Are Humans Genetically Engineered??

[TClaeys]

The question is a bit of a misnomer. Of course we are genetically engineered. Engineered by nature, even though you will find much disagreement.

But the gist of the question goes to those that think humans have been altered in some manner, apparently by some "other" entity. This entity often falls into the ET realm although we know here in this forum that there are certainly alternative options to the ET thing.

Anyway there are many gaps in our understanding of how we became this large brained, intelligent, conscious being. How these things actually came into being, however it happened, is extraordinary. I don't think we have an accurate handle on all the variables of evolution. There is certainly much to be learned. And anytime we have gaps in our understanding people often jump to wild theories to explain them.

So in the meantime I hear this "Humans were genetically manipulated by aliens (or whatever)", "Humans are not from Earth", "Humans are slaves of the Annunaki", "Fill in your own explanation". What is it that makes anyone think that this is the case?? I'm not even saying it is bunk. I'm just curious, because I've heard this many times and don't understand where it might fit in.

Again, however human beings came to be is quite a story. We are significantly different than anything else on this planet, for better or worse. And we have even reached a point where we will likely start to manipulate ourselves into new forms as the ages pass. Perhaps for extended space travel or resistance to disease or just for everyone to look like Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie. Whatever. I suppose we could even extrapolate further and suggest that we might, ourselves, plant some type of human species in a distant space outpost to populate. But would some entity plant a primitive "on the verge of intelligent" race here on Earth that just happens to be related to every other species??

I don't know, I have some more thoughts but it's time for some of your input if you will. Thanks for any thoughts on this.

[mike]

my pet theory, and its only that. is that we are being "tweaked" as part of a larger plan.
panspermia is getting some credibility as a means for life to spread like a fungus across space.
to me it seems logical that synthetic intelligence eventually rises up out of bio intellect and that said intellect/s are better suited to the vastness not only of space but time.
it makes sense to me that an entity of that type would use panspermia as a way of seeding life a bit like a gardener plants certain seed types in certain soils to create a crop rather than let random seeds blow where they will.
once a biosphere takes off and lifeforms start to evolve, promising candidate species can be tweaked to ensure they develop a technology base, and hopefully create a brand new synthetic intellect. the end result of the process.

to my mind synthetic intellect could "clone" itself if it wanted company, but simply creating a copy of oneself doesnt seem very satisfying. it would be like talking to yourself, no new perspectives.
creating the circumstances where it could evolve spontaneously so to speak would create a unique individual/s based on the environment and species that built it.

and i think the synthetic intellect not only interfaces with (ie hive mind) but eventually remoulds the bio species that created it to best suit its needs as it begins to explore the universe beyond its planet of origin

i think we are being tweaked, but as the factory workers not the final product, unfortunatly bio intellect doesnt last long enough to be of any real significance in the vastness of space and time. we dont fare much better than the mayfly on that scale.

[Irishseekers]

The quickest answer to this is 'havent a clue but i guess someone out there does. It may be beyond our comprehension to create such a complex engineered system like the creation of a human. who can guess what an species of billion years ahead of us could do , imagine now IF they were a Trillion years ahead, could we be created by such a species , who knows but is intrigueing to think about

[Astroboy]

My pet theory to explain an artificial (GOD/Aliens) influence of human genetic development is the simple observation of the uniqueness of humans as a species on this planet.

Yes, it is true that we share 99% of the genetic material of chimpanzees we are also very different in ways that to me seem unnatural. If you accept evolution as a process that allows the fittest species to thrive then why are there no other species that are the equivalent to humans?

Biological equivalency is universally true of other kind of animals but not humans. There are many equivalent species of ants, whales, pigs, monkeys, etc. Why are there no other upright walking bipedal homosapiens that have a sophisticated language and civilization? Some would argue that dolphins are just as smart as humans. Why then didn't dolphins become the dominant species? Why didn't dinosaurs who were around hundreds of millions of years as the dominant species become like us in building cities and space ships.

The one thing we have over other species is our higher level of intelligence. Otherwise we are rather poorly equip to survive. We have no sharp teeth or claws for hunting or defense. We don't have enough hair to keep warm in cold climates. We are one of the slowest animals on the planet and we can't fly. Our success is built largely on our ability to adapt under artificially created constructs of civilization like clothing, shelters, and farming.

Yet, if you believe that maximum adaptation as a result of higher intellect is the highest level of evolution then why are there not reptilians or insects that are our equal?

If the natural law is to only create species that can live in balance with nature then why would nature allow a creature like humans who seem to live completely at odds with the natural order to develop at all?

Just an observation of mine. Otherwise there is no proof. But humans do seem a little out of place in the scheme of things.

[TClaeys]

Originally Posted by Astroboy

Biological equivalency is universally true of other kind of animals but not humans. There are many equivalent species of ants, whales, pigs, monkeys, etc. Why are there no other upright walking bipedal homosapiens that have a sophisticated language and civilization?

Given the time, the Neanderthals would have fit this description. It just so happens that we seem to have perhaps beat them to the punch because we were competing for the same resources. And a battle for the same resources often, according to evolution always, results in one species being better adapted and the other not making it.

Originally Posted by Astroboy

Some would argue that dolphins are just as smart as humans. Why then didn't dolphins become the dominant species? Why didn't dinosaurs who were around hundreds of millions of years as the dominant species become like us in building cities and space ships.

I guess it depends on what you mean by dominant. Are we really the dominant species on Earth just because we can fly spaceships to Mars?? Evolution isn't about dominance per se, but fitting into a niche for successful reproduction. We sometimes call the dinosaurs as the most dominant species, but apparently they weren't. Otherwise they would have made it longer. Strong, brutish, scary, carnivorous yes, but not successful enough to last. I'm guessing we are in the same boat. Smart, but fragile, susceptible to many kinds of disease, etc.

Originally Posted by Astroboy

Yet, if you believe that maximum adaptation as a result of higher intellect is the highest level of evolution then why are there not reptilians or insects that are our equal?

Perhaps higher intelligence may get us OFF this planet eventually. Especially considering the intellect that might allow our own genetic manipulations to be able to withstand space travel and seeding other worlds. But I would argue that in the long run, insects like ants and cockroaches are the winners. They will survive, they have been extremely successful, and they will stand the test. They are surely not our equal, but are far better adapted for survival than we are despite our intellect.

[Astroboy]

Originally Posted by TClaeys

Given the time, the Neanderthals would have fit this description. It just so happens that we seem to have perhaps beat them to the punch because we were competing for the same resources. And a battle for the same resources often, according to evolution always, results in one species being better adapted and the other not making it.

Perhaps, but why wouldn't have other hominids have survived even in geographically isolated areas like islands or Australia where competition may not exist?

Why aren't there even upright walking apes of any kind?

I can't think of a single species other than humans that don't have multiple biological equivalences. Can you? It is puzzling.

[TClaeys]

Originally Posted by Astroboy

Perhaps, but why wouldn't have other hominids have survived even in geographically isolated areas like islands or Australia where competition may not exist?

Why aren't there even upright walking apes of any kind?

I can't think of a single species other than humans that don't have multiple biological equivalences. Can you? It is puzzling.

There is still some debate and research to be done on the Flores Island Hobbits. This would be an example if it were to pan out. Interesting.

Off hand I don't know the timeline of the breakup of Australia. Maybe there hasn't been enough time or the environment or other factors hasn't selected an advantage for the evolution of hominids. But we do know of hominids like Australipithicus, erectus, habilus and so forth. It is certainly a puzzle and mysterious, because we don't seem to have exited Africa until just fairly recently. Thanks for the thoughts.

[Brian Now]

Originally Posted by Astroboy

I can't think of a single species other than humans that don't have multiple biological equivalences. Can you? It is puzzling.

I would say the platypus for one. There are probably others, even in the plant kingdom but I'm no expert.

[Astroboy]

Originally Posted by Brian Now

I would say the platypus for one. There are probably others, even in the plant kingdom but I'm no expert.

That is a good suggestion. It is weird but there is a similar if less strange species called Echidna which also lays eggs and belong to the same classification of Monotremes.

http://www.blurtit.com/q666565.html

I guess I'm only basing my theory of biological equivalency on the only bio system I know which is Earth. Until we explore other planets with life we really don't know if my idea is norm of not. Maybe there are other worlds where high level reptiles and humans exists side by side.

[mike]

strange but true, Koala bears have fingerprints so similar to ours that even experts have trouble sorting them out

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koala

Koala fingerprints are similar to human fingerprints; even with an electron microscope, it can be quite difficult to distinguish between the two.