top of page

Seventeen bits and pieces that do not add up

Steven & Evan Strong

21/03/2023



The traditional theory of human evolution is predicated around humans having an ancient chimp/ape ancestry. Way back a chimp-like mummy and daddy had children that were genetically so different, of particular concern is the suturing on the skull exclusive to hominids. All apes and monkeys have no sutures, but instead a rigid sagittal keel that runs across the top of the skull which means that their skull size remains static. But the inconsistencies do not stop there, by our count there are at least another seventeen genetic/skeletal/facial/muscular points of difference that challenge any shared ancestry.

Granted be it ever so improbable, there could be an infinitesimal chance these two non-sutured parents carried a genetic abnormality that gave rise to suturing, but it just doesn’t end there. By our count there are seventeen other distinct genetic deviations from every ape/monkey norm, and just the sheer volume of these contradictions leads on to one inescapable conclusion: our ancestry and that of the monkeys/apes have nothing in common. It just did not happen, simply because it just isn’t one species of apes but every animal on this planet that obeys the same rules of evolution and genesis. While we break all the rules.



Body Rules

Walking down the streets I have seen people standing two-and-a-half metres tall, and others are barely half-a-metre in height. Our weight varies between forty kilograms to four-hundred kilograms, and when it comes to body-shapes, anything goes. When in motion, unlike all animals who share the same gait and speed, we all have slight variations in how we walk, and our top speed for some is less than ten kilometres per hour up to moving beyond thirty kilometres per hour. When it comes to assessing our individual strength, some can just pick up a ten-kilogram weight, while for others effortlessly lifting ten times that load is not a problem.

Novak Djokovic has no problem chasing down a tennis ball no matter how hard it is hit, yet for ninety-nine-point-nine percent of the human population they would be flat out winning three points in the two set match while on the court with Novak as their opponent. What other animal has this degree of difference in co-ordination within the same species? The answer is clearly none, only humans are so spread out.


Face-to-Face

There are close to eight billion people presently residing on this planet, and no two people look the same. Each face has two eyes and ears, one nose and mouth arranged on one skull. When it comes to the faces of all other animals on Earth they share so many similarities, and granted there are minor deviations, but in general terms and appearance the faces of each individual face vary little. Of course, humans have tampered with the genetics of some commercial types of livestock and pets, but for those in their natural state it is hard to differentiate. Whether zebras, impala, chimps, gorillas or kangaroos, they do look the same. It is only humans who break Nature’s rules.

Even the hair that grows above this face, varies markedly in thickness, colour and presentation. Human voices vary in pitch and tone, some of us can sing others cannot hold a note. Our eyes each have a distinctive and unique retinal pattern and again differ greatly in colour, and when it comes to colour perception, some eyes perform badly while others function perfectly.


Running to Capacity or on Empty

When determining the intelligence of non-human animals, scientists list all species from top to bottom. Animals like chimps, gorillas, orang-u-tangs, whales, crows and dolphins rate highly while goldfish receive a much lower score. When it comes to humans our IQ scale can range from TLA (too low to assess) to a score of above two-hundred. Some of us cannot speak and live in a semi-vegetative state, while others like Einstein and Da Vinci function at a much higher level. What is undeniable is that no other animal on this planet varies so greatly in intelligence.

Quite recently an Australian politician claimed that 20% of Australians had some type of registered disability. It is probable half of that percentage will cover disabilities incurred after birth, and it would reasonable to presume that 10% of the disabled he spoke of were born with that condition. Again, there is no other animal on this planet that would exceed that percentage.

It is not just how we think, even what we eat is in contradiction to Nature’s directive. Cows eat grass, tigers eat meat and some animals are omnivorous, while humans make their own arrangements choosing to be vegan, vegetarian, fruitarian, eat varying degrees of meat, gluten-free, dairy-free, etc. Chocolate can actually kill some animals, but not us, anything goes. There is a saying that sums up a fundamental difference in our diet in that ‘one man’s meat is another man’s poison.

Even when the body is unwell, for some the medicine prescribed will be totally effective, partially so, or in some cases, it will actually kill the patient. But when a vet determines why an animal is ailing the medicine administered will work the same for all of the species.


According to Frederic Slater

Slater’s translation makes no mention of human’s evolving from monkeys or any earth-bound creature. He claims that “man (life) came to Earth as man with all his senses (seven of them) and was established in truth.”(1) He was also adamant that our creator, “who brought life into the world set down man and woman and gave them the sacred means of propagating life.”(2)

Our off-world Alien guide Mezreth insists that humans are a hybrid through the direct involvement of genetic additions on two separate occasions. Clearly such manipulation would give reasons as to explain why we are so different and would explain why the seventeen bits and pieces we have listed do add up to an off-world Alien equation.

*See more on this here –


REFERENCES:

(1): Frederic Slater, (and Richard Patterson, ed.). Personal Letters – Correspondences – Not

es. 2013 ed. No. 1-19 & Original 53-61. Archaeological and Education Research Society, 1939, no. 6.

(2): R. H. Goddard, and Frederic Slater. “Burragurru or Devil’s Rock: An Aboriginal Burial Ground in the Wollombi District [Manuscript]. – Trove,” 1937. https://trove.nla.gov.au/work/35581115. (II-INTERPRETATION OF THE DRAWINGS AT BURRA GURRA AND YANGO), 14.



247 views0 comments

Comentários


bottom of page