Maksutov wrote:Using aliens as an explanation is about as strong as using angels or just "God did it."
What is your evidence that beings with completely compatible human DNA exist on other worlds? You do realize that "cosmic pluralism" is both an ancient and a thoroughly debunked notion. Besides dealing with pseudoarchaeological problems, would you also add the burdens of endless UFOlogical fraud and delusions to be sorted through?
Well, I didn't suggest that Adam and Eve were "aliens" precisely, in the same sense that we are used to. That was this guy's theory:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0671227475/There is some similarity between his theory and mine of course. I just learned of the existence of this book recently when a guy on the LDSFF referred me to it, and then I acquired a copy.
I am actually just suggesting that God himself is a human, but the fact that he is not from this world makes him extraterrestrial. He didn't use UFO's to get here. And he and his wife came here to have children, so that their children would eventually meet up and hybridize.
I don't have specific evidence of this course. You have to remember that some of my evidence is religious, and everything that I do is an attempt at harmonization between science and that. And so it is a foregone conclusion that those that don't share that epistemological ideology will not agree. I'm comfortable with that fact.
The empirical evidence I have is only that of science, of course and I don't presume to suggest that science is supportive of every specific thing that I theorize. Rather, it is in the hybridization of science and Mormonism where these things emerge from.
But, specifically, science is more generally supportive of the idea of horizontal gene transfer and hybridization of unrelated species. For example the sea squirt is a product of a hybridization event of an ancient chordate and the ancestor of the sea urchin. Yes, most of these kinds of events are not viable, but once in a while, there will be a weird event that ends up being viable. Most of the time when horizontal gene transfer is viable is at the microbial level. We see it all the time where a gene for resistance is spread throughout the whole microbial world between non-related species.
Another example is that the genes from jellyfish where our eyes came from is actually something that the jellyfish got from a horizontal transfer of genes from plankton.
But there is a serious scientific position called the pig/chimp hypothesis which states that homonins are descended from the common ancestor they have with the chimp, but that along the line, there was an introduction of porcine genes into the line. This makes a lot of sense as to why pig organs are so compatible with humans, etc., and why many things that differentiate us from chimps is what we share with pigs, etc. Except, the scientist that suggests this hypothesis believes that there was an actual mating event between a pig and a chimp-like animal. In my emails with the scientist that came up with this hypothesis, I have told him that I disagree with this, but that rather, I believe that the genes were introduced into a homonin ancestor through a bite from a wild pig-like animal, perhaps a wild boar or something. And so, it introduced stem cells, and there was a fusion at a fundamental chromosomal level, and then those cells made their way to the reproductive organs of the animal.
This is similar to how there were multiple events were SIV was introduced to humans from chimps and from gorillas, and how some HIV strains are more related to the Chimp variety of SIV, while other strains are more related to the gorilla variety. And how probably these events sometimes may have been because of a bite. SIV may have jumped the species barrier multiple times in history from various great apes or other primates.
And so, its not surprising that Heavenly Father's children would have hybridized with native humans.
Work on uploading yourself into the matrix before the Singularity, though. That's time well spent.
