- Joined
- Aug 25, 2020
- Messages
- 2,005
- Reaction score
- 8,103
I think the people doing darkfield microscopy aren't interested in providing evidence, they are usually content with their own observations. Haven't really seen data on this, unfortunately.
SH Archive Human Origins: Are We Hybrids?
- Thread starter plamski
- Start date
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2020
- Messages
- 1,140
- Reaction score
- 2,171
I like the idea that hybridisation determines the world - you make an interesting case. I'll add it to the list of plausible hypothesis I have running in my mind, to explain wtf is going on around here.
However, there are some problems with it, in addition to the fact that I do not think that pigs and monkeys could mate. (PS, you could have just said 'yeah - back in the day, they had genetic engineering, and that's how humans came about' but I'm sure you realise that.)
Yes, there is a correlation between the environment, growing populations and getting weaker. But you are quick about accepting it in the way you set out!
What if there are a nefarious elite in control of the mechanisms of society, and that they are intentionally removing nutrients from food, and introducing stuff to the food chain that weaken us? Eg with the coronavirus we are experiencing right now, it could be in part, about TPTB to gain the right to introduce vaccines into us. This is to say, the environment, growing populations etc have nothing to do with people getting more ill over time (if that is even true) - its TPTB that do this. This seems way more plausible to me!
You better do away with yourself then! Go on, I'm waiting.
Actually don't, but I don't like people trying to guilt me - its crass emotional manipulation. I don't accept the idea that we should feel a guilt on behalf of whatever our forefathers may (or may not) have done. This is straight out of the green agenda emotional manipulation playbook and I don't buy it at all. Put simply - you should feel bad if you personally did something wrong and you should try to make amends. You shouldn't feel bad for simply existing.
What if the idea of nutrients itself is a hoax? The idea that you need a balanced diet, minerals, etc - perhaps all this is just a way of creating a new market? I mean, look at Pandas - they eat bamboo, cows - grass, lions - meat. Those creatures don't have a 'balanced' diet, but they do ok, no? Perhaps its about projection of belief - if you believe the food you eat is good - it is! Maybe that's all there is to it. Maybe its hard to gather up much belief in the food we eat, knowing that the system we find ourselves in is not about the best produce, but about produce that is cheap yet looks good enough.
Overall, I think there is some mileage to this idea, but there are better ways to put this argument. It remains plausible, but not a high possibility to me.
From my understanding, all mammal species can mate across other mammals as birds can mate with any other species of birds. The question is whether their off-spring can. We have many accounts of bovine-humans recorded in history, most famous being the Minotaur. Hybrids in general are a common theme in many historical tales.
Here some unusual hybrids:
Deer-Pig (Babirusa)
Cat-rabbit (Cabbits)
Now I understand why the movie Children of Men put a pig where WW2 blimps used to be. There used to be men in those blimps, men watching for bombers and rockets. The substitution of a pig was a (now) obvious swipe at Churchill's self-loathing remark.
I'm pretty sure that we used to be giants because there are records of giant bones being found all over the world. I'm also pretty sure that was around the time of the dinosaurs when everything was big, because the moon wasn't here, slowing down Earth's rotation. The faster rotation would have allowed capillary action and organic structures to reach greater heights, and there was perhaps less gravity before the moon, too.
I know what contemporary theories say, but the only way for me to make sense of our lost history is to look at the sky and imagine what Earth was like before the moon.
The guy proposing is a geneticist specializing in hybridization with a doctorate degree, what evidence and or credentials do you have to support your statement?
Is there any way, a crossbreed of one hybrid type and another could also have a child, albiet at this low rate of repropagation.
Monkey+Pig=Pigman, but can that pigmonkey hybrid then mate with another hybrid, lets say Monkey+Rodent=Ratman, so on and so forth.
I had been considering after studying anthropolgy, human anatomy, then after studying animal behaviors, biology etc. and intense consideration and reflection, could a series of bastardizations be considered as responsible for creating something genetically messy, perhaps something fixable by benevolent farmers from above and selectively breeding the bastardization, that there is some possibility that the Human created after this mixing is bastard offspring from something ritualistic and a desired science unknown as of now, sexual rite's bearing a significant ideal to primitive culture and pre-religion seem like an ideal way to direct the bastard process, and possibly the outcome is an ultra hybrid meant for unknown purposes. I think there is more to this aswell when we consider the cynochephalus Dogmen depicted, and more species like this hiding in historical analysis seem abundant quite abnormally so, like others have commented that there absolutely could have been more races of Human than we have now, giant people, little people, large headed, big feeted, animal headed, animal bodied, and more.
There are countless speculations on the fact so damn many mythologies feature multi armed, animal headed people prominently or in a place of godliness, have the hybrids been marked down in history already, and were they once our gargantuan rulers, slowly seperated from after perhaps armageddon like conditions and many ethnic cleansing of these offshoots, and surely a desire to hide evidence of this like the hiding of giant skeletons and other freak finds.
Many thoughts run through my head on the behavior of rodent, elephant, porcine, and equine behavior. I have heard countless times of animal human hybrids in fiction, in history and even in modern day science. From our perspective looking retroactively, smart gods could have cleverly been farming us anyways and we would barely be able to tell, perhaps we have some seperation anxiety from the days working their farms to this day. If its possible to be creating these things with known science, I have a hunch that our precursors wouldn't have to try too hard to selectively breed, control populations in enclosures and provide ways to urge genetics in some direction of approximation or another through environmental and conditional changes, personally I can see it happening quite easy. Maybe we didn't like being livestock for long enough that we became wildly overpopulated in comparison to the precursor farmers, maybe that situation was enough to upheave and destroy that system, and dissavow our bastard origins, and hide the origins so that we never remember that kind of past. The plentiful nature of known hybrids, mutants and subspecies makes me think that we have many close cousins forgotten about and buried deep within our genes, and maybe this type of thing resurfaces over generations.
Something must have disturbed the previous system, perhaps multiple times over, to reduce all the unique populations of man and leave only us, who all happen to be related to the same genetic heritage convergence. Far back enough and we find enough races to fill middle earth.
Could Tolkein be commenting on something much deeper, with the way those Orcs and Goblins are bred like hyper cattle or maybe like ants? Breeding Chambers? Incubating People Hatchery? Huxley Capsule Farm? Human Beehive's? Wouldn't it be our luck to be just as virile and verminlike as the bugs?
Those hive's have some elaborate architecture, maybe the master builders are the bugmen?
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2020
- Messages
- 1,140
- Reaction score
- 2,171
How do you know that?
If a professional historian explained that the cultural layer just builds up over 100 years, would you believe that?
If a credentialed astronaut tells you he's been in space, do you believe that?
Do you believe in cabbits?
I’m disinclined to believe this theory myself but I will add an interesting note that makes me ponder its possibility. If it’s not possible to hybrid humans with animals why do almost all governments give so much energy to beastiality laws? The humans get harmed. No logical reason for a governing body to intervene other than it being “wrong”. But how many other wrongs get overlooked or supported by the same.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2020
- Messages
- 321
- Reaction score
- 316
Codex Alimentarius comes to mind.
Codex Alimentarius, Agenda 2030 and New World Order (NWO)
Codex Alimentarius - the REAL threat to World health
Assuming cabbits are true, what is their diet? Is it herbivore (rabbit) or carnivore (cat)? Can they be omnivores?Now there's only one way to find out...
They can only eat catnip. Like pandas and bamboo or koalas and eucalyptus.
Freak! Freak!
Because it's cruel to the animals to start with, plus being unnatural to them whether they 'like it' or not.
Sexual deviancy is harmful overall to societies. While I realize this seems to change with cultural norms just to prove it -all the arguments used always lead back to approving pedophilia. Cultural norms can be bad and good. There's a reason cultures have always kept some kind of lid on sex and it's not all prudery.
The reason I would not call myself Libertarian is because the philosophy leads back to saying, 'you are free to become a slave', if you want. Duh, the Auschwitz sign. This is related.
It's better to ignore all 'discussions and debate' on the pedophilia/bestiality topic. This is how society is always fooled and dumbed down then lead into tactic approval. Just say no.
I believe in the scientific methods leading to replicable results over rando db's faith based bs on the internet any day of the week.
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2020
- Messages
- 1,140
- Reaction score
- 2,171
"Believe" is the right word for it too.
Do you think someone trained to a phd level is more or less likely to apply the scientific method than a rando?
Have you heard that most published studies fail according to the scientific method?
Most scientists 'can't replicate studies'
70% fail - it should be 100% repeatable! This is the nature journal saying this. Perhaps it's closer to 90% really.. But who knows really?
Scientists are just as flawed as any of us and do not prioritise the scientific method. For the sake of their careers, they can only pay lip service to it. And that is not the only problem - there's also the issue of where all that funding for science comes from. Eg, if I find 10 climate change studies and 0 non-climate change studies, what sort of balance do you think you get? What we have is scientism, government and corporate dictat dressed up in scientific robes.
Key word: "Replicable results", can you provide that for anything that you believe in relating to this topic. You dont get to pick and chose science and faith as it suits your agenda. Pick one a stick to it.
