Are humans not changing naturally?

[goldkingcoiner]

According to the oldest skull of humans, it is said that primitive humans have small skulls, there were time when there was no single human on Earth, but evolution still continues after the humans evolved, it can be hard to notice but will become obvious after thousands or millions of years passed. We do not know where the world is going, I believe the scientists will be the one that will not let people to know some structures or functions in their body may be evolving artificially.

When covid 19 was known to the world, there has been several mRNA vaccines, I hope this is not one of the scientist manipulation that is evolving humans away from what should be natural towards what is artificial. Only organic fertilizers were used by the old farmers, but now they are using inorganic which we see difference in foods that inorganic fertilizers is not good like organic. I have been reading about genetic modified crops also. I hope the natural make-up of human being will not become artificial one day with scientists manipulation

What do you think about this?

From my perspective, it's all natural. If you throw away the idea that humans are special/priviledged and somehow are in control of their own evolution, then yes, its natural.
Evolution is a very chaotic, random and extremely inefficient process which is becoming more and more complex with time. So whats to say that these new fertilizers and vaccine technologies is not the next natural step in our evolution? Lets just hope its not a huge misstep into extinction for humanity.

[BADecker]

^^^ Virtually all evolution ideas have the word 'random' in them somewhere. Random simply means that we don't know what the cause and effect process really is for evolution. Since there isn't any spontaneity proven anywhere, cause and effect is all there is. Cause and effect suggests planned operation rather than happenstance... which is totally against the idea of evolution even existing.

[goldkingcoiner]

^^^ Virtually all evolution ideas have the word 'random' in them somewhere. Random simply means that we don't know what the cause and effect process really is for evolution. Since there isn't any spontaneity proven anywhere, cause and effect is all there is. Cause and effect suggests planned operation rather than happenstance... which is totally against the idea of evolution even existing.

I can only speak from a physics background, not biology. What you say makes sense at smaller and smaller scales, until you reach the scale of quantum physics where what you can or cannot observe hits a barrier. For all intents and purposes, until we develop a better theory of our physical world, cause and effect is very much random to us.

[BADecker]

^^^ Virtually all evolution ideas have the word 'random' in them somewhere. Random simply means that we don't know what the cause and effect process really is for evolution. Since there isn't any spontaneity proven anywhere, cause and effect is all there is. Cause and effect suggests planned operation rather than happenstance... which is totally against the idea of evolution even existing.

I can only speak from a physics background, not biology. What you say makes sense at smaller and smaller scales, until you reach the scale of quantum physics where what you can or cannot observe hits a barrier. For all intents and purposes, until we develop a better theory of our physical world, cause and effect is very much random to us.

Here is the big flaw with QT. QT essentially starts out with an idea the probability of which makes it something that would never happen. Maybe the odds are so against it happening that they may be like 10^0000000000 to 1 against. But they are imagined to have happened, and all kinds of things that would have happened if they happened are examined.

Then the whole ball of wax, including the improbable happening, and all the stuff that would have to go with it, are applied to things that DO exist, and we get a picture of something new that we never would have begun to imagine if we hadn't done it that way. From there engineers make new stuff out of these ideas.

But some of this Quantum stuff is so unable to happen that it would really be like everybody in the world winning the same lottery at the same time. All QT has to do with probability and improbability.

[goldkingcoiner]

^^^ Virtually all evolution ideas have the word 'random' in them somewhere. Random simply means that we don't know what the cause and effect process really is for evolution. Since there isn't any spontaneity proven anywhere, cause and effect is all there is. Cause and effect suggests planned operation rather than happenstance... which is totally against the idea of evolution even existing.

I can only speak from a physics background, not biology. What you say makes sense at smaller and smaller scales, until you reach the scale of quantum physics where what you can or cannot observe hits a barrier. For all intents and purposes, until we develop a better theory of our physical world, cause and effect is very much random to us.

Here is the big flaw with QT. QT essentially starts out with an idea the probability of which makes it something that would never happen. Maybe the odds are so against it happening that they may be like 10^0000000000 to 1 against. But they are imagined to have happened, and all kinds of things that would have happened if they happened are examined.

Then the whole ball of wax, including the improbable happening, and all the stuff that would have to go with it, are applied to things that DO exist, and we get a picture of something new that we never would have begun to imagine if we hadn't done it that way. From there engineers make new stuff out of these ideas.

But some of this Quantum stuff is so unable to happen that it would really be like everybody in the world winning the same lottery at the same time. All QT has to do with probability and improbability.

I couldn't make sense of anything you wrote until I looked at your signature. I think I am not going to waste time debating with you. Its like trying to accelerate your car on neutral.

[BADecker]

^^^ Virtually all evolution ideas have the word 'random' in them somewhere. Random simply means that we don't know what the cause and effect process really is for evolution. Since there isn't any spontaneity proven anywhere, cause and effect is all there is. Cause and effect suggests planned operation rather than happenstance... which is totally against the idea of evolution even existing.

I can only speak from a physics background, not biology. What you say makes sense at smaller and smaller scales, until you reach the scale of quantum physics where what you can or cannot observe hits a barrier. For all intents and purposes, until we develop a better theory of our physical world, cause and effect is very much random to us.

Here is the big flaw with QT. QT essentially starts out with an idea the probability of which makes it something that would never happen. Maybe the odds are so against it happening that they may be like 10^0000000000 to 1 against. But they are imagined to have happened, and all kinds of things that would have happened if they happened are examined.

Then the whole ball of wax, including the improbable happening, and all the stuff that would have to go with it, are applied to things that DO exist, and we get a picture of something new that we never would have begun to imagine if we hadn't done it that way. From there engineers make new stuff out of these ideas.

But some of this Quantum stuff is so unable to happen that it would really be like everybody in the world winning the same lottery at the same time. All QT has to do with probability and improbability.

I couldn't make sense of anything you wrote until I looked at your signature. I think I am not going to waste time debating with you. Its like trying to accelerate your car on neutral.

But you are used to that, 'trying to accelerate your car on neutral'. Exactly where you are going with QT.

[just_Alice]

Oh for heaven's sake, how many times? The mRNA vaccines can’t change your DNA!! Like, it’s not an assumption, it physically can’t!

For mRNA to become DNA you need an enzyme called reverse transcriptase and we, humans, don’t have those (except for in special regions that encode retrotransposons, but that’s a different story and they only work in a specific manner for several sequences)!

To reach the nucleus special signal recognition patterns are also required, as well as special transporter proteins. At last, in order to be inserted into human DNA, you need to get rid of histones that hold DNA together in chromosomes, unravel it (which also requires a set of enzymes and molecular factors), and make cuts in the strand (this also needs to be specifically triggered).

It’s a complex process and even after that, the chances of insertion aren’t that high. Get over it, people! And stop fearing scientists so much, rather fear mass media which spreads so many fakes. That’s where the real horror is…

[BADecker]

Oh for heaven's sake, how many times? The mRNA vaccines can’t change your DNA!! Like, it’s not an assumption, it physically can’t!

For mRNA to become DNA you need an enzyme called reverse transcriptase and we, humans, don’t have those (except for in special regions that encode retrotransposons, but that’s a different story and they only work in a specific manner for several sequences)!

To reach the nucleus special signal recognition patterns are also required, as well as special transporter proteins. At last, in order to be inserted into human DNA, you need to get rid of histones that hold DNA together in chromosomes, unravel it (which also requires a set of enzymes and molecular factors), and make cuts in the strand (this also needs to be specifically triggered).

It’s a complex process and even after that, the chances of insertion aren’t that high. Get over it, people! And stop fearing scientists so much, rather fear mass media which spreads so many fakes. That’s where the real horror is…

There are several things missing from your explanation... your explanation, which is right in its simplicity.

1. As you say, the mRNA doesn't do anything other than deliver a message. Here is a good simple explanation https://www.civilbeat.org/2021/04/what-is-mrna-heres-a-crash-course-on-what-it-does/. But what you don't say is that there are thousands of messages it can be designed to deliver, instructing your cells to do the things that the mRNA can't. So, what are the messages telling the cells to do in the vaxx, and how do you know it?

2. Many people seem to get no adverse effect, or only a minor irritation of some sort, from the mRNA vaxx. Other  folks die almost immediately. And there are all kinds of reactions that come about over a period of time, from days to months after the jab, which wouldn't have come about without the jab. See https://openvaers.com/, a simple, statistical breakdown of the CDCs own info... which is lacking both in quantity and quality. Since adverse effects come about at varying times after the jab, how does anybody know what the longest time for reaction to take place is? It might take 10 years for some people... or longer.

3. There are loads of real doctors and scientists who are not conspiracy people - who often are vaccine proponents - who are expressing dangers in mRNA vaxxes. Do you really think that all these professionals and experts are mistaken? Do you really think that they are simply jealous that a few companies got there before they did?

Inside these 3 points, alone, are loads of sub-points that you blow right by without even addressing them. All your talk about the safety of the mRNA vaccines is pure baloney from example (VAERS) and from the warnings of health professionals all over the place.

Since you suggest by your talk that the vaccines are safe and effective, yet you blow right by the facts, you are either way too ignorant to be talking like you do, or you are a Big Pharma shill, out to help them make money at the expense of the people.

[Natsuu]

So, what are the messages telling the cells to do in the vaxx, and how do you know it?

?

There's no feedback option for this kind of things. The vaxx delivers the message, and its gone, there will be no receiver for the feedback/reply.

How do I know it, it is in the basics of molecular biology, and the fact that you accept the concept of DNA and RNA, means that you accept the basics of this which is the mRNA, tRNA, and rRNA

But what you don't say is that there are thousands of messages it can be designed to deliver

The main word for this is "CAN" and overthinking about this thing is the anxiety most people have that refrains them from making decisions. This method of thinking is psychological, and most often, it makes us missed opportunities

There are loads of real doctors and scientists who are not conspiracy people - who often are vaccine proponents - who are expressing dangers in mRNA vaxxes.

When you said "LOADS", how many is it actually comparing to the overall numbers of "real doctors and scientists who are not conspiracy people"? cause believe it or not, it will not even reach 15-20% of the entire population.

[figliar0]

Well, we (in the meaning of mankind) used to rate and evaluate everything we
meet on our journey through life. But we must have in mind, that some of these
ratings are just our subjective point of view and maybe it simply cannot be
applied to such a thing as evolution is.

We know that evolution of life is full of dead and blind branches, species
that extincted completelly. Species that were superseded by others. How can we
tell, that way mankind's evolving is unnatural? Maybe it will be the final
victory over other species on the planet in this longtime-period battle. Maybe
it is the only way to start next journey in the evolution of whole universe.

We are blind wanderers and it is not up to us to deciding what is natural and
what isn't. Everything what mankind did was a part of evolution process that
started long before us. These process brought us to this moment in time. There
are just two possible future realities: We will survive or we will extinct.
That is only relevant rating of mankind's deeds, when comes to rating
evolution.

What will the future look like? Who knows such a things? Maybe we will
extinct. But it is sure that this eventuality is totally natural thing in the
diversity of evolution and hence there is nothing to worry about. The universe
will still works as it used to do.

[Gases]

The advancement of biological sciences can make people live longer, and I believe more is to bring about social progress.I am studying alien civilization recently. And Bitcoin should also be a form of civilization.

[OgNasty]

The Netflix documentary Unnatural Selection was pretty crazy talking about and even showing people trying to “hack” their own bodies to do things it wouldn’t do on it’s own. The scariest part is the documentary is a couple of years old. I was shocked at how easily it was shown to be to obtain things that in essence altered your DNA.

[inoes]

Humans have a social nature.  So every human being is dependent on other humans.  This requires humans to be able to change, including drastically, is our outer packaging, attitudes, and ways of thinking.  Likewise, among others, physical appearance, attitude, maturity, insight, and ideology.  This includes feelings of resentment, jealousy, or heartache that previously you could only keep to yourself in your heart, which can also bring change to individuals and groups.  So I agree more if humans can change caused by humans.  Even the innocent nature can change yes because of human activities.

[tvbcof]

...
the only thing left is the neo-nazi fear of the lineage of 'pureblood' being diluted into mix-race offspring..
...

Talmudic Judaism pre-dates 'Nazi' ideology in this respect by a few thousand years, and is vastly more widely distributed and powerful than a few seemingly mostly imaginary fringe groups in Idaho.

It's probably safe to say that 'Nazi ideology' is on life support complements of Jewish dominated media primarily as diversion so that people could get away with ignoring the proverbial elephant in the room.

[PreciousH]

According to the oldest skull of humans, it is said that primitive humans have small skulls, there were time when there was no single human on Earth, but evolution still continues after the humans evolved, it can be hard to notice but will become obvious after thousands or millions of years passed. We do not know where the world is going, I believe the scientists will be the one that will not let people to know some structures or functions in their body may be evolving artificially.

When covid 19 was known to the world, there has been several mRNA vaccines, I hope this is not one of the scientist manipulation that is evolving humans away from what should be natural towards what is artificial. Only organic fertilizers were used by the old farmers, but now they are using inorganic which we see difference in foods that inorganic fertilizers is not good like organic. I have been reading about genetic modified crops also. I hope the natural make-up of human being will not become artificial one day with scientists manipulation

What do you think about this?

I think it was evolution that led to creation of humans. Billions of years ago, animals evolve before humans when the earth was structured and well-organised in the form of a crust. Climate also changing due to human activity. Therefore, humans are changing naturally.

[Oshosondy]

I think it was evolution that led to creation of humans. Billions of years ago, animals evolve before humans when the earth was structured and well-organised in the form of a crust. Climate also changing due to human activity. Therefore, humans are changing naturally.

I too believed that humans are changing naturally. I watch the documentary of tortoise and turtle which makes me think more about that, about how they have primitive ones while the the ones existing now have more shells than the old ones but the shell add more weight to them while scientists believed that the old ones move faster than the present new ones.

Humans are genetically changing naturally if scientists can trace primitive humans which they said to have small skulls to the modern era ones, there are some differences already.

[Lordhermes]

Change is constant,but not all humans have the ability to change.Naturally,change is suppose to come when it's due for every human,but some person's just remain adamant,and won't want to change at all no matter what.

Change comes by choice,and when it comes,it just like a reflex action,before you know yourself,you are a new person from your old self.

[Cnut237]

Virtually all evolution ideas have the word 'random' in them somewhere. Random simply means that we don't know what the cause and effect process really is for evolution. Since there isn't any spontaneity proven anywhere, cause and effect is all there is. Cause and effect suggests planned operation rather than happenstance... which is totally against the idea of evolution even existing.

This just demonstrates that you misunderstand the concept. Evolution is a two-step process.

1) Cell mutations occur due to copying errors. Whether or not this is truly random when considering a single instance of mutation is arguable. But it's not really relevant... the point is that when we are talking about the evolution of a species, the total number of mutations across all individuals within the species will include sufficient variety as to cover a wide range of effects. This introduces a variety of characteristics to the population.

2) Natural selection. This is most certainly not random. Whilst the selection pressures may be entirely separate to the development of the species so far, and may appear to be random (sudden temperature drop, sudden loss of habitat, etc), this is incidental.

What matters is that evolution occurs as a result of the combination of these two points, 'random' mutations, and selection pressures.

1) Some gazelle infants exhibit mutations that mean they can run faster. Some exhibit mutations that mean they are stronger, but run more slowly.
2) Selection pressure: this generation of lions is on average slightly faster than the previous generation.

Points 1 and 2 combine to mean that the gazelles with the 'go faster' mutation are more likely to survive and pass on their genetic profile to the next generation. The 'stronger but slower' gazelles are more likely to get eaten. Result: the next generation of gazelles are slightly faster than the previous generation. The species has undergone an evolution, through natural selection of 'random' genetic variations.

Mutations may be random. Evolution is not.

Here is the big flaw with QT.

I'm going to out out on a limb and suggest that you have no understanding of quantum mechanics. Fortunately I do have some background in this area, and will happily explain some key concepts if you wish.

[tvbcof]

...
1) Cell mutations occur due to copying errors. Whether or not this is truly random when considering a single instance of mutation is arguable. But it's not really relevant... the point is that when we are talking about the evolution of a species, the total number of mutations across all individuals within the species will include sufficient variety as to cover a wide range of effects. This introduces a variety of characteristics to the population.
...

Just because it is interesting and you seem not to know, individuals are classically considered the same species if they can mate and produce viable offspring.  If they cannot, they are not.

By way of an illustration, a donkey and a horse can mate and produce a mule, but the mule is itself not capable of breading with any other mule or horse or donkey.  The creatures are healthy enough, and they have a nice mix of characteristics from both parents, but they are sterile.  It has to do with chromosomal differences which are just to much for fertility, and this tends to occur when populations are isolated from one another over a sufficient period of time.

---

Contrary to what the Hasidic and kabbalahistic rabbis say, jews and goyim are in fact the same species.  At least by the above definition.  Their definition is more esoteric having do to with to which soul got given the 'sacred spark'.  Most people will be unsurprised to learn that He gave it only to his 'chosen' people, and everything else on earth (most specifically including the goyim) were put in the universe for the use and benefit of His chosen.  Eventually said 'chosen people' are expected to 'heal the earth' by sweeping up the spark-less souls of the non-Jews and throwing them into the dust-bin of history (though some goy may be kept on as slaves.)

Some people believe that that time ('tikkun olam') is finally here.  How the various Jewish people running the various vaccine companies, running 'simulations', setting 'vaccine' policies, etc feel is not presently known...but probably should be...

[Smartvirus]

Mutations may be random. Evolution is not.

This explains the concept of succession. Gradually adaptations until a stable community is established. There have been a lot of constraints in the growth of things in recent times and all traces right to the activities of man. As population continues to rise, nature poses a different kind of resistance to keep everything in check which trigger various responses, either consciously or unconsciously to ensure adaptation.

There may not be enough proof to account for certain occurances in evolution but that doesn't deny evolution of its existence. Its just a matter of time before certain discoveries are made and brought to light. Even up to date, archaeological findings still continues to surface and breath forth certain truths of past life and existence.