There is no proof either way Adam & Eve existed or not.
You're joking, right? There's no way either that we can prove or disprove the hypothesis that the universe was created when a giant cosmic cow farted, but no-one in their right mind would accept it.
There are many now in scientific circles now who see Darwin's theory as highly suspect.
Are you sure? Any evidence for this sweeping and unsupported statement?
Records appear to show that somehow the more violent Cro-magnon man was exterminated in their entirety virtually overnight, paving the way for the near totally upright Neanderthal and more peaceful race. How ? Without outside (some suggest extra terrestrial intervention) that appears to be a non sequitir.
Utter nonsense. First I'd like to see these records, and to have 'virtually overnight' defined. Then there's the classic conspiracy theorist leap: because we don't know the reason for something, the reason
must be outlandish or otherworldly. It simply doesn't have to be: the best thing to say is not 'The aliens came and wiped out the Cro-Magnon' but 'We don't know'. That said, I can offer a possible explanation: the neanderthal were simply more efficient at acquiring resources. That's all that's needed. Aggression doesn't come into it. If the neanderthal were better at acquiring resources and in exploiting them in time of dearth (water in a drought, food in a famine) they'd survive the doomed Cro-magnon without any need for some primeval race war or intervention by flying saucers.
The Bible (not to be discounted here as a historical document even if you are a non believer) offers a glaring clue mentioning giants who walked the Earth known as the Nephilim. Who were they ? They apparently interbred with us and left. WHERE ? This is where the UFO and alien circles take an interest in our origins and evolution.
The Bible mentions giants therefore aliens fucked us then fucked off? Come on, this is pretty risible. Again wild assumption covering lack of evidence.
Whatever it was mankind appears to have helped himself via the stone age, formingt tools, the wheel, weapons, etc. there as they say is history via the Greeks, Romans through to industrial revolution and the Hadron Collider. Technological progress seems to have taken a course of it own leading to all the things we enjoy today from running taps and light switches to modems and space rockets. A toilet, a fridge, a cooker, hairdryer are all products of progress. As is the television, but whether or not Baywatch or Hollyoaks is of any benefit to humanity I know not.
I certainly have sympathy with you here. Technological innovations have alwyas had the potential to harm or benefit us, and often both: we've previously discussed the effect of the railroad on native tribes and European settlers in North America. Maybe the difference with the next generation of advances is that they'll alter not only how humans behave but the very definition of what it is to be human. No doubt, though, that whoever - whatever - comes after these advances will look back and judge us as unbelievably primitive, just as we judge neolithic man.
21st century Westerners like you and i have the luxury of contemplating humanity. Whereas if you'd been born in say Mombassa or even Iraq your only concern to date would be where the next meal is coming from. I think its heartening that you are questioning the developments currently in progress as to whether or not they are for our beneffit or not. Many writers warned of this - particularly Orwell's 1984, Huxley's Brave New World where technology has progressed but not for any real individual or collective benefit for humanity, rather for a more sinister reason of a population slimming NEW WORLD ORDER which basically looks after a predetermined chosen few of our race (see the book review on Cosmic Top Secret in The Great Exhibition).
You spoil an very useful point about how we're lucky enough to have the luxury of worrying about something other than survival with tripe about the New World Order, whatever that is. No-one's ever proved its existence, just spouted a bunch of unsupported bilge, vague allusions and outright lies. Take that Zeitgeist movie that's doing the rounds on the web: one of the funniest things I've seen in years, but people swallow the idiocy it promotes without question. The killer is, of course, that it's in fact impossible to question the existence of this terrible conspiracy, as anyone that does so is at best a dupe and at worst one of its agents. So it's self-renewing and self-protecting, exhibiting all the facets of the more pernicious religious cults but attracting none of the opprobrium.
America has enough foodstuffs to feed each of its citizens five times over, but like UK it would sooner destroy surplus food than put it where it is needed for fear of upsetting the balance of the world economies. By anybody's reckoning that is inhumane. It is also functional Capitalism. Drug cartels have sufficent stocks to probably cure most diseases and ailments in Africa for a matter of a few pence per head, yet rather than offer a free lunch for all demand payment and profit margins and therefore are by and large disinterested in distributing free medicine.
Reasonable points here: the 'devil take the hindmost' aspect of modern capitalism is unpalatable and destructive. Your use of the term 'drug cartels', though, is problematic. I assume you mean 'drug companies': 'drug cartels' are entirely different in origin, though I understand you might say not always in behaviour.
I'm sure the Hadron lot know what they're doing (?). They just don't want you to. All the more reason for you to dig out exactly what they're doing and why as many groups are doing just that now. Sorry went on a bit there I hope it sheds some light on this new Dark Age in which I believe we now live. It's up to you guys to carry on asking and finding out if you do feel humanity isn't going to benefit. Your future hasn't happened yet...or maybe it has.
Again, vague allusions to conspiracy without one shred of evidence.
Really, Goldberg, I expected better than this from you. I understand the passion behind your words, and I know you care about the way humanity's headed, but what you're doing here is the exact opposite of what we at UD wanted when we created 'The Singularity' board. It's shadow, it's allusion, it's conjecture without evidence, and unworthy of you. It'd be great to hear what someone as driven and curious as yourself thinks about the collision between art and the swirling, chaotic advance of science and our uncertain future: how about leaving the conspiracy aside for the kooks?
Carpe diem,
Mike.
