sean6 Posted November 15, 2013 #1 Share Posted November 15, 2013 (edited) Humans do NOT come from Earth – and sunburn, bad backs and pain during labour prove it, expert claims A U.S. ecologist has claimed that humans are not from Earth but were put on the planet by aliens tens of thousands of years ago. Dr Ellis Silver points to a number of physiological features to make his case for why humans did not evolve alongside other life on Earth, in his new book. http://www.dailymail...ert-claims.html Edited November 15, 2013 by sean6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBelieveWhatIWant Posted November 15, 2013 #2 Share Posted November 15, 2013 This is very interesting and while some people may dismiss it without a second thought, this is something I have believed for quite a while. For quite a few reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGirl Posted November 15, 2013 #3 Share Posted November 15, 2013 worms must be alien then too because they can't lay out in the sun either. we as humans are subject to bad backs because we are too sedentary, and haven't kept those muscles developed adequately. baby heads are large in proportion to their bodies because the rate of growth for an infant is very rapid. the body catches up in very short order. as a woman who has given birth I can tell you that yeah it's tough but it's doable. lol 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Wearer of Hats Posted November 15, 2013 #4 Share Posted November 15, 2013 I thought bad backs was because we still haven't gotten used to being fully bipedal. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGirl Posted November 15, 2013 #5 Share Posted November 15, 2013 I thought bad backs was because we still haven't gotten used to being fully bipedal. this could also be why women have difficulty in childbirth. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Imaginarynumber1 Posted November 15, 2013 Popular Post #6 Share Posted November 15, 2013 This is very interesting and while some people may dismiss it without a second thought, this is something I have believed for quite a while. For quite a few reasons. This is not interesting in the slightest. It can be dismissed without a second thought because there are mountains of evidence that disprove this. Just another huckster cashing in on the ancient alien fad. 12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imaginarynumber1 Posted November 15, 2013 #7 Share Posted November 15, 2013 I thought bad backs was because we still haven't gotten used to being fully bipedal. While being bipedal gives us great advantages, it also has it's downsides. Spinal problems, back and joint pain, fallen arches, herniation, etc. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DecoNoir Posted November 15, 2013 #8 Share Posted November 15, 2013 Yep, and those entire lines of primates evolving into human like creatures are... coincidence? Space magic? Next cinge inducing theory please. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piney Posted November 15, 2013 #9 Share Posted November 15, 2013 This is not interesting in the slightest. It can be dismissed without a second thought because there are mountains of evidence that disprove this. ...and the sum total of his research has only been published by the Daily Mail. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendy Demon Posted November 15, 2013 #10 Share Posted November 15, 2013 this could also be why women have difficulty in childbirth. Hmm..I guess I was under the impression that the difficulty for women came because, while the pelvis is wider, the birth canal is still quite narrow for a mammal (we are mammals, by the way) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whisperer Posted November 15, 2013 #11 Share Posted November 15, 2013 Incest may have played a big part of the so called ills of modern man rather than a space born theory. Then there is ground radiation and cosmic mutagenics as well as dietry mutagenics to account for the seeming 'troubles' of an upright species. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imaginarynumber1 Posted November 15, 2013 #12 Share Posted November 15, 2013 Hmm..I guess I was under the impression that the difficulty for women came because, while the pelvis is wider, the birth canal is still quite narrow for a mammal (we are mammals, by the way) Though the pelvis became wider, it also closed in to facilitate bipedalism, resulting in the more narrow birth canal. Yep, and those entire lines of primates evolving into human like creatures are... coincidence? Space magic? Next cinge inducing theory please. I'm gonna go with space magic. It sounds fun. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Merton Posted November 15, 2013 #13 Share Posted November 15, 2013 I use to dismiss the theory of Mars being the original home of life (I know, but kinda on the same subject) because I saw it as an unnecessary complication when it is perfectly easy to posit that life began here. However, life appeared so quickly after the earth solidified, and Mars was for maybe a billion years before the earth solidified a much more pleasant place. (The delay for the earth came from the collision that gave us the moon). So it now seems reasonable that life first evolved on Mars and then got transported via asteroid (rocks from Mars sometimes end up after a few million years on the earth when an asteroid or something hits Mars). This would help explain how life was able to appear so quickly here (time frame of millions rather than billions of years). Of course it could be that life just naturally evolves quickly. One thing -- this gives us another good reason for exploring Mars and any fossils it may have much more closely/ 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imaginarynumber1 Posted November 15, 2013 #14 Share Posted November 15, 2013 (edited) I use to dismiss the theory of Mars being the original home of life (I know, but kinda on the same subject) because I saw it as an unnecessary complication when it is perfectly easy to posit that life began here. However, life appeared so quickly after the earth solidified, and Mars was for maybe a billion years before the earth solidified a much more pleasant place. (The delay for the earth came from the collision that gave us the moon). So it now seems reasonable that life first evolved on Mars and then got transported via asteroid (rocks from Mars sometimes end up after a few million years on the earth when an asteroid or something hits Mars). This would help explain how life was able to appear so quickly here (time frame of millions rather than billions of years). Of course it could be that life just naturally evolves quickly. One thing -- this gives us another good reason for exploring Mars and any fossils it may have much more closely/ I've always liked the panspermia hypothesis and found it quite plausible. The OP's, however, is complete hornswoggle and deserves to be derided. While life may or may not have originated here, humans certainly did. Edited November 15, 2013 by Imaginarynumber1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kahn Posted November 15, 2013 #15 Share Posted November 15, 2013 (edited) Please fasten your seatbelts and secure your tray table in the upright position! We're in for a wild ride. Next stop, woo-woo land. It always amazes me how some intelligent people fall into weird belief structures. So I guess our sedentary lifestyle has nothing to do with bad backs, not to mention obesity. Only human babies have large heads?I guess this ignores the fact that all mammals share this trait. Why do you think these pictures appear so cute? Maybe because the head/body ratio is bread into us? Most animals have the common sense to get out of the sun. (http://www.smithsoni...-Sunburned.html) But humans can be amazingly stupid at times ...Attractive, huh? So the fossil record is wrong. Silly me. Edited November 15, 2013 by Kahn 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DingoLingo Posted November 15, 2013 #16 Share Posted November 15, 2013 oh good.. another book to put in the loo in case I run out of toilet paper.. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amerix Posted November 15, 2013 #17 Share Posted November 15, 2013 Humans tens of thousands of years ago do not resemble the humans of today, which blows that theory out of the water, and gives further credence to the theory (it shouldn't even be called a theory anymore) of evolution and life evolving HERE on this planet. What a ridiculous article. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.United_Nations Posted November 15, 2013 #18 Share Posted November 15, 2013 This was well respected by the scientist forum earlier this year, but not humans but all forms of life, saying life came from asteroids in some sort of Bacterial form Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeWitz Posted November 15, 2013 #19 Share Posted November 15, 2013 (edited) Either it's a poorly written article, or it states baldly that humans may have come to earth on "comets or asteroids"--in which case we should be almost immune to sunburn or other high temperatures. Maybe the author meant pre-human microbes, but that's not how the link says it. To argue from an observation (large cranium, small birth canal--although the female pelvis has built-in fissures to help accommodate this; back pain; sunburn), is a logical fallacy of some sort. It's akin to saying "the appendix has no known function in the human body, therefore it is a vestigial organ left over from our Alpha Centauri forbears." I think I'll pass on this one until von Daniken and Stichin weigh in. Edited November 15, 2013 by szentgyorgy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Still Waters Posted November 15, 2013 #20 Share Posted November 15, 2013 ...and the sum total of his research has only been published by the Daily Mail. The original article was published by Yahoo. Mankind is supposedly the most highly developed species on the planet, yet is surprisingly unsuited and ill-equipped for Earth's environment: harmed by sunlight, a strong dislike for naturally occurring foods, ridiculously high rates of chronic disease, and more - he told Yahoo. And this topic has been posted on here already with Yahoo as the source. http://www.unexplain...howtopic=255492 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kahn Posted November 15, 2013 #21 Share Posted November 15, 2013 I would not dispute an asteroid "seeding" life on the Earth. This guy thinks ET just plopped us here, fully formed. This is just as bad as the creationists, it just substitutes ET for God. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scowl Posted November 15, 2013 #22 Share Posted November 15, 2013 Another classic in the "I don't understand this therefore aliens did it" theories. Ya know, one time I looked up in the sky and saw the moon had turned red! Really! Must have been aliens done that. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazzard Posted November 15, 2013 #23 Share Posted November 15, 2013 I posted this on another thread but I think it fits better here,... You have probably heard about how humans share over 98% of their genes with some chimps. But did you know that you share about 50% of your genetic makeup with a banana? Thanks to the Human Genome project, which mapped all the genes in the human body and allowed them to compare our genes with other life forms. Here are some other interesting comparisons: We share 60% of genes with a Fruit Fly, 75% with a mouse and 80% with a cow! Its interesting to think how little different all living things are. Scientists say that this is because plant and animal life separated about 1.5 billion years ago, and the genes we share are due to our common ancestors. And to think that some people still believe that humans didnt evolve on Earth! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
praetorian-legio XIII Posted November 15, 2013 #24 Share Posted November 15, 2013 I try to be opened minded but that article was the stupiest crock of **** I've heard yet. sunburned, sore backs, rough child birth, really........ really? How about the fact that we've become a bunch of lazy, weak, malnirished pussies! And when I use those words I don't mean them to be derogitory, but a way to describe what the advent of machines and processed food has done to us. Every thing we do and eat every day just continues to make us weaker then the day before. And consider that fair skinned people evolved in the north, hence less sun and more clothes, that we grew our food and worked the fields and hunted all day to eat and survive and didn't lay down on a fake piece of chemical foam to sleep, that women have been having babies leaned up against a tree for thousands of years, weak women or weak fetus's weren't supposed to procreate or survive, that we have large heads to protect and house our large brains. I could go on and on and on but I just wanted to make a point against the idiot that wrote the whatever it is. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted November 15, 2013 #25 Share Posted November 15, 2013 (edited) Humans do NOT come from Earth – and sunburn, bad backs and pain during labour prove it, expert claims A U.S. ecologist has claimed that humans are not from Earth but were put on the planet by aliens tens of thousands of years ago. Dr Ellis Silver points to a number of physiological features to make his case for why humans did not evolve alongside other life on Earth, in his new book. http://www.dailymail...ert-claims.html what a load of twaddle, but here is an article that says the bible was right, we do in fact come from....CLAY! "Was the Bible right? All life on earth 'may have come from clay" All life on earth may have come from clay according to new scientific research, just as the Bible, Koran and even Greek mythology have been suggesting for thousands of years. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/10431863/Was-the-Bible-right-All-life-on-earth-may-have-come-from-clay.html BUT - What anyone needs to remember is, we ARE ALL MADE OF STAR STUFF, particles of the universe itself. The wise will understand that statement typos Edited November 15, 2013 by seeder 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now