It turns out that by generally accepted scientific standards, not even yesterday, but this morning. If you believe traditional science, it turns out that a person has been living on Earth for 4.5 million years. Not everything can be trusted, and even more so to scientists who talk about the manners and customs of the Neanderthals. Every scientist is a person who has at least one higher education, and if so, then he could not help but study such an academic discipline as Logic. The question arises: - why study logic, take tests and exams, and subsequently, absolutely not use the acquired knowledge?
I can somehow understand the lack of skills in mathematical calculations among the humanities, because I myself am. Everything related to numbers is a “dense forest” for me. But logic is not as close to the exact sciences as the humanities! Why don't historians use it? Here's a typical example:
Even if we assume that all of humanity is the result of the reproduction of only two individuals - Adam and Eve (which is completely impossible, as even high school students know), then in a hundred years the population of the Earth should have been at least 150 people, not counting those eaten by crocodiles, drowned in a swamp and those killed in a domestic showdown.
These also happened. Remember how Cain hit his brother Abel with a stone? In another 100 years, the population should be at least ten thousand. Then what would the population be like three hundred years after the appearance of Adam? Let's assume that there are 50 thousand "Adamyches". I hope no one will accuse me of postscripting. And given that people at that time preferred to live for 1000 or more years, it should turn out many times more. But let's leave. For the "purity" of the experiment, we will use the smallest numbers.
Further. Using well-known sociological studies, we can easily calculate the minimum population of the planet. Science tells us that in the absence of massive epidemics and all-out wars, the population doubles, within 25 - 30 years. This has been confirmed in practice many times. The rule does not work, only in relation to Russia of the 19th century, but this is a separate topic for conversation. In principle, the law works flawlessly, it is easy to check by reading the census data of most countries, with a difference of one hundred years. China, India, Brazil, Iran, many Arab countries, for example, more than “exceed the norms”. So. It turns out that in the next 300 years, i.e. 600 years after the appearance of the first man, 51 million two hundred thousand people lived on Earth! Now imaginehow many people should have lived on the planet for 4 and a half million years!
Everything would be fine, but the dead have to be put somewhere! Bury. This is natural for most cultures, with the exception of some of the tribes of Indians and Slavs, who burned their dead. In areas where the population was very small in relation to the area of land on which the people lived, the corpses were traditionally left on a hill to be gnawed by birds and eaten by animals. In such conditions, the epidemic did not threaten people, and there was no inconvenience from the neighborhood with the decaying remains. But with the emergence of compact settlements of settled residents, the question of utilization inevitably arises. So, there is only one way out: - to dig holes.
And if so, then all over the earth there should be one continuous burial. Where are they? Archaeologists rush all over the earth in search of someone to dig out, but they can't find! More precisely, they find, but extremely rarely and relatively recent burials. In the Pskov region, for example, there are no remains older than 500 years. But the 18th century left a significant number of burials. 19th century - generally one continuous graveyard. Well, where are those who lived millions of years earlier on earth? The only answer suggests itself - before the 15th century, people did not live on the territory of the Pskov and Novgorod provinces. Why? I have written about this many times. Because there was the sea here. Man mastered these territories only after the water left, and it was only recently, in the 15th century, not earlier.
But what about other regions where there are no traces of the flood? The picture is exactly the same. And the point is not, or more precisely, not only that human remains do not last long. The remains are remains, but traces of material culture, as it is commonly called in archeology, are also absent. Those billions of ancestors could not help but leave countless evidence of their existence.
Promotional video:
I hope you are convinced that the problem is not far-fetched, not far-fetched, a paradox on the face, and there is no explanation for it. I propose to shift your attention to the present day, leaving the beginning of the conversation in your mind.
So. More than seven billion tenants officially live on planet Earth in 2013. Roughly speaking, in 80 years they will need seven billion new apartments. The average area of one grave is 2 square meters, which means that for an "apartment building" for those who presented themselves, 14 billion square meters of land will be required. Is that correct? Now ask what is the total land area on planet Earth! I will tell. Rounded 149 million square kilometers, each with half a million apartments for those who moved to another world, and this is not counting the passages between the graves.
Let us subtract this area, taking as a basis 350,000 graves per 1 km2. So, it turns out that in order to bury everyone, 426 square meters will be required. It seems not a little, but … Throw away from these potential 149 million, the area of mountains, rocks, deserts, territories covered with glaciers, settlements and agricultural land, etc. Remains generally with a gulkin nose. And all these remains will accumulate and accumulate, significantly increasing the mass and weight of the planet, which is impossible according to the laws of physics. The same physics that is taught in schools and institutes. But in practice, it is obvious that this is so!
Let's draw a preliminary line:
Whatever the true age of the Earth, man appeared on it only a few centuries ago. And he appeared, apparently not for long, because the growth of parasites inevitably leads to the death of the one on whom the parasites parasitize, forgive the tautology. And so that a person does not understand this obvious fact, fairy tales about millions of years of human existence were invented for him. However, having estimated the speed with which the so-called "progress" is taking place, it is easy to understand that we have not long left here.
In order to realize that the above "funeral arithmetic" is not a joke, and not a delusion, it is enough to recall the so-called "Ancestral Paradox", brilliantly described in Viktor Suvorov's book "Choice":
“We won't go deep into the millennia. Let's deal only with the latter
millennium. One hundred years is four generations of people. A thousand years - forty generations. Imagine a pyramid. You are the top. And forty floors below you. The previous generation is on each floor. Directly below you, on the fortieth floor, there are only two of your direct ancestors, father and mother, who created you.
- Yes.
- Without them, your existence would not have taken place. Which one is more important? Both. In the absence of one, you simply would not exist.
- Agree.
- And father and mother were created by four people. You have two grandmothers and two grandfathers. Who knows from whom of the four you inherited more, from whom less. Again, which one was more important? All.
- Agree.
- So, on the 39th floor of the pyramid, you have four direct ancestors. And your great-grandmothers and great-grandfathers, like me, like each of us, had eight. This is the 38th floor. A generation earlier, each of us had 16 ancestors.
- And before that - 32.
- Here's a problem for you, Nastya: calculate how many ancestors you had a thousand years ago. Easy to count with paper and pencil. But the sorcerer sets tasks that must be solved without paper and pencil.
- 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, 2048 … At first it goes quickly. But it’s very cool, the numbers pile on top of one another, dangle and get fat …
- 131 072 multiplied by 2. It turns out … Amazing things turn out. Only twenty generations ago, that is, five hundred years ago, each of us had a million ancestors. 1,048,576 for accuracy.
- So much for the arithmetic: before a million ancestors had to go down twenty floors, and there were two million of them on the floor below. Well, consider, I will not interfere. It took Nastya a long time to get to the first million, and then millions went to stratify one another, turning into tens of millions, into hundreds … It is easy to multiply 134 217 728 by two. But it's just that some people find it difficult to keep the result in memory and multiply it further and further. And the Firebird was lucky with memory, because she, staring at the ceiling, whispers with her lips:
- 137 billion 438 million 953 thousand 472 smart-o-press by two and get … Slowly numbers multiply, multiply, multiply, and here is the result:
“A thousand years ago, I should have had one thousand one hundred billion ancestors.
- More precisely?
-1 099 511 627 776.
- Maybe I'm wrong, but I got the same result. Now try to add them all, all your ancestors over the last forty generations. Do you know the easiest way?
- It is necessary to multiply the last figure from this series by two and subtract two.
- Right. Take action.
- 2 199 023 255 550.
- I agree. This is how many ancestors you should have in just one last thousand years. We assumed that both men and women produced offspring at the age of 25. If they produced offspring earlier, and this is how it was all the time, then over a thousand years not forty generations are recruited, but more, and the number of ancestors increases in a completely astronomical way. If we look into the depths for another thousand years, at the time of the Roman Empire, at the time of the Vikings and the heyday of Byzantium, then the pyramid of your ancestors cannot be expressed in any numbers.
- But on earth there never was, is not and cannot be so many people.
Usually, paradoxes have a simple and logical solution. But the Ancestral Paradox, as far as I know, has not yet been destroyed by anyone. The attempts that I have encountered are extremely unconvincing. This means that the question remains open. And the version that humanity is only a couple of hundred years old remains relevant.
S. P. Kapitsa was wrong, or was he leading us by the nose?
The ancestor paradox has a place to be, and it is necessary to take it seriously. It turns out that Academician Sergei Petrovich Kapitsa, who in 1999 published a scientific work dedicated to the Paradox of the Ancestors, thoroughly dealt with this problem.
And at first glance, he proposed a completely logical solution to it, but … This “but”, which Dmitry Enkov explains in an accessible way, does not remove all the questions, but generates new ones. The main conclusion, which will inevitably come to everyone who delves into the essence of the issue, turns over all conceivable and inconceivable ideas about the origin of man and his role on this planet.
It turns out that one thousand two hundred years ago, we were a natural source of food for someone. Those. the explosive growth in the population of Homo sapiens became possible only when a person took a place in the food chain, which was previously occupied by someone else standing above him.
Only when someone stopped hunting for a person, and thereby ceased to naturally regulate the size of his population, it became possible to increase the number of human individuals on Earth. In the same way as now there is no increase in the number of dogs, for example, or moles, or crocodiles. After all, the same reptiles exist on the planet in an unchanged form, for a very long time. And the size of their population changed at different times in one direction or another, but not dramatically. Over the millennia, some species have disappeared, but those that have survived to this day have a linear graph of changes in the number of their species.
The most discouraging question that arises with this conclusion:
- If we existed as a species 1200 ago, but were not intelligent, then where did the multi-thousand-year history come from? It's like trying to write a cat history today, for example!
Now it's clear why we can't remember what happened before? There was nothing! We were, but we could not have history, just as there cannot be history for cows and sheep. They, cows and sheep, exist, yes … But what is their story?
But when our masters, well, or the Gods, as you like, were gone, and some of their instruments fell into our hands, and we took their place, then the history of mankind began. And she is, at most, 1200 years old …
Now, keeping in mind the quote from Ecclisiastus “What was, will be; and what has been done will continue to be done, and there is nothing new under the sun,”one can assume with a high degree of confidence that we are actually children of the white Gods. We got not only their genetics, but also advanced knowledge that allowed us to take the top of the food pyramid.
Nations that did not have such ancestors as ours have been in their primitive state for thousands of years. We will not be - the inhabitants of the Amazon, islands in the ocean and the African jungle will continue to exist, but will return to their primitive way of life. And they will live like this until the prophecies are fulfilled, and the "white gods" will not appear again - our distant descendants who will preserve the memories of the technologies available to us today.
Author: kadykchanskiy