Humans are a hybrid with Chimpanzee Female mating with male Pig says Geneticist

[JeuneKoq]

I mean that, for a species to become the most dominant species on its planet(or group of solar systems for that matter) it has to have a highly competitive spirit. Look at our species for example:- sure, there are lots of people who are pacifistic and who love animals, but this isn't  remotely stopping the wholesale slaughter of wildlife and destruction of the environment, which is still continuing en-masse.

Once you surpass the competition, there is no need to use extreme violence anymore. The fact that we now have the luxury to care about and take care of other competitive animals, such as wolfs, lions, tigers, is because we understand that they do not represent a threat to us, at least not in the present days.
Therefore, we can assume that an alien specie that has come to explore our solar system will likely see us as non-threatening beings.

Maybe they are monitoring our mental and conscious development, and waiting for us to reach a point of higher consciousness before safely and officially coming into contact with us.

It is not constantly happening. The evidence for that is vague  and lacking in credibility, with alternative sufficient, perfectly logical explanations being given for all UFO sightings.

There are various explanations given for UFO abduction stories. One is fraud(eg:- crop circles), the other is sleep-paralysis, still others might be due to psychotic delusions, trance states, drugs, alcohol etc.

"...for all UFO sightings." Some experts disagree and say not all UFO sightings are explainable. Depends who you choose to believe, who's view fits best your already preconceived idea. Don't get me wrong, we're all guilty of this to various degrees, even if some try really hard not to be.

So you might think that all UFO sightings and alien encounters are imagined or faked, or believe that some people weren't all hallucinating and actually saw or met the E.T.s. You might be in denial of the evidence regarding the inconsistency of these people's accounts , or in denial of the existence of not perfectly rationally explainable experiences.

Right now it's more a matter of belief, and looking for reliable testimonials and evidence to back up one's own claim.

[TylerDurden]

Once you surpass the competition, there is no need to use extreme violence anymore. The fact that we now have the luxury to care about and take care of other competitive animals, such as wolfs, lions, tigers, is because we understand that they do not represent a threat to us, at least not in the present days.
Therefore, we can assume that an alien specie that has come to explore our solar system will likely see us as non-threatening beings.

Maybe they are monitoring our mental and conscious development, and waiting for us to reach a point of higher consciousness before safely and officially coming into contact with us.

This yet again a  clear example of human hubris. You actually think that a far more technologically-advanced civilisation would care empathetically about us. The point being that our behaviour is determined 80% genetically, and only 20% of our behaviour is determined by our environment. Therefore the aliens likely , just like us, will have their behaviour determined  almost wholly by their genetics which arose as a result of natural selection/survival of the fittest, and will therefore be hostile or at least competitive towards other sentient lifeforms elsewhere. Just like us, aliens will want to colonise other planets and so on...

The fact that a very few humans are able to domesticate some wild animals is wholly irrelevant. A few US states allow almost any wild animals to be domesticated, and most of those wild animals therein  are fed on wholly unnatural diets  and installed in tiny cages which lead to severe ill-health for those very wild animals, and most of the rest of the world forbids domestication of wild animals, anyway.

"...for all UFO sightings." Some experts disagree and say not all UFO sightings are explainable. Depends who you choose to believe, who's view fits best your already preconceived idea. Don't get me wrong, we're all guilty of this to various degrees, even if some try really hard not to be.

Unfortunately for you, there is a significant portion of UFO sightings which have been proven beyond doubt to be false(eg;- crop circles etc.), most of the remaining UFO sightings are easily explainable as being just atmospheric phenomena, with a tiny few being unexplainable. Those tiny remaining few sightings are only unexplainable because our technology is inadequate to explain them. In other words, further technological advance will lead to unravelling those few remaining UFO sightings, and give a sufficient non-alien interpretation thereof.

So, all in all, the evidence is against UFOs...

[JeuneKoq]

This yet again a  clear example of human hubris. You actually think that a far more technologically-advanced civilisation would care empathetically about us. The point being that our behaviour is determined 80% genetically, and only 20% of our behaviour is determined by our environment. Therefore the aliens likely , just like us, will have their behaviour determined  almost wholly by their genetics which arose as a result of natural selection/survival of the fittest, and will therefore be hostile or at least competitive towards other sentient lifeforms elsewhere. Just like us, aliens will want to colonise other planets and so on...

This is so hysterical. You accuse me of human hubris, while at the same time doing the same by giving Aliens a supposed aspiration to destroying threatening-yet nonthreatening civilizations, denying the possibility that they may be empathetical beings, curious beings, that either already have the sufficient resources to not have to invade our planet for our own, or don't want to disturb the native ecosystem by doing so, as all reasonable higher minds would do.
This isn't "Mars Attack"...*

The fact that a very few humans are able to domesticate some wild animals is wholly irrelevant. A few US states allow almost any wild animals to be domesticated, and most of those wild animals therein  are fed on wholly unnatural diets  and installed in tiny cages which lead to severe ill-health for those very wild animals, and most of the rest of the world forbids domestication of wild animals, anyway.

I'm not talking about domestication, I'm talking about natural reserves, where animals roam around almost totally freely (as long as they don't cross the fences etc... ) Maybe Aliens see life on earth that way. Not as pets, but as funny fishes in a big round aquarium. Or maybe they don't exist, or don't care about us humans. It's possible.

Unfortunately for you, there is a significant portion of UFO sightings which have been proven beyond doubt to be false(eg;- crop circles etc.), most of the remaining UFO sightings are easily explainable as being just atmospheric phenomena, with a tiny few being unexplainable. Those tiny remaining few sightings are only unexplainable because our technology is inadequate to explain them. In other words, further technological advance will lead to unravelling those few remaining UFO sightings, and give a sufficient non-alien interpretation thereof.

So, all in all, the evidence is against UFOs...

Well that's all just presumptions, theories. Their are no solid evidence for UFOs, or else they would be generally accepted, but there are some clear holes in some attempts at rational interpretation, which makes their existence quite possible.

It's like afterlife. Their are no solid evidence for it, but the number of amazing (improbable even) coincidence and likely sincere testimonials are such that it is something to consider.


*I can understand that you might believe in emotion-less, empathy-less, conscious-less beings that only live to conquer and propagate throughout space , but that theory is as credible as the other, and probably less so. At least we can assume they haven't come for us yet 

[TylerDurden]

This is so hysterical. You accuse me of human hubris, while at the same time doing the same by giving Aliens a supposed aspiration to destroying threatening-yet nonthreatening civilizations, denying the possibility that they may be empathetical beings, curious beings, that either already have the sufficient resources to not have to invade our planet for our own, or don't want to disturb the native ecosystem by doing so, as all reasonable higher minds would do.
This isn't "Mars Attack"...*

I simply pointed out the obvious, that even if they had sufficient resources, they would want even more such. I pointed out also, that no matter how alien they were, that they would be similiarly affected by the laws of survival/natural selection, just like we have been, even if they had access to sufficient resources.

I'm not talking about domestication, I'm talking about natural reserves, where animals roam around almost totally freely (as long as they don't cross the fences etc... )

Unfortunately, most such animals are kept in tiny cages and fed on unnatural, processed rubbish, so are very unhealthy.

*I can understand that you might believe in emotion-less, empathy-less, conscious-less beings that only live to conquer and propagate throughout space , but that theory is as credible as the other, and probably less so. At least we can assume they haven't come for us yet 

If they have enough competitive spirit in order to be able to travel the vast interstellar distances, then they would, for sure, wipe out any sentient lifeforms  on such planets, so that they could colonise them themselves.

[JeuneKoq]

Unfortunately, most such animals are kept in tiny cages and fed on unnatural, processed rubbish, so are very unhealthy.

What are you talking about? They're basically just roaming in their natural environment, just with a fence around it to protect us, and them for that matter. No humans are feeding them, they eat their natural native diet. Your probably confusing "natural reserve" with "zoo".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_reserve

[JeuneKoq]

I simply pointed out the obvious, that even if they had sufficient resources, they would want even more such. I pointed out also, that no matter how alien they were, that they would be similiarly affected by the laws of survival/natural selection, just like we have been, even if they had access to sufficient resources.

Yes, "have been"... Now paraplegics will be able to walk with exoskeletons, and drones will bring your groceries to your doorstep...

I disagree that beings with higher intellects and probably more balanced, perfected civilizations with better resource distribution would want to wipe out other beings in order to potentially extract their planet's resources. But that's just my point of view.

[Iguana]

Their are no solid evidence for UFOs, or else they would be generally accepted, but there are some clear holes in some attempts at rational interpretation, which makes their existence quite possible.

There is a huge amount of solid evidence, especially since UFO means Unidentified Flying Object! What the unexplainable ones are and where they come from, no one knows: it’s a total and puzzling mystery.

Tyler believes they can’t come from outer space for several assumptions and speculations he infers from Neolithic/modern nevrotic human behavior, way of thinking and current limited, fragmentary knowledge. But it’s not a matter of belief or unbelief — unbelief being a belief as well because a belief can be positive or negative.

The extraterrestrial hypothesis is nothing more than an hypothesis, but it’s the simplest, best facts fitting and most likely explanation that must not be excluded. Nevertheless, Tyler won’t accept the facts (nor even watch the amazing video you posted or read the science paper I linked, pretending he can't access it) because he knows better and he’s mind is definitively set, there’s no way he’ll ever question his own rigid negative belief.

For people understanding a bit of French:
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2f336r_dossier-paranormal-les-ovnis-et-le-pouvoir_tv#from=embediframe

[TylerDurden]

What are you talking about? They're basically just roaming in their natural environment, just with a fence around it to protect us, and them for that matter. No humans are feeding them, they eat their natural native diet. Your probably confusing "natural reserve" with "zoo".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_reserve

You were  initially mentioning tigers which are hardly naturally present in the US, where I thought you were from. I already know that many Americans have kept wild animals as pets, but they are usually held in squalid conditions. As far as nature reserves are concerned, actually these are coming more and more under threat. For example, Equador has now opened one big nature reserve for commercial exploitations re mining etc.  after  environmentalists did not come up with the 2 billion dollars that Equador had asked for. Now, the Chinese are about to pulverise another national park in Nicaragua to make way for a new canal. Elesewhere, wild animals are still being poached even if they are in national parks. So environmental destruction is still happening all the time.....

[Iguana]

So environmental destruction is still happening all the time.....

Yes, ever since we became able to make fire at will, and even more so when we switched from hunting-gathering to agriculture. 

[TylerDurden]

Yes, "have been"... Now paraplegics will be able to walk with exoskeletons, and drones will bring your groceries to your doorstep...

  Exoskeletons came about because of military research, hardly a peaceful endeavour, drones are being used to wipe out Islamic militants abraod, again not too peaceful....

I disagree that beings with higher intellects and probably more balanced, perfected civilizations with better resource distribution would want to wipe out other beings in order to potentially extract their planet's resources. But that's just my point of view.

I am, however, a realist.  I do not see aliens as being either wholly good or wholly bad. It simply makes sense that a more technologically-advanced civilisation will wipe out or at least greatly harm a less advanced civilisation after Contact, even if no war is declared. Look at what happened to indigenous types when people started colonising their territories. Even peaceful contact led to mass deaths through disease epidemics etc.

[TylerDurden]

There is a huge amount of solid evidence, especially since UFO means Unidentified Flying Object! What the unexplainable ones are and where they come from, no one knows: it’s a total and puzzling mystery.

However, there have been satisfactory explanations given for most UFO sightings. The very few that do not have a simple, non-extraterrestrial  explanation  are only unexplainable due to lack of enough evidence etc.

The extraterrestrial hypothesis is nothing more than an hypothesis, but it’s the simplest, best facts fitting and most likely explanation that must not be excluded. Nevertheless, Tyler won’t accept the facts (nor even watch the amazing video you posted or read the science paper I linked, pretending he can't access it) because he knows better and he’s mind is definitively set, there’s no way he’ll ever question his own rigid negative belief.

. No, the simplest explanation is that no aliens in Earth orbit have ever existed and that all UFO sightings can be attributed to complex weather phenomena, outright fraud and the like. The aliens explanation is , on the other hand, a very complex explanation indeed to  explain away minor things like bright lights in the sky.

Then there are all these weird, laughable  claims that so-called UFO abductees  routinely make. Such as that aliens always anally probe them or even sometimes have sex with their human captives. Logically, aliens able to travel from star to star would not need to insert metal objects anally into their human captives,  they would have access to  far superior technology that would allow intense scrutiny of a human body without any invasive techniques needing to be used. As for claims of sex, any star-crossing aliens would be so far advanced that the prospect of having sex with a human captive  would just not ever happen, as it would be seen as being bestiality.

I was not pretending, incidentally. I just got this message, among other text, when trying to open the link:-"ADS Access Denied

We are sorry to inform you that your access to the ADS services has been denied. If you are consistently receiving this message, even when trying to access our top-level page, then it means that our system detected suspicious network activity associated with your computer's IP address."



[/quote]

[Iguana]

  Exoskeletons came about because of military research, hardly a peaceful endeavour, drones are being used to wipe out Islamic militants abraod, again not too peaceful....

Because of the havoc and overpopulation caused by the use of fire, especially for cooking, and of the population explosion ignited at the Neolithic along with the aggressive, possessive and materialist behavior characteristic of agrarian civilizations.

Even peaceful contact led to mass deaths through disease epidemics etc.

That’s why an open contact is not desirable. As I already pointed out in previous dicussions with you on the same topic, a destructive society is unlikely to be able to get out of its native planet because it is prone to destroy its own environment and thus self-destroy before being able to develop interstellar travel.

[Iguana]

However, there have been satisfactory explanations given for most UFO sightings. The very few that do not have a simple, non-extraterrestrial  explanation  are only unexplainable due to lack of enough evidence etc.
. No, the simplest explanation is that no aliens in Earth orbit have ever existed and that all UFO sightings can be attributed to complex weather phenomena, outright fraud and the like. The aliens explanation is , on the other hand, a very complex explanation indeed to  explain away minor things like bright lights in the sky.

Obviously you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Then there are all these weird, laughable  claims that so-called UFO abductees  routinely make. Such as that aliens always anally probe them or even sometimes have sex with their human captives. Logically, aliens able to travel from star to star would not need to insert metal objects anally into their human captives,  they would have access to  far superior technology that would allow intense scrutiny of a human body without any invasive techniques needing to be used. As for claims of sex, any star-crossing aliens would be so far advanced that the prospect of having sex with a human captive  would just not ever happen, as it would be seen as being bestiality.

Yourself have just mentioned a few posts above that false memories can be implanted, even by our psychiatrists:

  Come to think of it, psychiatrists have managed to implant completely convincing but false memories of sexual abuse into their patients:-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_memory_syndrome
so it is possible for people to have false memories.

Back to your last post:

I was not pretending, incidentally. I just got this message, among other text, when trying to open the link:-"ADS Access Denied

We are sorry to inform you that your access to the ADS services has been denied. If you are consistently receiving this message, even when trying to access our top-level page, then it means that our system detected suspicious network activity associated with your computer's IP address."

Hmmmh, “suspicious network activity associated with your computer's IP address." ! 
Anyway, that paper is available elsewhere. I found its text here in one minute:
 https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.theosophy/SyrT-VhJF6k

[TylerDurden]

Obviously you don’t know what you’re talking about.

I  pointed out the obvious that your aliens explanation is a more complex explanation than the simple one that fraud and weather phenomena are more likely causes of UFO sightings. Unless you have solid evidence that aliens exist, your case is disproven.

Yourself have just mentioned a few posts above that false memories can be implanted, even by our psychiatrists

Precisely. If aliens did indeed want to examine humans, they would also by now have the technology to implant false memories. So why then do some humans claim to have witnessed all sorts of stuff on an alien spaceship, when it would be easy for any aliens to wipe out their memories so as to be unobserved. If they do want to be observed, then, logically, why have we not had first contact with the aliens by this time?

[TylerDurden]

That’s why an open contact is not desirable. As I already pointed out in previous dicussions with you on the same topic, a destructive society is unlikely to be able to get out of its native planet because it is prone to destroy its own environment and thus self-destroy before being able to develop interstellar travel.

Yes, I read that claim. The great filter theory is the best explanation for why aliens have never come to visit, though. Going into space requires a hefty competitive edge so that it is unlikely that a peaceful species would ever get the urge to cross interstellar distances. Our own space efforts were inspired by the Cold War and now space travel has been minimised in our current, more peaceful age. Colonists to the Americas, such as the puritans, only crossed those vast distances by sea in order to escape persecution, and so on.

[goodsamaritan]

Tyler... I would like you to formally stuff your ALIENs deflection in this hybridization is POSSIBLE debate.

As I already gave you the simple example of 12,000 years of HUMAN intelligence creating hybrids and making new species via Genetic Manipulation.

How much more of this current HUMAN intelligence will create hybrids and probably new species in the thousands of years more into the future?

And in the FUTURE then in hundreds of thousands of years or even into the tens of millions of years... there will be another TYLER (whether human or some other intelligent species) who will be an absolute DENIALIST  that there ever were hybrids or genetic manipulation in the past... that ONLY their current technology is the cutting edge... and everything else in the past was "primitive".

Tyler, your denial attitude is what is known as religiosity with ferver / absolutism / closed mindedness / zero imagination / everything to be known is already known... piss on it all... what is important is we are open to possibilities... and the mathematics of probabilities is not at all difficult to even imagine.

[Iguana]

I  pointed out the obvious that your aliens explanation is a more complex explanation than the simple one that fraud and weather phenomena are more likely causes of UFO sightings. Unless you have solid evidence that aliens exist, your case is disproven.

Fraud and weather phenomena can explain many UFO sightings, but not all. For example when there are physical traces on the ground or when the observers are well respected and highly competent airline or air force pilots, astronomers, police officers, strategic nuclear missiles sites staff, etc., their sighting being in many cases confirmed by radar observations and/or independent and distant other observers. These tentative explanations are totally ridiculous  in some very striking cases. Hynek himself was ridiculed by trying to explain a sighting by marsh gas.

If you are interested in this topic, even in view of obsessively wanting to debunk the extraterrestrial hypothesis, you should better inform yourself.

There’s a lot of solid evidence available, for example several Air Force and other very serious reports. Even the Condon Report, which was mandated to the University of Colorado with the mission to prove that UFOs’ sightings were hoaxes or could all be explained by natural phenomena, mentioned some cases that didn’t fit into those categories and could not be explained. The Socorro event, for example.

See, also for example, the striking French COMETA Report (in English here):
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_cometareport01.htm

Precisely. If aliens did indeed want to examine humans, they would also by now have the technology to implant false memories. So why then do some humans claim to have witnessed all sorts of stuff on an alien spaceship, when it would be easy for any aliens to wipe out their memories so as to be unobserved. If they do want to be observed, then, logically, why have we not had first contact with the aliens by this time?

Who knows? They may want to be observed in some blurry way to trigger our curiosity and to try to open our mind, but in the same time don’t want to be openly, officially and unmistakably recognized as aliens, which would be disastrous for our civilization. As you rightly pointed out, an open contact is potentially very destructive.

It looks probable that they erase the real memory of the contact or abduction event and implant false memories about it.

[JeuneKoq]

Iguana, thanks for the great documentary! A pity not everyone could understand.

It's amazing to see at what length people are ready to go to keep the truth out there. I mean the guy basically sacrificed his prestigious scientist career for the sake of keeping his right to talk about a very uncomfortable theme. He said it himself "I don't think I could've looked myself in the mirror again if I had accepted to put an end to my UFO work". It's also interesting to see all these politicians supporting the UFO theory, and also having their own experience with them. And the secrecy around it too...

[JeuneKoq]

Who knows? They may want to be observed in some blurry way to trigger our curiosity and to try to open our mind, but in the same time don’t want to be openly, officially and unmistakably recognized as aliens, which would be disastrous for our civilization. As you rightly pointed out, an open contact is potentially very destructive.

It looks probable that they erase the real memory of the contact or abduction event and implant false memories about it.

I have the same idea...

You were  initially mentioning tigers which are hardly naturally present in the US, where I thought you were from. I already know that many Americans have kept wild animals as pets, but they are usually held in squalid conditions. (...) So environmental destruction is still happening all the time.....

  Exoskeletons came about because of military research, hardly a peaceful endeavour, drones are being used to wipe out Islamic militants abraod, again not too peaceful.... 

Tyler, you have this amazing ability to take things completely out of context, and make discussions with you very difficult to pursue:

Did I ever say anything about lions and tigers in the US?! Where do you even get these claims from?!

If you hadn't noticed before, there's a little flag under my pseudo-name that looks kinda like the Belgian one. And I think I have made it quite clear several times in the past that I was not a native English speaker, therefore obviously not from the US...

The exoskeleton and drone statement was in opposition to your claim that humans where still in a purely survival/ law of the fittest scheme...nothing to do with army, or violence.

I am, however, a realist. 

*jumps out the window*

Yes-yes-yes, a "humans are totally fine naked in the arctic all winter"; "killing people that make sexy-time too much, and cannibalism is the way to stop overpopulation"; and "If a nuclear war could wipe out everyone except me, that'd be awesome" kind of realist. 

I do not see aliens as being either wholly good or wholly bad. It simply makes sense that a more technologically-advanced civilisation will wipe out or at least greatly harm a less advanced civilisation after Contact, even if no war is declared. Look at what happened to indigenous types when people started colonising their territories. Even peaceful contact led to mass deaths through disease epidemics etc.

It really doesn't make that much sense at all, but it seems to make some to you, so if that makes you happy...

Also If you only look at all the terrible things some humans did, and not the empathetical, caring, generous projects others have put in place (hospitals, non-profit organizations, natural reserves, peace protests, donations...), then of course you're going to believe that any intelligent beings' main intention is to kill and conquer.

Realistic also means being aware of both the bad and the good, and understanding that they can co-exist at variable degrees.

[TylerDurden]

*sigh*  I now found myself in a  sort of useless, pointless argument trying to argue that  2+2=4 while others are calling me closed-minded for not accepting the possibility that 2+2=7 or 3 or even 5.

First, GS and Iguana(to a lesser extent):- your ancient alien astronauts claims are absurd. They assume that ancient ruins such as walls or pyramids or whatever  could not have been made by the indigenous humans of the past and had to be created by aliens. I suspect that  the above members who subscribe to such theories have been watching too much science-fiction drivel such as the Stargate TV series, a series I mercifully avoided due to its Star-Trek-like sheer awfulness, and which featured notions of aliens having gotten the  Ancient Egyptian  pyramids built and similiar hogwash.

Basically, my point is that humans are not all that stupid and it is indeed easily likely  for humans to have created the pyramids, or drawn the Nazca Lines or built Stonehenge or the walls of Greater Zimbabwe or the ruins on Easter Island etc. No need for aliens to have built those monuments. Mind you, there have been previous attempts to mock history. There were H Rider Haggard's notions re Greater Zimbabwe, almost as bad as the current extraterrestrial myth-claims:-
http://www.badarchaeology.com/?page_id=1108 . Then there was the recent laughable "Black Athena" book, claiming that Ancient Greece was mostly influenced by Black Africa.


The Condon report, last I checked, made a fundamental conclusion that there was no possible genuine evidence to confirm the existence of extraterrestrials. Yes, there are  always incidents for which no explanation can be given due to lack of evidence and so on, but what do you expect? We humans have not fully managed to scientifically analyse. I duly checked your Socorro mention. Err, it seems  that there was only one eye-witness to the whole incident. Now, given that there have been many attempts by fakers to  generate false evidence to support UFO claims(re crop-circles etc.), having just one witness to the Socorro Incident  does rather invalidate the point, rather:-
http://www.ufocasebook.com/Zamora.html


The COMETA report is not credible. It apparently claims that Easter Island artifacts were of extra terrestrial origin.

Last point:- if aliens are so advanced that they are able to cross vast interstellar distances , why, oh why, would they be interested  in a puny, technologically backward civlisation such as ours? It makes no sense. It is the worst sort of hubris to assume that we humans are so important that highly advanced aliens would be interested in us. I mean, what on earth do we have to offer to such aliens? Nothing!

[TylerDurden]

If you hadn't noticed before, there's a little flag under my pseudo-name that looks kinda like the Belgian one. And I think I have made it quite clear several times in the past that I was not a native English speaker, therefore obviously not from the US...

Mea culpa, most RVAFers come from the US so I automatically assumed as such, not bothering to check your flag.

The exoskeleton and drone statement was in opposition to your claim that humans where still in a purely survival/ law of the fittest scheme...nothing to do with army, or violence.

The point I made was perfectly valid that exoskeletons and drones were only invented out of military concerns. The pacifistic uses of such weapons were explored much later, and  are merely incidental to their main purpose which was as weapons of war.

Yes-yes-yes, a "humans are totally fine naked in the arctic all winter"; "killing people that make sexy-time too much, and cannibalism is the way to stop overpopulation"; and "If a nuclear war could wipe out everyone except me, that'd be awesome" kind of realist. 

I  simply have not found other methods to control overpopulation to actually work as well as more drastic solutions.  The point re humans being fine naked in the arctic was also valid, I cited those indigenous tribes in Tierra del Fuego as an example of  naked adaptation to the cold, which was a rather good example, among others.

It really doesn't make that much sense at all, but it seems to make some to you, so if that makes you happy...

Also If you only look at all the terrible things some humans did, and not the empathetical, caring, generous projects others have put in place (hospitals, non-profit organizations, natural reserves, peace protests, donations...), then of course you're going to believe that any intelligent beings' main intention is to kill and conquer.

Realistic also means being aware of both the bad and the good, and understanding that they can co-exist at variable degrees.

It actually makes perfect sense, it is just that you failed to understand me. My point was simple:- even if a technologically-advanced civilisation were 100% pure and saintly, there are ways in which even the slightest contact between alien civilisations could be fatal to the more technologically-backward civilisation. For example, contact between european settlers and native tribes in the past brought mass epidemics, regardless of any pacifistic intentions or not. Your other examples where you cite natural reserves as being signs that humans are supposedly saving the environment are completely wrongheaded, as I showed in earlier posts, that many current  natural reserves are being  either laid waste or being  widely poached on, and so on. A civilisation can have lots of good intentions but still manage to wipe out entire species because of just a few hostile individuals.

[TylerDurden]

One last point:- these ancient astronaut theories and notions that we are descended from pigs and similiar nonsense are, if one thinks about it, extremely against palaeo doctrines re evolution. I mean, the whole thesis of palaeolithic diets is that we are 100% descended from primates, that we are 100% derived from this planet and so do not contain any extraterrestrial DNA, and so on.

[Iguana]

First, GS and Iguana(to a lesser extent):- your ancient alien astronauts claims are absurd. They assume that ancient ruins such as walls or pyramids or whatever  could not have been made by the indigenous humans of the past and had to be created by aliens. I suspect that  the above members who subscribe to such theories have been watching too much science-fiction drivel such as the Stargate TV series, a series I mercifully avoided due to its Star-Trek-like sheer awfulness, and which featured notions of aliens having gotten the  Ancient Egyptian  pyramids built and similiar hogwash.

I never stated that ancient astronauts built the pyramids and such. I think those construction are of human origin.
Concerning the COMETA report, I'm not sure it "claims that Easter Island artifacts were of extra terrestrial origin" and I won't take the time to check now. Maybe it considers that as a remote possibility, but anyway authors like these are certainly better informed and competent than you about UFO sightings :

COMETA members included:

            Air Force General Bruno Le Moine, weapons engineer

            General Pierre Bescond

            Chief of Police Denis Blancher

Those who contributed to the study included:

            Edmond Campagnac, former Technical Director of Air France

            Squadron Commander Michel Perrier

            Air Force General Joseph Domage



 

[Iguana]

Yes-yes-yes, a "humans are totally fine naked in the arctic all winter"; "killing people that make sexy-time too much, and cannibalism is the way to stop overpopulation"; and "If a nuclear war could wipe out everyone except me, that'd be awesome" kind of realist. 

+1 ROFL   

[Iguana]

One last point:- these ancient astronaut theories and notions that we are descended from pigs and similiar nonsense are, if one thinks about it, extremely against palaeo doctrines re evolution. I mean, the whole thesis of palaeolithic diets is that we are 100% descended from primates, that we are 100% derived from this planet and so do not contain any extraterrestrial DNA, and so on.

I totally agree with that point, as I wrote in a previous post.