This theoretical hyper-adaptable single celled organism would also shatter the Darwinian model of evolution. If the Cambrian Explosion was the result of a fantastically adaptable single celled organism generating over 30 phyla (body types for plants and animals) then the obvious Darwinian suspect would be the stromatolites. It appears that the scientific orthodoxy found the discontinuity between stromatolite genetics and the other life forms on this planet before I did. I tried to do some research on the genetics of stromatolites but I kept running into dead ends and double speak. Why use *ancient stromatolites* to answer when the aliens arrived on Earth because living stromatolites are found in many areas today? Using stromatolites as the starting reference point opens the door to this range of time and potential alien arrivals Does this mean the aliens appeared much more recently on Earth then? Although these are freshwater bodies, they all have an unusual water chemistry, allowing the stromatolites to thrive in both saltwater and freshwater environments.1,2" The latest research has identified them even living on land.1 Modern stromatolites are another example of a “living fossil.” Living stromatolites have been found in highly saline marine environments in the Bahamas and in atolls in the Central Pacific.2 Stromatolites have even been found in freshwater lakes and streams in Spain, Canada, Germany, France, Australia, and Japan. "Scientists believed stromatolites were extinct-until they found them living in Shark Bay, Australia, in 1956.2 Living stromatolites just keep popping up in newer and more diverse environments. The modern oceans and other areas have living stromatolites, thus these are living fossils. There is a problem using stromatolites as a starting reference to answer *when the ancient aliens appeared on Earth*. Stromatolites in the fossil record, some from the Precambrian dated ~ 3 billion years ago. Well, post #13 by Geomartian starts to frame or define the ancient aliens appeared on Earth. With each generation, humanity gains new knowledge, and that's why it might seem to one that the present generation is more intelligent than the previous one, but that's an illusion and nothing else. The Early Middle Ages' Kings didn't have the same amount of knowledge as their Roman predecessors! It took a long time for the Successors of the Romans in Europe to have as good technology as the Romans. The Romans had greater knowledge than their successors in the Early Middle Ages, and if this theory is to be agreed with, why did the Early Middle Ages' Kings' technology as good as their Roman predecessors if this theory is to be believed? Sounds pretty obvious to me. I mean, this literally means that everyone is as intelligent or more intelligent than Newton or Einstein. And, each generation more intelligent than the previous generation, I highly disagree. And, I guess, any anthropologist will disagree too. But, if you say that human intelligence increased significantly within 5000 years, I am gonna disagree. And, I do quite agree with the fact that humans are more intelligent than apes. Of course, the evolution from ape to humans happened after a process of millions of years. There is only greater knowledge, at least, within the last 5000 years of human history. Though, this might sound pretty stupid, but still, there is nothing like greater intelligence. There is nothing like greater intelligence IMO.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |