Ther Human Story: topic suggestions

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Ther Human Story: topic suggestions

Unread postby tholden » Sun Nov 13, 2011 7:47 am

tholden
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:02 pm

Re: Ther Human Story: topic suggestions

Unread postby tholden » Sun Nov 13, 2011 10:18 am

Dave Talbott sees the Mars data as distractions: either as competing theories or as unrelated to the basic ideas of the Thunderbolts group about Mars.

I strongly disagree. The main thing if not the only thing creating the denial state at NASA wrt the last dozen years worth of Mars images is the fact that they believe the conformation of our system to be primordial, and thus cannot conceive of Mars ever having been habitable.

The Saturn theory of solves all of that. Both Al de Grazia's version and the Thunderbolts (Cochrane/Cardona) version of a Saturn thesis involve system-wide atmospheres which would allow bodies too small to hold atmospheres via gravity to be habitable.

Furthermore there is the following danger: Human feet are going to be on Mars and Phobos within many of our lifetimes. Given present circumstances, that would put the entire Thunderbolts movement on a page in the history of science books which Talbott and the others would probably not want to be on, that is, as the group which had claimed that all of the things which people were starting to take close up pictures of in 2025, were just a bunch of electrical scars.....
tholden
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:02 pm

Re: Ther Human Story: topic suggestions

Unread postby tholden » Sun Nov 13, 2011 10:20 am

The Hale Crater stuff, for anybody who missed it:

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=4382
tholden
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:02 pm

Re: Ther Human Story: topic suggestions

Unread postby tholden » Wed Nov 16, 2011 5:28 am

I've listed a dozen topics which would be at least interesting for any sort of a confab dealing with neo-catastrophism and "The Human Question":

http://bearfabrique.org/Misc/The_Human_Question.htm

Granted one or two of the topics are speculative and I thought I'd used enough "IF" statements and capitalized the 'I' and the 'F' that discerning the one or two speculative items would not be difficult, but I'd like to go over the list, item by item.

The first item deals with the question of whether it would be possible for modern man to have arisen from the hominids via any process resembling evolution. The answer is NO, and this one is not speculative.

We've heard all our lives that we share 98% or something like that of our DNA with chimpanzees. That turns out to not be the case:

http://www.usnews.com/science/articles/ ... irs-debate
http://www.icr.org/article/new-chromoso ... ndermines/

So, the human Y chromosome looks just as different from a chimp as the other human chromosomes do from a chicken....


Neanderthal DNA of course is known to be about halfway between ours and that of a chimpanzee, so that even science venues like PlosBiology have ruled out the Neanderthal as a plausible human ancestor:

http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info ... io.0020057

And the thing which these scientists should have quickly picked up on but refuse to is this:

All other hominids are MORE remote from modern man THAN the Neanderthal. In other words, if the gap is too wide for humans to be descended from Neanderthals, then the 500,000-year-back "last common ancestor(TM)" (between humans and Neanderthals) which we read about is fiction, there's certainly no way we could be descended from something MORE remote than something too remote to be descended from.

As my article notes, that leaves three possibilities as to how modern man came to this planet:

Modern man was created here from scratch, recently.
Modern man was brought here from elsewhere in the cosmos.
Modern man was genetically re-engineered from one of the hominids, most likely the Neanderthal.
tholden
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:02 pm

Re: Ther Human Story: topic suggestions

Unread postby katesisco » Wed Nov 16, 2011 9:48 am

i just don't see how we can get around the Second Law. That means what we had then, we won't have again.

My theory is that we are a much reduced form of a smarter us. NASA says Fluff has been around for 10 my. What Earth supported before Fluff we don't know. We don't even know how many planets were added. We don't know when the asteroid belt was created. We don't understand the Ort cloud. We have no idea of how the electric plasma operates. We have so many theories we are mentally suffocating in them.

We don't even know why we sleep. We didn't even know the thalamus was involved until the FFI (fatal famial insomnia) families were investigated.
katesisco
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2008 9:36 am

Re: Ther Human Story: topic suggestions

Unread postby nick c » Wed Nov 16, 2011 7:22 pm

The reason that consensus science cannot accept Neanderthal as the ancestor of Homo Sapiens is the underlying acceptance of the uniformitarian principle and its' corollary, slow Darwinian evolution. Since it has been shown that there is an overlap between modern man and Neanderthal, that is they existed at the same time, then the assumption of uniformism does not have enough time for Neanderthals to "evolve" into Homo Sapiens.
Catastrophism discards the uniformitarian assumption and therefore has no problem with Neanderthals giving birth, over an unspecified number of generations, to Homo Sapien children after a cosmic catastrophe.
Velikovsky laid the ground work for how this mechanism might work in Earth In Upheaval, the section "Cataclysmic Evolution." Though, this does not specifically cover human evolution, the same principles may still be applied.
I don't see any problem with entertaining the hypothesis that Neanderthal may have been a direct ancestor of Homo Sapiens, through the normal process (not in operation at the present time) of nature.
User avatar
nick c
Moderator
 
Posts: 2457
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: Ther Human Story: topic suggestions

Unread postby tholden » Wed Nov 16, 2011 8:41 pm

nick c wrote:The reason that consensus science cannot accept Neanderthal as the ancestor of Homo Sapiens is the underlying acceptance of the uniformitarian principle and its' corollary, slow Darwinian evolution. Since it has been shown that there is an overlap between modern man and Neanderthal, that is they existed at the same time, then the assumption of uniformism does not have enough time for Neanderthals to "evolve" into Homo Sapiens.
Catastrophism discards the uniformitarian assumption and therefore has no problem with Neanderthals giving birth, over an unspecified number of generations, to Homo Sapien children after a cosmic catastrophe.
Velikovsky laid the ground work for how this mechanism might work in Earth In Upheaval, the section "Cataclysmic Evolution." Though, this does not specifically cover human evolution, the same principles may still be applied.
I don't see any problem with entertaining the hypothesis that Neanderthal may have been a direct ancestor of Homo Sapiens, through the normal process (not in operation at the present time) of nature.



In my opinion, Velikovsky's notion of catastrophic evolution could account for much of what we term 'microevolution', but not for macroevolution, which is what the theory of evolution is about. One problem is that there has never been any shortage of catastrophes and to the people caught up in them, anything including a car crash or airplane crash would seem cosmic enough; hence you'd have to think that if getting a new KIND of animal out of a catastrophe were possible, we'd see it happening here and there.
tholden
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:02 pm

Re: Ther Human Story: topic suggestions

Unread postby tholden » Thu Nov 17, 2011 5:44 am

Item number 23 on my little list of topics:

http://bearfabrique.org/Misc/The_Human_Question.htm

was a brief mention of Elaine Morgan's "Aquatic Ape" thesis:

http://www.primitivism.com/aquatic-ape.htm

Morgan assumes evolution but as I note, nobody should need to believe in evolution to comprehend that she is almost certainly correct in claiming that humans originally lived in water. The case she makes is as airtight as you normally ever hope to see; we share a hundred or so characteristics with the aquatic mammals, and very little with other land animals. This one also is not conjecture.

The standard theory you read about australopithecenes coming down out of trees to live on the African savannas is basically idiotic. I mean, what's the most major difference between human infants and the young of all prey animals? That's right: the baby deer have the sense to keep quiet until they're old enough to run, full speed. What's gonna happen the first time a gang of 'proto-humans' starts walking around on the savannas and some human infant starts screaming his head off because something displeases him, with 500 and 1000 lb predators walking around all over the place? Can you say "Dinner Bell"??
tholden
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:02 pm

Re: Ther Human Story: topic suggestions

Unread postby tholden » Thu Nov 17, 2011 5:25 pm

The third item I mentioned as a possible topic for any sort of a neo-catastrophism confab dealing with "The Human Question" was the notion of "splash saltations" and this one was clearly speculation and should have been obious enough, being in the form of a question and not a statement.

But it isn't "wildly speculative". It's totally plausible and it could in fact answer one of the biggest questions which the fossil record itself presents, i.e. the fact that animal species appear as if out of the blue at certain boundaries, often as if, Velikovsky's words if memory serves, a curtain had gone down at a theater, and then gone up again to reveal an entirely different cast of characters.

The idea would be that another body in our system got too close to us as has been described in neo-catastrophism literature, and then groups of animals from the other body were swept into our atmosphere and into one of our shallow bodies of water (splash), and then simply swam ashore for the curtain rise.
tholden
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:02 pm

Re: Ther Human Story: topic suggestions

Unread postby Lloyd » Thu Nov 17, 2011 8:51 pm

* Thanks for thinking, Ted, and for sharing these theories.
* Mo mentioned arrival of species via the plasma column, I think, one time. Have you thought about how species might have been lifted off of another planet, what the maximum distance apart the planets could be before species would die enroute and the maximum time the species could survive enroute, and what maximum gravitational force Earth would have for species to splash-down safely? Under present gravity, are there any species that would survive a mile-high fall or more? I've heard of someone surviving a fall from a plane during WW2 by landing on a haystack. Under present gravity, falling more than a few meters onto water is fatal to many animals, because for an instant the water is like concrete.
Lloyd
 
Posts: 4382
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Ther Human Story: topic suggestions

Unread postby nick c » Thu Nov 17, 2011 8:59 pm

Ted,
I will answer your criticisms of the Velikovsky's hypothesis of cataclysmic evolution, and then you can continue to state your case for topic suggestions, without any further interruption from me.
tholden wrote:In my opinion, Velikovsky's notion of catastrophic evolution could account for much of what we term 'microevolution', but not for macroevolution, which is what the theory of evolution is about.
On the contrary, microevolution is governed by natural selection, it determines what survives and what becomes extinct but does not create new species. Catastrophic evolution is, imhop, the hypothesis that best fits the available facts for macroevolution. During a global cosmic catastrophe every member of a species (and all species to varying degrees) would be exposed to enormous doses of various mutagenic effects - cosmic rays, x rays, and other forms of radiation; also thermal, chemical, and a variety of other effects. There would be massive electrical discharges on a planetary scale.
It has been shown in laboratory experiments with flies (drosphilia) that exposure to similar types of radiation can produce similar mutations in different individuals of the same species. It is not hard to imagine an entire species giving birth to a generation composed of individuals with the same mutations after the parent generation was exposed to the massive doses of EM radiations, thermal, and chemical effects of a cosmic catastrophe. Natural selection, in it's microevolutionary role, would then determine which of the mutations were advantageous to survival in the new environment of the post apocalyptic world.

tholden wrote: One problem is that there has never been any shortage of catastrophes and to the people caught up in them, anything including a car crash or airplane crash would seem cosmic enough; hence you'd have to think that if getting a new KIND of animal out of a catastrophe were possible, we'd see it happening here and there.
That no one has observed a car crash or airplane crash creating a new species is not a valid reason to reject the hypothesis. We are talking about statistical probabilities. A global catastrophe would involve any number of catastrophic events exposing all members of a species. The effects would be felt in future generations as explained above.
But on that note, there may actually be an example of a new species (or at least a radical mutation of a known species) being created in a scaled down version of that type of event. As cited by Velikovsky in Earth In Upheaval p254:
If, as experiments with the vinegar fly demonstrated, a mutation of some gene can produce a wingless fly, many mutations simultaneously or in quick succession would be quite able to transform an animal or plant into a new species. In bomb craters of London new plants, not previously known on the British Isles, and possibly not known anywhere, were seen to sprout. "Rare plants, unknown to modern British botany, were discovered in bomb craters and ruins of London in 1943."
"Botany" Britannica Book of the Year, 1944, p117
The plants could not be identified by British botanists. The seeds could have been transported on the bombs, though that seems unlikely. No scientist claimed that the plants were a new species but rather that they were "unknown to modern British botany." This may have been an example of a new species being created in a scaled down catastrophic event, or maybe not.
Anyway, explosions, even nuclear bombs, that we experience in our own time are local events on a small scale and while they may be accompanied by mutagenic effects it is not likely to produce a new species. As food for thought, if several years after a nuclear bomb test there was discovered a new species of insect in the area, would it be likely that consensus science would claim that the nuclear explosion created the new species or would it be more likely that they would claim to have discovered a species which pre existed but was only unknown to science? After all, there are new species of plants, insects, and other life forms discovered all the time. The fact is that if Science had no previous knowledge of a species, it would be assumed that it was not "new" and that Science was simply unaware of its' existence before its' discovery. The point being that the implied assumption taints any such analysis and one would not expect to find such a declaration in the scientific literature.

If planet wide catastrophes occurred in the past then the mutagenic effects of intense doses of radiations, cosmic and x rays, thermal, and chemical bombardment could not have happened without a corresponding effect upon the biosphere. The fossil record supports this hypothesis.

Should a somatic chromosome be hit by a powerful charge, it might at worst cause disorganized growth and be the origin of a neoplasma; but if the genes of germ plasma should be the target of a collision with a cosmic ray or secondary radiation, a mutation of the progeny might ensue; and should many such hits occur, the origin of a new species, most probably incapable of individual or genetic life, but in some cases capable, could be expected. Thus, increased radioactivity coming from outside this planet or from the bowels of the earth could be the cause of the spontaneous origin of a new species. Should an interplanetary discharge take place between the earth and another celestial body, such as a planet, planetoid, a trail of meteorites, or a charged cloud of gases, with possibly billions of volts of potential difference and nuclear fission or fusion, the effect would be similar to that of an explosion of many hydrogen bombs with ensuing procreation of monstrosities and growth anomalies on a large scale.
What matters is that the principle that can cause the origin of species exists in nature.
Earth In Upheaval p256


There are ancient references to the appearance of new species after global catastrophes.
Ovid, in Metamorphoses wrote of the appearance of new life forms after a global flood:
The earth, of its own accord, brought forth other animals of different forms. Damp warmth brings all things to life. When, therefore the earth, covered with mud from the recent flood, grew warm again from the nourishing heat of the sky’s sunlight, she put forth countless kinds of living things. Some she brought back in their ancient forms, some she created in new and unfamiliar shapes.
User avatar
nick c
Moderator
 
Posts: 2457
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: Ther Human Story: topic suggestions

Unread postby tholden » Fri Nov 18, 2011 5:56 am

Lloyd wrote:* Thanks for thinking, Ted, and for sharing these theories.
* Mo mentioned arrival of species via the plasma column, I think, one time. Have you thought about how species might have been lifted off of another planet, what the maximum distance apart the planets could be before species would die enroute and the maximum time the species could survive enroute, and what maximum gravitational force Earth would have for species to splash-down safely? Under present gravity, are there any species that would survive a mile-high fall or more? I've heard of someone surviving a fall from a plane during WW2 by landing on a haystack. Under present gravity, falling more than a few meters onto water is fatal to many animals, because for an instant the water is like concrete.


Hadn't tried to put any real numbers on the idea...

Nonetheless I thought the idea might be appropriate to a confrence on "The Human Question" since it obviously applies to humans as well. As I have noted before on this forum, there is provably nothing on this planet which modern man could have evolved from and Gunnar Heinsohn puts the changeover from Neanderthals to modern man no further than about 4000 years ago.
tholden
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:02 pm

Re: Ther Human Story: topic suggestions

Unread postby tholden » Fri Nov 18, 2011 6:07 am

nick c wrote: During a global cosmic catastrophe every member of a species (and all species to varying degrees) would be exposed to enormous doses of various mutagenic effects - cosmic rays, x rays, and other forms of radiation; also thermal, chemical, and a variety of other effects. There would be massive electrical discharges on a planetary scale.
It has been shown in laboratory experiments with flies (drosphilia) that exposure to similar types of radiation can produce similar mutations in different individuals of the same species. It is not hard to imagine an entire species giving birth to a generation composed of individuals with the same mutations after the parent generation was exposed to the massive doses of EM radiations, thermal, and chemical effects of a cosmic catastrophe.


Nick,

One of the links I posted goes into that one; it is precisely the experiments with fruit flies in the first half of the past century which stops me from believing in macroevolution, Velikovsky's version or anybody else's.

Fruit flies breed new generations every other day so that running any sort of a decades-long experiment with fruit flies will involve more generations of them than there have ever been of anything even remotely resembling humans on our planet. Those flies were subjected to everything in the world known to cause mutations including every sort of effect which a cosmic catastrophe would ever produce, heat, cold, xrays, blast, electric shock, chemicals, you name it, and the mutants were recombined every possible way; all they ever got were sterile freaks, and fruit flies. Several prominent scientists publicly denounced evolution at that point in time including the famous case of Richard Goldschmidt.

The failure was due to the fact that our entire living world is driven by information and the only information there ever was in the picture was that for a fruit fly. When the DNA/RNA information scheme was discovered, even if the fruit fly thing had never happened, evolution should have been discarded on the spot. But GIVEN the fact of the fruit fly experiments, somebody HAD to have thought to himself "Hey, THAT'S THE REASON THE FRUIT FLY EXPERIMENTS FAILED!!!!!!"

The DNA/RNA system is an information code just like C#, Java, or C++. Any particular kind of animal is similar to a highly complex application such as an operating system like Windows or LINUX, written in one or more of those languages. Asking cosmic catastrophes to create such a thing either from pre-existing animals of other kinds or from scratch is asking for probabilistic miracles.
tholden
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:02 pm

Re: Ther Human Story: topic suggestions

Unread postby tholden » Fri Nov 18, 2011 6:13 am

The fourth topic I mentioned was Consciousness, and the findings of Julian Jaynes. Again, my version of an executive summary resides here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1aKXn9XHuEw

This is the beginning of understanding the most complex question involving humans on this planet, i.e. consciousness and as I've noted on Thunderbolts previously, everybody interested in pre-history should have copies of two books which are key, i.e. Worlds in Collision, and Origin of Consciousness. This one does not involve speculation, "wild" or otherwise.
tholden
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:02 pm

Re: Ther Human Story: topic suggestions

Unread postby tholden » Sat Nov 19, 2011 7:13 am

Again I have made up a list of a dozen topics which I feel would be appropriate for any sort of a conference dealing with a neo-catastrophism view towards recent prehistory and "the human question":

http://bearfabrique.org/Misc/The_Human_Question.htm

Item five was the question of pre-flood language/communication; the question is whether or not Julian Jaynes findings could be construed as indicating that human communication prior to the flood and the tower of Babel was TELEPATHIC, as opposed to our present spoken languages. I view the case for this interpretation as so strong that the idea does not amount to speculation.

http://www.bearfabrique.org/Catastrophism/babel.html

Normal thinking is that all modern humans are related to a "mitrochondrial Eve" i.e. descended from one woman, who lived back there a few hundred thousand years ago or thererabouts. That would demand that all human languages be related back to some original "proto-world" language and that the language families of today be recently descended from "super families" such as "Nostratic".

Here is the main problem.....

The IndoEuropean and Semitic groups could not plausibly have split up more than four or five thousand years ago; there is no meaningful racial difference between the two. Nonetheless, the languages are totally unrelated other than for a handful of words borrowed within historical times. Likewise the Baltic peoples, particularly Lithuanians, have lived directly between the Germanic and Slavic worlds forever and by all rights their language should be halfway between German and Russian. Nonetheless English is a lot closer to Russian than Lithuanian is. Lithuanian contains a couple of dozen things which might be called IndoEuropean roots; the remaining 99+ percent of Lithuanian looks like it came straight from Mars.

In other words, the evidence we actually have does not imply language evolution beyond a sort of a language MICRO-evolution such as you see between Russian and Ukranian or between our English and Chaucer's. The evidence we actually have is what we'd expect if human communication had been of some entirely different nature until some very recent point at which whatever that was totally broke down and stopped working on a single day, after which the kinds of languages we use now were devised in a big hurry out of dire necessity. GIVEN that thesis, the only thing needed to explain the otherwise mysterious IndoEuropean/Semitic divide is the fact that the two groups were separated by the Caucasus mountains during the critical period of one or two centuries during which their basic languages were being constructed.

All of that, of course, is basically the story you read about the tower of Babel in the OT. Combining the Bible story with Jaynes' findings and Al de Grazia's notes about electro-static phenomena leads to the following thesis: that before the flood and the tower of Babel, the static-electrical environment of the planet had enabled a form of telepathic communication amongst humans and almost certainly amongst other higher animals as well, and that the collapse of those ancient electrostatic fields resulted in the breakdown of that ancient communication system.
Last edited by tholden on Sat Nov 19, 2011 7:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
tholden
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:02 pm

Next

Return to New Insights and Mad Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron