Proof of Where GOD Came From

ganja man23

Well-Known Member
You do not know that those feats are possible with basic human innovation. Are you referring to that old guy moving that rock on the discovery channel? Please, that doesnt even explain how Coral Castle was made, never mind the pyramids or any other massive ancient structures. Also, the perfect sculpting of giant granite blocks at Puma Punku was supposed to of been done with copper tools and chicken bones? The best stone masons of the world are baffled by this and wouldnt even bother attempting it with their technology. One of the only descriptions of moving these stones was done by Incas of a later generation. They tried to achieve what their predecessors have but they couldnt even drag one stone over a span of years with 20000 people. Do you honestly see only the slimmest chance if it being done by advanced knowledge? (btw, I do believe in the alien part, but I dont think they were much more intelligent than humans at the time, because we are a species with amnesia).

Yeah they should of just hired look-a-like actors for different races. It was a tough challenge though, the author did say the book was unfilmable.
i love seeing ancient civilizations that could make smoother and more precise dimensions and surfaces in stone then we can today :) (if not smoother then at least at the same level, which we have proved impossible for us to replicate without power tools). supposedly they had sticks and stones to help them? not to mention the certain amound of rocks lifted that are so massive and heavy it is not possible to fit anywhere near enough hands under them (based on the highest strength output of a human) to actually be able to lift them.
 

tyler.durden

Well-Known Member
You do not know that those feats are possible with basic human innovation. Are you referring to that old guy moving that rock on the discovery channel? Please, that doesnt even explain how Coral Castle was made, never mind the pyramids or any other massive ancient structures. Also, the perfect sculpting of giant granite blocks at Puma Punku was supposed to of been done with copper tools and chicken bones? The best stone masons of the world are baffled by this and wouldnt even bother attempting it with their technology. One of the only descriptions of moving these stones was done by Incas of a later generation. They tried to achieve what their predecessors have but they couldnt even drag one stone over a span of years with 20000 people. Do you honestly see only the slimmest chance if it being done by advanced knowledge? (btw, I do believe in the alien part, but I dont think they were much more intelligent than humans at the time, because we are a species with amnesia).

Yeah they should of just hired look-a-like actors for different races. It was a tough challenge though, the author did say the book was unfilmable.
i would consider the presence of certain genes not found in hominids as my evidence. again not credible by scientific terms but valid to many nonetheless. i look at the presence of certain genes as the answer that our genetics have been "experimented" with. i believe we were implanted the genes necessary for intelligence since they are not simple hydrocarbon based genes. they're not found in any other animal (i realize this may be because we're unique, but not unique enough to randomly come across such complexity in our genetics).

they are extremely complex and i chose to believe that they are not created by chance (i choose to believe the same for dna). we are just cracking the function of human genes (not to mention the other 95%+ of the dna found in our nucleus). anyways in the future we will see more developement in the human genome. keep in mind we only proved the existance of dna in the 1950s (while information about it can be found as early as 10 000 years ago). with respect to age, genetic research is a new born baby with the softest tush imaginable. it will literally be the most solid and uncontroversial aspect to finding out about our past. our genetics tell a story, i can't wait to find out how it began.

just a side note: i find it interesting that the earliest known civilization believed that not only did aliens exist, they were essentially created by them. many tell similar stories as well about creation of mankind and how it "unfolded". i think in attempt to try and justify our intelligence as leaders on the surface of this planet we find that we must often criticize a lack of information. there's nothing wrong with that because it has pushed us forward in some cases. chances are it will not however. the method of criticism claiming there is a lack of sufficient evidence is based upon disproving a currently circulating hypothesis, in which case any success means we must disregard the information while the method does not offer a replacement. ultimately we find ourselves one step backward. don't get me wrong, a certain level is necessary to ensure we end up with the correct information but it's important to allow a certain amount of information to circulate in order to justly criticize what is right and wrong, not criticize because science can't prove something yet.

i want to add one last thing and tie two of my points together. i said that the first recorded reference to DNA can go back as far as 10,000 years (the sumerian civilization and the anunnaki). we discovered genes approximately 11,950 years later so by using the "lack of evidence theory" and simply dismissing the idea of genes because we cannot prove it then ultimately we would have been blocking it from being explored whereas we could have been working all those years to prove its existence.
Interesting. Please provide links to the bolded text above from credible sources so that I may learn more, gentlemen...
 

Chief Walkin Eagle

Well-Known Member
i love seeing ancient civilizations that could make smoother and more precise dimensions and surfaces in stone then we can today :) (if not smoother then at least at the same level, which we have proved impossible for us to replicate without power tools). supposedly they had sticks and stones to help them? not to mention the certain amound of rocks lifted that are so massive and heavy it is not possible to fit anywhere near enough hands under them (based on the highest strength output of a human) to actually be able to lift them.
Exactly. I dont know what evidence Pad is talking about other than that old guy on the discovery channel and that egyptian drawing of a HANDFUL of people dragging a massive stone. He also refuses to acknowledge that the builders said that they had special help.
 

Chief Walkin Eagle

Well-Known Member
Interesting. Please provide links to the bolded text above from credible sources so that I may learn more, gentlemen...
The first one is on an episode of Ancient Aliens that features one of the best stone masons in the world. Im too lazy to find the second. I read it in "Fingerprints of the Gods" and its based off of a translation done by a 17th century (I think) spanish researcher.
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
You do not know that those feats are possible with basic human innovation. Are you referring to that old guy moving that rock on the discovery channel? Please, that doesnt even explain how Coral Castle was made, never mind the pyramids or any other massive ancient structures. Also, the perfect sculpting of giant granite blocks at Puma Punku was supposed to of been done with copper tools and chicken bones? The best stone masons of the world are baffled by this and wouldnt even bother attempting it with their technology. One of the only descriptions of moving these stones was done by Incas of a later generation. They tried to achieve what their predecessors have but they couldnt even drag one stone over a span of years with 20000 people. Do you honestly see only the slimmest chance if it being done by advanced knowledge? (btw, I do believe in the alien part, but I dont think they were much more intelligent than humans at the time, because we are a species with amnesia).

Yeah they should of just hired look-a-like actors for different races. It was a tough challenge though, the author did say the book was unfilmable.
I do not know anything for sure, I can only use the available evidence to shape my understanding. As I said before, the absence of evidence is not evidence. You are listing things that you believe ancient humans could not have accomplished, not what ancient aliens did accomplish. That is the problem, there is nothing suggesting external forces were at work except the absence of knowledge of how ancient humans did it. You must understand this distinction. As I asked earlier, what is to determine that ancient aliens were responsible for the creation of world wonders and not some earlier unknown species of Earthbound organisms? Where is the evidence?

i would consider the presence of certain genes not found in hominids as my evidence. again not credible by scientific terms but valid to many nonetheless. i look at the presence of certain genes as the answer that our genetics have been "experimented" with. i believe we were implanted the genes necessary for intelligence since they are not simple hydrocarbon based genes. they're not found in any other animal (i realize this may be because we're unique, but not unique enough to randomly come across such complexity in our genetics).
Which genes are you talking about, specifically, and what makes you think they couldn't have evolved naturally?

they are extremely complex and i chose to believe that they are not created by chance (i choose to believe the same for dna). we are just cracking the function of human genes (not to mention the other 95%+ of the dna found in our nucleus). anyways in the future we will see more developement in the human genome. keep in mind we only proved the existance of dna in the 1950s (while information about it can be found as early as 10 000 years ago). with respect to age, genetic research is a new born baby with the softest tush imaginable. it will literally be the most solid and uncontroversial aspect to finding out about our past. our genetics tell a story, i can't wait to find out how it began.
Over 50 years of collective evidence suggesting it evolved naturally as well, from an earlier form of RNA.

just a side note: i find it interesting that the earliest known civilization believed that not only did aliens exist, they were essentially created by them. many tell similar stories as well about creation of mankind and how it "unfolded". i think in attempt to try and justify our intelligence as leaders on the surface of this planet we find that we must often criticize a lack of information. there's nothing wrong with that because it has pushed us forward in some cases. chances are it will not however. the method of criticism claiming there is a lack of sufficient evidence is based upon disproving a currently circulating hypothesis, in which case any success means we must disregard the information while the method does not offer a replacement. ultimately we find ourselves one step backward. don't get me wrong, a certain level is necessary to ensure we end up with the correct information but it's important to allow a certain amount of information to circulate in order to justly criticize what is right and wrong, not criticize because science can't prove something yet.
If science cannot prove it, why is it useful to us?

i want to add one last thing and tie two of my points together. i said that the first recorded reference to DNA can go back as far as 10,000 years (the sumerian civilization and the anunnaki). we discovered genes approximately 11,950 years later so by using the "lack of evidence theory" and simply dismissing the idea of genes because we cannot prove it then ultimately we would have been blocking it from being explored whereas we could have been working all those years to prove its existence.
Information is useless unless we can prove it's validity. 10,000 years ago, we did not have the capability to prove such things. Information without validity is best guess, best guess is irrelevant in science.
 

tyler.durden

Well-Known Member
Exactly. I dont know what evidence Pad is talking about other than that old guy on the discovery channel and that egyptian drawing of a HANDFUL of people dragging a massive stone. He also refuses to acknowledge that the builders said that they had special help.
This Michigan dude has no problem moving and lifting HUGE stone blocks all by himself with the tech they had back then. Check it out -

[video=youtube;pCvx5gSnfW4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCvx5gSnfW4[/video]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
 

Chief Walkin Eagle

Well-Known Member
This Michigan dude has no problem moving and lifting HUGE stone blocks all by himself with the tech they had back then. Check it out -

[video=youtube;pCvx5gSnfW4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCvx5gSnfW4[/video]
Thats exactly the guy I am talking about, and that doesnt even explain how Coral Castle was made.
 

tyler.durden

Well-Known Member
You do not know that those feats are possible with basic human innovation. Are you referring to that old guy moving that rock on the discovery channel? Please, that doesnt even explain how Coral Castle was made, never mind the pyramids or any other massive ancient structures. Also, the perfect sculpting of giant granite blocks at Puma Punku was supposed to of been done with copper tools and chicken bones? The best stone masons of the world are baffled by this and wouldnt even bother attempting it with their technology. One of the only descriptions of moving these stones was done by Incas of a later generation. They tried to achieve what their predecessors have but they couldnt even drag one stone over a span of years with 20000 people. Do you honestly see only the slimmest chance if it being done by advanced knowledge? (btw, I do believe in the alien part, but I dont think they were much more intelligent than humans at the time, because we are a species with amnesia).
The first one is on an episode of Ancient Aliens that features one of the best stone masons in the world. Im too lazy to find the second. I read it in "Fingerprints of the Gods" and its based off of a translation done by a 17th century (I think) spanish researcher.
So, the 'best stone masons in the world' turns into one dude on the non-factual show Ancient Aliens? Glad I pressed for clarification. And still no link provided...
 

ganja man23

Well-Known Member
I do not know anything for sure, I can only use the available evidence to shape my understanding. As I said before, the absence of evidence is not evidence. You are listing things that you believe ancient humans could not have accomplished, not what ancient aliens did accomplish. That is the problem, there is nothing suggesting external forces were at work except the absence of knowledge of how ancient humans did it. You must understand this distinction. As I asked earlier, what is to determine that ancient aliens were responsible for the creation of world wonders and not some earlier unknown species of Earthbound organisms? Where is the evidence?

I think the quote is "absence of evidence is not evidence of an absense". as far as evidence, watch ancient aliens... it'll prove "beyond a shaaaadow of a doubt that the answer is......extraterrestrials"

ancient-aliens-guy-big-hair-giorgio-tsoukalos.jpeg


Which genes are you talking about, specifically, and what makes you think they couldn't have evolved naturally?

The gene responsible for human speech was the first that came to mind.




Over 50 years of collective evidence suggesting it evolved naturally as well, from an earlier form of RNA.
"suggesting" therefore not proved (it feels great to finally use that statement :D:D:D)

If science cannot prove it, why is it useful to us?

You missed my point. My point is just because science hasn't proved it, doesn't take it out of the equation.


Information is useless unless we can prove it's validity. 10,000 years ago, we did not have the capability to prove such things. Information without validity

is best guess, best guess is irrelevant in science.

How exactly can you measure our scale of advancement as a species? Based on how much we have evolved in the past? For all we know we may only be living up to 5% of our intelligence potential at this very moment which is limiting us in terms of our accomplishments and findings.
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
I think the quote is "absence of evidence is not evidence of an absense". as far as evidence, watch ancient aliens... it'll prove "beyond a shaaaadow of a doubt that the answer is......extraterrestrials"

View attachment 2387997
It clearly does not. I've seen ancient aliens, and what I concluded from that was they only have speculation and questions, absolutely no proof of anything. I was completely disappointed and discouraged from any further History Channel programs. That one show alone informed me the people at the History Channel are not interested in actual history, only ratings.

[youtube]j9w-i5oZqaQ[/youtube]

The gene responsible for human speech was the first that came to mind.
Have you researched human speech yourself? My understanding is it developed somewhere between 25,000-40,000 years ago, near northern Africa, southern Europe.

"suggesting" therefore not proved (it feels great to finally use that statement :D:D:D)
Can you name anything in existence that is 100% "proven"?

You missed my point. My point is just because science hasn't proved it, doesn't take it out of the equation.
Yes it does. If it is not proven via science it is unreasonable to believe. What is the value in believing in something not proven to be true? Why not believe in fairies and dragons and Santa Clause?

How exactly can you measure our scale of advancement as a species? Based on how much we have evolved in the past? For all we know we may only be living up to 5% of our intelligence potential at this very moment which is limiting us in terms of our accomplishments and findings.
History.

Where is the evidence to suggest we're only living up to 5% of our intelligence?
 

ganja man23

Well-Known Member
This Michigan dude has no problem moving and lifting HUGE stone blocks all by himself with the tech they had back then. Check it out -

[video=youtube;pCvx5gSnfW4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCvx5gSnfW4[/video]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
this explains how the blocks can be moved in a certain direction altough im not sure anyone is going to push all these stones for hundreds of miles when their technology is that primitive it seems almost irrelevant to do such a thing. even though they do somehow ( i question that they would unless the technology that was available to them was advanced enough to not make them go out of their way by dragging stones to the middle of no where. By the way stone henge lies on the focus of an energy grid. you should go meditate there, you might comprehend something you don't want to. so how exactly is it that they are able to life these stones and place them on top of each other perpendicularly? maybe i missed it but it doesn't explain how they placed the tops on.
 

ganja man23

Well-Known Member
It clearly does not. I've seen ancient aliens, and what I concluded from that was they only have speculation and questions, absolutely no proof of anything. I was completely disappointed and discouraged from any further History Channel programs. That one show alone informed me the people at the History Channel are not interested in actual history, only ratings.

Depends on what you consider proof. Most will want proof as in meeting an alien face to face. This is the only proof some will accept and this won't happen until at least after the 21st of december for many of us. don't worry about that because it's not relevant to you. forget i even said it :)

Have you researched human speech yourself? My understanding is it developed somewhere between 25,000-40,000 years ago, near northern Africa, southern Europe.

You can't prove that unless you go back 25-40,000 years ago.

Can you name anything in existence that is 100% "proven"?

Exactly my point, everything is an illusion. even the word proof. proof is derived from the human mind seeking validation when in reality we existe within the complexity of infinity. we don't need to prove anything, the answers are all within.

Yes it does. If it is not proven via science it is unreasonable to believe. What is the value in believing in something not proven to be true? Why not believe in fairies and dragons and Santa Clause?

Again you forgot my initial point. As it turned out the belief in genetics turned out to be a fair assumption didn't it?


History.

Where is the evidence to suggest we're only living up to 5% of our intelligence?

I didn't say we are living up to 5% i merely said for all we know. that doesn't mean i find any validity in that statement or the number, we are nothing but masters of limitation. consciousness is forever expanding so have fun and enjoy. i think this is the lesson you try to preach as well no?
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Depends on what you consider proof. Most will want proof as in meeting an alien face to face. This is the only proof some will accept and this won't happen until at least after the 21st of december for many of us. don't worry about that because it's not relevant to you. forget i even said it :)
Trust me, nothing will happen on Dec. 21st. Life will remain the same on Dec. 22nd.

Proof is objective, proof is true regardless if you or I believe it.


You can't prove that unless you go back 25-40,000 years ago.
There is strong evidence to suggest it. Again, "proof", in absolute, does not exist.

Exactly my point, everything is an illusion. even the word proof. proof is derived from the human mind seeking validation when in reality we existe within the complexity of infinity. we don't need to prove anything, the answers are all within.
That is why we've developed the scientific method, to enable us to derive the truth regardless of personal opinion or anecdotal evidence.

The truth of reality is not within, it's something that needs to be learned, studied, accepted. Otherwise we're subject to our emotions. Our emotions tell us what we want to hear, not what we need to.

Again you forgot my initial point. As it turned out the belief in genetics turned out to be a fair assumption didn't it?
I'm not familiar with the belief you're referring to, citation?

Regardless, if the ancients said rain water provides sustenance for crops, would you proclaim they had advanced knowledge about current meteorology? Had they said "more color would be better", would you proclaim them advanced art geniuses, the likes of which wouldn't be seen until DaVinci?


I didn't say we are living up to 5% i merely said for all we know. that doesn't mean i find any validity in that statement or the number, we are nothing but masters of limitation. consciousness is forever expanding so have fun and enjoy. i think this is the lesson you try to preach as well no?
"For all we know", we do know. MRI's have well established the "we only use 10% of our brain" myth is BS. We use 100% of our brain.
 

tyler.durden

Well-Known Member
I think the quote is "absence of evidence is not evidence of an absense". as far as evidence, watch ancient aliens... it'll prove "beyond a shaaaadow of a doubt that the answer is......extraterrestrials"
You're joking of course. Have to make sure as The Chief actually cites the show as a credible source of information...

Which genes are you talking about, specifically, and what makes you think they couldn't have evolved naturally?

The gene responsible for human speech was the first that came to mind.
Are you referring to Forkhead Box Protein P2? If so, that gene is found in many mammal species -

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOXP2

If you scroll down to the evolution section, you can see our version of the gene is only different by two amino acids from the FOX P2 in chimps, and only by several down the line to mice. It is easy to see the slow mutation of this gene up through lesser mammals to the higher primates, including us. No alien intervention explanation necessary...


How exactly can you measure our scale of advancement as a species? Based on how much we have evolved in the past? For all we know we may only be living up to 5% of our intelligence potential at this very moment which is limiting us in terms of our accomplishments and findings.
What is your source on the bolded text?
 

ganja man23

Well-Known Member
Trust me, nothing will happen on Dec. 21st. Life will remain the same on Dec. 22nd.

Nothing will happen on december 21st? are you implying that our world is going to end or something. of course something is going to happen. the answer as to what is based on your own reality. If you believe in a doomsday then why not create that scenario for yourself and have fun? i'm too high for such low ideas. i see the 21st as the threshold when the energy on our planet tips the scale becoming from collectively negative to slightly more positive. Do you really think the 22nd is not a different reality. We shift from dimension to dimension countless times every second and your sheer lack of knowledge as to what will happen in the future is immaculate seeing as how it has not happened. the future has not been created yet.


There is strong evidence to suggest it. Again, "proof", in absolute, does not exist.


The truth of reality is not within, it's something that needs to be learned, studied, accepted. Otherwise we're subject to our emotions. Our emotions tell us what we want to hear, not what we need to.

with all due respect you have no idea what reality is. you consider your reality as the life in front of your eyes because you have convinced yourself that you have never lexperienced anything other than this. it's not your fault seeing as how incarnation is based upon an agreement of access to only certain memory which is limited and filtered by the brain. the truth about your "reality" (my illusion) is that you are as helpless in everything but your choices as you are in a dream where you are simply an observer.

I'm not familiar with the belief you're referring to, citation?

Regardless, if the ancients said rain water provides sustenance for crops, would you proclaim they had advanced knowledge about current meteorology? Had they said "more color would be better", would you proclaim them advanced art geniuses, the likes of which wouldn't be seen until DaVinci?




"For all we know", we do know. MRI's have well established the "we only use 10% of our brain" myth is BS. We use 100% of our brain.

for the third time (second maybe?) you quoted out of context. i didn't say we use 10% of our brains, i said we are living up to five percent of our intelligence potential (i pulled the number from my ass, i made it up). using your logic since we use 100% of our brains, we are as smart as we will ever get... and i'm sure you already think that however i already realize i have been expanding for many many years and will continue to do so forever.
 

ganja man23

Well-Known Member
You're joking of course. Have to make sure as The Chief actually cites the show as a credible source of information...



Are you referring to Forkhead Box Protein P2? If so, that gene is found in many mammal species -

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOXP2

If you scroll down to the evolution section, you can see our version of the gene is only different by two amino acids from the FOX P2 in chimps, and only by several down the line to mice. It is easy to see the slow mutation of this gene up through lesser mammals to the higher primates, including us. No alien intervention explanation necessary...




What is your source on the bolded text?
no i'm no referring to that gene. in all honesty i just searched it and the function is different then the one i described. the one i mentioned has not been found anywhere but in human genes.

i bolded by accident but i believe i was trying to differentiate my text from his initially. as you can see it says "for all we know" and "we may be". you're smarter than this tyler, hang in there buddy. the source for this was my rectum, i reached in there and pulled it out as a wonderfully appropriate example. you like!?
 

Heisenberg

Well-Known Member
*Cough* o.o
Every claim made about Puma Punku is addressed in the video Pad posted, at the beginning even.

"Contrary to Ancient Aliens’ claims that archaeologists are baffled by Pumapunku, Archaeologists know the basics about how Pumapunku’s stones were cut and shaped. This is partly because there is evidence for this all over the site itself."

"The sandstone and andesite stones at Pumapunku would have been easily worked with the most basic stone working tools, the idea that diamond tipped power saws were needed is ridiculous. The red sandstone was relatively soft and easy to work with, and even though andesite is pretty hard, because of the way it cooled it could be easily flaked off using stones as soft as 5.5 on the Mohs scale. Such pounding stones were found all over andesite quarries in the area."

"Some stones at Pumapunku that Ancient Aliens would never show the cameras are the ones that were in the middle of this process. They show that at the same time a stone was being pounded by stone hammers, which created these troth like depressions, the grinding and polishing was taking place on the other end of the stone. Unfinished stones like this one clearly show how they were shaped "

"Many stones have grooves several centimeters in width and depth on two adjacent faces for holding ropes. They even had special places cut into the stones that Pumapunku scholars call “hoisting grips.” These are all very strange things to do if they could simply levitate these blocks."


and so on and so on....
 
Top