Merged Radical New Thesis on Human and Solar System Origins

icebear said:
....... Cro Magnon man appears to have arrived on this planet fully formed, with his exquisite artwork, his fancy tools and projectile weaponry and everything else fully formed from day one. That one is also a good homework exercise for budding skeptics....
Click to expand...

This stupidity deserves a response all of its own.

So, Cro magnon man lives on planet X, where he evolves into a sophisticated creature capable of building a rocket and conducting interplanetary missions. He then hops on said rocket, and flies to earth, whereupon he instantaneously forgets all his technology and starts living in caves, painting on the walls using ochre and ash, and reverts to hunting animals with stone tipped spears..........!

Really? Really.........? Anyone who believes that we will give this more than a seconds thought is underestimating the intelligence of the average Jreffer. No, not the average Jreffer. Let me rephrase.. Anyone who thinks this is worth a second of our brainpower underestimates the intelligence of the stupidist Jreffer in history.

Mike
 
Last edited:
fuelair said:
I would use a different word there but yes. Also, in all fairness I consider the "complex" idea to be a "simple" idea if you get my drift and I think you do!!!!
Click to expand...

How about simplistic idea?

Just had a look into the orbital inclination of the planets. They are all within 7 degrees of the Invariable plane

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

There are a few moons that it is believed have been captured by the planets after the planets were formed. They have all got some strange features. Like the Earth's moon is the biggest in ratio to the planet. Mars has a moon that has an orbit that is less than a day.
 
For a guy who calls himself "icebear", you seem to have little understanding of the Pleistocene.

What's the main ingredient of a glacier, icebear?
 
MikeG said:
This stupidity deserves a response all of its own.

So, Cro magnon man lives on planet X, where he evolves into a sophisticated creature capable of building a rocket and conducting interplanetary missions. He then hops on said rocket, and flies to earth, whereupon he instantaneously forgets all his technology and starts living in caves, painting on the walls using ochre and ash, and reverts to hunting animals with stone tipped spears..........!

Really? Really.........? Anyone who believes that we will give this more than a seconds thought is underestimating the intelligence of the average Jreffer. No, not the average Jreffer. Let me rephrase.. Anyone who thinks this is worth a second of our brainpower underestimates the intelligence of the stupidist Jreffer in history.

Mike
Click to expand...

Never watched the Flintstones, did you? It was a documentary you know.
 
icebear said:
A number of people who have investigated the thing have come to the same basic conclusion i.e. that humans would be so enormously ill adapted for conditions on this planet some 100,000 years ago that there's no reasonable way to think we originated on this planet.
(...snip...)
Click to expand...

The world is full of colourful characters with wild ideas. Simply taking people's word for it is not how our collective knowledge is advanced.

You have been continually making unsupported assertions in this thread. You have provided no evidence for your claims about solar system formation, the origin of our species or the mythology of ancient peoples. You have ignored several good counterarguments.

Also, are you ever going to answer my questions? Here they are, expanded a bit:
  1. What methodologies did you use to attempt to falsify your hypothesis? Did you think of alternative explanations and weigh them against each other? If so, what and how?
  2. Exactly how likely is the observed distribution of axial tilts under the mainstream hypotheses of solar-system formation (that is, formation from a single protoplanetary disc)? And how likely under the hypothesis you are putting forward in your OP and your book (I assume you are one of the authors)?
  3. Given that you are hypothesising a relatively recent merger (within the last 100,000-200,000 years, as anatomically modern humans are supposed to have been present), how do you account for the planets having a common orbital plane? What probability do you calculate for that under the mainstream hypothesis (single disc)? Under your alternative (two systems merging)?
 
Last edited:
Pixel42 said:
I thought it was generally accepted that the likeliest explanation of the various axial tilts was collisions with the larger bits of debris that were flying around the solar system during its formation.
Click to expand...
Pretty much. Complex systems don't produce neat solutions.

icebear said:
The name associations between pantheon gods and planets are primordial and universal.
Click to expand...
Evidence?

icebear said:
The two chieftain gods of all ancient religions were Jupiter and Saturn.
Click to expand...
Evidence?
wollery said:
:nope:

It seems that brown dwarfs are the new vogue in astronomy crackpottery.
Click to expand...
Well it takes cranks a while to absorb, via parasitism, from real science.

icebear said:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/...&p=86168&sid=931c1ad30988a38ec64343efd9385b69
Click to expand...
You're citing the EU/PC cranks?
:rolleyes:

icebear said:
There aren't any sort of haphazard interactions which would leave four of the planets with ~26-degree axis tilts.
Click to expand...
Show your calculations.
 
icebear said:
If our system had formed from a swirling disk of solar material as textbooks claim, all axial tilts should be approximately the same, that is, all near zero with all axes of the planets roughly perpendicular to the plane of orbit.
Click to expand...
I thought that this was supposed to be a robust thesis. The above claim is just crap. The early solar system was a chaotic place with bodies colliding all the time. Even the Earth/moon system is the result of a collision.

And why is our DNA virtually identical to Neanderthals? Anatomically modern humans and Neanderthals are both members of the genus Homo. And that picture you posted is not an image of a Neanderthal. Here's an actual reconstruction of what a Neanderthal would have looked like.
 

Attachments

  • 439px-Homo_neanderthalensis_adult_male_-_head_model_-_Smithsonian_Museum_of_Natural_History_-_20.jpg
    439px-Homo_neanderthalensis_adult_male_-_head_model_-_Smithsonian_Museum_of_Natural_History_-_20.jpg
    59 KB · Views: 1
What a load of hogwash. It is as someone mentioned earlier a rehash of Velikovsky. Velikovsky claimed that the Earth once orbited Saturn?! The plasma stuff reads like rehashed Velikovsky and his fantasy of an electro-magnetic Universe and gravity being irrelevant. Velikovsky also spouted nonsense about the features on the moon being not much over 3000 years old and being the result of electric discharges.

I wonder all about the abundant evidence indicating that the day has been slowly lengthening for billions of years doesn't exist, such has studies of fossilized Coral Reefs.

Others have already mentioned that Humans and Neandertals share the overwhelmingly the same genes. You seem to have misunderstood the recent studies which indicate that Humans and Neandertals interbred recently. You ignore that aside from that Humans and Neandertals shared a common ancestor c. 600,000 years ago. All the recent evidence indicates in that when humans emerged from Africa c. 100,000 years ago we interbred with Neandertals

Further as mentioned before the fact that the actual orbits of the planets are, all, (Now that Pluto is not a planet), on very similar orbital inclinations. Further orbits of the 8 planets are pretty circular. Both of those things are not likely to have happened if the Earth and other planets started circling the sun after being captured under 200,000 years ago. The result would have been a cosmic screw up of highly elliptical orbits with high orbital inclinations.

As for this quote from Icebear:

The other consideration is that Cro Magnon man appears to have arrived on this planet fully formed, with his exquisite artwork, his fancy tools and projectile weaponry and everything else fully formed from day one. That one is also a good homework exercise for budding skeptics...
Click to expand...

Fail on so many levels. It is obvious you haven't the faintest notion or idea about what has been found out regarding the origins of Homo Sapiens, Sapiens. The data is abundant. Everything you said above is bunk.
 
Last edited:
Garrison said:
And this assumes that all the planets we see now formed out of that disk in a nice smooth process and that there were no interactions between the bodies that formed in that early period of the solar system that would have altered orbits and axial inclinations. Since we know the opposite to be true the idea fails straight out of the gate.
Click to expand...


Not only that, but axial tilts relative to the plane of the orbit (obliquity) are not constant and can vary in response to the gravitational influences of other planets. (The Earth is fortunate in this regard in that the Moon helps stabilize Earth's axial tilt and dampens any changes in obliquity.)
 
icebear said:
Consider the axis tilts of planets in our system. If our system had formed from a swirling disk of solar material as textbooks claim, all axial tilts should be approximately the same, that is, all near zero with all axes of the planets roughly perpendicular to the plane of orbit.
Click to expand...

"As textbooks claim"? Which textbooks, precisely? You are either consulting (a) imaginary textbooks you daydreamed up yourself for strawman purposes, or (b) Dr. Whiz Beaker's Cartoon Book of Simplified Science for Beginners. Actual planetary-science textbook will actually claim that the Solar System evolved gravitationally, including resonant planet-planet gravitational forces which cause the axial tilts to wander.
 
icebear said:
Return around mid October

Off on business tomorrow for about a week and a half, see ya.
Click to expand...

How about we let this thread die until icebear comes back? I think we have raised more than enough points for him to consider. I doubt if he would be able to address many of them.
 
rjh01 said:
How about we let this thread die until icebear comes back? I think we have raised more than enough points for him to consider. I doubt if he would be able to address many of them.
Click to expand...

How about we hogtie this silliness to the Simon Shack Solar System, and just toss them both into the Thunderdome? Let 'em both die. :mad:
 
Foster Zygote, at first i thought the pic you posted ^^ was of Fidel Castro. lol

To all; has anyone else ever feared gaseous Jupiter or Saturn might burst into flames as a star and cook us to death? I remember thinking that years ago when i heard these were gaseous planets and started wondering why our sun burns, but these dont. I was glad when the comet Shoemaker-Levy-9 struck Jupiter in 21? pieces in 1994 with explosive force, that it didnt ignite. Now i dont have that fear. :)
 
Iamme said:
Foster Zygote, at first i thought the pic you posted ^^ was of Fidel Castro. lol

To all; has anyone else ever feared gaseous Jupiter or Saturn might burst into flames as a star and cook us to death? I remember thinking that years ago when i heard these were gaseous planets and started wondering why our sun burns, but these dont. I was glad when the comet Shoemaker-Levy-9 struck Jupiter in 21? pieces in 1994 with explosive force, that it didnt ignite. Now i dont have that fear. :)
Click to expand...

This post makes me worry about the state of Science education somewhere or, at least, on the part of someone. :boggled:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom