. I said I entertained the idea. I just want other perspectives on this subject.
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2010 12:14:28 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Evolution is getting faster naturally however this can be explained by looking at what causes evolution chemically. Anyone deserving of a pass in late teen Biology classes ought to know the forms of mutation. Mutation is the random(debatable) change in the protein strains that compose our DNA. Some time during meiosis usually due to a high level of ions the proteins will combine in a way contrary to what they should according to the ribosome. Ergo propter hoc you have a mutation.

Given the fact that the more "complex" the animal the more likely it is that said animal has a longer DNA pattern. The longer the DNA pattern to more likely it is for that DNA to mutate during meiosis. This atleast can be seen in known fauna-flora and their given class.
'sup DDO -- july 2013
TheAtheistAllegiance
Posts: 1,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2010 3:15:11 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/19/2010 1:49:29 AM, Ren wrote:
At 11/18/2010 6:31:19 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
Punctuated Equilibrium may help to explain periods of rapid evolution, along with the "bottleneck" effect, which speeds evolutionary processes up during times of harsh environmental conditions.

The bottleneck effect isn't likely, given we are no more suitable for all living conditions than we were when we first appeared on earth.

Humans not being suitable for the environment would hasten evolution, which in this case, would take place in the brain. This may not actually apply, but it is a possibility.

I doubt that human evolution was specifically targeted by an outside source. The fossil record shows clear evidence of transitional species, which trails back to the beginnings of life itself.

Ehhhh, not quite.

The fossil record is clear. "Missing links" are continually found, and they further confirm evolutionary theory with nearly every find.

These fossils are geographically distributed according to consistent migration patterns, and radiometric evidence coordinates with the phylogenetic tree, which matches up with genealogical and morphological patterns as well. If an alien species did spur human evolution, these creatures did a great job of covering their tracks.

1. Human evolution and disambiguation is not so cut and dry. That is purely (and, quite loosely) theoretical.

Human evolution is ambiguous? Human evolution is well substantiated with genealogy and the fossil record.

2. I'm sure that any being so far advanced than our species would be more than capable of going over our heads.

Possibly, but before making a blind assumption, it's logical to first find evidence of such a scenario taking place.

Humans are not an abomination. Distinct levels of sapience and intelligence have gradually increased with evolutionary adaptations. Fish are not as mentally complex as reptiles,

?!

Manta rays and octopi will blow any reptile that exists out of the water.

Octopuses are not fish, and Manta Rays are the exception; not the rule.

whom are not as mentally complex as mammals. Apes actually display discreet signs of intelligence, so the phenomenon is nothing new; it's an evolutionary process that has been at work for a few hundred million years.

Not sure what you mean by the bolded statement.

It was a typo. I meant to state that apes display discreet signs of self awareness.

Your argument is nothing but conjectural sweeping claims.

Actually, this claim better fits that description.
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2010 9:00:46 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
How did every culture in the world at a given time get the same "Pyramid" idea? There was no internet, so they couldn't communicate with each other. They didn't even know each other existed. Not only did they all build pyramids, but they built them relative to the constellations. These were primitive people, and we have given them an awful lot of credit. Many of the ingenious parts of the pyramids, we would not be able to duplicate today with the technology they had back then. All very strange "coincidences." I am not one of those conspiracy theory guys, but to me it seems fairly obvious that we are missing a lot of the puzzle from back then.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2010 9:13:17 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/20/2010 9:00:46 AM, gavin.ogden wrote:
How did every culture in the world at a given time get the same "Pyramid" idea? There was no internet, so they couldn't communicate with each other. They didn't even know each other existed. Not only did they all build pyramids, but they built them relative to the constellations. These were primitive people, and we have given them an awful lot of credit. Many of the ingenious parts of the pyramids, we would not be able to duplicate today with the technology they had back then. All very strange "coincidences." I am not one of those conspiracy theory guys, but to me it seems fairly obvious that we are missing a lot of the puzzle from back then.

There is some evidence for pre-columbus trans-atlantic trade, certainly provides a neat excuse for the evidence of whites and blacks in ancient mexico and the cocaine and tobacco is ancient Egypt.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2010 5:12:01 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/20/2010 9:00:46 AM, gavin.ogden wrote:
How did every culture in the world at a given time get the same "Pyramid" idea?

They didn't. Unless we start equivocating on "same" as "within 1000 years or so". The "every culture" line is silly, Germanic/Celtic structures followed concentric circles as a preferred basis during the same time frame and that's just one example. The two main cited examples in this common silliness is Egyptian and Meso American. But they are very dissimilar structures as were the methods of their construction dissimilar. As to why pyramids are popular it's basic engineering. If you want to build a tall stable structure, those structures based on a triangular system are more stable than other basic geometric shapes. And this is in context of civilizations who had not developed the structural significance of arches.

What else? Well it's an equivocation on pyramids too, or more accurately, a structure that builds from a triangular base is only a pyramid in common definition, as a descriptor of actual geometry, very few civilizations built pyramids - the more common form is trapezoid.

What was built was stable tiered structures based upon the sound engineering principle that triangles are able to be more weight bearing in relation to other building forms, a concept that gets more relevant the higher you want to build. Why do people want tall buildings? Because tall is impressive. The tallest trapezoids and pyramids had religious and cultural significance. The significance changes across culture e.g., funerary vs. ceremonial. And what's significant about the shapes anyway? Why not say, zomg different cultures had squat square buildings, or zomg different cultures used mound based structures, or zomg different cultures used straight lines to build roads?

Many of the ingenious parts of the pyramids, we would not be able to duplicate today with the technology they had back then.

That's like saying lost Japanese sword making techniques are indicative of something because some of the technical methods for doing so are lost. Even so, that claim has been long debunked. It's basic engineering principles - we have plenty of evidence for how the stones were quarried, shaped, transported and set into position.

All very strange "coincidences." I am not one of those conspiracy theory guys, but to me it seems fairly obvious that we are missing a lot of the puzzle from back then.

What's conspiratorial about it? A more accurate term would be mystical.

Constellations

And? It's also clear that the Egyptians never took into account precession. ;) That took the Greeks another 2000 years to work out.

Say no to von Daniken.