My "scientific theory" on the creation of human being.

[Johnny Rico]

So I'm watching a History Channel marathon of UFO Hunters and one of the episodes was about the "starchild" skull. A slightly smaller skull, but with more internal volume for brain mass than a typical human skull. Also had smaller eye sockets, and what appeared to be no nasal cavity. The mandible was absent, but from the way the lower skull was shaped it looked like it tapered down into what we all think of as Roswell Greys.

Anyway, oh, the skull was carbon-dated to about 900 years ago, and was found in an cave by a girl in northern Mexico. Northwest of Mexico City.

OK, anyway, here's my theory. Well, by the end of the episode, the UFO Hunter crew decided that it might be a hybrid of a hybrid of alien-human reproduction. But my theory differs slightly. What if per say that we humans, homo sapiens are hybrids of not aliens and humans, but of aliens and cro-magnon man. Because think about it. There is quite a leap in facial structure from cro-magnon man and modern humans. I'm talking about the skull shape and nose-mouth area. From that ape-like snout to the more pronouced and separate nose and mouth as well know.

And if indeed these aliens have been coming here for a long time and abducting us for experimentation, then perhaps that they're just back checking up on us to see how we've developed over the generations.

There was one lady that they interviewed (who was supposedly abducted) that said that there were several different variations of "Greys". Some benevolent, others with more nefarious plans.

But back to the hybrid theory. Or more specifically the hybrid of a hybrid theory. They were saying that by dilluting (so-to-speak) of the human-alien genes, that sooner or later, you'd get a "modern human". But the thing was, the stuff going on upstairs...the knowledge that these "people" would have could be used for nefarious purposes. And alien invasion from within so-to-speak.


The next episode was talking about how Nazi Germany who was 25 years ahead in its technology at the time, was getting their knowledge from aliens. The V-1 and V-2 rockets, jet engine for the Me-262 and others. In fact, one such V-2 launch actually went into space. The purpose is still debatable, but some say that it was an attempt to communicate with the aliens.

Well, anyway, what do you all think?

 

[Garrovick]

Sounds some thing like my theory with some unexpected twists from you that I hadn't thought about.

"Kirk" droped off "Khan" on Earth. Then to survive "Khan" intermingles with your cro-magnon man, thus ensuring the survival of what we now call ourselves.

 

[miraclefan]

I prefer that we are decended from the NU-GALACTICA crew that came to this planet a cupple of thousand years ago or whatever.

 

[Johnny Rico]

I prefer that we are decended from the NU-GALACTICA crew that came to this planet a cupple of thousand years ago or whatever.

Well, funny you should say that. Because I'd be willing to lay a bet that that's where RDM and DE got the idea for the final episode.

At least the fact that modern man did come from outer space and whatnot.

Because let's be frank folks...whether you believe in evolution or creation, you gotta wonder where modern humans came from. Actually that brings up an interesting question regarding the ancient alien/astronaut discoveries. We know that ancient civilizations were big into "their Gods" and many apparently believed that they did come down from the heavens. And even the Judeo-Christian God followers (of which I am one) believe "that man was created in God's image". So...kinda makes you wonder, now doesn't it?

Were the Gods real people as in human beings or advanced humans? And they interbred with primitive beings, much like the nu-BSG story line would lead you to believe.



But back to that German link. Now after the fall of the Third Reich, it would have thrown a big monkey wrench into the human-alien relationship there, and isn't it ironic that just 2 years later in 1947 is when we get the Roswell crash? where we get some of the first inklings as to what a "Grey" was.


So, I'm telling ya folks, if the governmemt would ever get off their high horse, do the right thing and disclose exactly what they know about extraterrestial life, I think it'll be shocking. But at the same time, eye opening. I honestly don't know what motive the government(s) use to justify keeping all this secret.

Also apparently, there is some underwater criss-crossing runway thingies just 10 miles off the coast of that island south of western Cuba. That some people claim is a USO underwater base. And one of the "runways" line up directly with Guantanomo Bay, which is supposedly a hot-spot for USO sightings. Unfortunately, the Cuban government won't let anybody dive on the site when they say they are going to investigate the possibility of USOs. The UFO Hunters got permission from the US and Cuban government to dive there, but once they told the Cubans that they were going to investigate USOs, the Cuban gov pulled the plug on the deal.

Anyway...all very interesting stuff.

 

[Maurice]

Using UFO Hunters as a jumping off point for scientific discussion is like using Barney as a jumping off point for paleontology.

 

[Neopeius]

1. The jet engine, the V-1, and the V-2 were not 25 years ahead of their time. The Nazis, in general, were not ahead of their time. The British invented the jet engine. An American invented the liquid-fuel rocket.

No Nazi ever invented or came close to inventing the atomic bomb. Want to tell me aliens helped in the Manhattan Project?

2. No V-2 ever made it into space. The best a V-2 ever did was scrape the edge of space before coming back down.

 

[Delta1]

What if per say that we humans, homo sapiens are hybrids of not aliens and humans, but of aliens and cro-magnon man. Because think about it. There is quite a leap in facial structure from cro-magnon man and modern humans. I'm talking about the skull shape and nose-mouth area. From that ape-like snout to the more pronouced and separate nose and mouth as well know.

Cro-Magnons were homo sapiens. Maybe kind of ugly looking, but I wouldn't call that a snout.

 

[TIN_MAN]

What if per say that we humans, homo sapiens are hybrids of not aliens and humans, but of aliens and cro-magnon man. Because think about it. There is quite a leap in facial structure from cro-magnon man and modern humans. I'm talking about the skull shape and nose-mouth area. From that ape-like snout to the more pronouced and separate nose and mouth as well know.

Cro-Magnons were homo sapiens. Maybe kind of ugly looking, but I wouldn't call that a snout.

Are we sure we're not confusing Cro-Magnon w/ Neanderthal?

 

[Squiggy]

Neanderthals were a sub-species of homo sapiens too.

 

[Meredith]

I think the aquatic Ape Hypothesis has some merit to it, it may not all be true, but there seems to be some truth to it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquatic_ape

The insulation provided by fat is strongly analogous to the sub-cutaneous fat in aquatic birds and larger aquatic mammals. This correlation was first noticed by Alister Hardy in 1930, while reading Frederic Wood Jones' Man's Place among the Mammals, which included the question of why humans, unlike all other land mammals, had fat attached to their skin. Hardy realised that this trait sounded like the blubber of marine mammals, and began to suspect that humans had ancestors more aquatic than previously imagined.

In comparison with infant apes, human infants have a remarkable level of subcutaneous fat[6]. The fat appears in the thirtieth week of pregnancy and continues increasing for the first year after birth. As well as providing insulation for a baby while its mother is in water, the additional buoyancy has been noted as another benefit of fathttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subcutaneous_fat#cite_note-Morgan1997-4

In a lot of very specific ways we humans are a lot different than chimps, The loss of body hair for a layer of fat seems contradictory to a savanna existence, if we evolved to become hunters on the plains then why wouldn't have humans remained hairy like plains baboons?

The hooded nose is also a lot more effective in keeping water out of our respiratory system and also the fact that newborn babies have a "swim reflex" something baby chimps and bonobos lack.


Humans may not have been exclusively aquatic in their past, but they may have been semi-aquatic enough at some point so the traits developed in that state were what enabled their ancestors to settle around the world like the first world wide Hominid Homo Erectus.

 

[Maurice]

^^^All of this forgets that in order to be able to bear such large headed children at all, human females had to start delivering them in a physical state that's about half as developed as most other mammals, A human baby at about 8-9 months old is much more equivalent to a newborn of other mammal species. Since we're all effectively born "premies", and adapted to survive as such, comparing a human at birth to other mammals at birth isn't really an apt comparison.

 

[Delta1]

Neanderthals were a sub-species of homo sapiens too.

Depends on who you ask. I don't follow the research very closely, but I think most consider Neanderthal a species in its own right. Neanderthals were a little uglier than Cro-Magnons. Shorter, too, if memory serves, with stubbier legs that couldn't run very well and larynxes ill-suited for talking.

I wonder if they simply died out slowly, over time, or if our ancestors warred upon them and killed them. Would that constitute genocide? Are the moral issues surrounding the extinction of Neanderthals even worth considering?

 

[MIB]

Using UFO Hunters as a jumping off point for scientific discussion is like using Barney as a jumping off point for paleontology.

To be fair though, it wasn't the UFO Hunters as a whole that decided it was a hybrid of a hybrid. That conclusion was only reached by the crazy one with the fetish for aviator sunglasses. Everyone else felt it was the skull of someone afflicted with hydroencephalitis. A conclusion that I personally agree with.

 

[Shawnster]

Neanderthals were a sub-species of homo sapiens too.

Depends on who you ask. I don't follow the research very closely, but I think most consider Neanderthal a species in its own right. Neanderthals were a little uglier than Cro-Magnons. Shorter, too, if memory serves, with stubbier legs that couldn't run very well and larynxes ill-suited for talking.

When the only evidence we find are bones, how is it we can conclude how ugly (or beautiful) these people were?

 

[Anticitizen]

Neanderthals were a sub-species of homo sapiens too.

Depends on who you ask. I don't follow the research very closely, but I think most consider Neanderthal a species in its own right. Neanderthals were a little uglier than Cro-Magnons. Shorter, too, if memory serves, with stubbier legs that couldn't run very well and larynxes ill-suited for talking.

When the only evidence we find are bones, how is it we can conclude how ugly (or beautiful) these people were?

Click the link in Delta 1's post.

 

[Shawnster]

^ I did. DNA tells us that the neanderthal had red hair, pale skin and freckles. If that's all it takes for someone to conclude that a girl is ugly then they best stay away from Ireland.

When we see the illustrations how much is based on fact and how much is based on "artistic license?"

 

[Delta1]

And the skeletons tell us they were trollish little people. Also, I suspect they were not prone to bathe, generally susceptible to disfiguring infections, quickly "weathered" by the elements, frequently suffered from malnutrition, utterly lacked orthodontia, had only a primitive understanding of makeup, and were several seasons behind the latest haute couture. Beauty is a social construct, and there's not very many criteria in my society by which a stone age humanoid would likely be judged beautiful. The divergence from modern human features only makes Neanderthal less beautiful--unless you really go for the exotic.

 

[Neopeius]

Since a thread is worthless without pics, here's a reconstruction I made of a Neanderthal teenager assuming a First World upbringing.

Not all Neanderthals had red hair, btw.

 

[Venardhi]

I believe they've established that modern humans have no DNA that came from Neanderthals, so even if they did branch off of our same limb, they were too far off of it for us to have interbred to any extent that would leave any sort of genetic legacy after we wiped them out. It used to be theorized that the stocky builds, freckles and red hair common amongst northern europeans may have been inherited from cross-breeding, but recent discoveries show that they're completely different genes.

It is kind of sad in a way. Neanderthals were undoubtedly stronger than the men of their day and possibly even smarter, but likely didn't have the same tendency towards pack hunting, which meant when they encountered men they were almost always outnumbered.

 

[Meredith]

Since a thread is worthless without pics, here's a reconstruction I made of a Neanderthal teenager assuming a First World upbringing.

Not all Neanderthals had red hair, btw.

She looks fairly attractive, I have seen uglier Humans who are not Neanderthals.

If I had a time machine I would see if could bring forward some Neanderthals and see if they could be raised as normal humans and see if they could integrate into society if raised from a baby.