HOMOSAPIENS: Man or Monkey?

Discussion on technology and how it could be used to assist spiritual development and NOT enslave us. This includes technology that will help us live in harmony with Nature (e.g.: "Lifter" technologies that could replace the petrol driven engine). Also, discussion of past and current scientific thought so that gems are not buried in the sands of time, and spiritual progress through science is achieved.

Moderator: Moderators

Homosapiens were:

Monkeys
6
38%
Humans
8
50%
Undefinable
2
13%
 
Total votes: 16

User avatar
Robanan
Posts: 949
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 3:27 pm
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Post: # 8242Post Robanan »

hmmm... I feel a little bit misunderstood. My purpose is to question the evidence, already claimed to be proof that monkeys can evolute into men.
Zio wrote:Well, if you are talking about the homo sapiens that lived in caves and had hair all over, then you're talking about... monkeys? Anyway, as said in TP, monkeys and humans had no connection, the two species living in differents ways. And it is also said that humanoid have 9 bodies, but animals only have 3 differents bodies, if my memory is not lacking ^^.

If everything does evolve into humans, or other very intelligent species, then there would be no more microscopic organisms (bacteria) that is necessary to life, right? If so, then how can Nature recreate those microscopic things to balance biodiversity?
Let me bring into your attention that I know what is said in TP. To make your quote even more correct, it was said in TP that cows have 3 bodies, in contrast to humans who have 9 bodies. The difference of the two spieces has been illustrated in the book in a pretty informative form.

As in my understanding, spieces can not evolve into eachother, i.e. bacteria can not evolve into humans. What the theory of evolution has observed as micro-evolution and by taking the macro-evolution concept which this very theory proposes, into careful consideration, we see that all this which has been observed can be explained in the context of TP, not surprisingly... it seems that such an explanation gives a much more realistic picture of nature.

If homosapiens were human men and women, then such a revelation would further disprove the claim that humans have evolved from monkeys. So simple.
shezmear wrote:Robanan the evidence I have seen of people trying to get monkeys to integrate with humans has been futile, we are a unique creatures, nothing in nature is quite like us, take a look at the way your mind works, your sense of beauty and humor, your inspirations... You look for evidence yet you are the evidence.... Smile
hehe... futile indeed. That's why the page has to turn over and more has to be added to the book of knowledge of man on earth. Can we write those new pages? of course we can; as you say all it takes is just looking inside and around yourself, to see and understand and then share your findings with others.
User avatar
shezmear
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 2:48 pm

Post: # 8247Post shezmear »

yes, I agree...:)
By their deeds shall you know them.
J.C
User avatar
Eon
Posts: 68
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 1:58 am
Location: Lithuania

Post: # 8900Post Eon »

I've posted link to transcript of "Reality Check by Alan Watt" on another thread already , but I feel that short excerpt of it belongs on this thread also. No, this guy is not a scientist, rather self-educated historian and social commentator , but so much of what he says makes perfect sense, that I just cannot ignore these words :


"
Charles Galton Darwin, the grandson of Charles Darwin said that "every civilization has really been a form of slavery for the people," and he was all for it. That was a NATURAL ORDER according to him and of course those who are trained in power and control of the people are trained in this technique since birth.


...........


The trick of Darwin was to make you think we just evolved in 200,000 BC and before that he even said 10,000 BC which is rubbish. This whole evolution thing is actually a Masonic doctrine. It's nothing to do with what we think it's meant to be. It's a Masonic doctrine. So Darwin just was pulled out of the hat by the Royal Society which was a Masonic scientific establishment chartered by the British Crown to exist and he basically gave the "Origin of the Species" et cetera to justify the right of certain types to rule and he wasn't talking about other animals or animals. He was talking about themselves over us. So evolution is a caste system. It's to verify a caste system to reinforce it and of course it's worked very well up until now.

...........................................


In the 1700s it really took off with all the different writers amongst the interbred elite like Charles Darwin. Charles Darwin's family only interbred with one other family for generations and that was the Wedgewood family, the famous pottery Wedgewood's of England and his grandfather married one. This father married one. Charles married one and then when his wife died he married his mother's sister another Wedgewood. So they're all Wedgewood's and Darwin's all mixed together you see until they bring some other outside blood to Galton's another sweet bunch who believed in population reduction and so they end up with or Charles did anyway had ten children from his first wife and even died in childbirth or two died in insane asylums very young. Too interbred you see. "


This is just an alternative point of view about Darwin family to keep in mind. :)

The obvious truth is, that science is becoming new religion , and establishment can make up any "theory" , make it sound "scientific" and have majority believing in it. So-called "experts" are like priests nowadays. :)
"I have as much authority as the Pope, I just don't have as many people who believe it." - George Carlin
Ptah
Posts: 59
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 2:39 pm
Location: australia
Contact:

Post: # 9343Post Ptah »

From my limited understanding of quantum mechanics in this zero point field there seems to be a blue print for every thing in this higher world so to speak.

I find it silly science argues that whole creation evolution argument on the physical level.
physics dr Friz popp's work showed a lot more interesting things, fields of energy that must exist outside this material world. {it also cost him his job, he opened up a tin of worms}
Cells 99% distroyed can be regenerated by a very good computer sound card, sending the cells own frequency. How can you argue natural selection when you see just what frequencys can do.

I can see why Dr Chalko was so interested in Michels little adventure.

Lets not forget atoms are just stable waves. The very act of looking at something is able to change just slightly the outcome. Consiousness is a very big part in all this. Our brains a mere lenses that enable us to peer into the material world.
User avatar
Robanan
Posts: 949
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 3:27 pm
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Re: HOMOSAPIENS: Man or Monkey?

Post: # 10292Post Robanan »

Looks like "undefinable" is the correct answer to the question, unless we find more evidence of the intellectual features of the homosapiens.
The essence of Consciousness, is the ability to Create, Process, Transmit and Receive Information Autonomously.
User avatar
Robanan
Posts: 949
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 3:27 pm
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Re: HOMOSAPIENS: Man or Monkey?

Post: # 11006Post Robanan »

I feel I should add Tom's latest Q&A topic from his forums to this topic, I do feel it's a lot relevant,
Taken from: http://bioresonant.com/cgi-bin/htmlos.c ... 4606780428

Creation or Evolution?

You commonly refer to the Great Intellect in your book. I`m curious whether subscribe to Intelligent Design or Evolution more? [James].

Anyone who confronts Creation (Intelligent Design) with Evolution gives evidence that he/she has no idea whatsoever about either.

Evolution is not any "theory". Evolution is an Observable Fact. The most important feature of the Evolution is that it occurs in Consciousness. Appearances and functionality arise as a result of conscious needs.

This Universe is a result of Evolution of Consciousness of Great Intellect - its Designer. The Big Bang has been specifically designed to facilitate and inspire the Evolution of Consciousness - of Great Intellect itself and everyone else in the Universe.

As you can see, when you expand the context of your considerations, there is no conflict between Evolution and Creation. In fact, creativity can only arise when Consciousness becomes sufficiently evolved... [Tom]
The essence of Consciousness, is the ability to Create, Process, Transmit and Receive Information Autonomously.
User avatar
Robanan
Posts: 949
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 3:27 pm
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Re: HOMOSAPIENS: Man or Monkey?

Post: # 11007Post Robanan »

So what is evolution according to Tom? I must confess I totally lost him there... ](*,)
The essence of Consciousness, is the ability to Create, Process, Transmit and Receive Information Autonomously.
Post Reply