Rahasya - 24 January 2010 01:57 PM

According the the infor5mation on over 30,000 clay tablets written in cuneiform it was the Annunaki who were from Nibaru, a planet that has a 3,600 year orbit around our Sun. I know how outlandish this sounds but with the amount of evidence one has to take it serious enough to research. A very high official of the Catholic Church (Monsignor Corrado Balduci) said that after researching the evidence (remember that they have 52 miles of library at the Vatican) one has to consider the possibility that we were genetically engineered from sentient beings already existing on Earth. Remember that up until a few years ago that almost all the archeologists were either Christian, Muslim, or Jewish, all of which adhered to the Biblical history that we have all been indoctrinated with as will no doubt be evidenced by the replies this gets. You are welcome to contact me for more in depth information. http://www.rahasyapoe.com
Take care, Rahasya

This is how religions are born. I don’t think science and the government are withholding or capable of withholding verification of this kind of information anymore than dinosaur remains are being withheld. Even for unanswered questions, the leap to a conclusion of alien creators is no different than that of god. You are now asking that we substitute alien for god. That seems to be the conclusion here by Sitchen, et al. I’m finding what I see as conspiracy theories and misinformation about Mars and the sphinx/pyramids so why should I even go any further unless I were a sci-fi ufo buff or Daystar Bible hobbiest? The three pyramids of giza were built as burial tombs for three pharoahs, not landing strips for aliens. The sphinx was built by the middle pharoah (father, son, grandson) which has a perfect alignment with his pyramid, which aligns with the setting sun at a specific time of year. I’m no scientist, mathmetician or engineer, but if the relationship of the so-called face and pyramid structures on Mars are of the same distance and relationship as the sphinx and giza pyramids, then I wouldn’t think that the setting sun would be in the same relationship on Mars due to its 1) distance from the Sun, 2) its different orbit and 3) the planets different size. Also, the sphinx was carved from layers of limestone natural to the site and the methods for its construction was closely duplicated utilizing the tools of the time. There will come a point in time (well, there already is) when no matter how much these ‘theories’ are debunked, people will fervently believe them. Is this the legacy and biology left to us through the DNA of such an advanced alien race?

IT would be impossible to do justice to his research in such a brief review as this one; however, there are some very significant findings on the existence of this other race of people. One the rather compelling is the “face on Mars,” the structure in the area called , Cydonia on the Red Planet (Mars). ~Now this is really groovy—-> When the relationship of the face on Mars is analysed for its distance to other pyramidal structures also discovered on Mars, the geometric relationship is found to be “identical” to the distances of the Egyptian Sphinx and the Pyramids in the surrounding areas of Egypt. Sitchin concluded the placement of these pyramids indicates that they served as landing markers for the Nibiruans after they entered the Earth’s atmosphere from outer space. Sitchin also has asserted that the early pyramids were not designed by the Egyptians (Anyone that has actually researched what was involved in the designing of the pyramids can see why this makes sense). NBC-TV aired a program on Nov.10, 1993 entitled “The Mystery of the Sphinx”, indicating that the Sphinx is 2,000 years older than previously thought. Then, in Jan 2001, the Discovery channel aired a special where scientists now think the Sphinx could be as much as 10,000 yrs old! This corroborates Sitchin’s findings that someone other than the Egyptians designed the Sphinx & Pyramids.

                                                                                                        - Net Scientia Web Concepts

Rahasya - 24 January 2010 01:57 PM

According the the infor5mation on over 30,000 clay tablets written in cuneiform it was the Annunaki who were from Nibaru, a planet that has a 3,600 year orbit around our Sun. I know how outlandish this sounds but with the amount of evidence one has to take it serious enough to research. A very high official of the Catholic Church (Monsignor Corrado Balduci) said that after researching the evidence (remember that they have 52 miles of library at the Vatican) one has to consider the possibility that we were genetically engineered from sentient beings already existing on Earth. Remember that up until a few years ago that almost all the archeologists were either Christian, Muslim, or Jewish, all of which adhered to the Biblical history that we have all been indoctrinated with as will no doubt be evidenced by the replies this gets. You are welcome to contact me for more in depth information. http://www.rahasyapoe.com
Take care, Rahasya

OK, you’ve offered two compelling explanations for the appearance of humans on earth:
1.  they were built by the Annunaki from the hitherto undiscovered planet Nibaru, or
2.  the were created by God in the Garden of Eden (although you discount this possibility as a Christian, Muslim and Jewish conspiracy.)

Here’s a thought:

3.  (From the digital tablet Wikipedia: “The term “human” in the context of human evolution refers to the genus Homo, but studies of human evolution usually include other hominids, such as the Australopithecines. The genus Homo had diverged from the Australopithecines by about 2.3 to 2.4 million years ago in Africa.[2][3] Scientists have estimated that humans branched off from their common ancestor with chimpanzees - the only other living hominins - about 5–7 million years ago. Several species of Homo evolved and are now extinct. These include Homo erectus, which inhabited Asia, and Homo neanderthalensis, which inhabited Europe. Archaic Homo sapiens evolved between 400,000 and 250,000 years ago.”

But number 3?  That’s just crazy!

By the way, Rahasya, you don’t know Fairyprincess, do you.  She recently regaled us with her expertise on the physical form of angels.

fairyprincess - 10 October 2009 03:17 PM

Andrew - 10 October 2009 12:46 PM

Fairyprincess—
Thank you for your most wonderful reply, but you didn’t answer the question I asked:
How do you know that the common depiction of angels—if angels exist—is false?

I thought I did Andrew; my apologies. The documentation available clearly indicates that the common depiction of angels is false. I thought it was an expectation to support one’s opinion with some sort of “proof”.

I could just as easily say that I see “angels” and that it goes beyond just being a false depiction of the winged human image. I could also say that 16% of those beings thought to be “angels” actually are…but I don’t have anything that was written to support that claim. Whether or not it is true; there is no support other than my own claim. All the way around, how would that be better or even change what has already been documented? I don’t think it is relevant.

I could also spur off on a tangent and make references to Zechariah Sitchen and the Annunaki. Particularly the Lost Book of Enki which clearly tells us of the Igigi [lesser Annunaki] who married human women. Oddly enough it maps very closely to the Book of Enoch where the Watchers (Angels) marry human woman [compare to Gen 6:4]. What’s even better? Watchers (Angels) are the grigori; in Greek is egrigoi; in Sumerian igigi. All of that documentation only further supports my stance that angels are not humans with wings.

I’ll not get into the debate of whether or not angels exist. I was merely pointing out that with the documentation that does exist it does not support any human figure with wings. Again, if anyone can counter that with actual writings; I welcome it.

Actually, I would be more appreciative if I could get actual countering documents rather than anyone’s subjective opinion about my mental status.

Based on what documentation I have, I’m going to stick with my opinion that angels are not humans with wings. I’ve not been in the orbit of the planet yet I still believe that the earth is round based upon somebody else’s writing.

So we will all have egg on our faces for mocking the story of the Annunaki, since we’ve all now been told about them.  TWICE! But that’s just the pile of rational fuckwits we are here.  Sorry.

Nice catch there on that past thread, Teuchter.

Looks like this is a full blown cult….....

Nibaru Conspiracy book?

“doh!”

I just want to thank everyone for being so predictable and proving my point about indoctrination. I have always found it interesting why most people, once they identify with a belief, cannot under any circumstance open up to even the possibility that they may be wrong or there may be, let’s say, new information to consider that’s been available fro well over 50 years. If you happen to be interested in a critique you may want to notice that you didn’t address any point I brought up; you brought up your own points and debunked them as if they were mine. I just thought I would bring it up because if this were a live debate you would feel rather silly. 

But I don’t have any desire to keep doing this so it’s probably the last you will here from me until someone with some education into what we are talking about has something to say that is a legitimate point, which I’m all for. If you can show where the information I spoke of can be explained another way I would be eager to hear it because unlike most of you, I am searching for the truth even if it means I am wrong…isn’t that the goal?  This is called The Reason Project which means we are supposed to hear points of view and use our intelligence to reason using logic, not just throw out BS info and call people “fuckwads” or whatever it is that you are calling people. I guess that should be my clue to who I’m conversing with…have a good life…......
Rahasya

“I know of no society in human history that ever suffered because its people became too desirous of evidence in support of their core beliefs.”
— Sam Harris (Letter to a Christian Nation)

Rahasya - 24 January 2010 06:31 PM

I just want to thank everyone for being so predictable and proving my point about indoctrination. I have always found it interesting why most people, once they identify with a belief, cannot under any circumstance open up to even the possibility that they may be wrong or there may be, let’s say, new information to consider that’s been available fro well over 50 years. If you happen to be interested in a critique you may want to notice that you didn’t address any point I brought up; you brought up your own points and debunked them as if they were mine. I just thought I would bring it up because if this were a live debate you would feel rather silly.

But I don’t have any desire to keep doing this so it’s probably the last you will here from me until someone with some education into what we are talking about has something to say that is a legitimate point, which I’m all for. If you can show where the information I spoke of can be explained another way I would be eager to hear it because unlike most of you, I am searching for the truth even if it means I am wrong…isn’t that the goal? This is called The Reason Project which means we are supposed to hear points of view and use our intelligence to reason using logic, not just throw out BS info and call people “fuckwads” or whatever it is that you are calling people. I guess that should be my clue to who I’m conversing with…have a good life…......
Rahasya

“I know of no society in human history that ever suffered because its people became too desirous of evidence in support of their core beliefs.”
— Sam Harris (Letter to a Christian Nation)

Rahasya :

I am sorry you meet with this kind of incivility . I am really ashamed of that kind of behavior here, and wish the periodically pausing to evaluate ourselves would be a requirement on this forum.

There is no good excuse for the immediate negativity , when just a little benefit of the doubt would be more productive. Unfortunately, this happens all too often and I know the feeling that you must have experienced; it is as if a pack of wolves has joined forces to bring down a victim. It’s so nonconstructive , and frankly, dumb. But there are always the egos of the “big thinkers “

Whether your book or your ideas are right, wrong, good or bad , isn’t the point . The reasonable thing to do on this “reason ” forum is encourage a discussion that examines ideas, not discard them .

I apologize for such rudeness and am sorry you leave with such a bad impression. Your book-cover is not bad either. A lot of people like that kind of art. After all-it has abstract design and that you find in nature.

Best wishes

Sheba

Rahasya - 24 January 2010 06:31 PM

I just want to thank everyone for being so predictable and proving my point about indoctrination. I have always found it interesting why most people, once they identify with a belief, cannot under any circumstance open up to even the possibility that they may be wrong or there may be, let’s say, new information to consider that’s been available fro well over 50 years. If you happen to be interested in a critique you may want to notice that you didn’t address any point I brought up; you brought up your own points and debunked them as if they were mine. I just thought I would bring it up because if this were a live debate you would feel rather silly. 

But I don’t have any desire to keep doing this so it’s probably the last you will here from me until someone with some education into what we are talking about has something to say that is a legitimate point, which I’m all for. If you can show where the information I spoke of can be explained another way I would be eager to hear it because unlike most of you, I am searching for the truth even if it means I am wrong…isn’t that the goal?  This is called The Reason Project which means we are supposed to hear points of view and use our intelligence to reason using logic, not just throw out BS info and call people “fuckwads” or whatever it is that you are calling people. I guess that should be my clue to who I’m conversing with…have a good life…......
Rahasya

“I know of no society in human history that ever suffered because its people became too desirous of evidence in support of their core beliefs.”
— Sam Harris (Letter to a Christian Nation)

LOL! You’ve offered nothing so far but a big steaming pile of shit! Show something actual instead bullshit. For example, if you know where this planet is, point to it so we can look with our telescopes to verify it. No bullshit about you can’t see etc.. If you know this secret information that has hidden from us as you claim you do, email it to every scientist and news group on the planet and lets have a look (No, a book you are selling doesn’t count). And no bullshit about the government will stop you or silence them all etc…

sheba - 24 January 2010 08:03 PM

Whether your book or your ideas are right, wrong, good or bad , isn’t the point . The reasonable thing to do on this “reason ” forum is encourage a discussion that examines ideas, not discard them .

It is the point, especially when it is being “sold” as fact.

I just shit a talking turd out of my ass, it says I have been chosen to reveal the hidden truth of the universe to all the world and will become it’s leader.

Now, how much time should we spend on a reasonable discussion on what comes out of my ass, remember, right, wrong, good or bad, isn’t the point….............

sheba - 24 January 2010 08:03 PM

Rahasya :

I am sorry you meet with this kind of incivility . I am really ashamed of that kind of behavior here, and wish the periodically pausing to evaluate ourselves would be a requirement on this forum.

There is no good excuse for the immediate negativity , when just a little benefit of the doubt would be more productive. Unfortunately, this happens all too often and I know the feeling that you must have experienced; it is as if a pack of wolves has joined forces to bring down a victim. It’s so nonconstructive , and frankly, dumb. But there are always the egos of the “big thinkers “

Whether your book or your ideas are right, wrong, good or bad , isn’t the point . The reasonable thing to do on this “reason ” forum is encourage a discussion that examines ideas, not discard them .

I apologize for such rudeness and am sorry you leave with such a bad impression. Your book-cover is not bad either. A lot of people like that kind of art. After all-it has abstract design and that you find in nature.

Best wishes

Sheba

Couple of points here, Dee:

1.  Where appropriate, it is always good to apologize for one’s own behavior; in fact, I recall apologizing to you on one occassion.  However, apologizing for others is a bit of ostentatios overreaching. 

2.  I highlighted the portion of your post where you said, “Whether your book or your ideas are right, wrong, good or bad , isn’t the point . The reasonable thing to do on this “reason ” forum is encourage a discussion that examines ideas, not discard them .”  I suppose that the proposition that it is “reasonable” to discuss wrong and bad ideas might be true to the extent, but only to the extent, that the discussion illuminates what is wrong or bad about the idea.  But to sit around having a discussion in which we all pretend that the theory that

Rahasya - 24 January 2010 01:57 PM

According the the infor5mation on over 30,000 clay tablets written in cuneiform it was the Annunaki who were from Nibaru, a planet that has a 3,600 year orbit around our Sun [who created humans].

is worth discussing as an alternative to the theory of evolution would be an utter waste of time.  Telling someone who argues that his crackpot idea that (1) there is a planet which orbits the earth every 3,600 years, (2) that this planet is populated by beings vastly more intelligent than we, and (3) that the genesis of humanity is either cross breeding with or genetic engineering by these creatures

Rahasya - 18 January 2010 05:24 PM

[size=3]settles the long debate over evolution and Intelligent Design

that his ideas are worth discussing is patronizing, wastes our time, and cannot do the Prophet of the Annunaki any good either.  Let’s not encourage they guy, alright.

Well, I thought my common sense arguments based on the evidence supplied by other researchers were pretty sound. Here’s another thing. Sitchen suggests that he is preparing us for the return of our creators, another race who are about to visit our planet as they apparently have many times in the past. Then, the point is stressed that Nibiru orbits our sun, which takes 3,600 years to do as compared to one year for the Earth, with the implication it seems to me, that this distance is the reason for the lengthy interim between visits. This also doesn’t jive with the notion of current visitors. The first questions that come to my mind are, do planets of any galaxy in the universe have that type of orbit trajectory tied to our specific sun? Shouldn’t a single ship on a round trip mission from Nibiru be able to touch down every 18000 years provided the ship is traveling at 6660,000 mph? I just wonder if this information is provided in the documented evidence or if we’re supposed to be waiting for a chance visit. If they’re here already, why can’t they make themselves readily known to the entire population, since they created us? I see the same dilemma as god. Sorry, it’s the way I think.

GAD - 24 January 2010 08:22 PM

sheba - 24 January 2010 08:03 PM

Whether your book or your ideas are right, wrong, good or bad , isn’t the point . The reasonable thing to do on this “reason ” forum is encourage a discussion that examines ideas, not discard them .

It is the point, especially when it is being “sold” as fact.

I just shit a talking turd out of my ass, it says I have been chosen to reveal the hidden truth of the universe to all the world and will become it’s leader.

Now, how much time should we spend on a reasonable discussion on what comes out of my ass, remember, right, wrong, good or bad, isn’t the point….............

Is that his ideas are bad a mutual concession ? If not, there is more of a chance that your assessment of his works could be weak . I’m saying to treat his book as if it’s flat-out wrong even though you can’t possibly be sure of that is unfair. But even if you know what you are talking about and his work is , according to someone who is qualified to judge, a dud or something like it , can’t you be more civil about it ? I mean, there is nothing wrong with disagreeing, but that’s not the same thing as BELITTLING, and that’s what I read on these posts. And that is shameful. Heaven knows, I have put up with enough of that and it’s a wonder I’ve survived. And it hasn’t done one once of good.

We should try to remember that the persons we are responding to; the receiving end, are human and not just chalk on a blackboard . The only persons who should not be encouraged are the ones who are consistently nasty and wanting to fight.

Mr poe ( was that his name ? ) couldn’t be too much more far-out than Depak Chopra , and that quack is laughing all the way to the bank.

teuchter - 24 January 2010 08:28 PM

sheba - 24 January 2010 08:03 PM

Rahasya :

I am sorry you meet with this kind of incivility . I am really ashamed of that kind of behavior here, and wish the periodically pausing to evaluate ourselves would be a requirement on this forum.

There is no good excuse for the immediate negativity , when just a little benefit of the doubt would be more productive. Unfortunately, this happens all too often and I know the feeling that you must have experienced; it is as if a pack of wolves has joined forces to bring down a victim. It’s so nonconstructive , and frankly, dumb. But there are always the egos of the “big thinkers “

Whether your book or your ideas are right, wrong, good or bad , isn’t the point . The reasonable thing to do on this “reason ” forum is encourage a discussion that examines ideas, not discard them .

I apologize for such rudeness and am sorry you leave with such a bad impression. Your book-cover is not bad either. A lot of people like that kind of art. After all-it has abstract design and that you find in nature.

Best wishes

Sheba

Couple of points here, Dee:

1. Where appropriate, it is always good to apologize for one’s own behavior; in fact, I recall apologizing to you on one occassion. However, apologizing for others is a bit of ostentatios overreaching.

2. I highlighted the portion of your post where you said, “Whether your book or your ideas are right, wrong, good or bad , isn’t the point . The reasonable thing to do on this “reason ” forum is encourage a discussion that examines ideas, not discard them .” I suppose that the proposition that it is “reasonable” to discuss wrong and bad ideas might be true to the extent, but only to the extent, that the discussion illuminates what is wrong or bad about the idea. But to sit around having a discussion in which we all pretend that the theory that

Rahasya - 24 January 2010 01:57 PM

According the the infor5mation on over 30,000 clay tablets written in cuneiform it was the Annunaki who were from Nibaru, a planet that has a 3,600 year orbit around our Sun [who created humans].

is worth discussing as an alternative to the theory of evolution would be an utter waste of time. Telling someone who argues that his crackpot idea that (1) there is a planet which orbits the earth every 3,600 years, (2) that this planet is populated by beings vastly more intelligent than we, and (3) that the genesis of humanity is either cross breeding with or genetic engineering by these creatures

Rahasya - 18 January 2010 05:24 PM

[size=3]settles the long debate over evolution and Intelligent Design

that his ideas are worth discussing is patronizing, wastes our time, and cannot do the Prophet of the Annunaki any good either. Let’s not encourage they guy, alright.

You are at least somewhat right when you say we shouldn’t apologize for others, but that’s not what I meant to do. I am embarrassed that a stranger comes here likely expecting a friendly welcome from the Sam Harris Reason site and he must go away feeling we are a bunch of self-righteous slobs , full of ourselves. We should remember, in a way we are representative of Sam Harris himself. I’ve wanted to say that for a long time but have been afraid I’ll be eaten alive.

And “to sit around discussion in which we all pretend the theory ...etc ” Well, you don’t have to PRETEND one way or the other. Surely a person who has enough interest in these subjects and DOES manage to get a book together is worthy of a few questions ? I’d want to know where he’s coming from. Each person sees it differently, I know. These are just MY style of communicating . But before you know different, this man deserves respect.

sheba - 25 January 2010 12:58 AM

. . . I’m saying to treat his book as if it’s flat-out wrong even though you can’t possibly be sure of that is unfair. But even if you know what you are talking about and his work is , according to someone who is qualified to judge, a dud or something like it , can’t you be more civil about it ? I mean, there is nothing wrong with disagreeing, but that’s not the same thing as BELITTLING, and that’s what I read on these posts. And that is shameful. Heaven knows, I have put up with enough of that and it’s a wonder I’ve survived. And it hasn’t done one once of good. . . . The only persons who should not be encouraged are the ones who are consistently nasty and wanting to fight.

Dee, most of the regulars around here love and encourage the nasty ones who arrive at these shores. Those who rate high abuse are usually quite nice, at first at least. Remember Michael812 a while back? Nicest guy you ever saw at first, then someone (Mia, perhaps?) did some research and discovered that he was a vicious con artist. I don’t get the same vibe from our current artist, but will remain steadfast against any attempt to sensibly argue with him, because even if he’s as sane as the best of us, his thoughts, feelings and ideas have been hatched by way of nuttiness. Never argue with a psychotic or anyone whose ideas are fed by mental illness, because doing so will draw in lots of people and allow the artist to shine, in his head at least, with inspiring feelings. Then you’ll see nastiness. You think you saw nastiness here? Go back and watch what happened with Michael812.

All this person has to do is provide some independent, corroborative evidence for said planet.
If such evidence is not available, then the claims can be dismissed like any other (similar) claim.

“Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”

I’m more than happy to examine evidence for the existence of Nibaru.  Just provide some.

So, humans were genetically engineered from sentientt beings that were already on Earth from a planet in our own solar system that we have no evidence of ever existing, except for something somebody put on a stone tablet perhaps 4,000 years ago?

Again, any evidence for this besides ancient hearsay? And if this were to be true, who designed the designers? And what happened to their planet? How did they space travel to earth? Where did their genetic code come from?

Here is a simply explanation supported by evidence, not complete yet of course, on how life began on earth-

Organic molecules
Common elements like hydrogen, carbon, and oxygen are easily attracted to each other. They bond together to form chemical compounds like water and carbon dioxide. It is more natural for these elements to combine into chemical compounds than it is for them to be found in their pure form.

Under the right conditions, carbon has a tendency to bond with other common elements to form long and complex chains of atoms known as organic molecules. Organic molecules can then bond with other organic molecules, and there seems to be no limit to how long and complex these organic molecular chains can become.

Billions of years ago, the conditions on the surface of the earth were very favorable for the formation of organic molecules. These molecules were washed into the sea to form pools of organic matter on the sea floor. Over millions of years, they continued to bond together to form increasingly long and complex molecular chains.

The first spark of life
Life began when one of these complex organic molecules began reacting with the other molecules around it in an unusual way. It was able to attract all of the pieces that it needed to assemble an identical copy of itself. The copy then split away from the original and began to assemble its own new copy.

These self-replicating molecules may not have lasted long before they were broken down by other chemical reactions, but they were still able to spread through the pool of organic material fast enough to have a lasting chain reaction.

The process of self-replication was not always perfect. Quite often a piece was missing or the wrong piece was used, and the copy would be different from its parent. Very few of these mutated molecules were still capable of replicating, but occasionally, by pure chance, a new molecule was created that could survive longer or replicate faster than its parent.

Single cells
After millions of years and countless mutations, new and more complex molecules developed a protective layer. The chemicals needed for replication could still pass through this protective layer, but the molecule was now safe from harmful reactions. The protective layer slowly evolved into a cell wall, and safely contained within the cell, the chemical reactions of life were able to evolve to become much more complex.

It took hundreds of millions of years, but eventually a new process evolved for producing a copy of a cell. This new process used a number of molecules working together like an assembly line in a factory, using chemical attraction to assemble sophisticated molecules known as proteins, which then carried out all of the tasks associated with the survival and reproduction of the cell. The instructions for how to build these proteins were encoded in the main molecule, known as the DNA.

As the mutations continued over hundreds of millions of years, new strains evolved the ability to use sunlight to convert common chemicals into food. This ability, known as photosynthesis, has the side effect of producing oxygen.

Before photosynthesis, there was no oxygen in the earth’s atmosphere. Then after millions of years of photosynthesis, the atmosphere became rich with oxygen. We know this because the oxygen reacted with dissolved iron in the seawater and deposited a layer of rust on the ocean floor. Oxygen also formed the ozone layer, which still protects the surface of the earth from the sun’s deadly radiation.

There were occasions in the history of evolution, when a smaller cell became trapped inside the body of a larger cell, and the children of the smaller cell survived and reproduced inside the children of the larger cell. Sometimes these smaller cells provided benefits to the larger cell, and sometimes they continued to evolve inside the larger cell over millions of years to become permanent organs of the larger cell.

One of the most important steps in the evolution of life was the appearance inside some cells of an organ called the nucleus. The nucleus had evolved to become especially good at copying and repairing its own DNA, and so the DNA inside the nucleus was able to become thousands of times more complex. Cells with a nucleus soon evolved to become thousands of times larger and more sophisticated than cells without a nucleus.

Not as mysterious, or sexy as Poes ideas, I grant you, but…..fascinating nonetheless, and quite plausibly understandable and believable. Plus we do not have this infinite regression of who designed the designer question.

It’s just not fashionable for humans to think that we are all just made up of particles. Across billions of years of assembly and disassembly and assembly again. Modification, mutation, adaptation and evolution. Of particles. Biochemistry and thermodynamics. Pretty damned cool I think!

Not as cool as Poe’s Idea though.