The Ultimate Vampire Resource and Directory

Does anyone have any input on where the human and/or vampire/other night-time creatures came from? I know there is a thread similar to this one, but I want to know some theories on how the HUMAN race and others came about.

Die frage, die kommentar, die steinen Sie werfen...Questions, comments, stones to throw?

there was already a thread about this once. maybe try doing a search of the fourms?

Evolution is a crock,have you seen a monkey evolve into a man in the last 10,000 years...NO...cause it can't and never happened

One would assume that mostly everyone here knows or is familiar with the scientific origin of man. For vampires no one is for sure, there are many many variations of the creation story of the vampire. One would be Lilith, who was said to be the mother of all demons (vampires). But in other stories she is said to be nothing but a tree nymph of sorts.

well I don't believe some all powerful god snapped his fingers and made man either...not do I believe in Lilith either...she is a Mormon made up woman

I would have to agree with mrd on this matter. Evolution is a theory that is being taught in schools all over the country. I'm curious darkwolfman, why is evolution so impossible?

The modern idea of evolution is impossible due to the time limits it has. It was impossible for life to exist even 1 billion years ago,microbial or not due to the suns size and distance from the earth. This is just one of many problems evolution has.
As far as the origins of Humans Mideast-Northern Africa and up throught the Middle east.

Very interesting SacredDefiance... thank you :)

the evolution of man, the theory that man was created from dust, the big boom, sudden creation by a god, and even that man was strategically plac here by aliens. I wrote on essay in my history majors class on the evolutions of man, and when you read through thte theories, and really look at them, theyre all so rediculas. they heed you one purpose. to believe in something in order for the reason why we got here to make sence. aliens, gods, and science. hell they even have theories that aliens built the pyramids, aliens did this, sin and youll go to hell.
I say, why do you need a reason. jsut let it be.

Oh I have proof.
First the solid fossile record does not exist anywhere on the planet in one peice.
Second carbon 14 dating can be highly suspect
3)The suns temp has a lot to do with life, but esspecailly when you are talking about aything higher than a simple microbial lifeform.
4) Scientists disagree on dating because the evidence of such varies depending on methodology, perception and hell the scientist.
5) Have you ever done the math to prove Darwinian Evolution, my god the numbers are mind boggling

I believe in adaptation not evolution. One species does not give birth to another, regardless of time. The only thing we have seen are slight adaptations.

I'll be happy to go on if you insist.

Sacred I wouldn't attempt to argue with someone who backs his statements up with such facts.

I will say that I believe man did evolve from the primordial muck and while we share common traits with monkeys & other creatures we didn't evolve from them.

i can relate to the nephilim and if there is any truth in the bible i would think this is where their birth may have come from

There is no concrete evidence as to how humans evolved, but there are some interesting theories...did we come from some sort of monkey? are we the product of a neanderthal man and an alien being? did we evolve from a creature of the sea? One theory suggests aliens were excavating gold on earth, but when they got tired with the labour involved, an early form of man (possibly neanderthals) became slaves to the aliens. Eventually, the gold mines were abandoned and the few aliens that did stay behind were able to breed with early humans to make a new race of humans which we are derived from. Now is that f@#ked up thinking or what? Any proof or evidence gets destroyed with each world cataclysm, the next one which is due to happen soon according to the Mayan calender.

Anyway, enough crazy talk for now.

Here's a theory; God farted and made the Big Bang, then made a fully adaptable monkey species on a planet in another solar system which exploded and a piece of it found its way to our solar system, landed on Earth, and bits of alien monkey space-dried goo mated with microbes here and evolved into....us!

I win! Not that there was a contest, or that I'll get a prize...and not that anything I just said was particularly intelligent...but can I win anyway? I'll bake cookies.

Ah, anyway. I had previously thought that human life as we know it has been proven to have started in the African region of the world. These are the threads I love the best; when I actually learn a few things. (Links!! Links to sources!! I love it!)

We've all had to come from somewhere and Evolution takes time. Monkeys or whatever were thought of as our closest ancestor. Everything evolves over time in order to adjust to climate ot area.
We didn't just get put here one day or grow out of the ground.

So if evolution doesn't exsist how do we explain new species popping up that are one genetic step away from a species that has disappeared?

Adaptation IS the first step towards evolution. A species adapts to their enviroment. Add to this the theory that only the strong will survive and you have "ta, da!" evolution.

The strongest of the species are the ones who procreate and carry those genes on to the next generation and so on and so on. This takes time though, lots of time. Weakness are weeded out and the genetic structure becomes stronger.

The mapping of the genome has done alot to explain where we came from and where we might go. Did you know as humans our DNA only differs by 0.01%? That teeny tiny bit makes each of us unique. Otherwise it looks like we all came from the same ancestral line.

I definately have to agree with everyone that said humans came to be through evolution. There is scientific proof to back it up and i have to admit, i'm a bit of a realist, and I tend to believe things taht can be proved

Carbon 14 dating fails to muster acurate reaings after aprox. 40,000 once you get the millions of years its rediculous.

I understand the processes of evolution fully, of course it does not work via one birth to anonther but the key issue is that of time. Not to mention the fact that most genetic mutations harms the organism more than helps it.

As far as the sun goes, take distance as an idea, Venus, closer to the sun,lead melts in the air. Mars, farher away freezing cold..no life (anymore perhpas) the suns diamenter shrinks at a measured rate, rewind the clock and in time the suns size would actullay cover the orbit of Mercury.

Given that time is a key factor in evolution I would like to understand why it took alegedly billions of years for a rock to turn into a fish and less than 65 million years for a cold blooded reptile to turn into a bird.

I never said the fossiel record had no use, simply that for it to wokr it has to be complete, and my friend its not. I live in an aread where you can find both fish,plant and mammalian fossiles and fones in the same strata, not diferent ones as "should" be.

But then again Im just a physicist and not an Evolutionary Microbiologist.

Oh, I agree humans did not evolve from monkies, but if were talking about Darwinian Evolution...
Anywho I did not realize anthing I had said was disprovn, please inlighten me.

As for Neanderthals and Humans, where is your fossile evidence? Where is this "originator" species?

This is my whole point, there are to many holes and errors in Dawrinian Evolution for it to be true, let alone science.

For the intelligent, sapient, sentient, humans on this planet, not enough time has past for us to give judgement on how evolution works. We can merely play around with rocks and form safe guesses. Until we see something in our known world do this, then we shall have some real answers.

There is fossil evidence, and let us take your corpse and randomly toss it somewhere in Africa, then in a few thousand years, let's go looking for it in an area that is most likely in a desert prone to the worst forces of erosion......Let's see how long it takes......

I didnt say it doesnt exist mearly we have no proof. Without proof, there is nothing.

There is an originator species, lol, I just don't know what it is :( Oh Google, why hast thou forsaken me?!

--Well google does not have all the answers my friend. If you cant sustacieate your claims......

BTW- I am fairly certain that our glorious planet could not have sustained stability if the sun were as large as you say when it was......Its ok, for, there are many holes in astrophysics for it to be true, let alone science........

--My point, what I said is true. Which means we must reevaluate uor whole method of dating and origins.
Yes astrophysics has hoels, but we can see its actions everday. The main problem with astrophysics happend with in the 1st few millionths of a sec. Evolution has holes in it throughout the theory.

Sources... well for one myself
Dr.Henry Morris,PhD
Dr. Timothy Colrey, PhD
Dr.Duane Gish, PhD
Dr. Kent Hovind, PhD
P.T.Bakker
Nature
Scientific America
Hell even howsuffworks.com has some things on it lol

The biggest issue with scientists and evolution is the idea that there is no god therfore we must prove evolution. I dont believe in evolution, but adaptation. I beleive in the Big Bang, just not as its says in the text books. I also believe in God, but thats not why I dont belive in evolution, I dont believe in it because it doesnt work.

Frankly, I am waiting for the post of someone that isn't cut/paste happy or has their way with wikipedia.

Until there is a child born with frog legs, we can only say things are possible and not fact.

I am for whatever party does the mouth shooting of people that don't know how to speak to other humans properly--humans, that obviously came from something, but should be more worried about being able to stay here.

1. Alright, C14 is only good for about 50,000, but that's plenty of time for evolution to work it's magic. And there are other ways to date fossils - geological strata for one

--Micro-evolution yes, hell that happens everyday. But one destinct species to another, for a higher life form?

2. And millions of years isn't enough time for evolution to occur? And actually it doesn't take as long as you seem to think. Numerous studies in laboratory settings have shown how organisms will respond to environmental pressures. Take any random culture of E. coli and grow it on ampicillin - which is toxic to E. coli - in any population, some bacteria will be resistant, and those bacteria will grow and thrive. Similar things can be done with other fast growing organisms. for some examples: 1, 2, 3.

--Again micro-evolution. Not macro-evolution

And of course there's the famous peppered moth example (the creationist cited fact that there were dark colored moths before the pollution does not mean that evolution did not occur. Natural selection does not create the original mutation, it just makes it more competitive. Evolution is something that occurs to populations, not individuals)

It'll take more than a few weeks for slower reproducing organisms, but not more time than the existence of life on earth.

3. The sun has not at any time since the existence of life been large enough to make earth too hot for life. (wish you would provide some links. the only source I can find which makes such a claim is the institute for "creation research." This research doesn't seem to have made it into a mainstream publication. And somehow I doubt that's because of bias)

--Um I disagree, during the beginigns of the solar systme the sun was not a very happy place to be, nor the earth for that matter. The sun doesnt have to be to large for it to make life on earth hard if not impossible.

4. A rock to turn into a fish? The process (and granted, the earliest bits are mostly unproven theory) is: atmospheric gases + electricity = organic molecules. From organic molecules RNA develops (RNA contains both genetic information and catalytic properties) from RNA one goes to DNA and proteins in a lipid membrane (lipids in water will spontaneously form a bilayer membrane, exactly like those of cells). No rocks. Ever. And once you have biological molecules, the process speeds up quickly, since there's a mechanism for passing on genetic information. Sex, which mixes genes from two organisms, also speeds up the process quite a bit.

--Rock+heat+differnt rock=primoridal soup+lightning+time+gases+trillions of calculations+the right molecules at the right time=perhaps some organic substance then organic substance must go through neumerous changes. Once you have an organisim it must meet other within its life time blah blah blah, you get a fully functional human. This sounds more like a Sic-Fi experiment gone wrong.

5. Exactly how would you define complete in terms of the fossil record? Every single organism that ever lived? And I'm not sure I understand, are you saying that the specific fossilized fish plants and mammals in your area can't have coexisted? Which species are they may I ask?

--A complete fossile record as in the fossile record that we have does not exist in one place, it is taken from thousands of locations in different envirnments spliced together to form a qusi-coherant map of evolution. You can't dig in the dirt a 20' deep hole in various places and find the same fossile record as it states.
As far as the species I am not sure of thier names, 1 is a saltwater plant and muslce(not sure if its salt water or not)the bone is of a common dog.

6. Even without a complete fossil record, there is a great deal of evidence in genes. Sequence similarity is an excellent indication of where species diverged (see, for example this study on dogs which, btw, are an excellent example of how dramatically traits within a species can change in a short amount of time, although with domestic dogs the changes have been produced 'artificially' through breeding)

--Breeding not macro-evolution

Oh, being a physicist, perhaps you'll enjoy this article.

I can assure you, to molecular geneticists, this is exactly what you arguments against evolution are. Just because a theory does not have every minute hole filled (and with evolution, they're pretty small) does not make it false.

--Holes will always exist, however the ones that we have discoverd now are notmy friend small.

Defining an originator species is a bit tough. Do we mean the first primate? the first bipedal primate? The first mammal? It's too continuous to define an originator. And btw, would you mind substantiating your own claims? Maybe with some links (pref. to scientific articles if you can find them. You'll have to pardon me but I don't consider creationist websites, as noted under #3 of this rebuttal, as reliable sources

On the topic of bias, your not going to find any sciences with our bias. You take the evidence, set aside personal opinins or wishes and pound out a truth.
BTW, There have been how many suposed missing links that have tunred out to be fakes?

No, because every time I try to get across what I would surely say to you, I get back exactly what I despise in return. I like to keep things simple, to be fair to everyone. Since my comment did not have a definant recipient, those that want to claim it can surely speak. However, in doing so, you proclaim yourself an asshat, that uses words like a weapon, to belittle those that are honestly trying to ponder things for themselves.

Oh, I am enjoying this to the fullest.

As far as religion etc. it is this, if one has a religion you must live by that religiong yes. If you remove God from the equation then you are as god, in other words scientists (including myself) have a hard time with the notion that we are not in total control. However this particualr topic should be saved for another thread, due to the amount of ideas and philosophy in it, not much to do with origins as per the prevailing coversation.

Perhaps it has everything to do with this thread. Scientist are what, looking for God on earth? I am sure that isn't far from the truth.

Strigocia
Not so much that we are searching for god on earth, so much that scientists tend to think themselves as god, that is to say, the highest of beings on earth.
I do not subscribe to that notion lol

Yes, yes... that is what I was going for. Scientist would like to see that "God" is something they can touch, research, and get a good grasp on.

yes, but by definition God is everything therfore we as only part of everything, can not see or touch that which is all.

Touche, yet you must know you are speaking to an Atheist right now. For myself, It is possible for me to touch, or be touched, by everything on this planet. My mind does not search farther than that. ;)

No problem, a different topic for a different time.
To those who are engaged in this conversation, I m going to be gone for the next while so dont expect an instant response...its been fun.

I have been pleased to see the responses here, but am dismayed at the use of derogative names being used within the discussion.

There is no reason at any time to use phrases such as asshatto belittle another VR member. Flaming is prohibited within the forums, and to do so to another member who is clearly stating their opinions will not be tolerated per forum rules.

If you feel you are not getting a clear response I would remind everyone not to assume that others have any clue as to what you mean, we only have the words that you have put here within the forum.

This thread could justifiably be closed due to the lack of restraint some members have shown here, but considering that the person on the receiving end of being called an asshat is also a Dominar and did not close this thread, I will leave it open.

Perhaps the comment was made in jest, but as I read it... the intent seemed to be purposeful.

I will close with this, flaming is not and never will be accepted in these forums. Threads that turn into such will be closed and members who flame run the risk of suspension should an Admin feel that it is called for.

Thank you, sahahria, for mentioning that wonderful restriction against flaming. I myself was beggining to think opening this thread of mine was a bad idea, considering the verbal attacks made by Xzavier and Strigocia(no offense to any named or unamed parties).

Secondly, I would like to thank everyone who provided ACTUAL opinions and theories they believed in or heard about, rather than just personal ideas they were trying to gather viable clout for.

Thirdly, I recently was performing a search on the web for the topic at hand, many results of which had religious backgrounds or theological foundations. Although I think many of those resulting thoeries are WAY blown out of proportion of plausible deniability, there was one that caught my fancy, but for the reason that it would be nice bedtime "story" for little children.

This is it:

"Long ago, when the world was brand new, creatures with two heads, four arms, and four legs came to exist because of an indescribably fierce storm that carried a torrent of organic material that collected to create the creatures. The creatures lived in peace together alongside the life that was developing around them.
Then, one day, a storm reminiscent of the one that had created the creatures descended upon the only pack of the two headed creatures, and lightning struck each one, seperating them into two seperate beings. Each had one head, two arms, and two legs, and shared one half of a soul that was one when the creatures were multi-limbed.
Confusion spread throughout, and they wandered the lands, searching for something lost and a place of living.
To this day, the creatures seek out the other half of themselves that was split from them, hoping to one day reach the perfect harmony they once held with their other half."

...................

As I said before, some were pretty ridiculus and outstanding. I myself, believe in what I believe, but I will not share my thoughts here. If you must know, you must message me, and provide MUCH persuasion for me to diverge my belief in the origins of the human race and the other creatures that walk/limp/crawl/slither/fly/exist on this earth.

But, as my only other post on this particular thread says, I merely wanted to know the thoughts and thoeries of all those who replied to this. Until more thoughts can be diverged from you all, I bid a warm "Auf wiedersehen."

Nykl Dormir

Sahahria Thank you for your response and reminder of the rules. I have always tried to wrap my mind around the idea of were we come from. All that makes sense to me and it goes kinda with my Native beleifs is that we all came from a higher power. We at one times were one with animals and evolved. Natives still have spirit animals and spirit guides that represent the characteristics that we posess.

I personally feel like its ok to have many oppinions. You brought allot of facts to the table. It is always a pleasure to read your posts and it offers allot of insight. Sometimes these things get very heated and at times people dont want to bend there minds to see anothers oppinion.

Thank you MRD, if indeed I said anything that could be misconstrude as an attack I do apologise.
And would also like to thank everyone for their opinions,facts ect, this has been most stimulating.

I bow to you and say thank you!

That is why I left this thread open, as it has proved much stimulating if not differing opinions. It is a good example of what the forum threads SHOULD be like.

We all have the right to disagree, but when we bring sources to the disagreement everyone benefits by education. :)

I hope to see more on this once the opposing sides have rested ;)

I am almost thinking that once the opposing sides have rested, they will be ready to start the discussion again and delve even deeper =]

sahahria
I am sure MRD has a great deal of facts he could bring to the table as does myself. Which poses a problem time and space lol
Although,after a rest should the thread remain open..you never know

getting deep...

*wades in*

Perhaps you all might take a chance on looking at this from a slightly alternative angle?

That of- We are a collection of mineral filled bags of chemicalised water, held together by an electrical field, which is generated by our intake of outside energy sources, food, vitamins and what have you.

Our entire bodily system is designed to maintain this field and essentially, it then founds the basis of the aura.

How difficult is it consider how this field can be manipulated, adjusted and 'reconfigured', within a persons single lifetime?

Though, in a way, it could be said to be 'mutation', I don't consider this in the classic sense of the word, since active choice to reconstruct is much different from a random 'natural' change.

With this in mind, is it therefore feasible to assume that a person who understands the nature of their energy being, how their whole system operates and what is required to adjust it, could make these changes to themselves and others?

And in doing so, they could create a new state of being. Not strictly human, but still developed from the original homo-sapiens architecture.

Cell division and growth would form along the new lines of chemical and energetic balance, poducing the traits sought after.

In such a manner, it is hypothesised that some of the first 'psychic vampyres' came into being. Through ritualised reworking of the body's chakra's and energy flows.

The physical form is motivated by our non-corporeal form, just as the physical sustains the energetic field.

Who needs evolution?

;)

But your theory is evulotion. Just intentional not random.

i have always had the idea if christianity has any truth then vampires and other creatures may have come or were the nephilim,, which were the sons of angels and human women

Nezail
The children of the angels and human women were destryed in the Biblical flood were they not?Gen ch 6-7

I can't really have an opinion here because I don't really know enough and, to be honest, it isn't something I would spend ages looking up.

I'm trying to slot together a few of things here and seeing if I can reason something else.

If the planet was too hot or whatever for life as we know it. Couldn't life as we don't know it have been around and evolved as the conditions changed to cope with the new climate ?

I can actually use my profile quote now ... If man evolved from apes, why are there still apes ? If conditions were about that made the ape evolve, why didn't it make all the apes change.

Surely it can't only affect part of the species and leave other part unaffected, otherwsie we would have neanderthal man walking along side us today.

Just something that my line of thinking can't get to grips with

Well we all had to get here some how didn't we. Some believe in the evolution, other that they where created by some divine being. My belief is that we sprang up somewhere in the middle east or africa, a very, very, very long time ago. as for the origins of Vampires and creatures of the night, who knows. I seriously need to do more reading and such. LOL!

STABB,

That is an interesting, well-thoughtout, researched, and well-put thought. I would never have thought of such an inuiry. Perhaps I shall post any information I may turn up after researching this idea. Thank you very much for giving me something to do with the time I'm given for lunch at work. I will certainly enjoy this endeavor.

And once again, thank you...everyone, for your opinions. And for the previously named parties(and unamed), I merely meant that what I saw could be interpreted as an assault when the tone of the individual speaking the words is unkown. I am sorry for any misunderstandings on my part, and on those who cannot find it within themselves to forgive one another for a stray comment.

Again, thank you everyone, and especially you, Stabb, THANK YOU.

Supposedly, all human life began in Africa.

there are so many different theory's I don't think anyone will know what was true

Do mean in the near future, or ever, BloodyVampireRose?

My veiw on evolution is if we came from monkeys, why are the monkeys still here? we are the dominant species so that means that according to survival of the fittest, monkeys should have disappeared/

Are we not still evolving? Just in the past 100 years we have gotten taller, our brains are more developed, and our chemestry has changed to build up more immunities. I know alot of this has to do with nutrition and enviornment, but is that not evolution?

i think we where a mistake of natcher cuz well wev fu~~~d up the planet i dout it was a good thing or ment to happen

She is right. If evolution Was not posible then how are we able to do that?

you can have all the theroies and truths you want but there is only 1 true truth

Athos, I disagree with you on that. You state that there is only one truth. Please consider this analogy, someone who is looking at the tail side of a coin will describe something entirely different from someone looking at the “head” side of that same coin. They are the same coin, but the perspective the viewer has is totally different.

A very good example of this is Xzavier’s and MrD’s discussion within this thread. Both contain valid scientific evidence from the types of science each has access to, yet both differ far from agreeing as to how/why we are. So far science only has small glances as to where our origins are. We have one truth? Only if you are willing to allow that truth to be so vast that one perception cannot fully explain it, nor will it work within all the paradigms that we currently live under.

evolution mammals have been doing it for centuries

The doubts on the evolution on man from chimps all stems from the fact that there are possibly one or more missing links between us and them. The jump from chimp to early neanderthals is too far when the whole basis on evolution is that it happens over immense amounts of time, slow changes which eventually form recognised species and the previous one dies off because the newer one is better equipped to deal with competition for food or perhaps is killed by the next step.

The way I see it, if we assume that humans follow an evolutionary path back to chimps that the reason chimps are still around is because we must have moved from chimps to some form that was primarily based on the ground, therefore the competition for food was lessened, since then with the evolution of another step of ground based human type meant that the previous is killed off all the way up to Homo Sapien.

The major flaw in that theory is that if there was that gradual change and killing off of previous evolutionary steps, where is the fossil evidence showing it? Sure many kinds have been unearthed and plotted on the evolutionary scale, but we still miss many to bridge the gaps.

I believe in a combination of creation and evolution to some extent. I don't believe we evolved from monkeys but have evolved as a species of man from one form to what we are now. The older humans bones they have found are much different from what we are now.

This web site has some good arguments on how old the earth is and that is only about 6000 years old.
http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/05agee2.htm

Not sure if believe the earth is that young. But they make some good points..

The web site also makes good points of why the dating methods don't work to prove how old things are. Each of the dating methods give different dates so which one is right?
http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/06dat2.htm

Okay, everyone. It seems everyone has some very interesting ideas and some have some sort of evidence that gives their perspective clout. I will be posting a new thread like this one soon so as to continue this discussion, and also to approach the other half of the objective of this thread: The origins of the Night kin, dark creatures, and other unseen nightmares.

Until then, everyone have an excellent night. And for one last time, thank you, everyone, for your input.

if anyone wants to know this email me