In most schools, we learn about the theory of evolution. Many scientists have long since out that this theory explains the origin of man. They say that humans and apes have a common ancestor. Creationists take the Bible literally and know to report that man has 6000 years ago and that God has buried the dinosaurs to test our faith.
No serious arguments
The alien intervention theory
People are stupid
Pyramids, once people were able to build sustainable
Literature of antiquity
Flying Machines Worldwide
Fly in Bible and Apocrypha
150 million times spacecraft spotted
These arguments of creationists prevent any meaningful discussion, and are seen by many as nonsense. Is the scientific theory of evolution therefore necessarily true? That is not at all because there is another theory that explains the origin of man. This theory is also accepted by many scientists alone he has not been generally accepted as a theory. Therefore, you will read much about it in newspapers and the other media to television are not treated.
There have been numerous scientific studies done and read books by academics about the extraterrestrial solution to the missing link, the Alien Intervention theory. Incidentally, by hardcore evolutionary scientists such as Richard Dawkins denied that there would be a missing link in the evolution of man. This is certainly because the differences between humans and animals are huge. In addition, the animals which at the most people would seem, the primates, very different in behavior. They are 100% vegetable despite the fact that their teeth is most similar to that of humans. While evolutionary biologists claim that humans are naturally omnivores are what would be seen on the teeth. This evolutionary theorists contradict itself, and I have yet to meet a scientist who gives a good explanation for the fact that apes with the same kind of teeth when humans feed on a vegetable diet. According to many biologists, the theory of herbivores and carnivores should be revised. For why should man be an omnivore and a primate with the same teeth a vegetarian?
But vegetarianism of primates is not the only argument. What about the fact that scientific research has shown that apes transfer knowledge without ever having seen each other? Simians can namely ways to open fruits over to each other without them live close to each other or even though they live on islands. If discovered a monkey thing, this really is not directly on the ocean swimming to tell it to conspecifics. Here, a different mechanism must be at work.
An important argument against the theory of evolution is that man gets smarter as evolutionary biologists. Biologists say that man has become more intelligent by chance. That should be a natural overall survival attribute that applies to all present life. Monkeys and primates should therefore also be getting smarter and using more tools. There is no evidence of it. Incidentally, it is in any case difficult to prove that people are getting smarter.
Take for example the architecture of the pyramids. There are many theories about how that would be built. But today there is no method to rebuild them! The pyramids are not alone; there are thousands of buildings, artificial objects and monuments of antiquity which it is not possible to reproduce them! A familiar example is the plateau of Baalbek stones where tens of thousands of kilos with great precision have been constructed also in South America, the many pyramids were built on older platforms with stones that the Aztecs and the Mayans could transport impossible. Worldwide scattered buildings of 12 000 years appear to have been built by beings with higher intelligence than those of today. The fact that scientists close their eyes to here does not indicate intelligent behavior. In any case, these historical facts that ever smarter people or other intelligent beings must have walked around on earth.
You can not blame biologists perhaps they only seek biological arguments for the genesis theory of man. Scientists have knowledge of specialist areas. As a whole, you could say that science is conducted with blinders on. It only looks at the results of studies that are done on site. It is a consequence of the knowledge fragmentation caused by the introduction of a variety of defined areas of expertise. There are facets of the science pointing to a different genesis theory of man. The most important is archeology. Another important is the science literature. There is 12,000 years old Sumerian literature facts inns that we know only a few decades. As the Sumerians knew of the existence of Pluto, they also knew the color of Pluto, and it is the smallest planet in our solar system that is furthest away from the sun. They knew 5000 years ago that the sun was the center of the universe, and not claimed the earth as the Roman Catholic Church from 2000 years ago. There is no evidence that people are getting smarter because many facts that mankind has discovered are actually re-discovered in the last 100 years. So there is involution; the opposite is being done and no evolution!
Piri Reis map
hieroglyphs of flying machines?
It goes too far to treat all scientific arguments against the theory of evolution in one article. But a very interesting cartographic argument I would like to mention: the 600 year old map of the Turkish admiral Piri Reis.
On this map, including the outline of South America signed during the time the card was this continent was undiscovered by Europeans at that time. Quite strange is that the exact coastline of Antarctica is there, while we only know that 60 years Antarctic is a continent. Therefore, scientists thought that it was a large ice cap without land underneath. Only by satellite pictures from the 50s and 60s of the last century of Antarctic coastline could be seen. In short; This is another example of decline in knowledge of mankind. It would increase in intelligence testify as scientists recognized that the people were apparently used to be smarter than now.
Japanese detail of the moon
An argument happened historically is that all people share stories about the existence of flying machines. According to today's scientists that "myths". But is it scientifically justified to describe thousands of sources as myths? The Irish legend about gods who flew with the same name as the Aztecs had it. How can Irish and Aztecs tell the same stories? The only answer can be that this really happened. The Sanskrit books in India and Tibet are full of stories about flying machines ie vimanas. There's even written in how they should be built.
The Bible is a book that is a collection of other books, especially from Sumer. The scholar Zecharia Sitchin has clearly demonstrated that through deliberate mistranslations the contents of the Bible is maimed. God came down from heaven, the Bible says, but does so in an aircraft! Moses had contact with beings who flew in machines. There are many apocryphal books of stories about people who were invited by the gods to fly a little with it! The most famous apocryphal book on a flight is the book of Enoch. We also know that the Catholic Church wanted to keep people ignorant of the fact that the sun is the center of the solar system. But there are many more things that hides the church to the people. Why? Knowledge is power and the Roman Catholic church is more than 2000 years to the most powerful institutions on earth.
Finally I want to mention an argument in the present. There are scattered all over the planet earth 150 million people who have seen UFOs in the past 50 years and these are reported to the authorities. In general, these people crazy explained by scientists, just as the church people previously declared insane who said that the Earth is not the center of the universe. That should give us pause for many people. It may be not just that there are techniques to eliminate the force of gravity that is not shared with the whole mankind? The answer is yes, unfortunately that's entirely possible. I say unfortunately because the rule Knowledge = Power still holds true.
Those currently in power, the government does not share her complete knowledge with the public. This military and ecclesiastical institutions goes hand in hand. The only thing a man can do is develop themselves and think releasing the institutes want to control the mind. The only truth you have to accept the truth that discovers a man himself.