Jump to content

Just random thinking


Rasori
 Share

Recommended Posts

Not exactly sure where this should go, feel free to move it.

 

I'm starting to think that we human beings are from another planet. Sure there's no proof, but it could explain why all 'UFO' and 'alien' sightings are top secret classified documents. Anyway, here's my reasoning:

 

First off, what are the odds that a species evolved, or was created, that completely threw off the natural balance in the world? Before humans, creatures hunted only for food, and hunted only the weak, old, and sick. Before humans, forests kept the world nice and clean (now many of us can barely breathe without coughing, who knows how the animals feel?)

 

Next, we seem to be deevolving. The farther back you go, the better we were. Sure, we have technological 'advances', but they make us MORE barbaric. Look at the Egyptians- they treated what slaves they had VERY well.

 

Lastly, well, this could explain inexplicable things like those heads (you know, those heads on that island), Stonehenge, the pyramids (Mayan and Egyptian) and other stuff like that.

 

So, yeah, that's what I've been thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 83
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

What are the odds that a species evolved? Fairly high, as I'm here. What are the odds it would have an impact on the environment, again high. Look at the delicate ecosystem environments in biology. Why are humans self destructive? That's to do with our natty perception of self. Follow the copious psychological work on the human disposition, and learn why the perception of self leads to idea of self importance and disregard of natural laws.

 

If you want to compare the Egyptians to modern society, you really need to have an understanding that we know very little about their society apart from they liked big rocks and pretty pictures. They did not have slaves in Egypt, that's an idea that was produced in the old testament. They actually provided work, food and accommodation to people during drought periods when farming was impossible. That work was substantial monuments, because there was a substantial free workforce. There were no slaves, as they were free to go if they wished and had somewhere to go.

 

As for the 'inexplicable things' like the Easter Island heads, they are not inexplicable they are just odd. Like giant gnomes, or a pink island, they aren't impossible. Stonehenge is one of thousands of similar earthworks dating from the stoneage through to the bronze age that the UK has, interesting and impressive as they are they present little mystery. People like building stuff to make an impression on their surroundings, as it has always been so it still is today. Humans are ostentatious by default. The pyramids, I've covered. Excess of labor and a over exaggerated sense of self worth in the Pharoses.

 

To sum it up, you are not special. You aren't from a far off planet where they do battle with lightsabers, they are not going to come and proclaim you the savior of a far flung race, your just a normal earth worm baby. But your free to believe otherwise, and spread your gospel across the lands. Your also free to become a Scientologist, who think as you think. Me, I'm free to believe in the giant green magic samurai who's almighty will rules us all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gosh, not too sure really. It's helps with independent logic I guess. The only real thing it means is that the idea of self is the basis of sentient thought, conscious and so on. Raises us above the common animal, and enables us to become more than we are. The flip side is the generation of a sense of self worth that is above the worth you attribute your fellow species members. If that makes sense. Probably not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it does a bit, I see myself as the sum total of my physical being and my thoughts (I am my hardware and software for wants of a better way to put it).

so is the fact that I`m aware of that the "Self" part? I was also wondering when I see a greedy animal that will hog all the food and guard it even though it`s already full, or an animal trying to establish its leadership in a pack, the same think as the "Self" concept?

is another word for it "Ego"?

 

Cheerz :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did mention it was RANDOM thinking, no? I was thinking about it, not REALLY considering it. Just kinda.

 

What are the odds that a species evolved? Fairly high, as I'm here. What are the odds it would have an impact on the environment, again high. Look at the delicate ecosystem environments in biology. Why are humans self destructive? That's to do with our natty perception of self. Follow the copious psychological work on the human disposition, and learn why the perception of self leads to idea of self importance and disregard of natural laws.

 

This is the simple thinking that means you entirely ignored my post and are still thinking INSIDE the box. Honestly, how likely is it that only one species on this planet evolved to our level? If one could do it, why haven't any others? Alligators and Crocodiles (or one of them at least) have been around since the dinosaurs (or so I've been told). Given they had millions more years than primates to evolve, why haven't they?

 

As for the Egyptians, well, I'm not very smart when it comes to history. Egyptians, last thing I remember was from my sixth grade ancient history book made probably in the 70s or 80s, and I don't remember that clearly.

 

As for the 'odd things', well, they are in a way inexplicable. We can't explain how, back in those times, they could make these things. I'll ignore the heads, I have a wrong impression of them, I think. But Stonehenge, with the technology they had back then, was NEARLY impossible to erect. However, it was deemed possible. But then, what about the fact that it could make a perfectly good calendar when it was complete? How about the pyramids? There's something about them lining up with certain stars and planets and stuff like that that makes it hard to believe they did it on their own. Again, not IMPOSSIBLE, but unlikely. The Mayan pyramids were the same I believe, although I'm not sure and can't find any references.

 

And, so you know, I never thought I was special. I was just telling you what I was thinking to have your opinions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rasori said in post #6 :

I did mention it was RANDOM thinking, no? I was thinking about it, not REALLY considering it. Just kinda.

 

This is the simple thinking that means you entirely ignored my post and are still thinking INSIDE the box. Honestly, how likely is it that only one species on this planet evolved to our level? If one could do it, why haven't any others? Alligators and Crocodiles (or one of them at least) have been around since the dinosaurs (or so I've been told). Given they had millions more years than primates to evolve, why haven't they?

 

And, so you know, I never thought I was special. I was just telling you what I was thinking to have your opinions.

 

Thinking 'inside the box' is not a good insult unless you appreciate what that actually is, a corporate management tool. It’s a method of approach to a problem that seems complicated. It’s made simpler by scoring it on 4 axis which create four quadrants, each of which represent a certain aspect of the business (Customer Service, Quality, Value, Cheese Eating, whatever) to make it easier to form a solution. The quote ‘your still thinking inside the box’ is used when people forget to stop using the principle to examine a problem. It's all middle management spiel to avoid actually having a point to your meanderings during meetings. See David Brent and ‘The Office’.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/theoffice/clips/brent/

 

I’m not in the sodding box; it’s your question and not mine:D

 

Stonehenge was not even remotely impossible to erect. I’m sorry to be blunt, but being from the UK what I can see is the physical remains of thousands of similar sites, from stone age cairns to circular barrows used as centres of trade and worship. The henge’s were just an extrapolation of thousands of years building monuments and meeting places. Taken individually, Stonehenge seems an impossible feat but taken in context of what the ancient Britons were doing it’s not that surprising. As for it being a good calendar, how tricky would it be for you to mark out a circle at points during a year? Ancient Britons were primitive, but not a bunch of morons. Give them some credit!

 

The jury’s still out on aligning the pyramids to the stars. I’ve heard theories from both sides, both quite convincing. Arial maps of Giza’s pyramids have often been compared to Orion’s belt, but they can quite as easily be mapped to McDonalds locations in major US towns (and there are fewer McDonalds than stars). I haven’t really looked deeply into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are the odds that a species evolved? Fairly high, as I'm here.

 

The fact that you exist does little to support any claims of how you go here. You could attach any reason for your existence, and then say that your existence is proof that your reason is correct.

 

If you want to compare the Egyptians to modern society, you really need to have an understanding that we know very little about their society apart from they liked big rocks and pretty pictures. They did not have slaves in Egypt, that's an idea that was produced in the old testament.

 

First you tell us that we know very little about egyption society, and then you go on to detail how society functioned. It seems as if you were trying to take a blow at the Old Testament. The Old Testament isn't the only place slaves are mentioned. There is controversy over whether or not their was slavery (as we define it) in egypt. It is foolish to state unequivocally that there were no slaves in egypt, period. The claim that hebrews were in egypt is almost undeniable, as it can be substantiated both by contextual evidence and by examining hebrew society before and after their stay in Egypt. There are inscriptions which indicate there were some forms of slavery in existence.

 

Slaves were NOT denied human rights, but they could be sold, traded, and handed down through will. They were not always free to leave as they will. They were considered property of estates.

 

"There were presented to him the things of his father, the judge and scribe Anubisemonekh; there was no grain or anything of the house, [but] there were people and small cattle. "

 

Prisoners of war and debters were also made slaves:

 

"Then Avaris was despoiled, and I brought spoil from there: one man, three women; total, four persons. His majesty gave them to me as slaves. Then Sharuhen was besieged for three years. His majesty despoiled it and I brought spoil from it: two women and a hand. "

 

"The number of spoil taken in them .. of vile Naharina who were as defenders among them, with their horses, 691 prisoners, 29 hands [of slain], 48 mares in that year 295 male and female slaves, 68 horses, 3 gold dishes, 3 silver dishes, . "

 

According to the greeks, many slaves died of exhaustion and thirst in the copper mines of Nubia and Sainai.

 

source: http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/index.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rasori said in post #1 :

First off, what are the odds that a species evolved, or was created, that completely threw off the natural balance in the world? Before humans, creatures hunted only for food, and hunted only the weak, old, and sick. Before humans, forests kept the world nice and clean (now many of us can barely breathe without coughing, who knows how the animals feel?)

 

The only reason we are the most powerful animal on this planet is cos we are the most intelligent. There is no mystery in that. But our journey here was not fast, it has taken thousand and thousand of years of learning and great imagination to get to where we are. The reason not other animal has done what we have is cos are social, had hands for manipulating our environment, and big brains to allow us to learn and create language.

 

Maybe to exlain the pyramids is that aliens came and assisted us

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To tell you the truth, atinymonkey, I couldn't just make out a circle of henges and other various arranged stones that was aligned with the sun to make a damn good calendar. Maybe a sundial in the right place (like, right at the equator) but not a complete calendar.

 

As for your claim for henges and everything before Stonehenge, I didn't say it was impossible, just NEARLY. Who knows, I probably trust TV too much, but I saw on the discovery channel an attempt to try to duplicate their work on just one of the upright stones. It took us days with our modern thinking (although they were limited in technologies) to get it upright. And after that they had no clue how the stones at the top, going across, were raised.

 

This is after we know the principles of leverage and all those nifty things we take for granted, which back then wasn't a defined principal. Sure, it was known that ramps could reduce effort to raise something to a certain height, but the reasoning wasn't known. It was just something taken for granted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm I`m not 100% sure how true this is, but I`m fairly sure for some of these structures, dirt was used as a type of scafolding, and then removed aterwards leaving large stones LOOKING like they`de been lifted and placed on there. and lets be honest, nature does that kind of stuff all the time with water flows and glaciers, it wouldn`t have taken Man very long to figure out what was going on and then replicate it :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've hit at no less than three major subjects for scientific examination, Rasori, no wonder you're inspired.

 

Roughly, you've postulated that:

1) humans have de-evolved anthropologically.

2) humans do not appear to be indigenous lifeforms to planet Earth.

3) the aforementioned postulations are supported (if not inferred) by physical observation, or in other words may be corroberated by remnant artifacts.

 

Firstly allow me to provide my encouragement for an inquisitive mind. These subjects are interesting within certain contexts and yours allows for reasonable discussion.

My scrutiny is naturally, impartial:

 

1) I think you've really hit on something here, I congratulate your courage and point your scrutiny towards sociology.

Individual, democratic ideals exist in spite of, not because of human sociologies. The truth is, right from high school it's a smart idea to develope some kind of capacity for self defence. Odd, isn't it? Considering how few hours of your social life are spent solitarily. We're surrounded by our own species and yet present genuine immediate danger to ourselves (as a species).

 

It is in fact necessary, by choice or conscription to intellectually de-evolve for survival purposes at around the evolution of youth-hood.

You don't have to become a "meat-head," you can be a "philosopher" but make no mistake that de-evolve you shall and it is noteworthy that any conclusion will be victims.

 

That our species has de-evolved anthropologically however would be an usupported statement. Paeleoanthropological evidence of ancient Egypt suggests, precisely as inferred that it was an early, complex culture which comprises a primordeal civilization in terms of technological, political and scientific understanding. However we can only interperet inferrances of ancient Egyptian sociology for observation.

It is likely Egyptian sociology was seasonal to Pharaonic rule.

It is likely that barter systems were prevailant (ie. including environments of human slavery).

It is likely that a significant degree of patriotism existed (political and/or topographical).

Its circa. 4,000 year archaeological history is more a segmented one, than an individually coherant nation.

 

Ancient Olmec civilization (ref: South Americas), infers visitation by seafaring northern Europeans through the discovery of large, stone sculptures which have the appearance of caucasian features.

An "adventurer" by the name of Thor Hyredahl exampled that coastal, papyrus vessels of the kind used in ancient Egypt could be used to travel vast ocean distances when he built and sailed one from northern Africa to Easter Island. He had neglected to build it of as sound engineering as those which were in fact used (he was working off a small model and reliefs found in Egyptian tombs), it had been subsequently discovered and he almost sank however, nevertheless made it to Easter Island in a papyrus-reed boat from northern Africa.

 

Mayan civilization was far more avid in mathematical interperatation of astronomical observation than many ancient civilizations, whom perhaps concerned themselves with respectively: engineering, geometry, political and other sciences.

 

Neolithic humans exampled artistic rendition and human burial from around 40,000 B.C. As far as we can tell by observation in nature, from this point we may begin to measure intelligent, human sociological presence and perhaps thus the environment for the formation of civilizations.

 

There is nothing which demonstrates or infers anything other than an ultimately linear development of human anthropology, although in examining an inevitably rich history there are incontravertably impressive instance at many points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2) If humans did not evolve indigenously to planet Earth, what kind of evolutionary process might we have enjoyed upon another planet? ie. archaeological evidence? fossilized bones and examples of primordeal tool usage? cave paintings? early civilizations? rich mythologies? impressive, ancient monuments? linear development of primordeal technologies?

By what process could we have appeared upon another planet to have travelled from there to here?

 

Once again, by observation of nature it is directly inferred that humans quantifiably evolved upon planet Earth.

That the human of the planet's species does not appear indigenous to the common environment of other species by our produced associations is answerable in the term 'produced associations.' That which sets us apart is indigenous to ourselves and then we are indigenous to planet Earth as a species.

 

3) There are simply no inferrances of any non-indigenous involvement in any human monuments or artifacts. It is the argument itself which is non-indigenous to its environment.

 

A UFO sighting is exactly that (re: the term). An unsubstantiated claim (re: alien autopsy) is also, exactly that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is nothing "outside the box" about this question at all.

 

It makes no difference if we come from earth or not - you are just changing the question from "did we evolve" to "where did we evolve".

 

Even if you argue that we must have been "seeded" here by a superior force because evolution could not produce us, you are left with the more complex problem of "how did the superior force come about?"

 

So, instead of thinking "outside the box" and being all revolutionary and special and amazing (yes I am being sarcastic - none of this is new in any way and the merest scraping of research on your part would have established this), you actually come off as being pretty limited in imagination.

 

Congratulations :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, there is evidence to prove that something VERY intelligent was on earth when they made the henges. They are arranged in a goemetric pattern hard to create without seeing it from the air. And in Chile there are the Nazca lines across the desert that would be REALLY hard to make without a flying machine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, there is evidence to prove that something VERY intelligent was on earth when they made the henges. They are arranged in a goemetric pattern hard to create without seeing it from the air. And in Chile there are the Nazca lines across the desert that would be REALLY hard to make without a flying machine.

 

Yes. Homo Sapiens Sapiens has been present for something like 100,000 years now.

 

An interesting postulation might be how you might have made these monuments. If you were transported to that technological level (remember technological and not intellectual level: same relative brain cavity), and given say, unlimited resources. How might you make something such as these (say it was some religious or sociological requirement)?

I mean we can make computers and such these days, you can make a big calendar, can't you?

 

Perhaps as impressive is late medieval star charts. You know people like Tycho Brae stared up at the sky from their study window and with a length of lead and piece of paper, systematically marked each and evey single star and classified them. Now that's tenacity.

 

etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geometry? "It looks like something from the air" doesn't mean it can't be devised purely on the ground. I'm pretty sure I could duplicate the Nazca designs with a big paintbrush and a long stick.

 

This is completely aside, but does anyone else think "Olmec" is a wonderful word?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.