|
|
Post by paleofreak on Feb 1, 2011 7:17:48 GMT
Hi it just dawned on me when i was looking up blood types that mans ancestor has to share a common ancestor with the Rhesus monkey Of course. No surprise here: we share common ancestors with every known species  |
|
|
|
Post by paleofreak on Feb 1, 2011 11:02:57 GMT
Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems you are thinking of a misterious kind of "blood" that came from some strange source. But It's just a genetic variant. We, and all living beings, have tons of genetic diversity that affects lots of characters. Most of them is poorly known. RH- type blood is caused by a mutation that arose thousand years ago and reached some frequency in certain populations (mostly Europe) by natural selection (perhaps some advantage against parasites) or by genetic drift. The highest percentages of RH- are in the Basque Country, in Spain. RH- people are not the 15% of the global population. Perhaps the 15% is correct if we look only at people with european origin. yes then what is the origin of RH- blood? What is the other 15% of the population that does not have Rhesus blood? |
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Feb 1, 2011 13:29:22 GMT
yes then what is the origin of RH- blood? What is the other 15% of the population that does not have Rhesus blood? It's just a protein that may or not be found in the cells in a bloodstream. Just like A/B/AB/O, there are dozens of blood protein variations. |
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Feb 1, 2011 22:00:54 GMT
I mean 15% of US UK i heard it was only 5% worldwide also i heard that this protein is also used to combat HIV can anyone verify this? What is so advantageous about having this when it creates anti bodies against your unborn child? Dont hybrids have the same sort of problem? Some of it is genetic drift--given 'isolated' populations like the UK (traditionally) some gene frequencies may go up. There may also be natural selection at work--some blood types or blood conditions (like partial sickle-cell anemia) confer some mitigation against diseases (malaria). So there is a good possibility that the Rh factor may indeed have some sort of selection going on; alternatively, it may not be selectively lethal enough to prevent reaching reproductive age and bearing offspring; yes, problems can arise with child-bearing, but it may be offset by something else (I won't say what, since I don't know). And in a funny twist, hybrids are often either very genetically weak, or enhanced by 'hybrid vigor', growing larger and stronger than normal (but are almost always sterile). |
|
|
|
Post by paleofreak on Feb 4, 2011 12:45:48 GMT
I didn't watch the documentary, but this "star child" thing is on the Internet since years. In my opinion it's pure B*LLS*T. They are just making money from a severely malformed hidrocephalus child's skull, using tons of pseudo-science. |
|
|
|
Post by paleofreak on Feb 4, 2011 18:55:02 GMT
Well why would they do that if they know its indeed a hidrocephalus is my question? a) They don't want to know an ordinary scientific explanation; they want to believe in alien hybrids and superpowers, which are a lot cooler than an abnormal child. b) They know, but they want money. Pseudoscience, alien hybrids and superpowers bring money. A poor abnormal child doesn't bring money. Because that's the only weird skull they owned? |
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Feb 4, 2011 19:32:04 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by paleofreak on Feb 4, 2011 20:47:12 GMT
Yes, of curse ;D Sorry for my bad spelling. |
|
|
|
Post by Megaraptor on Feb 4, 2011 21:38:24 GMT
He's Spanish. I think we can make an exception.
Seriously? Starchild? o_0 I thought it sounded a bit fishy, then I read the article and it is indeed a money-grabbing scheme *agrees with Paleofreak*
|
|
|
|
Post by fooman666 on Feb 5, 2011 6:54:55 GMT
Well they acknowledged they know what a hydrocephalus on their site is so why would they claim this one is different if it tested to be hydrocephalus? Because they want to make people believe its an alien skull SO THEY CAN MAKE MONEY!!, simple as that, we have already explained that  |
|
|
|
Post by paleofreak on Feb 5, 2011 9:51:16 GMT
So your saying they are being unethical? Anyway that was on history channels ancient aliens Nasty History channels, then. |
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Feb 5, 2011 11:05:40 GMT
So your saying they are being unethical? Anyway that was on history channels ancient aliens Don't trust the stuff you see on TV The history channel runs junk like "Monsterquest" as well. |
|
|
|
Post by DinoLord on Feb 5, 2011 14:03:57 GMT
And barely any of the stuff on History Channel is actual history. I mean come on, Ice Road Truckers?
|
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Feb 5, 2011 17:05:50 GMT
So your saying they are being unethical? Anyway that was on history channels ancient aliens Essentially, yes, they are lying, or have convinced themselves to the point that they don't realize that they are lying. But it all comes down to 'good T.V.' or book sales or what have you. |
|
|
|
Post by paleofreak on Feb 5, 2011 18:01:58 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by DinoLord on Feb 5, 2011 20:22:26 GMT
Cause otherwise they'd get less viewers; they're just cashing in on the craze started by the movie 2012.
|
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Feb 5, 2011 23:37:09 GMT
Trying to decide how to deal with the classification of independently-reproducing lab-based organisms? It's right in the abstract. Also--why exactly are these sorts of things being posted here? |
|
|
|
Post by Horridus on Feb 6, 2011 2:57:39 GMT
Because this is, as one might expect, a gathering of eccentrics.
|
|
|
|
Post by Megaraptor on Feb 6, 2011 6:44:03 GMT
So your saying they are being unethical? Anyway that was on history channels ancient aliens Pretty much, yes. |
|
|
|
Post by foxilized on Feb 11, 2011 0:19:50 GMT
The cone-heads of these skulls were related to meso-american corn gods. Mayans they used to modify the skulls of the noble babies using wood plates so they got that shape. So the rulers and high shamans had the head with a corn shape because the corn was the main food source of the population (they were a lot!) and their lifes depended on it. So they needed to be sure a concrete amount of corn was about to grow. If the shamans and rulers had a direct connection with the corn spirits, then they surely had power to assure a good harvest. Natural forces like rain were also crucial to assure a good harvest, reason why the "water shamans" became so powerful in the last years of the Mayan. In times of severe drought, many people suffered and died of hunger so they started to sacrifice a few chosen persons throwing them to the cenotes, where they died drown, as a gift to Chac (god of rain). The purpose was Chac to give them the rain back. Mayans identified water as the blood of Chac, reason why they gave him human blood by change. They were desperate. It's not like they enjoyed sacrificing people cause they were crazy psycho sadists like they love to depict them in movies today. I consider that depiction a huge lack of respect and also a pretty ignorant and arrogant view of these cultures. Of course they could have used human sacrifices to assure political power, and also they were violent warriors and practiced slavery to the others they subjugated. But that happened only in certain times and places and sadly today that has been taken as definitory of all these cultures as violence-based. It's like if an alien archeologist from the future researched on European history and defined us by Hitler and Nazi fascism. The point to all this is that we tend to look at these ancient cultures and remains from a very, very, very limited point of view and of course many many things look "alien" to us. So "alien" that sometimes one thinks they are actually, literally, alien. There have been a lot of TV programs and books and magazines in Spain from the 70's to today talking about the subject, of Aliens helping ancient precolumbian cultures to develop their knowledge and build the pyramids. I don't deny the existence of alien beings, indeed I pretty much believe they exist and all. But I consider a mistake trying to explain mysteries of humanity's past through aliens. It's like denying our amazing potential. So, how's that the precolumbian people couldn't build the pyramids by their own? Were they so retarded, or monkey-like or what? Of course they were able to build them by their own. Also were able to achieve a so amazing knowledge on astronomy and maths, without computers or high-tech. They had the brain, the instinct, and the open mind. And the peyote.  |
|
I think you mean hydrocephalus? 
