Alien Invasion.......

[mike]

I was watching a local TV show called message stick, its a show about aboriginal australians, i was watching this comunity and suddenly i saw some people so black, they were almost blue, now the vast majority of the people in this comunity were of aboriginal heritage, but not "full blood" as these very dark individuals were.

i thought to myself, in 200 years time people of aboriginal heritage, will look at these images, and realise the true extent of that which has been stolen.

their very gene's are being "soaked" up by the technologically enhanced and more prolific white mans gene.

the abduction scenario seems to indicate we are genetically compatible on a grand scale, and bunnies with jellyfish genes that glow green prove that given the technology we are all "compatible" at a genetic level if the technology is capable.

is this our fate ?. will humans as we know them simply be soaked up by contact with ET's.

perhaps the process is already well underway

History seems show a pattern of technologically more advanced cultures invading and soaking up the genes of those less advanced cultures....

 

[skunkape]

History seems show a pattern of technologically more advanced cultures invading and soaking up the genes of those less advanced cultures....

My European ancestors soaked up my Native American ancestors culture pretty thoroughly. I guess I got good teeth and sparse facial hair out of the deal.
I hope the aliens are less violent than the White Man.

 

[Tommy Allison]

Since when are White People the ONLY violent people on the planet?

For Crying Out Loud... Self-Loathing White People are the bane of human existence.

 

[Schuyler]

If you really look at the genetic makeup of 'Homo Sapiens sapiens,' racial characteristics are superficial. We pay attention to them because, to us, they are 'obvious,' but from a genetic standpoint they represent local variations of the same species simply adapting to varying climates. From an evolutionary standpoint it takes about 20,000 years for skin color to change based on the sun's radiation. In other words, if you left medical science out of the equation and just let evolution do its job without interference, a race of dark skinned people from a tropical clime transported to Scotland without benefit of transportation or contact with their homeland, would be light skinned, blonde or red-headed, blue or green-eyed, and with a tendancy to color-blindness within 20,000 years. Scotland is a cold, hard, monochromatic climate. The same is true of 'stout' eskimos to conserve heat and tall Africans to dissipate it. Long European noses warm the air. Flatter African noses let the already warm air in. This doesn't take a few million years; it takes a few thousand.

Given that our modern transportation systems have rendered local climate variations in evolution largely moot, you can expect a greater mixing in the future. On the West Coast of America, for example, there are already areas where you would be hard-pressed to differentiate between Caucasian and Asian. The cultural reistance to intermarriage between the two races is almost non-existant, particularly in the 'educated classes' where both do well. The result is an entire generation of 50/50 people who have now reached marriagable age. The Viet Nam war, by the way, gave a big push toward this.

Further, I think you're jumping to conclusions here assuming whites are somehow invading or soaking up other-colored humans. First off, brown is dominant. If you mixed everyone up equally with equal access, we'd all tend toward a darker color over time. It is the white race that is being absorbed. Secondly, unusually dark skin color is often a local variation and has nothing to do with an influx of Caucasian people. Genes do create occasional extremes, imcluding albinos. In New Guinea, for example, the Highlands were inaccessible until the 1950's and were thought uninhabited. Turns out this is one of the most linguistically diverse and highly populated areas. Early anthropologists into the area like Kenneth Read and James Watson, found a diverse population. Watson once related an inter-tribal gathering where one of the men was of different coloration. The other tribe members remarked, "My, he is dark, isn't he?" This was not the result of western influences.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but if you do the math, we're all related to each other anyway. Figuring four generations per century, which is not being generous since marriagable age is often way less than that, you have 40 generations per millenia. That works out to over a trillion ancestors in just 1000 years during a time when the population was far less than it is today. All you need is one Marco Polo or one Dr. Livingstone to wander into the world spreading his genes, and voila! You are related to nearly everyone in the world.

In short, the idea of one 'race' 'stealing' genes from another is absurd. Without calling anyone unecessary names here I think such an attitude deserves some serious re-assessment. Also, the idea that the white race is 'more prolific' flies in the face of modern population and fertility rates. It simply is not true. The opposite is. Given current trends, the 'white race' will be extinct and 'absorbed' into other long before any other is.

 

[mike]

its just an observation, and idle speculation, not promoting a theory.

but it looks like in some instances the humans with advanced technology, have used that technology to travel to new lands, and ultimatly soak up the genes of the "native" humans.

if that has happened, then there may be larger implications in regards to "contact"

 

[Schuyler]

but it looks like in some instances the humans with advanced technology, have used that technology to travel to new lands, and ultimatly soak up the genes of the "native" humans.

I'm feeling kind of like I'm in Oppositeville or that Superman world: Bizzaro World. In your original post you were lamenting the fact that you observed lighter-skinned natives amongst the darker 'pure-bred' (my term, not yours) natives and that this indicated whites were 'stealing' native genes. In fact, it shows exactly the opposite because white genes were 'invading' the local population and making their presence known by a lighter-skinned population. They were not stolen so much as they were infused. This may or may not be true. I gave you some reasons last post and will let that issue alone for this one. For the sake of argument, let's just go with this idea.

Population inter-mingling doesn't take advanced technology. You can, more or less, walk there, or take a wooden boat. Any time populations mingle, babies are born. Whether this is Hannibal's troops invading and occupying rural Italy or Alexander conquering Egypt, this always happens. History shows, and DNA will confirm, that this is the natural course of events. The result for the local population is an infusion of 'foreign blood,' and for the invading forces--not so much. The direction of flow is toward the native population, not away from it.

So how do we then get to 'contact?' I assume the implication is that the ET guys are 'stealing our genes' because of the many reported cases of egg harvesting and so forth reported by Strieber, Hopkins, et. al. I can understand that. I'm not convinced, but let's just assume that as well. Let's say it is not in dispute.

I don't think you can use an argument such as 'A implies B' to prove 'B implies A.' If we use your original observation that the native population of aboriginals is turning a slightly lighter color because of the infusion of white genes from a technologically superior population, then for that to have implications for 'contact' would mean that we would expect to see ET traits turn up in our population because the technologicaly superior ETs had invaded.

Except for a couple of anecdotal and highly suspicious accounts ("I saw my ET baby!") we don't have any evidence of that. And if our genes are changing ET's population, we don't know that either. In any case, you can't use the evidence of the lightening of the aboriginal population due to western influence to prove the ET population is changing in the same manner due to their harvesting our genetics.

The conclusion does not follow the evidence, however speculative.

 

[mike]

i used the expression "Full blood" which is a commonly used expresion here when refering to such an entity.
the other being "half caste" again the terms used are common ones.

http://search.live.com/results.aspx?q=Full+Blood+Aboriginals&FORM=QSRE4

not only did these people loose their lands, and their languages, but if the trend continues they will loose their genes as well.

its happeinng before our eyes, im not making a judgement of the matter as right or wrong, just observing the reality as it unfolds, and wondering if these trends would play out in a larger ET contact scenario.

im not a white supremist, i abhore the KKK and that mindset. The only person i seek to be superior to, is the person i was yesterday.
i am simply noting that if the trend continues there will eventually be no more "full blood" natives left here, the invasion of the technologically advanced humans will then be total

there are for example no more "full blood" tasmanian aboriginals left.....they are all gone.

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

the last photo of the last of them is in the above link, all that remain are the Hybrids.

 

[Schuyler]

mike, I wouldn't dream of casting about any accusations of racism or anything of that sort. If anyone picked that up from my posts I deeply and sincerely apologize.

My largest point is that traits of race are superficial in regards to genetic makeup and excessive attention to them is not warranted by the DNA involved. We are all close enough genetically to interbreed. That makes us the same species by definition. I would that we would concentrate on that fact rather than those which are barely perciptible in our DNA. In any event, such a process is mutual. If everyone on the globe were statistically mixed, all genes would be everywhere, even as they really are now. 'Races' mix and form new races. The interbreeding of Asian and African and, perhaps, aborigine has produced Polynesian, for example, beautiful by any standard. There is a case to be made that a mixture is preferable for survival. It's stronger, resistant to more diseases. I don't see the gradual disappearance of of one partuclar expression of humanity as a bad thing.

I'm much more concerned about the passing of unique cultural traits (languages, art, etc.) than I am of a particular racial look. It seems to me that our expression of culture is much more important to preserve.

But extrapolating to ET begs so many questions I wouldn't know where to start. Every sentence I even think of writing on the subject would be speculative and devoid of any proof at all. I guess my only conclusion is a peronal one. I'm not really worried that my descendents will turn into ET, or that ET, heaven forbid, would turn into me. I just don't see it as an issue to be concerned about.

 

[CapnG]

"Race" accounts for less than 1/10th of 1% of our DNA. What you're talking about is cultural absorbtion which is often rapid and destructive (NA Indians, South American cultures and the Spanish, etc).

Interbreeding is the result of that absorbtion, not the cause.

 

[mike]

none the less, if trends continue you wont "see" them 500 years from now.
the seperate genotype and culture that was here before the sailing ships arrived will be gone.


[SIZE=-1]1891 - Journal of Legislative Assembly - Milton Ulladulla - 59 natives, 23 full blood, 36 mixed blood [sic].[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]1900 census shows four full blood & 63 half blood [sic][/SIZE]



the half bloods become 1/4 bloods........ who become 1/8th bloods... etc etc.

the ET link is of course speculative, and based on the data which is not always evidence....

but lets say that the Verdants are real, that they have a "megapopulation" that inhabits hundreds of thousands of planets, and they contact us and with technology are genetically compatible with us.

we then find ourselves in the same situation as the tasmanian aboriginals, there may come a time if that trend is a universal one where you dont "see" any full blood humans.

it just looks to me like there is some suggestion that when a significantly larger and more technically advanced population meets a small isolated one, the small isolated one winds up being absorbed by the larger group to the point where you dont "see" any of the original inhabitants anymore.

 

[CapnG]

none the less, if trends continue you wont "see" them 500 years from now.
the seperate genotype and culture that was here before the sailing ships arrived will be gone.

Evolution, survival of the fittest, etc.

 

[mike]

Again not making a moral call on whats happening, thats a whole seperate discussion, there are pro's and cons to be sure.

just observing what has happened, and wondering if the trend might extrapolate out to the ET aspect.

technology seems to be an underlying common aspect

 

[CapnG]

technology seems to be an underlying common aspect

Technology always serves the same purpose, regardless of field: it makes things faster, easier or more efficient. It's inclusion is kinda inevitable.

 

[Schuyler]

Both issues are valid. mike was originally talking of DNA. I also discussed the cultural aspects. We know the difference and weren't 'intending' to talk of culture when discussing DNA.

The thing is, there is no such thing as a 'pure-blood' of any race. Some traits may be predominant, but that doesn't make that genetic line 'pure.' If you were capable of tracing all genes from a genotype back you would find genes from every major race already there. If you trace 'pure blood' Native Americans back past 10,000 years you will find genes from Asia, Africa, and even Europe as part of that strain. It is statistically impossible not to. To concentrate what are superficial racial characteristics is to concentrate on a false dichotomy.

(I think I understand correctly that) mike is interested (to use a non-judgmental term) in the idea that if there is a large 'Galactic Federation' with trillions of ETs on many planets that if WE are thrown into serious contact with THEM, then the unique characteristics of the 'human race' will inevitably disappear as as our unique genes are absorbed into the much larger population and our unique traits become diiluted. (Note: We all admit this is highly speculative.)

My reaction to this is: (1) Race is really a non-issue because the notion of race is based on superficial characteristics. (2) If that is possible then we must be the same species or close to it or such interbreeding would not be possible or desirable. Food for another thread. and (3) So? Where is the harm? Where is the detriment? On the whole, such a situation breeds a stronger species. I can't see a downside here.

 

[Tommy Allison]

There was this special on The Discovery Channel, where this guy went around taking DNA samples from various people and was able to ascertain that this notion of pure blood is an absolute myth.

I am caucasian through and through, but what would I have been 2000 years ago? What were my ancestors 2000 years ago?

I can trace my family back to Germany on my mom's side, and on my father's side Scotland. Going back further revealed that on my paternal grandmother's side there were Swedish and French people in her tree. On my mother's side, it was German, and I'd be willing to bet that somewhere along the way I probably have some Jewish blood in there too. Judging the way my mother was in life, I would probably bet on it.

The thing is, once you get about 5 generations back, or more, you start to see that unless your entire family line comes from the same place, you can't really claim racial purity at all. Who knows what you have in there going back 5 generations let alone 100.

 

[mike]

perhaps these are localised observations, and thus the perspective is different as the following article suggests in its opening paragraphs.

"In a recent lecture by Kat Ellinghouse, it was suggested that the concept of Assimilation meant different things to the Australian and US Governments in the second half of the 19th Century and the first half of the 20th century. Consequently the resultant policies, as they applied to the respective indigenous populations, were very different in intent. In America, Ellinghouse observed, the idea of Assimilation (both in concept and intent) was to 'absorb' the natives into the greater American society's notions and values, but not necessarily to biologically eliminate them as a 'race'. Whereas in Australia it might seem that this latter motive was operative, with the ultimate aim to genetically eliminate the native populace by absorption into the white 'race' by breeding out the negative 'native traits' through long term intermarriage of the races."

http://www.kooriweb.org/foley/essays/essay_15.html

if you scroll down you can see 3 generations of aboriginals starting with a half caste grandmother, a Quadroon mother and Octroon grandson

for all intents and purposes hes White.

these people may as well have met the Borg..............

and i guess that is the larger question im posing, we know you can make a rabbit glow in the dark by giving it jellyfish genes, and there are plenty of alleged accounts of Hybrids in the abduction scenario.

what if contact means the same thing will happen to us as a species, as has happened to the native australians.

its a tough proposition for any planetary govt, join a galactic mega population, and reap the benefits, but know that eventually you will be absorbed into the greater gene pool of that population, so that eventually you as a sovereign species are gone.

 

[Schuyler]

its a tough proposition for any planetary govt, join a galactic mega population, and reap the benefits, but know that eventually you will be absorbed into the greater gene pool of that population, so that eventually you as a sovereign species are gone.

Most of that article and the ideas expressed simply reflect politics and are based on the contradictory ideas of preserving a 'race' or assimiliating it. It's an example of using the false dichotomy of race to make political decisions. The problem here is that you are making 'race' equivalent to 'species' and then lamenting the possibility that a 'soverign species' may be absorbed and eliminated as a result.

A 'species' by definition is composed of creatures who can breed together. It gets a little fuzzy when lions and tigers can produce off-spring, but that just shows how close they really are genetically. You are suggesting here that the human species can interbreed with the ETs and that the resulting interbreeding will result in a 'sovereign species' being gone.

'Sovereign species'? There's no such thing. Species evolve without ET intervention through the natural process of evolution. Home Erectus--as a distinct species--is gone, but its descendent, Homo Sapiens, lives on. I doubt that many Homo Sapiens spend time lamenting the loss of their ancestors any more than our 50/50 offspring from Caucasian/Asian marriages spend time worrying what is going to happen to their parents' races. 'Races' on Earth constantly interbreed over the centuries and make new 'races,' shallow though that concept is. It's politically charged, but from a DNA perspective, it's no big deal. We're the same species.

There's a very large question begged here, and that is how ET Sapiens can be compatible enough with Homo Sapiens to allow such absorbtion to exist. That would be an interesting discussion. But even if we allow it for the sake of argument, the ultimate question to be answered is: So what? Why should we even have the self-interest to keep Homo Sapiens intact if being absorbed into an inter-galactic federation allows us to participate.

It's a no-brainer to me. Bring her on! I hope she's pretty, and I hope for a better life for my descendents. The cost of staying here is to wait until the Sun blows up, in which case our 'soverign species' doesn't even get to pass along its genes. That's not such a hot prospect either. There is no evolutionary advantage to protecting the species from change--None! Our success so far lies in our adaptability. We must continue to do that to survive.

 

[mike]

Again the abduction scenario does contain references to Hybrids, so the suggestion is that it is possible prob with the aid of technology.
if panspermia is the source of life here, its also possible that we are compatable simply because the base templates are from the same source.

if the hybrid accounts from the abduction scenario are true, and the pattern we have seen with "native" populations holds true, then contact may lead to the same result as observed in terrestrial models.

and im interested in everyones personal choice re that possibility, as stated some dont see a problem with merging with a more prolific population with the result that we disapear into the melting pot.

but i cant help thinking that if the native australians had been shown the result of contact,had been able to understand what the future held for them and been able to make a choice, they may have opted to be left alone instead of erased

 

[Schuyler]

but i cant help thinking that if the native australians had been shown the result of contact,had been able to understand what the future held for them and been able to make a choice, they may have opted to be left alone instead of erased

You can't control the future, much as you might like to. The real question is: Would their DESCENDENTS prefer to have been left alone? How much of their descendents own heritage would they have to give up so they could look like great grandfather? What if they preferred the 'other side of the family'?

 

[mike]

Its been said the best way to predict the future, is to create it...............