Are we living in a simulation? | Page 3 | INFJ Forum

Are we living in a simulation?

Bas said:
Either way one looks at it, this world being created by intelligent-design means it had to be made by someone who didn't leave here.

@Belle4757 , it's interesting to note, the Patriarch Noah (as in 'Noah and the Ark') was, according to the Ethiopic Book of Enoch, born with very pale, fair skin, white hair, and eyes like fire. Noah's father freaked-out! Enoch said that God told him that Noah is an angel sent from the presence of God to the earth.
Click to expand...

Some have suggested that aliens are the 'missing link' in humanity's evolution i.e. how we managed to jump from monkey to intelligent human.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deleted member 16771
Belle4757 said:
Some have suggested that aliens are the 'missing link' in humanity's evolution i.e. how we managed to jump from monkey to intelligent human.
Click to expand...

We never came from monkeys. The world of science is mostly made-up stuff. The whole narrative that society tells is mostly made-up stuff, made-up histories,etc.

There are many reasons evolution is nonsense, but here is one of those reasons: If evolution were a true thing, there would be many species that are somewhere in their growth between monkey and mankind. There are not millions of in-between creatures. And for that matter, we don't see that anywhere else among the animal world either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kgal and Deleted member 16771
Bas said:
We never came from monkeys. The world of science is mostly made-up stuff. The whole narrative that society tells is mostly made-up stuff, made-up histories,etc.

There are many reasons evolution is nonsense, but here is one of those reasons: If evolution were a true thing, there would be many species that are somewhere in their growth between monkey and mankind. There are not millions of in-between creatures. And for that matter, we don't see that anywhere else among the animal world either.
Click to expand...

Ahhh, you're a creationist...got it. I like the idea of the creationists and the scientists working hand in hand but I accept that we still have a way to go to get to that place. In the meantime we will all just continue to argue with each other. Sigh! Oh well!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deleted member 16771
Belle4757 said:
Draconian: an adjective meaning great severity, that derives from Draco, an Athenian law scribe under whom small offences had heavy punishments (Draconian laws).
Draconian may also refer to: Draconian (band), a death/doom metal band from Sweden.
Click to expand...

Draconians are the reptilian aliens.
I'm just being funny with these references.

Belle4757 said:
nor am I a member of a death/doom metal band from Sweden. Sorry to disappoint.
Click to expand...

That is pretty disappointing. I'm a big fan of the Sweden death metal scene.

Belle4757 said:
Alas I am currently just a mere earthling mortal residing in a land down under. I am one of those people who happens to believe that there are non-human intelligent life forms in the universe though.
Click to expand...

They're out there
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deleted member 16771 and Belle4757
Bas said:
We never came from monkeys. The world of science is mostly made-up stuff. The whole narrative that society tells is mostly made-up stuff, made-up histories,etc.

There are many reasons evolution is nonsense, but here is one of those reasons: If evolution were a true thing, there would be many species that are somewhere in their growth between monkey and mankind. There are not millions of in-between creatures. And for that matter, we don't see that anywhere else among the animal world either.
Click to expand...
Lmao. Everything you just said is wrong, but I'm not 23 anymore so I don't care. Good luck!

And there were many species between 'monkey' and man; it's a well-documented evolutionary trajectory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MoonFlier, Cornerstone, Skarekrow and 3 others
  • Like
Reactions: Skarekrow and Deleted member 16771
Deleted member 16771 said:
Lmao. Everything you just said is wrong, but I'm not 23 anymore so I don't care. Good luck!

And there were many species between 'monkey' and man; it's a well-documented evolutionary trajectory.
Click to expand...
I'm talking about there are no species between monkey and man currently dwelling in society at the same moment. If evolution were a real thing, there would be cromagnon man walking around everywhere now, neanderthals too, etc. Additionally, we don't see any fish that have grown legs and started walking on land, there should be millions of them if evolution were true. There should be millions or more of various species in the various stages of evolution right now. But there are not.



Additionally, every speck of consciousness is already it's own species of whatever it IS. A cat will always be a cat, because consciousness doesn't change. Self-awareness in intelligent beings can grow or regress, but consciousness itself, remains the same. A frog is always a frog. A Horse is always a horse. A man or woman is always a man or woman. Changes may occur within a species, but no species changes entirely from one species to another--consciousness doesn't work that way. Consciousness just IS. In-order for man to exist, the consciousness for man must already exist--as one cannot make something or someone from nothing. The consciousness of man has always been man. The consciousness of a cow has always been a cow. Again, changes within species can occur and do occur, but not species changes into another species altogether. Nature always does the bear minimum necessary for something to function, and so a fish will never need to grow legs. No need. A nature would never do that. Man attempting to cross species will happen, but it doesn't work. And those monsters can't reproduce either. It's like in the world of mankind, two males together can't make a baby, two females together can't either. It is not in a fishes' DNA to have legs, it doesn't just get "leg" DNA all of a sudden. There is no need in nature for fish to have legs. A housefly will never develop the DNA to become an eagle. You can introduce foreign DNA, but it won't reproduce. And if it in it's mutated-state did reproduce, it will still be a housefly, and not an eagle. The consciousnesses of houseflies and eagles are too different, their species aren't compatible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kgal
Bas said:
I'm talking about there are no species between monkey and man currently dwelling in society at the same moment. If evolution were a real thing, there would be cromagnon man walking around everywhere now, neanderthals too, etc. Additionally, we don't see any fish that have grown legs and started walking on land, there should be millions of them if evolution were true. There should be millions or more of various species in the various stages of evolution right now. But there are not.


Additionally, every speck of consciousness is already it's own species of whatever it IS. A cat will always be a cat, because consciousness doesn't change. Self-awareness in intelligent beings can grow or regress, but consciousness itself, remains the same. A frog is always a frog. A Horse is always a horse. A man or woman is always a man or woman. Changes may occur within a species, but no species changes entirely from one species to another--consciousness doesn't work that way. Consciousness just IS. In-order for man to exist, the consciousness for man must already exist--as one cannot make something or someone from nothing. The consciousness of man has always been man. The consciousness of a cow has always been a cow. Again, changes within species can occur and do occur, but not species changes into another species altogether. Nature always does the bear minimum necessary for something to function, and so a fish will never need to grow legs. No need. A nature would never do that. Man attempting to cross species will happen, but it doesn't work. And those monsters can't reproduce either. It's like in the world of mankind, two males together can't make a baby, two females together can't either.
It is not in a fishes' DNA to have legs, it doesn't just get "leg" DNA all of a sudden. There is no need in nature for fish to have legs. A housefly will never develop the DNA to become an eagle. You can introduce foreign DNA, but it won't reproduce. And if it in it's mutated-state did reproduce, it will still be a housefly, and not an eagle. The consciousnesses of houseflies and eagles are too different, their species aren't compatible.
Click to expand...
giphy.gif


Fins and legs have different purposes, they have evolved in different directions since they diverged from the proto-fin/arm
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skarekrow, ThomasJ79 and Deleted member 16771
Bas said:
I'm talking about there are no species between monkey and man currently dwelling in society at the same moment. If evolution were a real thing, there would be cromagnon man walking around everywhere now, neanderthals too, etc. Additionally, we don't see any fish that have grown legs and started walking on land, there should be millions of them if evolution were true. There should be millions or more of various species in the various stages of evolution right now. But there are not.



Additionally, every speck of consciousness is already it's own species of whatever it IS. A cat will always be a cat, because consciousness doesn't change. Self-awareness in intelligent beings can grow or regress, but consciousness itself, remains the same. A frog is always a frog. A Horse is always a horse. A man or woman is always a man or woman. Changes may occur within a species, but no species changes entirely from one species to another--consciousness doesn't work that way. Consciousness just IS. In-order for man to exist, the consciousness for man must already exist--as one cannot make something or someone from nothing. The consciousness of man has always been man. The consciousness of a cow has always been a cow. Again, changes within species can occur and do occur, but not species changes into another species altogether. Nature always does the bear minimum necessary for something to function, and so a fish will never need to grow legs. No need. A nature would never do that. Man attempting to cross species will happen, but it doesn't work. And those monsters can't reproduce either. It's like in the world of mankind, two males together can't make a baby, two females together can't either. It is not in a fishes' DNA to have legs, it doesn't just get "leg" DNA all of a sudden. There is no need in nature for fish to have legs. A housefly will never develop the DNA to become an eagle. You can introduce foreign DNA, but it won't reproduce. And if it in it's mutated-state did reproduce, it will still be a housefly, and not an eagle. The consciousnesses of houseflies and eagles are too different, their species aren't compatible.
Click to expand...

If you look in the animal kingdom, multiple species rarely occupy the same "niche".
This is the real crux as to why there are not more animals that have evolved to our
level. We prevented it. Or are ancestors did.

Humans have been interfering with the evolution of animals for a long ass time. We
even do it today trying to save endangered species.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skarekrow, Professor Snep, Daustus and 2 others
Bird said:
If you look in the animal kingdom, multiple species rarely occupy the same "niche".
This is the real crux as to why there are not more animals that have evolved to our
level. We prevented it. Or are ancestors did.

Humans have been interfering with the evolution of animals for a long ass time. We
even do it today trying to save endangered species.
Click to expand...

"Nature always finds a way"--Dr. Ian Malcolm (Jurassic Park)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kgal and Deleted member 16771
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back