GENIUS FORUMS

how much evidence would you need to be proven that someone that looks like a normal human is not

lets say they claim to have a faster healing ability they can think outside the normal realm of thinking they can also see things we cannot and when you ask them what they are they proclaim to be a last decendent of martians that there kind came here when humans where in very early development pre pyramids cant give a time frame cause 99% of there knowledge has been lost over time. besides a mapping of his/her dna what evidence would u need. and i mean u not the scientific community.

-_-

no one really

I'm too lazy to answer this question with a serious tone. This reminded me of the "Annunaki!" or however it's spelt, utter horse shit. I've heard someone speak about them asserting his DNA was merged with theirs thousands of years ago, someone who believes in evolution. God, existence really is pointless.

despite mental vagrant's abject objection to the question, i think it can lead us to a more basic, yet still interesting question: what is human?

i've never been one to base things on the scientific community, as it clouds the glass of water that is my mind. but, i obviously must base my answer off something society has provided to make my point capable of being understood and properly conveyed; i must use labels. attempting to avoid simplistic and platitudinous explanations of what is human, the quintessence of human is the mind--the conscience awareness of being human. if something claims to be human, it is in fact human. there are obvious loopholes, but there are loopholes in anything.

Gurrb wrote:despite mental vagrant's abject objection to the question, i think it can lead us to a more basic, yet still interesting question: what is human?

i've never been one to base things on the scientific community, as it clouds the glass of water that is my mind. but, i obviously must base my answer off something society has provided to make my point capable of being understood and properly conveyed; i must use labels. attempting to avoid simplistic and platitudinous explanations of what is human, the quintessence of human is the mind--the conscience awareness of being human. if something claims to be human, it is in fact human. there are obvious loopholes, but there are loopholes in anything.

I suspect if you had read the psychotic ravings of the people that promote these ideas as realities you'd also have a distaste. Abject, not so sure.

i'll admit, abject was a bit extreme. and i meant to use the term 'conscious awareness', but had in my mind 'the possession of a conscience'. as a result, a new term is coined, 'conscience awareness'. i suppose it can be appropriate in a certain sense...we are aware that we have a moral compass, that we are governed by a relatively dogmatic internal set of guidelines.

but then again, we cannot determine that a deer will not eat a rabbit because it will 'feel bad', but we are conditioned to believe that it is purely evolutionary.

Gurrb wrote:i'll admit, abject was a bit extreme. and i meant to use the term 'conscious awareness', but had in my mind 'the possession of a conscience'. as a result, a new term is coined, 'conscience awareness'. i suppose it can be appropriate in a certain sense...we are aware that we have a moral compass, that we are governed by a relatively dogmatic internal set of guidelines.

but then again, we cannot determine that a deer will not eat a rabbit because it will 'feel bad', but we are conditioned to believe that it is purely evolutionary.

'conscious awareness' - Awareness?

'conscience awareness' - Awareness?

'dogmatic' - Mabey, partially.

'conditioned' - Somewhat, depends on how creative you are.

Am i to understand you're postulating that my response was reactionary ~mindlessness~? Why are the sum reasons for a Rabbit to not eat a Deer, not part of Biological theories?

My advice is to stay far away, very far away, from anybody who claims to be descended from martians or espouses such ideas as you mentioned. It won't end well.

I concur.

I'd say the "alien" of any origin is symbolism, and the origin itself makes it compounded. For the most part, I doubt they realize they are talking in code. As such, their message is going to be nonsensical, even under the most careful cipher. still though, I will believe them if they give me a spaceship.

n2xn wrote:I'd say the "alien" of any origin is symbolism, and the origin itself makes it compounded. For the most part, I doubt they realize they are talking in code. As such, their message is going to be nonsensical, even under the most careful cipher. still though, I will believe them if they give me a spaceship.

The space ship would probably disappoint. Hubble spoils us.

how much evidence would you need to be proven that someone that looks like a normal human is not

It's the fact they look like a normal human that spoils it.

I'm not human.

Depends how you define 'normal human'.

How much evidence would you need to prove that YOU are not part Martian / Annunaki or whatever? Given that the theory of evolution is, strangely enough, a theory, where did that 2~5% difference in chimp/human DNA come from?

Are you sure you're who you think you are?

Just sayin' ;)

IanB ~

IanB wrote: where did that 2~5% difference in chimp/human DNA come from?

8 Percent of Human Genome Was Inserted By Virus, and May Cause Schizophrenia