Aliens and Evolution

Kinkajou:. Some of the aliens in contacting us, have told the contactees that our history is not as we expected. They tell us that we are not the product of natural evolution. There was a suggestion that perhaps we are even evolved from pigs not chimpanzees – because we have more compatible blood types with pigs than with chimpanzees.

Goo: . Why look at blood types as the basis of assessing evolution. There are better ways to assess compatibility and evolution.

Erasmus: . True. DNA is the ultimate judge on closeness of biological relationships and evolution. Blood types are one small part of the overall DNA, so they are not a good basis on which to judge the progress of evolution. To me a comment such as above suggest a “human” level of understanding, which has its basis in the pre-DNA era of our technology.

Any statement by the aliens that they intend to change the evolution of the human race is ridiculous. Genetic changes in small parts of a population of millions to billions are unlikely to disseminate, unless they are truly unusual revolutionary changes. They will not propagate to the entire species. In short, the genetic improvements that the aliens tell us they are here to assist us with, will affect at best only a very small number of people in a population of 7 billion on this planet.

Genetics Laboratory

Kinkajou:. Yes I would agree. The comment of assisting evolution here today on this planet is ridiculous. How could any changes in the biology of a few affect the biology of billions?

Goo: . We did breach the topic previously that may be the evolution we are talking about is not biological evolution but sociological and technological evolution.
Erasmus: . True , but we have witnessed no actions arising from the aliens that would establish their presence to the human population in general and give them a platform for altering our sociological or technological evolution.

Kinkajou:. If you start with evolutionary changes many thousands of years ago of course, the answer could be different. The American Association of Physical Anthropologists in 1994 at the Annual Meeting concluded that we are likely to be descended from a single Eve 200,000 to 250,000 years ago based on mitochondrial DNA and a single Adam at approximately170,000 years ago based on patterns of “Y” chromosomal DNA structure.

A single change this far back in an evolutionary tree, would change the entire species. A revolutionary change say 250,000 years ago to the first Adam/Eve would define a new race (Cro-Magnon – Homo sapiens) and replace the old race – Neanderthal.

Dr Xxxxx: . Generally most of us regard that a time scale of 100,000 years for the emergence of a new animal species would be regarded as “sudden”. But, at the other extreme, the humble horseshoe crab has remained virtually unchanged for 200 million years.” The consensus is that the normal rate of evolution is somewhere in the middle.

Researchers from the University of California at Berkeley, declared that all women alive today must have had a common genetic ancestor who lived between 250-150,000 years ago. How did they arrive at this conclusion?

Hominids of Human Evolution

Erasmus: . This genetic dating has been made possible by the discovery of mitochondria – the tiny bodies within a cell that are responsible for production of energy through breakdown of sugars. Unlike our other DNA, which is scrambled by sexual recombination, mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is inherited virtually unchanged through the female line and is thus a perfect marker to trace ancestral relations. Moreover, it mutates at a predictable rate.

The number of differences between the mtDNA in a worldwide sample of 135 different women allowed researchers to compare how far back the ancestors of these women had diverged. In order to calibrate the divergences, the researchers used a comparison of mtDNA between man and chimpanzees, based on a separation 5 million years ago.

And that led to the conclusion that a common ancestor named “Mitochondrial Eve” must have lived 250-150,000 years ago. This genetic evidence has been challenged, due to its calibration with the chimpanzees, whose separation date from man is not known with certainty. However, Geneticists in repeating this experiment with improved methodology in 1992 based on human populations, found essentially identical results.

The revised date for the common mtDNA ancestor, with a 95 per cent degree of confidence, is now either 133,000 years or 137,000 years ago, using method 1 or method 2 respectively.

This new genetic evidence does not undermine the fossil evidence dating back to 190,000 years ago, but simply proves that surviving female variation dates to an ancestor who lived somewhat later.

This does not mean that Eve was the only woman on Earth at that time, just that she is the only one who has an unbroken line of female descendants.
The chances are that many earlier Eves have descendants alive today, but their ancestry has passed, at some point, through the male line only. Despite the new mtDNA dates, most studies still tend to support and cite the 200,000 Base Pair common ancestor. It is, after all, a date remarkably similar to the fossil evidence for the emergence of Homo sapiens.

 Kinkajou:. So tell us about the evolution of the early hominids.

Erasmus: . The early hominid Afarensis had a brain of approximately 500cc and Habilis/Australopithecus had a brain approximately 700cc. As we move forward in time to 1.5 million years ago, we find a sudden leap in the cranial capacity of Homo erectus to around 900-1000cc.

Chimpanzees
Finally, after surviving 1.2 to 1.3 million years without any apparent change, and having successfully spread out of Africa to China, Australasia and Europe, a significant revolutionary event occurred to an individual Homo erectus hominid, suddenly transforming one of these hominids into >  Homo sapiens, with an increase in cranial capacity from 950cc to 1450cc!

It is widely accepted that we are the descendants of Homo erectus
(who else was there to descend from?)

Kinkajou:. Many scientists suggests that the sudden emergence of Homo sapiens from Home erectus defies all known laws of evolution-in the Darwinian theory of evolution.
Dr Xxxxx: . I would beg to differ. I believe that mono-genic Darwinian evolution is not the process of evolution. It is more a process of fine-tuning species to their environment. Tell us more about human evolution, old dog.
Erasmus: . Darwinian evolution: I believe that there are problems with this theory.

Human evolution appears like an hourglass, with a narrowed clade population of Homo erectus with likely one single mutant, whose improved genes catapulted a new species into a new era of unprecedented progress. The transformation from ordinary Homo erectus to hyper successful Homo sapiens is sudden and rapid.

Darwinists have problems with the concept that our ancestor was a Clark Kent Super-Erectus that suddenly expanded his brain size by 50 per cent! But the problem here is concept of mono-genic evolution. I believe the progression of changes in single genes will not create or define a new super organism.

The fossil record suggests that mankind has evolved slowly with multiple “steps” in its evolution over the last several million years. It suggests that in general evolution progresses very slowly but with sudden changes redefining the entire population of Homo X.
Homo sapiens suddenly appeared around 200.000 years ago, with a 50 per cent increase in brain size, together with language capability and a modern anatomy.

The fact of the matter is that Homo sapiens fossils suddenly appear within the last 200,000 years, without any clear record of their origins. There is no line of gradual change. There is an event of sudden change. That is what science and research tells us. And this is not consistent with the theory of mono-genic Darwinian evolution.

Kinkajou:. Do you have an alternative theory?
Dr Xxxxx: . Yes. It is best explained by modeling evolution’s action in evolving a sponge cake to a fruitcake.
Darwinian evolution is essentially mono-genic.

A population of sponge cakes evolving into a population of fruitcakes by Darwinian evolution would develop substantial mutations within its gene pool.

There would be sponge cakes that have brown sugar, sponge cakes that have cherries, sponge cakes that sultanas, sponge cakes that have coloured flour et cetera. As these mutations increase, there would be increasing numbers of dual mutation sponge cakes – sponge cakes with 2 of the features and progressively more of the features of a fruitcake. Eventually as the advantages of the “recipe” genes continue to be felt, more and more the population would develop the recipe genes resulting in the development of a fruitcake.

This super being - the "fruitcake" would overcome and swamp out all the inferior models and then become dominant.

But is a fruitcake with 50% cherries really that inferior? Is a sponge cake with many of the features of a fruitcake, really that inferior?

Sponge Cake> Fruit Cake Evolution

I think this story of evolution is ridiculous. Evolutionary record shows a stepwise development of new variants of hominids over several million years. Australopithecus hominids are replaced by Homo erectus are replaced by Neanderthals are replaced by Homo sapiens with no intervening ramp of change. One type of hominid is here today. Another type hominid is here tomorrow.

Dr Xxxxx: . I have an alternate theory of evolution.
This type of evolution occurs by multi-gene transfers. One day you have a sponge cake. For some reason, one of these cakes inherits a whole list of extra instructions and ingredients, and tomorrow a fruitcake is born. This new species has substantial advantages over the old species, rapidly out-competing and driving its originator species to extinction.

Mutations are dealt with in the usual fashion. A truly advantageous mutation is rare. Most mutations disadvantage the bearer or are as often as not - lethal. So, in the population showing this type of evolution there are sponge cakes, and then one day there will be fruit cakes. And there is nothing in between – because these variants are disadvantageous or lethal. They die. There is almost no genetic detritus or intermediate lifeform on the ramp of evolution.

Evolutionary record bears out this theory of revolution, not the Darwinian theory of evolution.

Erasmus: . I believe that another example of this evolution involves human beings acquiring advanced personality genes. It is the widening spread of these genes into the native human population (which we believe to consist of high opioid brain genes, low noradrenaline brain genes, high serotonin brain genes and high histamine gene-based brain receptors), that gave humanity its flavour and character allowing it to develop the civilisation of Sumeria.

I would note that the Bible states that the Gods “ created man in their own image”. Thus it would be impossible to tell apart the skeletal remains of a God from that of a man. It is the DNA that makes the man and the creature. It is Advanced DNA which is instrumental in creating advanced civilisation.

The advanced genes from God and the angels are like to be advanced "personality genes". Genes that do not change the intelligence of the organism, but genes that fundamentally change the behaviour of the organism. Simple genes with vast effects on human behaviour and the development of human civilisation. Another change that appears to have developed suddenly – perhaps 7 to 12,000 years ago, approximately 5000 years before the development of the civilisation of Sumer.

Kinkajou:. So aliens who say they have been visiting for some time and have been responsible for genetically upgrading humans – on the face of things, are making quite spurious claims.

Erasmus: . The exception we have though is the mass introduction of advanced personality genes: namely slow histamine brain genes, fast noradrenaline brain genes, low opioid brain genes and fast brain serotonin genes approximately 13,000 years ago preceding the time of the deluge. Widespread introduction of this type of genetics would change the fundamental nature of humanity as a species.

Traeki > Jophur: a guided evolution

If you have ever read David Brin’s books in the Uplift series (David Brin is a science fiction author), – there is reference to one species genetically upgrading others. One particular example is the upgrade of a species of peaceful plant symbionts who live peacefully and cooperatively (the Traeki). With the provision of “commanding genes” they are transformed into one of the feared “power” races of the galaxy – the Jophur. A change in the personality genes completely changes the nature of a species from cooperative pacifist to commanding warrior. The new genes are commanding genes that take control of the multi-organism symbiont and "DO".

Our personality site introduces the concept of this change at enkcharms.com and at ennegenes.com.

I would propose something similar happened to the human population Once upon a time approximately 12,000 years ago, with the development of a deciding unoptomistic cooperative active species from the placid indecisive social natural human population.

Through the addition of “commanding genes, action genes, thinking genes and low optimism genes”.

Goo: . The birth of humanity as we know it. But the birth of variants of a species capable of creating a civilisation. The variants of the species were Not created by the action of aliens, but introduced to Earth in spite of the actions of the Aliens. The birth of variants of our species initiated by “God and the angels”. Genes that we have suggested came from human beings of extra-terrestrial origin.

The evidence suggests the human beings of extra – terrestrial origin are Homo sapiens human beings – not human beings of the Homo erectus clade. Perhaps the real God or the vagaries of natural evolution initiated the change from Homo erectus to Homo sapiens. But there is very little evidence that there was alien intervention in this process. The evidence for alien involvement since the addition of “commanding genes” to the natural human populations on planet Earth does exist. It appears likely that they opposed the changes our ancestors initiated, not supported them.

After all, why would anyone with any sense support the evolution of a potential competitor. And especially possibly a superior competitor.