Primate lessons

My favorite theory on this is the stoned ape theory where they just figured it out by tripping balls. However, I believe that they realized that killing children and other people harms their group and species and that the wolves are more useful for companionship and hunting than just killing them, etc.

That's funny. A psilocybin induced revelation of rationality! 😄 But what if they found that killing other tribes and the weaker children actually advances or improves their group?

Civilized^ 🤦‍♂️

They might've found a use for the weaker children, ie figuring more stuff out for the advancement of their new society. Then again I kinda don't really know anything about how it happened because I wasn't there.

Nothing a few millions of years wouldn't fix, eh?😉

True.

You read Terence McKenna?

No, but now that you mention it I'll look it up.

Cro-Magnon and the other species of man banged, were all hybrids. did we come from apes or did we come the water? Apes without hair and seal fat? Brain Growth required certain amount of oils and fats mainly found in water. We’re close to many animals for DNA aside from apes. Cerebellum and higher heavens for the brain

Apparently evolution teaches we came from the apes and the water way before that. Although intelligence seemed to stop at a certain level with the animals, and not evolve anymore.

Yea quoting the Aquatic theory or aquatic ape theory, an anthropologist I follow debating apes involvement altogether in a recent documentary. I think it’s bc they are still trying to find the prima of the rh blood genes. Heard about the theory last month, haven’t looked into the original content yet. Have limited data atm so I beat for watching anything of really using flip much for now. Sucks

Or we evolved and got our intelligence from EA after genetic altering lol, or during the 3rd generation of man after igigi revolted

Makes me think of lovecraft’s writing about the ancient ones and those who came from the sky and into the water and eventually to surface. Can’t always trust translations of tablets and will find different versions of the stories

EA? I'm not familiar with that. Though I'm more open to alien intelligence intervening than I am with Darwinian evolution.

Enki is another name of EA, the book of enki talks about the debate between him and his brother enlil to change man into slaves and a one point, as smart and gifted as themselves but that pissed enlil off. The story of eden could come from this story. EA children being the first human mixed that weren’t slaves in the palace of eden. When you read the First-second book of Enoch, you really get the impression it’s about aliens, eden in the heavens or space ship. I could go one lol

All of those stories could be seen as allegories for human anatomy also. Finished a tiny book yesterday called the anti christ from a dr George Carey talking about. So many other books to quote for the same idea, could tell when actor jim Carey was going insane talking about Christ secretion, he must of been reading those topics or OG Essenes lol

Ah, yes, from the Samarian tablets. I've heard of it. The Annunaki and all that. I've read a little about the tablets and the laws on them. Many eerily similar to the Levitical laws in the Bible. But I haven't read too much on the other translations they've got from them, like the Enki and Enlil stuff. A friend of mine is well versed on them and has told me alot. Good stories, but they don't hold as much weight as the Bible as a whole, imo.

I've also seen the secretion thing too. The three day cycle through the body. Its interesting, but to me it just shows the handiwork of of our creator, Jesus Christ. It mirrors in the human body the work that he came to accomplish for our salvation. I also find it intriguing that laminin, a protein in our bodies that is like the glue that holds cells together, is shaped like a cross when viewed under a microscope.

Yea there interesting bc of their kings lists is like the Egyptians, goes back a few hundred thousand years and can tie to other theories of why it could work or truth in myths. Most religion pretty much repeat in aspect of holding a piece of the picture or books inside of a book. I find Gnosticism and Greek’s referencing electricity or electromagnetism a fair bit. Walter Russell’s work that seems to be more applicable to English and modern terms we know.

Too much time into comparative religion and non pc alt history has warped my perceptions trying to understand power, the prima and light lol That and finding scanned originals with tabs labelled banned info doesn’t help. Who the hell is or can reading the OG slav, Greek and Arab to compare to our Western English pc standard lol

Yea I seen a vid about that years ago about the glue, similar aspect in Sound/light breaking down function

Maybe an ape banged a dolphin?

When something happened, a social rule was broken and they asked how do we fix this? What equals what to do? and they said this is truth, this is how to act in good conduct and then in good judgment. Later they found ideas alone are not enough, you need convictions, and religious convictions base in emotional belief suffice as a false conviction or temporary backbone til ya discover skepticism and a stronger truth than pathos/emotion based ideas.

It feels like you're giving them more than they were capable of. But of course, over thousands of years, they could have figured a few things out. Question is, why aren't they still gaining intelligence and evolving into Neanderthals today?

Ha, if you go to kensignton (Philly) many have not developed "Morality" yet

South philly isnt as bad as kensignton

Never been to Philly. I hear they have good cheesesteaks and cream cheese...😁

lol

It was probably at some point in the evolution of Homo Erectus. At that point, humans started caring for the sick and elderly.

well some people say we evolved alongside apes but if we evolved from them, prehaps they developed it from maternal instinct and as we became more intelligent we began caring for others we never even met.

Thats a good theory. But some mothers in the animal kingdom eat their young that have defects or are not strong enough. But the problem remains that if apes are a transitional species between monkey and man, why are they still around and no longer evolving, still gaining morality and intelligence? And further, what would be the transitional species between a monkey and ?? To many holes in the theory of evolution that only the magical "millions or billions of years" can apparently seem to fix. And even if that were true, there is still the lack of millions of transitional fossils to prove it.

additionally, the apes no longer need to evolve, and they could still be, the process of evolution takes millions of years.

See what I mean? Without the millions of years, it doesn't work. Theres no proof that apes or monkeys were around that long ago.. And not all fossils take millions of years to form. Some can form quickly from severe atmospheric conditions.

well some of the evolutions happened not long enough ago to fossilize yet, besides i didnt say we evolved from apes i said we could have evolved alongside them.

But from what, then?

i dont know! fish?

Eaxctly. And think how many transitional forms there would have to be between a fish and a man. But where are they? If it was a proven fact and not still a theory, then they would be able to show us every transitional form and fossil. Since there was millions of years of this happening, we should have plenty of fossils to show each step clearly. But we don't.

Yes, yes, but fossils may be buried in sediments for millions of years, and besides, the formation of fossils requires special conditions. The soil they die on has to be nutrient rich, the remains have to be buried quickly by natural causes, and the creature can't be destroyed. They didn't bury their dead back then, and there were enough scavengers to eat most things, so if something died on the side of a river it might fossilize but other creatures need water so they could end up eating the body!

Yes, that may be true, but it still doesn't answer the question of what exactly these transitional creatures were. Without the fossil evidence, it's all theory and conjecture.