the disclosure project - ufos exist, no really!

[gjm]

personally I think it's hard to deny that there is some characteristic of sentience that is able to exert will powerfully enough to actually change physical make-up - the power of thought if you like

Very good point. Apart from physiological changes, instinctual behaviours and the ability to choose, exert will is another piece that needs to fit into the puzzle.

if you are at all interested in this kind of thing I strongly recommend a book called "A short history of nearly everything" by Bill Bryson - great writer and he basically set out to spend 3 years researching all the different schools of science and condense it and put it into language anyone can understand - that book was absolutely captivating and it almost led me to start thinking religious thoughts for the exact reasons mentioned in this thread - because the universe is just so awe inspiringly amazing

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Short_Hi ... Everything

http://www.amazon.com/Short-History-Nea ... 0767908171

Cool, I have seen this on the shelves at the local book store but simly dismissed it....can't remember why. I will look it up. Thanks.

[gjm]

I think you're overlooking the posibility of multiple modes being present in the same organism.

Educate me. What do you mean by modes...

[Abzurd]

Yea Meef. Total world genocide courtesy of Chaney & Bush by late October.

[Noel]

I think you're overlooking the posibility of multiple modes being present in the same organism.

Educate me. What do you mean by modes...

Just what I said on my post, e.g. just because a fish gains the ability to spend some time on land it doesn't mean it can't go back in the water any more. The first creatures to walk on land may only have been able to survive for a short time out of the water.

And there are primitive lifeforms that can reproduce by budding as well as by sexual reproduction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydra_(genus)#Reproduction

Evolution (if true) is a gradual process, gaining a new ability does not necessarily mean losing an old one.

[Emissary]

before makin gsuch bold statements, maybe first read a book about it.

did you know how many animals actually turn into a fossil after dying.

maybe look that up, and maybe you will better understand why these 'holes' in our understanding come from.

it's naive to state that because a link is missing to unravel the specific details about how one species evolved into another that people actually question the existence of this link.

i mean, why the fuck am i running at work days o computer time tocreate an evolutionary three on elegans (roundworms) when according to you evolution is bollocks. why then am i able to create such genetic three's in the first place. i did'nt make them up dude.

it's ok to ask questions. scientist ask questions all the time. it's stupid to make unfunded statements of your questions without actually lloking for a rational answer first.

i don't mean to be patronizing in any sort of way. but i realy start to feel offended by unfunded statements. especially because they are picked up by youngsters that take them for true. that's bad.

when your starting to feel offended it means you have basically been infected by a belief or religion. That people disagree with your belief system on how the world was created makes you angry, it means you are no different from a creationist.

The fact that their are these huge gaps in the fossil records and that all traces of a previous hi tech civilisation would have completely disappeared probably 1000 years after it was brought down can not be theorys that can be ruled out. Scientists need to start creating theorys that fit facts rather than what they have been doing lately, trying to wedge their findings into a pre thought out theory.

Your perception of what evolution is will be laughed at in probably less than 50 years. We are at the birth of discovery and you think we have all the answers, your no different from a priest with blind faith really.

[abort]

Anyone hear about planet-X http://www.universetoday.com/2008/05/25 ... -planet-x/

Some scary stuff going on.

[Emissary]

I think you're overlooking the posibility of multiple modes being present in the same organism.

Educate me. What do you mean by modes...

Just what I said on my post, e.g. just because a fish gains the ability to spend some time on land it doesn't mean it can't go back in the water any more. The first creatures to walk on land may only have been able to survive for a short time out of the water.

And there are primitive lifeforms that can reproduce by budding as well as by sexual reproduction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydra_(genus)#Reproduction

Evolution (if true) is a gradual process, gaining a new ability does not necessarily mean losing an old one.

there are not actually many facts to back this up though, hence its a theory. Scientists are always full of "mays" and "buts" how in any way is that different from a religious person or someone who believes in aliens?

the only possible way you can be considered a rounded scientist is if you consider all and every circumstance and aren't dragged into dogma, as scientists are slowly doing now

Evolution takes just as much a leap of faith as religion except is doesn't have reams and reams of human anecdotal evidence to back it up as religion does. One is based on small fractures of evidence and the other is based on the fallible human imagination.

All i can see in this thread is the only people with opened minds are those that believe in the atlantis theory as they don't even remotely disbelieve in the other two. They have a knowledge that exploring all theorys will eventually lead to a better understanding of themselves and where they came from

[Noel]

Educate me. What do you mean by modes...

Just what I said on my post, e.g. just because a fish gains the ability to spend some time on land it doesn't mean it can't go back in the water any more. The first creatures to walk on land may only have been able to survive for a short time out of the water.

And there are primitive lifeforms that can reproduce by budding as well as by sexual reproduction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydra_(genus)#Reproduction

Evolution (if true) is a gradual process, gaining a new ability does not necessarily mean losing an old one.

there are not actually many facts to back this up though, hence its a theory. Scientists are always full of "mays" and "buts" how in any way is that different from a religious person or someone who believes in aliens?

the only possible way you can be considered a rounded scientist is if you consider all and every circumstance and aren't dragged into dogma, as scientists are slowly doing now

Evolution takes just as much a leap of faith as religion except is doesn't have reams and reams of human anecdotal evidence to back it up as religion does. One is based on small fractures of evidence and the other is based on the fallible human imagination.

All i can see in this thread is the only people with opened minds are those that believe in the atlantis theory as they don't even remotely disbelieve in the other two. They have a knowledge that exploring all theorys will eventually lead to a better understanding of themselves and where they came from

I think you are putting words into my mouth there. I can't remember saying anything at all about God or Space Aliens in my post.

The thing about the Hydra IS a fact. And I mention it only as a counter argument to gjm's assertion that going from simple cell division to sexual reproduction has to be a step change rather than a gradual change.

Also my speculation about animals that can survive for a short time out of water was meant in answer gjm's speculation that the switch from land to water had to happen in a single generation. Clearly it's possible to see how it could take many generations for the total transition.

But evolution is not a belief system, it is a theory, just like any other scientific theory. It's not like a mathematical theorem that can be either proven or disproved (even in mathematics not everything that is true can be proven - see Godel's incompleteness theorem )http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del ... s_theorems

Life is full of uncertainties, the best we can do is go along with the balance of probabilities.

Do I believe in GOD (Christian or otherwise) ? No I don't - but I'm not ruling it out as a possibility, any more than you should rule out evolution as a possibility.

My own view is that although the spontaneous origin of life and subsequent evolution is highly improbable, it's a lot less improbable that the idea that the whole universe was created by some spiritual being.

There is far more to existence than meets the eye and some things may be forever unknowable.

On the whole I'm content to admit that I just don't know the answers, but that does not mean I'm not fascinated - or indeed awed - by the mystery of it all.

[Emissary]

Just what I said on my post, e.g. just because a fish gains the ability to spend some time on land it doesn't mean it can't go back in the water any more. The first creatures to walk on land may only have been able to survive for a short time out of the water.

And there are primitive lifeforms that can reproduce by budding as well as by sexual reproduction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydra_(genus)#Reproduction

Evolution (if true) is a gradual process, gaining a new ability does not necessarily mean losing an old one.

there are not actually many facts to back this up though, hence its a theory. Scientists are always full of "mays" and "buts" how in any way is that different from a religious person or someone who believes in aliens?

the only possible way you can be considered a rounded scientist is if you consider all and every circumstance and aren't dragged into dogma, as scientists are slowly doing now

Evolution takes just as much a leap of faith as religion except is doesn't have reams and reams of human anecdotal evidence to back it up as religion does. One is based on small fractures of evidence and the other is based on the fallible human imagination.

All i can see in this thread is the only people with opened minds are those that believe in the atlantis theory as they don't even remotely disbelieve in the other two. They have a knowledge that exploring all theorys will eventually lead to a better understanding of themselves and where they came from

I think you are putting words into my mouth there. I can't remember saying anything at all about God or Space Aliens in my post.

The thing about the Hydra IS a fact. And I mention it only as a counter argument to gjm's assertion that going from simple cell division to sexual reproduction has to be a step change rather than a gradual change.

Also my speculation about animals that can survive for a short time out of water was meant in answer gjm's speculation that the switch from land to water had to happen in a single generation. Clearly it's possible to see how it could take many generations for the total transition.

But evolution is not a belief system, it is a theory, just like any other scientific theory. It's not like a mathematical theorem that can be either proven or disproved (even in mathematics not everything that is true can be proven - see Godel's incompleteness theorem )http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del ... s_theorems

Life is full of uncertainties, the best we can do is go along with the balance of probabilities.

Do I believe in GOD (Christian or otherwise) ? No I don't - but I'm not ruling it out as a possibility, any more than you should rule out evolution as a possibility.

My own view is that although the spontaneous origin of life and subsequent evolution is highly improbable, it's a lot less improbable that the idea that the whole universe was created by some spiritual being.

There is far more to existence than meets the eye and some things may be forever unknowable.

On the whole I'm content to admit that I just don't know the answers, but that does not mean I'm not fascinated - or indeed awed - by the mystery of it all.

yeah sorry, i probably was putting stuff into your mouth (i like to do that) reading what you said, it looks like were on the same page just in different paragraphs.

[gjm]

All i can see in this thread is the only people with opened minds are those that believe in the atlantis theory as they don't even remotely disbelieve in the other two. They have a knowledge that exploring all theorys will eventually lead to a better understanding of themselves and where they came from

Don't be too quick to pigeon hole people based on their reply's in a thread like this. It's a fairly limiting medium (time wise) and lacks other communication subtleties. Also, not everyone leaves everything on the table in terms of their positions, or willingness to take on board newly presented information or perspectives. The process of being introduced to differences of opinion, mulling them over, sifting through the words and assumptions also take differing amounts of time depending on previous experience and practice. I for one am happy to have been a part of this thread as I have learned some new concepts that I have to find room for, regardless of how daft the initially sound.

I have a position that is hard fought after on my behalf. Its different than the position I had 2 years ago. I expect it to be different in the future. I will remind you that my original contributions to this thread was simply to say that Evolution, God and Aliens all require leaps of "faith" (identical thinking processes) and suggested that because they are all the same you can't reject the possibility of one while accepting another. I proposed an "all or nothing" position.

The common suggestions I have found to date all accept major (think fast not slow) environmental changes as the driving force behind rapid mutations and 'transitional forms' of species. There seems to be another line of thinking which Forge has highlighted that accommodates change over huge time periods. These polar positions within such a scientific pursuit happen to catch my interest. I have not seen them woven neatly together yet.

Quite frankly, one scientist with a small portion of a jaw bone claiming to have found all the evidence he needs to claim the missing link (see TD's youtube vid referral earlier) and therefore proclaim Evolution as triumphant, verses the collective spiritual experiences of ancient and modern humans, and the ever building body of knowledge and acceptance of possible ET existence is a bit out of balance (IMHO of course).

And then there is Atlantis.......

[Emissary]

All i can see in this thread is the only people with opened minds are those that believe in the atlantis theory as they don't even remotely disbelieve in the other two. They have a knowledge that exploring all theorys will eventually lead to a better understanding of themselves and where they came from

Don't be too quick to pigeon hole people based on their reply's in a thread like this. It's a fairly limiting medium (time wise) and lacks other communication subtleties. Also, not everyone leaves everything on the table in terms of their positions, or willingness to take on board newly presented information or perspectives. The process of being introduced to differences of opinion, mulling them over, sifting through the words and assumptions also take differing amounts of time depending on previous experience and practice. I for one am happy to have been a part of this thread as I have learned some new concepts that I have to find room for, regardless of how daft the initially sound.

I have a position that is hard fought after on my behalf. Its different than the position I had 2 years ago. I expect it to be different in the future. I will remind you that my original contributions to this thread was simply to say that Evolution, God and Aliens all require leaps of "faith" (identical thinking processes) and suggested that because they are all the same you can't reject the possibility of one while accepting another. I proposed an "all or nothing" position.

The common suggestions I have found to date all accept major (think fast not slow) environmental changes as the driving force behind rapid mutations and 'transitional forms' of species. There seems to be another line of thinking which Forge has highlighted that accommodates change over huge time periods. These polar positions within such a scientific pursuit happen to catch my interest. I have not seen them woven neatly together yet.

Quite frankly, one scientist with a small portion of a jaw bone claiming to have found all the evidence he needs to claim the missing link (see TD's youtube vid referral earlier) and therefore proclaim Evolution as triumphant, verses the collective spiritual experiences of ancient and modern humans, and the ever building body of knowledge and acceptance of possible ET existence is a bit out of balance (IMHO of course).

And then there is Atlantis.......

yeah your right, that didnt come out right, what i meant to say was seeing as the atlantis theory is probably the most far out of the theorys its probably only really followed by either the very opened minded or the very easily fooled. If i talked with somone who belived it 100% and became angry if i poked holes in it then i would probably wack them on the cheek and widdle in their mouths. absolute belief in anything at this point in history is a 1 way trip to freaksville. I'd like to apologise to anyone i may have offended in any of my posts. Like i said before, i have no credability, i try to believe everything and anything said to me or that i read to start with and then hack away at the inconsistencies in it to find the truth rather than build something up from nothing. Kind of like sculpting something from a log by hacking away the useless bits rather than sticking lots of bits of material together and staring at the freaky monster i just created.

[BoimB son of BoB]

before makin gsuch bold statements, maybe first read a book about it.

did you know how many animals actually turn into a fossil after dying.

maybe look that up, and maybe you will better understand why these 'holes' in our understanding come from.

it's naive to state that because a link is missing to unravel the specific details about how one species evolved into another that people actually question the existence of this link.

i mean, why the fuck am i running at work days o computer time tocreate an evolutionary three on elegans (roundworms) when according to you evolution is bollocks. why then am i able to create such genetic three's in the first place. i did'nt make them up dude.

it's ok to ask questions. scientist ask questions all the time. it's stupid to make unfunded statements of your questions without actually lloking for a rational answer first.

i don't mean to be patronizing in any sort of way. but i realy start to feel offended by unfunded statements. especially because they are picked up by youngsters that take them for true. that's bad.

when your starting to feel offended it means you have basically been infected by a belief or religion. That people disagree with your belief system on how the world was created makes you angry, it means you are no different from a creationist.

The fact that their are these huge gaps in the fossil records and that all traces of a previous hi tech civilisation would have completely disappeared probably 1000 years after it was brought down can not be theorys that can be ruled out. Scientists need to start creating theorys that fit facts rather than what they have been doing lately, trying to wedge their findings into a pre thought out theory.

Your perception of what evolution is will be laughed at in probably less than 50 years. We are at the birth of discovery and you think we have all the answers, your no different from a priest with blind faith really.

blablabla... are you actually saying anything? you speak about 'scientists' like they are a sort of subpopulation with some mental illness? besides, the existanse of a high tech civ blabla, is no argument against evolution. it would make things very intresting i give you that, scientists would LOVE something like that. of course some luneys would take wrong conclusions and fall to their knees to worship these GODS! go watch some more stargate, i can't disproove that either

[ThrowAway]

Don't be too quick to pigeon hole people based on their reply's in a thread like this. It's a fairly limiting medium (time wise) and lacks other communication subtleties. Also, not everyone leaves everything on the table in terms of their positions, or willingness to take on board newly presented information or perspectives. The process of being introduced to differences of opinion, mulling them over, sifting through the words and assumptions also take differing amounts of time depending on previous experience and practice. I for one am happy to have been a part of this thread as I have learned some new concepts that I have to find room for, regardless of how daft the initially sound.

I agree. +1

When the guy before einstein published his theory of atoms he was ostracized and ridiculed to the point of hanging him self. Two to three years later einstein enjoyed rock star status because he proved it, among other things.

[ThrowAway]

Totally unrelated to aliens god and bitterness, JOÃO MAGUEIJO’S BIG BANG THEORY is a pretty good show to get your quick science fix. A little too dumbed down in some parts for my liking but overall it was thought provoking.

[gjm]

^^Talking about Albert, as an aside, have you read this book http://www.amazon.co.uk/mc2-Biography-W ... 0330391658 ? I found it really neat, filling in some historical gaps and people.