2012 - The end is coming........again!

[taksraven]

The "missing link" crap is completely bogus. There are tons of intermediate fossils labeled as "homo archaic" that run the spectrum from looking amazing homo sapien and looking more like a form of Australopithecus. There ARE intermediate forms, it's clear as day if any of those nut jobs ever bothered to do more research than open up a pamphlet geared for 7th graders. Also, for anyone who cares, do some research on human blood types (ABO) and the occurrence of those blood types in the great apes. It's pretty interesting stuff and it also pretty clearly indicates our common ancestry.

And for a real kick, there's scientists working today to unlock remnant dino DNA in birds to restore things like long tails and teeth.

It's just reeks of the giant spaghetti monster to look for some sort of outside influence in evolution when the mechanics we understand today go so far to explain the process.

Um, anyway, 2012 looks like it will be crap.

Taksraven

[Macross_Fanboy]

I never got to watch that movie A Day After Tomorrow completely, I thought it was a load a bull that people in a helicopter were frozen instantly and whatnot. This movie looks kinda interesting, I didn't watch 10,000B.C. all the way, I missed the part of the king being an alien. It reminded me of Stargate since the character exposed him as not being a god just like O'Neil proved Ra was no god. Wonder when the trailer will come out.

[reddsun1]

And for a real kick, there's scientists working today to unlock remnant dino DNA in birds to restore things like long tails and teeth.

So you saw that show too, eh? LOL, I watch waaaay too much History Channel... It is quite disturbing though, when you think about it--the fact that genetic traits can be mainipulated--engineered so to speak--simply by introducing certain proteins into the DNA strand during embryonic development. Making hens grow tails--and teeth?! I've never been able to look at chicken the same way since...

Um, anyway, 2012 looks like it will be crap.

Taksraven

And yes, I agree--this movie will probably SUCK.

Edited December 12, 2008 by reddsun1

[CoryHolmes]

And yes, I agree--this movie will probably SUCK.

The question is, can it be entertaining crap and enjoyable sucktatude? 'cuz it is possible for a movie to both suck balls and yet still while away the hours of my life. At least that's what I tell myself whenever I watch the new Knight Rider...

[reddsun1]

The question is, can it be entertaining crap and enjoyable sucktatude? 'cuz it is possible for a movie to both suck balls and yet still while away the hours of my life. At least that's what I tell myself whenever I watch the new Knight Rider...

True, true--a valid question.

If I came across it on cable, and it was just a few minutes into the movie, would I stay on that ch and watch it to kill some time? Yes, perhaps.

But would I pay someone for the opportunity to sit and watch it? Aw, hell naw!

[lord_breetai]

The goverments would do just that Build a nice cozy bunkers somewhere and fill them with food and supplies and playstation games and then invite only the "best" people to come join them.

Maybe we should all go underground

And try to live a life without the sun.

Please be careful not to make a sound,

Because there may not be room for everyone.

(Do you think you might...)

sorry couldn't resist.

[taksraven]

Maybe we should all go underground

And try to live a life without the sun.

Please be careful not to make a sound,

Because there may not be room for everyone.

(Do you think you might...)

sorry couldn't resist.

Ok,

I was never cool in school

I'm sure you don't remember me

And now it's been 10 years

I'm still wondering who to be

But I'd love to mix in circles, cliques, and social coteries - that's me

Hand me my nose ring (Can we be happy?)

Show me the mosh pit (Can we be happy?)

We can be happy underground

Taksraven

[anime52k8]

Ok,

I was never cool in school

I'm sure you don't remember me

And now it's been 10 years

I'm still wondering who to be

But I'd love to mix in circles, cliques, and social coteries - that's me

Hand me my nose ring (Can we be happy?)

Show me the mosh pit (Can we be happy?)

We can be happy underground

Taksraven

you guy's deserve this,

We're no strangers to love

You know the rules and so do I

A full commitment's what I'm thinking of

You wouldn't get this from any other guy

I just wanna tell you how I'm feeling

Gotta make you understand...

(I just love F**king things up)

[Lonely Soldier Boy]

you guy's deserve this,

We're no strangers to love

You know the rules and so do I

A full commitment's what I'm thinking of

You wouldn't get this from any other guy

I just wanna tell you how I'm feeling

Gotta make you understand...

(I just love F**king things up)

Oh, no! Rick Astley is dead!

[wolfx]

RICKROOOOLLEED?

Going underground and being subject to social experiments? NooooOOO. Meh i'm at work and can't see the trailer that everyone's b**chin about.

[Lonely Soldier Boy]

You're not missing anything. Just think in the trailer from The Day After Tomorrow and add more water.

[taksraven]

You're not missing anything. Just think in the trailer from The Day After Tomorrow and add more water.

Excellent summary Hawkeye!

Taksraven

[big F]

You're not missing anything. Just think in the trailer from The Day After Tomorrow and add more water.

A lot more water

[anime52k8]

A lot more water

and a foreboding Tibetan monk.

[big F]

and a foreboding Tibetan monk.

yeah if I was the monk I'd be thinking to hell with this bell ringing lark. gonna find something more interesting to do with the last few seconds of my life... like poo my pants at the big wave.

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

Not sure if this was directed towards me, but I'll answer anyways . First, I never stated that ET's don't exist, to quote myself:

Also, never stated that I've shut my mind down to all probabilities, in fact I said that all things are possible, and even the best fool proof scientific theory on any topic is but a theory open to revision:

My point is just that tin-foil enthusiasts and conspiracy theorists love to draw the alien connection way before any other more plausible explanations are established. When we study something odd in nature or archeology or any topic for that matter we try and explain it based on our existing understanding of things first and build upon that, as opposed to just completely turning a new page on research and claim that the "aliens did it." Progress and science is built upon layers of existing knowledge - ie. you must understand how gravity works before building a plane or going into space. Even if a theory is proved to be wrong eventually, the paper trail will help explain in posterity why a particular line of thought is incorrect.

And regarding the human seeding theory (that Homo Sapiens come from another world). I think it's complete BS, but hey the internet is a big democracy and I respect everyone's right to say whatever they want. I can only do my best to present evidence to challenge this.

First, creationists or other <insert colorful group> love to point towards the lack of a missing link to invalidate evolution of humans (or evolution in general). Trying to find a missing evolutionary link is akin to looking at a chain of office paper clips and asking which one is a real species, and which one is a link? It doesn't work that way. Because it's based on random mutations of DNA, evolution can go sideways, branch-out, revert, and in all directions, the particular fitness of one product against an environment is what determines which variation survives, not how advanced or primitive said species is.

One needs to look no further then the DNA evidence. Humans and most animals that inhabit this earth share 90% of the same DNA. Chimps (our closest species relative) share 98.5% DNA similarity with humans. Related to DNA is that all animals (MWF member included) pretty much have the same metabolic pathways. The way a dog's DNA is copied, transcripted, and used to assemble a protein is exactly the same a human would (this is called the Terminal Dogma btw.... Evangelion reference ).

Also, if it's not evidence enough, the vestigial structures within your own body, pieces of tissue that serve no apparent purpose like your tonsils, appendix, etc, is clear proof of man/womankind's animal ancestry. Did you know that whales have hip bones even though they have no feet?

So for the purpose of science fiction, it's all good and entertaining to write about an alien connection to the biological or social evolution of humans, but in the real world, this represents the least plausible theory of how things came into being.

You're missing the point. I'm not here to argue whether creationists or evolutionists are right. I'm saying for the sake of argument: if you went into space yourself, saw with your very own eyes an intelligent lifeform on the surface of an alien planet. Went back to earth to tell people what you saw. And all the scientists laughed at you because you had no proof of the existence of aliens, it wouldn't matter what the scientists told you. They are basing their info on things they know. Not on what they don't know. You know something they don't because of what you saw. Just because there is no way to prove it to them doesn't mean it isn't a fact. It becomes a fact to you when you see it for yourself, experiment and find out what's real/fake and can confirm what you saw was in fact not mere delusion. It's just not going to be a fact to those who didn't get an opportunity like you, to see it.

Do you understand the logic?

That is if you are a scientist, did a bunch of experiments to prove all the theories to see if they are factual, were happy with those ones on earth but then ignored what else was out there, you would be in expert only in the sciences you know not the the ones you don't know about, so there is no point speculating on things you can't know due to your lack of experience in a field you never knew existed due to not being given a chance to study what isn't from earth. If they aliens really were around (and for the sake of argument the flying saucers that the conspiracy people capture on film are not convincing hoaxes or man-made ones but the type they say comes from another world) what scientists say that haven't even had a chance to see it in person and study doesn't hold much weight until say the government officially comes clean and allows something like that to be studied by all scientists out there not just ones they want to see it. (not saying that the government is lying but that IF.....there were real alien ufos, then there would be good reason to not let the public know everything about something like that any more than you would let anyone build nukes easily because the tech could be misused in some way - there are plausible reasons to hide a dangerous thing)

Please do not turn this into a debate about whether its real or not real. I'm saying if in future, people see stuff on a different planet, say what they saw, and they have no evidence to back up what they saw, doesn't mean they are kooky or making it up, just that we shouldn't assume we already know everything there is to know and that there is no purpose going out to explore to find new discoveries. If people didn't explore and find the hobbit cave or whatever it was, wouldn't that be bad for science because there is less for them to analyse now? Is it safer to assume we already found everything and nothing else new should be brought in? Of course not. This is not a debate about evolution. I wouldn't bother coming to a science fiction board for a discussion about that.

[Ghost Train]

You're missing the point. I'm not here to argue whether creationists or evolutionists are right. I'm saying for the sake of argument: if you went into space yourself, saw with your very own eyes an intelligent lifeform on the surface of an alien planet. Went back to earth to tell people what you saw. And all the scientists laughed at you because you had no proof of the existence of aliens, it wouldn't matter what the scientists told you. They are basing their info on things they know. Not on what they don't know. You know something they don't because of what you saw. Just because there is no way to prove it to them doesn't mean it isn't a fact. It becomes a fact to you when you see it for yourself, experiment and find out what's real/fake and can confirm what you saw was in fact not mere delusion. It's just not going to be a fact to those who didn't get an opportunity like you, to see it.

Do you understand the logic?

That is if you are a scientist, did a bunch of experiments to prove all the theories to see if they are factual, were happy with those ones on earth but then ignored what else was out there, you would be in expert only in the sciences you know not the the ones you don't know about, so there is no point speculating on things you can't know due to your lack of experience in a field you never knew existed due to not being given a chance to study what isn't from earth. If they aliens really were around (and for the sake of argument the flying saucers that the conspiracy people capture on film are not convincing hoaxes or man-made ones but the type they say comes from another world) what scientists say that haven't even had a chance to see it in person and study doesn't hold much weight until say the government officially comes clean and allows something like that to be studied by all scientists out there not just ones they want to see it. (not saying that the government is lying but that IF.....there were real alien ufos, then there would be good reason to not let the public know everything about something like that any more than you would let anyone build nukes easily because the tech could be misused in some way - there are plausible reasons to hide a dangerous thing)

Please do not turn this into a debate about whether its real or not real. I'm saying if in future, people see stuff on a different planet, say what they saw, and they have no evidence to back up what they saw, doesn't mean they are kooky or making it up, just that we shouldn't assume we already know everything there is to know and that there is no purpose going out to explore to find new discoveries. If people didn't explore and find the hobbit cave or whatever it was, wouldn't that be bad for science because there is less for them to analyse now? Is it safer to assume we already found everything and nothing else new should be brought in? Of course not. This is not a debate about evolution. I wouldn't bother coming to a science fiction board for a discussion about that.

No, I don't understand your logic, but supposing I do...

Never said aliens don't exist, (said this repeatedly in my last few posts). It's just the idea of them having influenced us greatly genetically or socially is "kooky." Or at least I find said idea to be somewhat insulting and not particularly well backed up by science.

Also, if someone does visit some distant world in the future, I'm pretty sure they would bring evidence back of some sort. Just look at those cute little Mars rover troll around on the red planet!

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

Pyramids on mars:

The whole point of the conspiracy theorists saying there even is a conspiracy to begin with is that someone is covering things up for whatever odd reason. NASA for example is often cited as being part of the conspiracy. Because if people are seeing UFOs outside their windows in cities, (some of it might be fake of course, this is the age of photoshop) and the guys looking out into space haven't seen any ufos, isn't it reasonable to assume they just don't want you to know?

So the message they are giving to others is the idea of aliens being with us riding around in UFOs, but that they haven't been 'allowed' (evidence is carted away by the military - so that means scientists from the outside can't get a chance to see it) to get the evidence out to the public because "men in black" or someone has threatened them to not have that evidence out. Now if this is at a government level of coverup, do you think the media is going to be allowed to do it without their permission? (assuming for a second there is a real coverup of knowledge of intelligent lifeforms out there or some evidence of intelligent lifeform like a crashed ship or a abandoned base, and they are not lying) Of course not. So we shouldn't assume we know absolutely everything.

The hobbit cave = new information. People had not believed in that species before. So new knowledge is being added and scientists have the chance to get something new. My point: don't assume you know absolutely everything there is to know.

And yeah I understand your point: aliens didn't create humans because there is evidence on earth of monkeys being ancestors. There is debate amongst creationionist and evolutionist scientists which I don't want to get into here. My post wasn't to get into one of those which is what you post was doing.

About the insulting part: Actually what difference does it makes who gets offended? Isn't trying to get the truth of how things came about much more important than being nice? I'm not a big fan of political correctness. People should just speak their mind so others know where they stand right from the start. My point isn't to try to challenge your own belief, just to say people must think out of the box: Why is it ok to just assume scientists have access to all information from the beginning (don't people want to keep technology secret so others can't steal it?) instead of some of that information being kept secret or that information being hidden away somewhere? It's a lazy mans way of doing things. It's not as simple as: If one guy knows something, that means everyone should know it at the same time; with our brains networked together and everyone has their share permission on their files and folders set on for others to look at.

I'm saying the attitude would be more like: "this information is valuable to someone, let's not share it, lets use it, keep it for ourselves, and hide it." In an imperfect world not everyone is 'nice' and wants to do the right thing.

The tinfoil crowd is saying "we don't have evidence gathered up right now. We still want you to believe us but we don't have evidence. Us not having evidence doesn't automatically mean those who think we are liars know absolutely everything or that those that do know something which the pulic doesn't, will just come out in the open and hand that info out freely. There might be some reason they can't speak (signed something saying they were not allowed to talk) or they just have their own reasons. (it might destroy their career or reputation and they've decided only on their deathbed will they reveal something like that. sorta like how some gays are "scared to come out in the open" because they don't want to live a life harassed or a target of anyone.

Edited December 17, 2008 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[big F]

It's just the idea of them having influenced us greatly genetically or socially is "kooky." Or at least I find said idea to be somewhat insulting and not particularly well backed up by science.

Not throwing fuel on the fire but isn't that essentially what the Macross story is saying. Therefore by definition you must be at least part Kooky, as probably we all are.

[Ghost Train]

Pyramids on mars:

The whole point of the conspiracy theorists saying there even is a conspiracy to begin with is that someone is covering things up for whatever odd reason. NASA for example is often cited as being part of the conspiracy. Because if people are seeing UFOs outside their windows in cities, (some of it might be fake of course, this is the age of photoshop) and the guys looking out into space haven't seen any ufos, isn't it reasonable to assume they just don't want you to know?

So the message they are giving to others is the idea of aliens being with us riding around in UFOs, but that they haven't been 'allowed' (evidence is carted away by the military - so that means scientists from the outside can't get a chance to see it) to get the evidence out to the public because "men in black" or someone has threatened them to not have that evidence out. Now if this is at a government level of coverup, do you think the media is going to be allowed to do it without their permission? (assuming for a second there is a real coverup of knowledge of intelligent lifeforms out there or some evidence of intelligent lifeform like a crashed ship or a abandoned base, and they are not lying) Of course not. So we shouldn't assume we know absolutely everything.

The hobbit cave = new information. People had not believed in that species before. So new knowledge is being added and scientists have the chance to get something new. My point: don't assume you know absolutely everything there is to know.

And yeah I understand your point: aliens didn't create humans because there is evidence on earth of monkeys being ancestors. There is debate amongst creationionist and evolutionist scientists which I don't want to get into here. My post wasn't to get into one of those which is what you post was doing.

About the insulting part: Actually what difference does it makes who gets offended? Isn't trying to get the truth of how things came about much more important than being nice? I'm not a big fan of political correctness. People should just speak their mind so others know where they stand right from the start. My point isn't to try to challenge your own belief, just to say people must think out of the box: Why is it ok to just assume scientists have access to all information from the beginning (don't people want to keep technology secret so others can't steal it?) instead of some of that information being kept secret or that information being hidden away somewhere? It's a lazy mans way of doing things. It's not as simple as: If one guy knows something, that means everyone should know it at the same time; with our brains networked together and everyone has their share permission on their files and folders set on for others to look at.

I'm saying the attitude would be more like: "this information is valuable to someone, let's not share it, lets use it, keep it for ourselves, and hide it." In an imperfect world not everyone is 'nice' and wants to do the right thing.

The tinfoil crowd is saying "we don't have evidence gathered up right now. We still want you to believe us but we don't have evidence. Us not having evidence doesn't automatically mean those who think we are liars know absolutely everything or that those that do know something which the pulic doesn't, will just come out in the open and hand that info out freely. There might be some reason they can't speak (signed something saying they were not allowed to talk) or they just have their own reasons. (it might destroy their career or reputation and they've decided only on their deathbed will they reveal something like that. sorta like how some gays are "scared to come out in the open" because they don't want to live a life harassed or a target of anyone.

I don't think anyone has closed the book on anything and automatically assumes that everything is known. But there is a big difference between legitimate intellectual curiosity and pseudo-science which is what a lot of the kooks are into. There is plenty of intellectual and scientific curiosity going around in the actual scientific community. The difference is that real scientific progress bases the foundations for future discovery upon stuff we know already know... that's how you understand things, We go from A to B to C... not skip a whole series of steps and jump from A to X. Plenty of creativity and ingenuity went into creating the current world we live in... and all of it was based on building upon our understanding of science and not automatically assume that something is "magical" or "alien." The problem with a lot of these UFO "I believe" people is that they often times discredit themselves, as their practices have no set standards and they don't actually posses as open of a mind you'd think they have - as they are super reluctant about other natural phenomena that could have caused something, and extremely sure that they saw something ET. This is no different than what you perceive as being a close minded person who believes that 99% of so called paranormal stuff have perfectly good scientific explanations.

Regarding what I said about "Alien interventions being a racist theory": it is, there is no denying it. Maybe racist is somewhat of a strong label, and ethnocentric would be more proper. No one ever says anything like the Roman Colliseum or the Parthenon was built by aliens - but whenever someone describes a an archeological site of non Anglo/European heritage it automatically becomes the product of alien intervention, because said bigots cannot believe that other cultures could have built these things. Now that is being close-minded, and quite frankly ignorant. Honestly, I'm appalled by your comment:

Actually what difference does it makes who gets offended? Isn't trying to get the truth of how things came about much more important than being nice? I'm not a big fan of political correctness.

Lol huh... wut... truth? By any standard, the alien theory is laughable at best and suited only for fiction. There is plenty of archeological and scientific evidence explaining how ancient humans achieved great things. On the other hand, you have the racist tinfoil crowd theory that says that aliens must have built the damm things because it was too difficult. Also, no one is denying your freedom of speech, I'm just suggesting that actual science is better and has achieved better results than pseudo-science - however, sometimes an anomaly occurs where if someone says something that is obviously wrong (morally wrong) with a loud enough voice and there is no counteracting antidote for it, it becomes the truth - see 1930's Germany.

Scientists don't know everything, no one ever will, but they sure as hell know A LOT more than pseudo-scientists and other kooks. If you need convincing just look at all the progress the human species has made in the 20th century, and then compare that to the achievements of kooks and tin-foil club members. The day pseudo-science starts to produce good results I will revisit my personal views, but I'm still waiting.

Not throwing fuel on the fire but isn't that essentially what the Macross story is saying. Therefore by definition you must be at least part Kooky, as probably we all are.

Not really, I just troll on this board ... jk XD. I already stated a few posts ago that it's all good for fiction and literature, but applying the theory in real life is fail fail fail.

Edited December 18, 2008 by Ghost Train

[MSW]

Day after Tomorrow was extremely stupid.

"Quick! Run! Its the cold cam stalking us!"

"Crap! the cold even goes around corners!"

This 2012, like the rest of the directors films, looks just as intelligent.

As for conspiricy theorists, they seem to have a pecular modus operandi. "Big things require big explanations." The lot of them should be locked up for stealing oxygen from the rest of us while spewing thier concoctions.

Scientific laws describe observable phenomenon. Scientific thoeries describe how phenomenon occur. Scientific theories DO NOT grow up to be scientific laws. Scientific theories are not guesses. Scientific theories (like evolution and relativity) can, and have, been proven. If you are looking to replace a scientific theory with one of your own, then it must give the same answers the old theory gives...In other words whatever is proven true with the old scientific theory must also be proven true in your shiny new theory as well.

Edited December 24, 2008 by MSW

[the white drew carey]

True, true--a valid question.

If I came across it on cable, and it was just a few minutes into the movie, would I stay on that ch and watch it to kill some time? Yes, perhaps.

But would I pay someone for the opportunity to sit and watch it? Aw, hell naw!

I'd have to agree. Although I almost went and saw 10,000 BC with a bunch of anthropologists, but I couldn't decide whether or not that would be fun, or annoying.

[big F]

Although I almost went and saw 10,000 BC with a bunch of anthropologists, but I couldn't decide whether or not that would be fun, or annoying.

Probably both

[Einherjar]

So I've taken a look at the various commercials and promotional websites for the movie and know a little bit more about their plan to survive 2012.

There's some big passenger boats to transport people under severe conditions to underground safe havens to wait out the disasters. And then the websites go into space stations, moon colonies, and finding another planet. But, before any of that happens it's every man for himself. And if you're really screwed, you're stuck with a survival kit suited for a particular environment.

We're boned.

[Ghost Train]

WE MUST SURVIVE LOL... Macross 30th anniversary series, whatever it may be could still be airing (or soon airing) during the "window of destruction." ... or at least we'll get an OVA before 12.21.2012 .

Edited October 25, 2009 by Ghost Train

[shiroikaze]

WE MUST SURVIVE LOL... Macross 30th anniversary series, whatever it may be could still be airing (or soon airing) during the "window of destruction." ... or at least we'll get an OVA before 12.21.2012 .

Ahaha... Macross LAM in theaters in Japan in 2012.

[Cent]

So in the trailer, it seems as if the entire crust of the earth was collapsing on itself, being sucked underground. You know, wouldn't be a lot easier for these far fetched act of nature movies to just incorporate a rapid reaction in the Sun that would flash fry everyone on earth and wipe out our atmosphere? Yea. So much simpler.

[eugimon]

So in the trailer, it seems as if the entire crust of the earth was collapsing on itself, being sucked underground. You know, wouldn't be a lot easier for these far fetched act of nature movies to just incorporate a rapid reaction in the Sun that would flash fry everyone on earth and wipe out our atmosphere? Yea. So much simpler.

that was Knowing.

[Uxi]

that was Knowing.

[EXO]

Hopefully by 2012 we'll all be on the Megarodo... it'll be like Noah's Ark...lol.

[Ghost Train]

You know they'll select only a few thousand people to go on the ark... their first criteria of selection will probably be: "Otaku need not apply!"

But when the arc returns to Earth, they will find that humans survived the catastrophe but have been mutated by the events, thus setting the stage for the 2013 Mutant-Exiles war to be fought with transforming aircraft.

[Max Jenius]

Gamma Ray Burst. ZAP!

Be there.

[nugundamII]

This movie looks gay

The family looks like they are laughing going through a rollercoaster ride

DUMB

the official end of Hollywood

[Einherjar]

Just like in The Day After Tomorrow, they're accelerating the effects of whatever theory they're basing this on to make a good movie. The scientific community is going to have a field day with this one.

[Ghost Train]

Often times, Hollywood is a thorn on the side of freedom of expression, rather than a friend. You'd think that they are our free society's first line of defense against crazy people who stand in front of cars, get hurt, and then blame video games/movies, but they're not...

Case in point being the fact that not a single US distributor picked up the incredibly well done biopic of Charles Darwin - Creation, as they feared that the subject of evolution is tooooo controversial for US audiences (lol).

I only limit myself to going to a cinema maybe 3x time a year now.

Edited October 27, 2009 by Ghost Train