Did aliens or God create the human race?

[wa3zrm]

If you notice, the flag is of Martian origin!

[truthwolf1]

[sgreger1]

I want to believe that it's a UFO so badly but I must warn you that the group on the expedition are purposely saying inflamatory things to garner media atention and funding, and they are only in this for the money. The last press release they put out was equally rediculous claims with nothing to back it up (like no video of the equipment failing or anything). Be skeptical of this team.

I really hope they find something cool though, I really really hope they do because it looks awesome.

[truthwolf1]

Some are claiming that it could be a old Russian round battleship they used for target practice but I doubt that would take out equipment like that. Very interesting.

[wa3zrm]

'UFO' at the bottom of the Baltic Sea 'cuts off electrical equipment when divers get within 200m'

Object is raised about 10 to 13ft above seabed and curved at the sides like a mushroom.
Hole is surrounded by an strange rock formation that expedition team can not explain.
Stones are covered in something 'resembling soot' which has baffled experts.
Divers say phones and some cameras switch off when close to the object.
The divers exploring a 'UFO-shaped' object at the bottom of the Baltic Sea say their equipment stops working when they approach within 200m.
Professional diver Stefan Hogerborn, part of the Ocean X team which is exploring the anomaly, said some of the team's cameras and the team's satellite phone would refuse to work when directly above the object, and would only work once they had sailed away.
He is quoted as saying: 'Anything electric out there - and the satellite phone as well - stopped working when we were above the object.
'And then we got away about 200 meters and it turned on again, and when we got back over the object it didn’t work.'
Diver Peter Lindberg said: 'We have experienced things that I really couldn’t imagine and I have been the team's biggest skeptic regarding these different kind of theories.
'I was kind of prepared just to find a stone or cliff or outcrop or pile of mud but it was nothing like that, so for me it has been a missing experience I must say.'
Member Dennis Åsberg said: 'I am one hundred percent convinced and confident that we have found something that is very, very, very unique.
'Then if it is a meteorite or an asteroid, or a volcano, or a base from, say, a U-boat from the Cold War which has manufactured and placed there - or if it is a UFO... 'Well honestly it has to be something.'

(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...

[sgreger1]

Direct evidence that something did NOT occur. hummmm. yea ok.

Not sure why you're getting so upset bro, you were takking about aliens and the biblical flood and all that so I was just stating my two cents. No need to get upset, we're all just shooting the shit here.

And yes, there is direct evidence that a global flood did not occur. Evidence in the geological record mainly, which would have looked very different if a worldwide flood had occured. I don't see your point, do you not believe that one can disprove something by showing contradicting evidence of it? Like if I said "there was a worlldwide flood", is it not reasonable to point out that the sea distribution stops at a certain altitude, or that the genetic record shows no evidence of this happening, or that the archeological record shows no evidence of this happening, and that the geological record shows that no flood occured? I am just pointing it out, it is not rediculous to prove something didn't exist by using evidence. I don't see what your angle is here man.

You don't know enough of the overall Bible to make a judgment.

I disagree. I know more than enough to make a judgement. And I know I am not the first to hear the "stories" about the bible being plegearized. It doesn't change the fact that books from the bible (namely the old testament) come from long before the jews or the christians or anyone else, and have been changed over time. The christians for example changed most of their religion to base it around the pagans of the day in order to attract the pagans into christianity, this is why we celebrate things like haloween and christmas (pagan holidays that the church integrated into christianity).


As far as convincing others to blieve one thing or another, that's a futile attempt anyways. What's great about a thread like this is everyone bounces ideas and theories off each other and everyone contributes to the discussion, and everyone takes away from it what they will. If someone starts talking about the bible and it's stories as though they were true events, than I have to step in and say that I have evidence to the contrary. You do not have to change your belives, I am just posting it so all sides are heard.

If you want to know why I believe this or that way, read the Bible. It's all in there.

Right, I am just saying that it's kind of dangerous to base your world view on a holy book plagearized from earlier cultures and full of inacuracies and myths. But that is your choice.

Please go back to how Aliens from Stargate SG-1 created humans to mine gold for them to carry back to their mother planet to prevent global warming..... or something else you can prove.

None of those things are provable. They are in the same realm as ideas from the bible, the realm of fantasy.

[Fazer]

the ultimate answer, of life, the universe, and everything (which we all know is 42)

Number 42 - Now that was funny. I'd forgot about that one.

[CoderGuy]

This post has my vote, and i have nothing else to say ..... Apart from, i think religion started as a form of social control

I'm an atheist ...

Social control is definitely part of religion, but I think religion started (way way way back even before known religions) as a result of people's incessant quest for the ultimate answer, of life, the universe, and everything (which we all know is 42). Someone along the way becomes "enlightened" and starts providing answers that sound reasonable, and they start following that person, which causes them to create more answers (and then the social control begins).

I think that paradigm applies to all religions, past and present (with varying degrees of social control).

[Fazer]

No entity "created humans". All available evidence points to mankind being the result of a natural, evolutionary process. And no matter how many holy books you read or how many times you try to make telepathic contact with aliens from zeta reticuli, you will never find evidence to the contrary. Anybody who nevertheless believes in either of those nonsensical ideas is either incapable or unwilling to think these questions through on even the most basic level.

This post has my vote, and i have nothing else to say ..... Apart from, i think religion started as a form of social control

I'm an atheist ...

[Jan]

Our current time understanding of how universe works is probably 1% of our future understanding.... Therefore I do not have an opinion on this but when I look at all the barbarism, stupidity and self destructive nature of the human kind, I am not surprised that some probable alien life avoids contact with us. We guys are dangerous, VERY DANGEROUS!

[Mordred]

No entity "created humans". All available evidence points to mankind being the result of a natural, evolutionary process. And no matter how many holy books you read or how many times you try to make telepathic contact with aliens from zeta reticuli, you will never find evidence to the contrary. Anybody who nevertheless believes in either of those nonsensical ideas is either incapable or unwilling to think these questions through on even the most basic level.

@Snusomatic: I'm interested to know why you keep referring to yourself as a moron?

[SnusoMatic]

I was just saying that there is no evidence of a worldwide flood. The issue has been studied before and scientists from many disciplines (namely archeology) believe there is no evidence for a worldwide flood, and that furthermore it would be impossible anyways. If there were a flood, it would be clearly seen in the genetic record, the fossil record, the geological record etc, but none of those records show anything that points to a flood occuring at any point in history that would match the story of the bible.

You said:



So that's why I was assuming. Sorry if I misread.


And no most religions do not use the bible, but the stories in the
bible are all plagiarized from earlier versions of the same stories that orriginated in egypt, in sumeria etc. The whole story of genesis in fact came from waaaay before the jews, which came way before the christians etc. But the flood story is a common theme in many different religions, so I was just asking why you believe one particular "holy" book's account of it over any other holy book? Why do you assume these books contain any wisdom or that their stories should be believed, even when there is direct evidence that it did not occur?

Here's a pretty good FAQ on why the flood was impossible, and why we don't see any evidence of a great deluge in the geological record.[/QUOTE]

No thanks. I know how to use google and read. sheeee. you must think everyone is a moron.

i made a statement. i even said i know yall wont believe this. i mentioned the flood. for some reason that bothered you. I told a story from the Bible that 99% of church goers don't even know exists. the main part of my story was right inline with this threads topic. No one said a word to me about my story other than you and that was about how the flood never happened, yada yada. THE WORLD WIDE flood. Did you read that in my post? You assumed I said a lot of things. I asked you to tell me what stories you meant and you *tell* me how the Bible plagiarized all of history.

And no most religions do not use the bible, but the stories in the
bible are all plagiarized from earlier versions of the same stories that orriginated in egypt, in sumeria etc. The whole story of genesis in fact came from waaaay before the jews, which came way before the christians etc. But the flood story is a common theme in many different religions, so I was just asking why you believe one particular "holy" book's account of it over any other holy book? Why do you assume these books contain any wisdom or that their stories should be believed, even when there is direct evidence that it did not occur?

why do i *assume* (i think you assume you know what i think) these books contain wisdom? I never said i think the books you name contain wisdom. You assumed since YOU think the Bible plagiarized those stories that I assume they contain wisdom or should be believed when (you say) there is direct evidence that it did not occur? do you not see how crazy that sounds? Direct evidence that something did NOT occur. hummmm. yea ok. you assume that i assume..... you heard some person on TV say something and now you generalize the Bible says it. not only that but that you can prove that something never happened because you have hard evidence to prove it never happened. oh boy.

Do you think you are the only one who has heard all these stories that the Bible plagiarized everyone? Please, that is third grader stuff. You can set back and cherry pick excepts from the Bible and turn it into a comic strip and I could too. You don't know enough of the overall Bible to make a judgment. The Bible is not what you think it is. and no I was not put here to teach you either. that's why the Bible is in English.

I entered this thread to have some input because i knew something about the topic that I thought maybe others might not heard of. Not to insult what *you believe*. I spent roughly 40 years with your thinking and yes I know all the stories.

No one says you have to believe anything. I am not here to answer your questions nor am I here get you to see things my way. I don't know why you feel the need to try and get me to defend mine. I added a post to this thread that was on topic. I have nothing else to offer this thread. If you want to know why I believe this or that way, read the Bible. It's all in there. Please go back to how Aliens from Stargate SG-1 created humans to mine gold for them to carry back to their mother planet to prevent global warming..... or something else you can prove.

Bye bye

[sgreger1]

If you notice I never even asked anyone to believe what i said. If you want to believe there is no evidence of the flood that is your right. I am not here to get you believe anything. From what I read in this thread it seems like a lot of people put their "faith" in things that cannot be proven and haven't been.

You imply that I said that I do. What makes you assume that? most religions dont use the Bible. such as what stories?

I was just saying that there is no evidence of a worldwide flood. The issue has been studied before and scientists from many disciplines (namely archeology) believe there is no evidence for a worldwide flood, and that furthermore it would be impossible anyways. If there were a flood, it would be clearly seen in the genetic record, the fossil record, the geological record etc, but none of those records show anything that points to a flood occuring at any point in history that would match the story of the bible.

You imply that I said that I do. What makes you assume that?

You said:

Aliens did not create humans, God did. If Aliens had created humans they would never sent Jesus to live with the human morons. Aliens flood would have taken care of all humans for good. "Aliens" did live before and after the flood but they are called "sons of God".

So that's why I was assuming. Sorry if I misread.



And no most religions do not use the bible, but the stories in the bible are all plagiarized from earlier versions of the same stories that orriginated in egypt, in sumeria etc. The whole story of genesis in fact came from waaaay before the jews, which came way before the christians etc. But the flood story is a common theme in many different religions, so I was just asking why you believe one particular "holy" book's account of it over any other holy book? Why do you assume these books contain any wisdom or that their stories should be believed, even when there is direct evidence that it did not occur?

Here's a pretty good FAQ on why the flood was impossible, and why we don't see any evidence of a great deluge in the geological record.

[SnusoMatic]

Except that there is no evidence that a biblical flood ever occured. Question for your snusomatic, why do you believe this story over any of the other various bible stories in other religions?

If you notice I never even asked anyone to believe what i said. If you want to believe there is no evidence of the flood that is your right. I am not here to get you believe anything. From what I read in this thread it seems like a lot of people put their "faith" in things that cannot be proven and haven't been.

You imply that I said that I do. What makes you assume that? most religions dont use the Bible. such as what stories?

[sgreger1]

Like you ever do...

Ken

Guilty as charged lol. No actually I get a lot done but some of these threads make me stop to hit F5 every like 2 minutes. Love when they happen on a Fridays especially.