PDA

View Full Version : Where did this come from?



astromark
2007-Jun-26, 10:38 AM
I'm putting this here because its not a question as much as a silly idea.. but I would like some feedback and do not hold back... I need to be told when I neeed to be told.:)

Are we the human race, The survivors of an alien race. Is this idea so stupid? Why did the ape like upright creature suddenly become so different. Where is the fossil evidence of hundreds of thousands of years of evolution..? Not a lot about is there. Is there any evidence to support this rather sudden change in behavior. Is what I am suggesting so improbeble..?
Could we be the descendants of aliens. Now do not get all angry but, could we be the son of god? Yes I have just been reading a old book called 'The chariots of the Gods' and have decided the Eric Van whatever was mad... But could there be any truth to this? can we so sure? I need to sleep. will look in for rebufle...:) Zzzzz.....

Damien Evans
2007-Jun-26, 11:05 AM
well, this isn't a rebuttal, but may i suggest you read a book or two on archaeology, specifically ones that deal with human evolution, cause we didn't "suddenly become so different", there was a long period of evolution from Australopithecus, through Homo Habilus and Rudolfensis to Ergaster and Erectus, and then on through several more intermediate species to Sapiens, so yes, there is a lot of fossil evidence.

Also, if we descended from Aliens it would be rather unlikely that we would be so similar genetically to other creatures on this planet.

Actually, that did sort of turn into a rebuttal, didn't it?

Damien Evans
2007-Jun-26, 11:07 AM
Oh yes, and I would also recommend a visit to the wikipedia site on the Genus Homo, it has some quite interesting information (to me, anyway)

Maksutov
2007-Jun-26, 11:22 AM
well, this isn't a rebuttal, but may i suggest you read a book or two on archaeology, specifically ones that deal with human evolution, cause wd didn't "suddenly become so different",...You mean anthropology (the biological variety), right?

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/566/iconwink6tn.gif

Damien Evans
2007-Jun-26, 11:27 AM
You mean anthropology, right?

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/566/iconwink6tn.gif

In Australia human evolution is mostly covered by archaeology, though there is some overlap with Anthropology.

I understand it is somewhat different in the US

farmerjumperdon
2007-Jun-26, 12:09 PM
On the genetics part, I'd heartily recommend Genome as a great primer. If our origins are extraterrestrial, then it is via a deposit from long before the coming of humans.

farmerjumperdon
2007-Jun-26, 12:49 PM
What a coincidence. The top 3 stories in the science section of the NYT (online) this morning are on evolution/genetics. One on evo-devo reads a bit woo-ish. That sounds like a mainstream media concocted attention grabboing label if I ever hard one. The other 2 are pretty good:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/26/science/26human.html?th&emc=th

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/26/science/26essay.html?th&emc=th

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/26/science/26devo.html?th&emc=th

That last one is the wweakest of the three. But the first one is right up the alley of what you ask about.

Donnie B.
2007-Jun-26, 12:50 PM
It was that pesky monolith.

Maksutov
2007-Jun-26, 01:05 PM
In Australia human evolution is mostly covered by archaeology, though there is some overlap with Anthropology.That's some difference.

Does Australian archeology deal only with human evolution in Australia? If not, then, per the classic definition of archeology, there might be a few problems with early human ancestors in Africa, considering that they left no cultural remnants.
I understand it is somewhat different in the USThat would appear to be the situation.To summarize briefly, here archeology has to do with the study of the evolution of human culture. Anthropology has to do with the study of human origins and evolution.

The difference between the Australian and American disciplines might be an interesting subject for archaeologists and anthropologists to study, as appropriate.

Jeff Root
2007-Jun-26, 01:34 PM
I started my own newspaper when I was between fourth and fifth
grades, publishing four issues over a period of about five months.
Since I didn't actually have any news, I put an editorial on the front
page, above the fold. The second issue featured my speculation
that as the Sun gets older, it grows dimmer, so mankind moved from
planet to planet, progressively closer to the Sun over millions of years.
Humans would have most recently lived on Mars, and might have
started out on Pluto. I don't recall thinking about the specific planets
in between. Living on moons of the giant planets didn't occur to me,
but then I knew that moons don't have atmospheres. I was aware
of the fossil record, but rationalized that maybe humans originally
evolved on Pluto the way they were thought to have done on Earth.
This was in 1963, a year before the first American space probe
launched to Mars, and we found out there weren't any canals there
after all, dried up or otherwise.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

Damien Evans
2007-Jun-26, 01:35 PM
That's some difference.

Does Australian archeology deal only with human evolution in Australia? If not, then, per the classic definition of archeology, there might be a few problems with early human ancestors in Africa, considering that they left no cultural remnants.That would appear to be the situation.To summarize briefly, here archeology has to do with the study of the evolution of human culture. Anthropology has to do with the study of human origins and evolution.

The difference between the Australian and American disciplines might be an interesting subject for archaeologists and anthropologists to study, as appropriate.

:lol: That is the exact reverse of ours (though i assume dig methods and such are the same, as we use American dig tapes as study references here)

And as for no cultural remmnants, what do you think stone tools are?

Maksutov
2007-Jun-26, 11:00 PM
:lol: That is the exact reverse of ours (though i assume dig methods and such are the same, as we use American dig tapes as study references here)That's amazing! But then, you blokes drive on the wrong side of the road... http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/566/iconwink6tn.gif


And as for no cultural remmnants, what do you think stone tools are?Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that once you get back a million+ years or so, say to the time of "Lucy", there are no tools or other artifacts to go by, just bones for characterization and classification of the specimen?

:think:

BTW, is it true that all human ancestors found in Australia are named "Bruce"? http://img394.imageshack.us/img394/4879/iconbiggrin1kg.gif

hhEb09'1
2007-Jun-26, 11:12 PM
Also, if we descended from Aliens it would be rather unlikely that we would be so similar genetically to other creatures on this planet.Especially the vegetables, right? :)

astromark
2007-Jun-27, 06:51 AM
So is I suspected. Blam! Blam! Blam!... and thanks for not being to hard on me... I just wanted to know if I was alone in wondering about this stuff, and no I am not. I have thrown the Eric Von-whatever book away. But while I was looking also found the three books of Douglas Adams:):):):O

Damien Evans
2007-Jun-27, 06:59 AM
That's amazing! But then, you blokes drive on the wrong side of the road... http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/566/iconwink6tn.gif

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that once you get back a million+ years or so, say to the time of "Lucy", there are no tools or other artifacts to go by, just bones for characterization and classification of the specimen?
:think:

BTW, is it true that all human ancestors found in Australia are named "Bruce"? http://img394.imageshack.us/img394/4879/iconbiggrin1kg.gif

Well, you're not wrong about there being nothing but bones and such in the time of Lucy, but that was more like 4 million years ago than 1, matter of fact one of our Intro to Archaeology case studies this semester was from an east african Homo Ergaster site from 1.6 million years ago, fascinating stuff.:)

Damien Evans
2007-Jun-27, 07:04 AM
Especially the vegetables, right? :)

well, I'm no genetic expert, but i would think so, yes.

thecolorofash
2007-Jun-27, 07:05 AM
having read both Eric von Daniken and Douglas Adams, I can say the latter makes for a far better read, and propably also makes much more sense :lol:

mickal555
2007-Jun-27, 07:15 AM
Lots of evidence that we evolved.

No evidence that we came from aliens.

What we observe is consistent with predictions based on what we would expect if we evolved.

astromark
2007-Jun-27, 10:34 AM
Calm down.... I am very happy with what we evolved from. I do not question any of the actuall archaeological history of the human race. Anthropology sounds like some ones sorry about some thing... Hmmm.... oh well back to my book. He is good a? was. He died a?

SeanF
2007-Jun-27, 01:29 PM
Especially the vegetables, right? :)
Unless the vegetables are descended from alien vegetables...:whistle:

NEOWatcher
2007-Jun-27, 01:32 PM
Unless the vegetables are descended from alien vegetables...:whistle:
Well; I'm sure they brought lunch with them. Perhaps a galactic pickeynik basket.:think:

hhEb09'1
2007-Jun-27, 01:33 PM
I knew those rutabagas sounded funny :)

Maksutov
2007-Jun-27, 02:57 PM
I knew those rutabagas sounded funny :)Root on, baby! (http://www.hotlinkfiles.com/files/101981_wugy1/Rutabaga.mp3)

Soup Fan
2007-Jun-27, 03:02 PM
It was that pesky monolith.

I just want you to know that this did not go unnoticed.

+1!

NEOWatcher
2007-Jun-27, 03:02 PM
Is it pun time? Lets not start with a root-I-beg-you.

Grey
2007-Jun-27, 07:51 PM
To summarize briefly, here archeology has to do with the study of the evolution of human culture. Anthropology has to do with the study of human origins and evolution.Sort of. My wife, who is an anthropologist, would probably emphasize that both archaeology (the study of artifacts and material culture, often primarily those produced by prehistoric cultures) and physical anthropology (which includes studies of human evolution) are both considered subfields of anthropology. It's true, though, that outside North America it is more common to consider archaeology a separate field.

Swift
2007-Jun-27, 08:03 PM
Are we the human race, The survivors of an alien race. Is this idea so stupid? Why did the ape like upright creature suddenly become so different. Where is the fossil evidence of hundreds of thousands of years of evolution..? Not a lot about is there. Is there any evidence to support this rather sudden change in behavior. Is what I am suggesting so improbeble..?
Could we be the descendants of aliens. Now do not get all angry but, could we be the son of god? Yes I have just been reading a old book called 'The chariots of the Gods' and have decided the Eric Van whatever was mad... But could there be any truth to this? can we so sure? I need to sleep. will look in for rebufle...:) Zzzzz.....
Absolutely not.
First, the evidence is overwhelming that we evolved on this planet along with the rest of the lifeforms. We share vast quantities of the same genetic code, have the same biochemistry, use the same amino acids, etc. Unless you propose that these aliens came here 4 billion years ago and introduced all life on this planet, it is not possible.

Second, what makes you think that the fossil record is so incomplete and does not show our relationship to the other primates and apes? Yes, there are gaps and disputes about some of the details of homonid evolution, but not enough to allow for the introduction of a species from another planet.

And why do you think the evolution of bipedal movement or other human behaviors was so sudden and not supported by the fossil record? Look at chimps and gorillas and how much we share with them.

I read Chariots of the Gods when it first came out and thought it interesting at the time, but it has been debunked many times over the years. It is actually a rather insulting book (IMHO). A lot of his evidence for aliens are things like pyramids and the Easter Island heads, with the idea that no ancient people could have built such things. That really insults the ability of those people.

astromark
2007-Jun-28, 10:35 AM
You have obviously not seen what I was doing here...

Yes it was that monolith.. Is it coming?

astromark
2007-Jun-28, 10:57 AM
Absolutely not.
First, the evidence is overwhelming that we evolved on this planet along with the rest of the lifeforms. We share vast quantities of the same genetic code, have the same biochemistry, use the same amino acids, etc. Unless you propose that these aliens came here 4 billion years ago and introduced all life on this planet, it is not possible.

Yes thats all true...

Second, what makes you think that the fossil record is so incomplete and does not show our relationship to the other primates and apes? Yes, there are gaps and disputes about some of the details of humanoid evolution, but not enough to allow for the introduction of a species from another planet.

Thats not what I am sagesting...

And why do you think the evolution of bipedal movement or other human behaviors was so sudden and not supported by the fossil record? Look at chimps and gorillas and how much we share with them.

As I have said... I am Happy with that as a fact.

I read Chariots of the Gods when it first came out and thought it interesting at the time, but it has been debunked many times over the years. It is actually a rather insulting book (IMHO). A lot of his evidence for aliens are things like pyramids and the Easter Island heads, with the idea that no ancient people could have built such things. That really insults the ability of those people.

and, Yes to this as well.
All I ever did not actually say was this.. Is it possible that in our history we have been bred with.. infiltrated.. or just influenced.. and the answer is a very clear NO. no. and no. :) and thanks all. end.

NEOWatcher
2007-Jun-28, 12:06 PM
.... Yes I have just been reading a old book called 'The chariots of the Gods' and have decided the Eric Van whatever was mad... But could there be any truth to this? can we so sure? I need to sleep. will look in for rebufle...:) Zzzzz.....
I think that book started me down the skeptic trail. I had that one right next to the Bermuda Triangle book. I also enjoyed In Search Of with Leonard Nimoy.
I always enjoyed the subject, but never the explainations.

farmerjumperdon
2007-Jun-28, 12:18 PM
Especially the vegetables, right? :)

My great (X10000) grandparents could have been rutabagas!

hhEb09'1
2007-Jun-28, 05:07 PM
Mine were Ua Ruaircs (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?p=1018624#post1018624)!