PDA

View Full Version : Ancient tech and stargates



glowingjellyfish
September 11th, 2004, 01:34 PM
there are so many threads on these subject I decided to start my own thread to coalesce all my views instead of responding to each thread separately.

First, why does this planet seem to have an embarrassment of riches when it comes to stargates :rolleyes: . there's the antartica gate - which was placed on earth by the ancients- then there's Ra's gate - then Apophis gate. I read that people think that the gate of the Ancients and the Apophis gate were destroyed but if you ask me they're all in orbit around earth and Sol :p

Also we know that wormholes can't work in hyperspace (think the episodes where Apophis lost 2 ships attacking earth) so the one we flew away on piggy back on a death glider would've be deactivated after entering hyperspace right? so ship glider probably exploded and the gates floating in orbit out there :)

also why must the ancients be 100 milllions old? we know the ancients left earth on atlantis several million years ago (max 7). we know we saw the ayanna watching them depart and later she was frozen in a snowdrift. we know that the hologram of the sol system on proklarush showed earth continent configuration 30 million years ago according to jackson.

and that's it. 30 mil is the oldest date spoken. this fits in with the ayanna episode where sam speculated the antartica DHD COULD be as old as 50 million.

no mention of ancients evolving on earth and no fossil record proof. no mention of any seeding of their species that implies would later become the tauri. actually jackson mentions parallel evolution several times thruout the series concerning cultures and architecture. and anyone in school who studied evolution and archaelogy is familiar with convergent and parallel evolution. think marine life and egyptian and mayan/teotihucan pyramids. and human and ancient bilogical similarity. it's quite clear that goa'ulds spread humans thruout the milky way.

no big deal.

so my theory is that ancients evolved on some unknown world or galaxy, developed hyperdrive and colonized many worlds and galaxies, including terra atlantis :cool: the milky way, ida (othalla?) and pegasus.

also has anyone noticed that Atlantis survived from 7 million years ago to the present :eek: it must be REALLY well built! maybe it's meant to be a generational ship? also it was mentioned in an ep with daniel/sara/osiris that the lost city was the "origin of doorways" so presumably the stargates were invented (and manufactured?) at atlantis and the tech was shared with other ancients everywhere

maybe that was atlantis primary function? to build stargates? it is a city after all they must have repair and manufacturing places.

also we know that stargates are excluded as time travel devices from the ground hog day episdo where they have a separate time machine and I doubt the extension theory (dial more than one gate on a planet specifically) because 'the busy signal' we saw in the antartica ep would not be needed then.....no flashing lights and ground shaking like we saw......it would not be necessary the 7th chevron would simply not engage as we saw during several episodes.....i have a great idea for an episode for the 9th chevron which i'm writing as a script ......maybe i'll post it here

next - there seems to be confusion about the DHD's and stargates.....
I believe the point of origin glyph is present on ALL DHD's because we saw sam point it out to jack on the episode where they were sent to antartica. the only reason i can think that the SGC stargate was dominant was because the sam mentioned that after a few uses the antartica DHD depleted its' unknown power source(which i like to think is naquadria! :rolleyes: ) and mcka y mentioned on a recent SGA episode that both sending and receiving stargates require some power for a wormhole to connect-hopefully not peculiar to pegasus gates. The big red button is the ENTER button as another poster mentioned......this allows the DHD to know when to dial a 7 or 8 or 9 symbol address. push six, seven or eight and point of origin and then hit big red button to open gate.

i wonder about the pegasus gates tho - it seems each ring 'box' has enough little lights in it accomadate as many are needed to illuminate any configuration constellation or maximum number for that galaxy. so how can u manually dial? perhaps from what i've seen on the show the 'boxes' on the ring remember the last know constellation they represented - so when you provide enough power they all display the constellation last present on them - so you then rotate the ring to the chevron you want.

but manual dialing seems by physically moving the ring seems to auto open wormholes after seven symbols are entered unless you have a big red button to hit enter or a cobbled together dialing device like Earth that signals the gate with an ENTER code........

regarding the torment of tantulus episode of the four races........i think jackson was only speculating that the four races were an alliance against the goa'uld or the wraith as some posters suggest. it was never stated that there allied and the meeting place was for this purpose. the 'meaning of life stuff' device indicates that this was a place where these species met to exchange knowledge not plot strategy...........as for the time frame who knows because the ancients had gate networks in many galaxies they might've chosen those 3 species because they felt they had the most potential just as the asgard felt about humans of earth..........


concerning ancient hologram lady saying the atlanteans returned to earth after fleeing pegasus there's no time frame determined yet tho I heard there's an new ep saying 10000 years. not sure what to say yet...........





;)

glowingjellyfish
September 11th, 2004, 01:47 PM
:p

forgot stargates and alternate universes - i bet anything the naquadah mirror form season 1-3 was Ancient built - remember they found it in a 'museum' collection of a planet of humans whose culture was from earth so presumably they found it on some Ancient colonized world............. so that excludes another possiblity for chevron 9 :rolleyes:

glowingjelyfish
September 14th, 2004, 08:14 PM
wouldn't it make sense for atlantis to have a facility for making and launching the glowing calamari of doom? it is a ship after all. it might need defences while in space.

also where do you think these glowing jellyfish of doom come from? are they synthetic? do they live inside a planet? are they transdimensional like that episode with Jonas seeing them thru the help of the Ancient pseudo bug zapper?
they seem to survive contact after more than one strike - if you watch the lost city epi carefully they attack several ships while flying to space and then return to the main swarm

:rolleyes:

LordAnubis
September 15th, 2004, 04:26 AM
:p

forgot stargates and alternate universes - i bet anything the naquadah mirror form season 1-3 was Ancient built - remember they found it in a 'museum' collection of a planet of humans whose culture was from earth so presumably they found it on some Ancient colonized world............. so that excludes another possiblity for chevron 9 :rolleyes:
I think a great deal of your theory is pure speculation. Also, why is it that everyone seems to think the Ancients evolved on another planet? They evolved here. The facts point to them evolving here, not elsewhere.

glowingjelyfish
September 15th, 2004, 04:43 PM
which part is speculation? and i saw every episode except the first half of the epi when anubis destroys the ra pyramid. there is absolutely no mention, heck even implication, that the ancients evolved on earth, that's earth centrism :D

as i mentioned jackson puts the earliest date based on continental drift and the sol system hologram at 30 million years. the ayiana epi only says that probably we evolved to look like the ancients - i.e. convergent evolution.

aren't u that dismissive poster?

TheHomegaMan
September 15th, 2004, 05:15 PM
I'm still wondering where people get the idea that the Ancients built the Quantum Mirror. Unless there's an episode that I missed somewhere, I mean. I pulled a TPTB and missed Season 6. :p

glowingjelyfish
September 15th, 2004, 06:32 PM
I'm still wondering where people get the idea that the Ancients built the Quantum Mirror. Unless there's an episode that I missed somewhere, I mean. I pulled a TPTB and missed Season 6. :p


okay, i admit that part is speculation. but the style of the design seems very Ancient. nox, furling, asgard, tollan and the other advanced tho extinct races mentioned seem to use a distinctive different style for their tek :S

LordAnubis
September 15th, 2004, 06:47 PM
which part is speculation? and i saw every episode except the first half of the epi when anubis destroys the ra pyramid. there is absolutely no mention, heck even implication, that the ancients evolved on earth, that's earth centrism :D

as i mentioned jackson puts the earliest date based on continental drift and the sol system hologram at 30 million years. the ayiana epi only says that probably we evolved to look like the ancients - i.e. convergent evolution.

aren't u that dismissive poster?
Some points to consider:
SPOILERS




In "Solitudes", Carter and O'Neill get stuck in Antarctica because of some gate gltch. I forgot what happened exactly, but later, during study of that gate, Carter told SGC that Earth's Antarctica gate was about 50-55 million years old, which made it the oldest gate they had encountered up that point. It's possible there are older gates out there, but Carter speculated that Earth's gate might have been the first gate built; however, she did not know for sure.

In "Frozen", where they found Ayiana, I think something was once again mentioned about the Gate being really old, plus Dr. Frazier clearly said that Ayiana was human, just like us, except for a few biochemical differences. There was comment in another episode, by Dr. Frasier and Dr. Jackson, about the Ancient humans and modern humans having similar body structures, biochemicals, hormones, and anatomical structural similarities in common, denoting a common evolution on Earth; or, the Ancients, humans, and all Earth animals evolved on an alien planet and were transported here and allowed to evolve further, which is unlikely.

Also, Atlantis was built and housed on Earth, so it seems, and Earth played a major role in the Ancients' Empire. It's logical to conclude that they did evolve here and that this was their home. They also came back here from Pegasus to escape the Wraith onslaught. If this was not their homeworld, why come back here of all places? Especially if it had gone "primitive"? If this weren't their homeworld, they wouldn't come back to a planet that had become primitive with no more advancements, unless this was truly their place of origin.

If they evolved here, how do we account for the lack of ruins and ancient findings? Here's some thoughts:

1) It was millions of years ago when they left and only about 11,000 when they returned. We know the Antarctic base was left in tact, but we haven't found much else of the Ancients on Earth. Over the millions of years since they originally left and moved on, Earth has undergone major climatic and geological changes, which might have eroded and destroyed cities, buried cities and ruins under lava/magma/ash or pushed the ruins/cities/buildings underwater after flooding and land movement. Some of the cities and ruins might have been lost in desert and jungle.

Also, since that time, the Goa'uld and Asgard came to Earth. It's possible that since Earth was the homeworld of the Ancients, the Asgard and Goa'uld, and possibly even Nem's peeps, the Oannes, who were also here at the time of the Goa'uld, picked the leftover Ancient tech and modified it for themselves. We know the Goa'uld are scavengers, and once they came to Earth, would have found lots of Ancient tech and structures. they would have either made them into their own temples to be worshipped by the primitive humans, destroyed them so humans won't be confused by advanced objects that were created by someone other than their gods, or the Asgard took some of the Ancient tech too; don't forget they were on Earth off and on for a long time too. Thor never said why they were on Earth exactly, other than some "genetic investigation" as described in "Fragile Balance", but we know they have been messin' around on Earth for thousands of years (see "Red Sky" and "Thor's Hammer"). If they knew this was the homeworld of the Ancients, with whom they once were allied, then once the Ancients disappeared, they may have come here looking for them, and once they discovered they were gone and had reverted to primitive humans, picked off the good tech for themselves...I mean, why not? Nem's people seemed pretty advcanced and some of that tech in "Fire and Water" seemed to be ancient or goa'uld-like, so maybe when the Oammes came to Earth to fight the Goa'uld, they took some tech too.

Time and garbage picking could explain for the lack of ruins on Earth.

2) Also, we have discovered a lot of alien objects on Earth so far. Most of it has been Goa'uld, but a few things have proven to be Asgard, Furling (see "Paradise Lost"), and of course, Ancient. Ancient objects have been found in Egypt, Central America, and even Europe I think. A lot of the alien artifacts found might be categorized as Goa'uld without knwoing for sure it was actually Ancient or Asgard or whatever. Hard to say for sure.

3) Like Major Fischer said: you have to suspend your disbelief and just enjoy the show wihtout thinking of technicalities like archaeological evidence of the Ancients on Earth.

4) In the movie, Abydos was in a different galaxy, but in the series, in "COTG", Carter said Abydos was the closest planet to Earth. She never mentioned how old the gate was, but I think I remember another Abydos episode when either Carter or Daniel said something about the Abydos gate being quite old too -- older than other gates in the galaxy. I don't remember specifics, but if it is closest to Earth, then it might have been the second gate seeded off Earth.

I think the hardest part for most of us to swallow is the millions of years thing; if it was hundreds of thousands, we would accept it better, but 50+ million years? I guess the writers wanted to justify the name "Ancients".

There are plenty of inferences and direct evidence to support the fact that they evolved on Earth. Of course, we don't know anything for sure, and I'm also speculating, but I think my points make more sense to some degree. Also, I'm not an Earth-centrist. I'm a biology major and know that if Ancients evolved on another planet, we could still be related to them by some master genetic plan, but that would not explain how we are biologically linked to life on Earth. We have related morophological, biochemical, embryological, and genetic structures/patterns to other terrestrial animals. If we evolved on Planet X, we would have very little in common with other Earth life, which isn't true.


signed, the dismissive poster :(

glowingjelyfish
September 15th, 2004, 07:18 PM
In "Solitudes", Carter and O'Neill get stuck in Antarctica because of some gate gltch. I forgot what happened exactly, but later, during study of that gate, Carter told SGC that Earth's Antarctica gate was about 50-55 million years old, which made it the oldest gate they had encountered up that point. It's possible there are older gates out there, but Carter speculated that Earth's gate might have been the first gate built; however, she did not know for sure.

see my first post- i don't dispute that' the antartica gate is the first - remember atlantis is probably the orgin of doorways, the first built



Also, Atlantis was built and housed on Earth, so it seems, and Earth played a major role in the Ancients' Empire. It's logical to conclude that they did evolve here and that this was their home. They also came back here from Pegasus to escape the Wraith onslaught. If this was not their homeworld, why come back here of all places? Especially if it had gone "primitive"? If this weren't their homeworld, they wouldn't come back to a planet that had become primitive with no more advancements, unless this was truly their place of origin.

i agree it was housed here obviously but there's no proof it was built here especially because there's no naquadah in the Sol system- a flying city could certainly fly to earth. the colonists of this world would naturally feel attached to it and so would there descendants of the pegasus galaxy. your argument is not convincing proof they evolved here.

If they evolved here, how do we account for the lack of ruins and ancient findings? Here's some thoughts:



Also, since that time, the Goa'uld and Asgard came to Earth. It's possible that since Earth was the homeworld of the Ancients, the Asgard and Goa'uld, and possibly even Nem's peeps, the Oannes, who were also here at the time of the Goa'uld, picked the leftover Ancient tech and modified it for themselves. We know the Goa'uld are scavengers, and once they came to Earth, would have found lots of Ancient tech and structures. they would have either made them into their own temples to be worshipped by the primitive humans, destroyed them so humans won't be confused by advanced objects that were created by someone other than their gods, or the Asgard took some of the Ancient tech too; don't forget they were on Earth off and on for a long time too. Thor never said why they were on Earth exactly, other than some "genetic investigation" as described in "Fragile Balance", but we know they have been messin' around on Earth for thousands of years (see "Red Sky" and "Thor's Hammer"). If they knew this was the homeworld of the Ancients, with whom they once were allied, then once the Ancients disappeared, they may have come here looking for them, and once they discovered they were gone and had reverted to primitive humans, picked off the good tech for themselves...I mean, why not? Nem's people seemed pretty advcanced and some of that tech in "Fire and Water" seemed to be ancient or goa'uld-like, so maybe when the Oammes came to Earth to fight the Goa'uld, they took some tech too.

no evidence/show background/wild speculation



Time and garbage picking could explain for the lack of ruins on Earth.

2) Also, we have discovered a lot of alien objects on Earth so far. Most of it has been Goa'uld, but a few things have proven to be Asgard, Furling (see "Paradise Lost"), and of course, Ancient. Ancient objects have been found in Egypt, Central America, and even Europe I think. A lot of the alien artifacts found might be categorized as Goa'uld without knwoing for sure it was actually Ancient or Asgard or whatever. Hard to say for sure.

the goauld could easily bring any Ancient tek with them. example being stargate








There are plenty of inferences and direct evidence to support the fact that they evolved on Earth. Of course, we don't know anything for sure, and I'm also speculating, but I think my points make more sense to some degree. Also, I'm not an Earth-centrist. I'm a biology major and know that if Ancients evolved on another planet, we could still be related to them by some master genetic plan, but that would not explain how we are biologically linked to life on Earth. We have related morophological, biochemical, embryological, and genetic structures/patterns to other terrestrial animals. If we evolved on Planet X, we would have very little in common with other Earth life, which isn't true.


name your inferences. i know biology also and you should know from your evolution course that nature is a great conserver and will reuse adaptive designs to solve similar problems facing diverse species. hence the biological similiarities. as the Ancients are human like they might have evolved on a similar world

finally - i can suspend my belief too :p i just think we should suspend the writers from their underwear when they can't keep their storylines consistent and logical :D

LordAnubis
September 15th, 2004, 08:54 PM
see my first post- i don't dispute that' the antartica gate is the first - remember atlantis is probably the orgin of doorways, the first built




i agree it was housed here obviously but there's no proof it was built here especially because there's no naquadah in the Sol system- a flying city could certainly fly to earth. the colonists of this world would naturally feel attached to it and so would there descendants of the pegasus galaxy. your argument is not convincing proof they evolved here.

If they evolved here, how do we account for the lack of ruins and ancient findings? Here's some thoughts:


no evidence/show background/wild speculation



the goauld could easily bring any Ancient tek with them. example being stargate








name your inferences. i know biology also and you should know from your evolution course that nature is a great conserver and will reuse adaptive designs to solve similar problems facing diverse species. hence the biological similiarities. as the Ancients are human like they might have evolved on a similar world

finally - i can suspend my belief too :p i just think we should suspend the writers from their underwear when they can't keep their storylines consistent and logical :D
They found naqadah when they started exploring the galaxy via ships. Then they brought it back here and experimened. I dunno...I'm just a stupid college student, not a writer. I wish I had the answers, but anyway. Also, you're wrong about the biological part, but that's okay. You can't evolve on one planet yet have compatible biological patterns with the life on another planet. If you took any biology courses, especially comparative evolution, you would know that dude.

glowingjelyfish
September 15th, 2004, 09:25 PM
They found naqadah when they started exploring the galaxy via ships. Then they brought it back here and experimened. I dunno...I'm just a stupid college student, not a writer. I wish I had the answers, but anyway. Also, you're wrong about the biological part, but that's okay. You can't evolve on one planet yet have compatible biological patterns with the life on another planet. If you took any biology courses, especially comparative evolution, you would know that dude.


it's possible they brought naquadah back, but there're still no references to their evolution on earth. as there are no actual samples of alien life you can't know - unless you know something we don't :D and i do know that biology does demonstrate that to solve similar problems evolution will craft similar molecules, similar tissue/organ structures, similar chemistries and similar anatomies. i'm not sure who taught *you* comparative anatomy but apparently they skipped a few chapters -dude :rolleyes:

glowingjelyfish
September 15th, 2004, 09:28 PM
scuse me I meant comparative evolution but the other is relevant too. also what do u mean by biological patterns?

LordAnubis
September 16th, 2004, 08:47 AM
it's possible they brought naquadah back, but there're still no references to their evolution on earth. as there are no actual samples of alien life you can't know - unless you know something we don't :D and i do know that biology does demonstrate that to solve similar problems evolution will craft similar molecules, similar tissue/organ structures, similar chemistries and similar anatomies. i'm not sure who taught *you* comparative anatomy but apparently they skipped a few chapters -dude :rolleyes:
Well, first off, you make the statement "there are no references to..." in several places. Hmm, ya know, the thing with Stargate, and many other sci-fi series, is that there are often no references to things we would like to know to fill in the blanks. If you read my detailed post about why I think they did evolve here on Earth, you can see the inferences that they are making: the Ancients and Earth are inextricably linked, possibly meaning they evolved here.

Do we know that for a fact? Nope, we don't because it wasn't said, however, what has been said leads more to the conclusion that they did evolve here rather than on some other planet. If you saw "Frozen" and "Solitudes" and "Lost City 1-2" and "Rising" (SGA), and understood what you saw, you might be making the right inferences instead of waiting for written/spoken canon, which you probably won't get until the very end of the show.

It's just like the Asgard question: Are they originally from Ida or Milky Way? It's never said, but they've given us clues supporting both Ida and Milky Way. What do we believe? We can just make educated guesses like we are about where the Ancients evolved.

Parallel evolution is different from convergent or divergent evolution.

Convergent: From several reptilian species, Repto-birds evolved and finally converged into the different forms of modern aves (birds).

Divergent: Cyonidictis (an Oligiocene carnivore) evolved into both CATS and DOGS.

You're right about nature/evolution making accomodations and adjustments in the evolutionary process. This often happens with natural selection, mutation, and parallel evolution in the form of homologues and analogues.

With homologous evolution, we see a particular organ or appendage have the same or different functions in different animals. For example, bats evolved from small rodent-like pseudo-primate-like animals that eventually took to the air; their wings are modified arms (forelimbs) with taut skin comprising the wing material. Birds evolved from theraspid reptiles; their scales became lightweight feathers and their forearms also evolved into wings, however, with feathers instead of tight stretched skin. Both are homologous: same embryological origin and same function with mild differences.

However, a fly or dragonfly's wings are analogous to a bird's or bat's wings. The fly has six limbs; it's wings evolved as separate appendages/organs unrelated to it's limbs. They are not modified arms, but separate organs altogether. Evolution on Earth can create two creatures that do the same thing (fly), but with different biological origins.

Nevertheless, there are biological markers and patterns that clearly link all terrestrial vertebrate life together (forget the insects and invertebrates, cuz they are vastly different from us and other animals). If you focus on the vertebrates, there are clear evolutionary consistencies: jaw structures, joint articulations, spacing of sense organs, type/function of ball-and-socket hip and shoulder joints, and other morphological and anatomical points in common.

Simply put, if humans evolved on another world, we would have very little in common with the native vertebrate animals found on Earth. Especially animals like chimps, orangs, and gorillas. We know that this is not true, so it shows we evolved on Earth, as did the Ancients, as noted in "Frozen", since Ayiana was just like us with the exception of a few superficial differences and millions of years of knowledge and tech :)

So, I've shown why I have to be right and you're wrong. Next? :)

glowingjelyfish
September 16th, 2004, 09:14 AM
Well, first off, you make the statement "there are no references to..." in several places. Hmm, ya know, the thing with Stargate, and many other sci-fi series, is that there are often no references to things we would like to know to fill in the blanks. If you read my detailed post about why I think they did evolve here on Earth, you can see the inferences that they are making: the Ancients and Earth are inextricably linked, possibly meaning they evolved here.

those 'inferences' are tenuous at best. the closest would be the tests that frasier and the other doc said they did on ayiana's blood. but depending on what they tested for, the Ancients could simply have similar cell structure and chemistry



It's just like the Asgard question: Are they originally from Ida or Milky Way? It's never said, but they've given us clues supporting both Ida and Milky Way. What do we believe? We can just make educated guesses like we are about where the Ancients evolved.

several times ida/othalla is mentioned as the homeworld or colony of the asgard. only the protected planets and the research facility of the ancient asgard indicate any presence in the MW


Parallel evolution is different from convergent or divergent evolution.

Convergent: From several reptilian species, Repto-birds evolved and finally converged into the different forms of modern aves (birds).

Divergent: Cyonidictis (an Oligiocene carnivore) evolved into both CATS and DOGS.

You're right about nature/evolution making accomodations and adjustments in the evolutionary process. This often happens with natural selection, mutation, and parallel evolution in the form of homologues and analogues.

With homologous evolution, we see a particular organ or appendage have the same or different functions in different animals. For example, bats evolved from small rodent-like pseudo-primate-like animals that eventually took to the air; their wings are modified arms (forelimbs) with taut skin comprising the wing material. Birds evolved from theraspid reptiles; their scales became lightweight feathers and their forearms also evolved into wings, however, with feathers instead of tight stretched skin. Both are homologous: same embryological origin and same function with mild differences.

However, a fly or dragonfly's wings are analogous to a bird's or bat's wings. The fly has six limbs; it's wings evolved as separate appendages/organs unrelated to it's limbs. They are not modified arms, but separate organs altogether. Evolution on Earth can create two creatures that do the same thing (fly), but with different biological origins.

just consider the evolution of humanity. there are several different subspecies that looked similar to modern humans and if their subspecies survived might've approached our appearance more closely - there's a good artistic rendition of these from the discovery channel hosted by that actor from red october


Nevertheless, there are biological markers and patterns that clearly link all terrestrial vertebrate life together (forget the insects and invertebrates, cuz they are vastly different from us and other animals). If you focus on the vertebrates, there are clear evolutionary consistencies: jaw structures, joint articulations, spacing of sense organs, type/function of ball-and-socket hip and shoulder joints, and other morphological and anatomical points in common.

Simply put, if humans evolved on another world, we would have very little in common with the native vertebrate animals found on Earth. Especially animals like chimps, orangs, and gorillas. We know that this is not true, so it shows we evolved on Earth, as did the Ancients, as noted in "Frozen", since Ayiana was just like us with the exception of a few superficial differences and millions of years of knowledge and tech :)

nothing was mentioned in the show that ayiana had any such markers similar to other terran species. only some vague mentions of similar cell structures


So, I've shown why I have to be right and you're wrong. Next? :)

still flawed and wishful thinking. C- try again
:p

glowingjelyfish
September 16th, 2004, 09:17 AM
another good example would be to consider dinosaur marine life and mammalian marine life for evolution guiding anatomy :)

LordAnubis
September 16th, 2004, 11:51 AM
In response to the mighty glowingjelyfish person who thinks he has the mystery solved:

Wow, it must be hard seeing where you're going when your head is so deeply and firmly wedged in your colon. :) Keep pulling, you might actually see the light of day one day.

You said:
those 'inferences' are tenuous at best. the closest would be the tests that frasier and the other doc said they did on ayiana's blood. but depending on what they tested for, the Ancients could simply have similar cell structure and chemistry.

Um, hehe, she said Ayiana was human in every way except a few minor biochemical variances. What do you think they tested for, Sexually Transmitted Diseases? No, they did a standard CBC, SMAC-21, viral load, and other normal blood work, among other standard tests (e.g., serum bilirubins, serum creatinines, dopamine levels, serotonin levels, etc.). Ayiana was just as human as you (well, that's debatable) and me, with the exception of some unknown biochemical differences. Hence, she was human but had some different blood chemistry most likely due to the geographic, climatic, and other differences found in her time.

You said:
several times ida/othalla is mentioned as the homeworld or colony of the asgard. only the protected planets and the research facility of the ancient asgard indicate any presence in the MW

Well, yes and no; what I recall being said was that they resided in the Ida galaxy on the planet Othalla and formerly Halla. If you ever saw "revelations", where the Asgard of today were doing genetic experiments on Asgard found in suspensed animation from 33,000 years ago,when they were able to reproduce sexually, Heimdall indicated that the Asgard from 33,000 years ago did not have FTL tech and traveled in slow sleeper ships; they were found in the MW galaxy. I guess reasonable inference here would be that their ship orginated from their homeworld in the MW, not Ida, since that would be one LOOOOOONG sleep. I would guess, and I admit I could be wrong, that they were from the MW, where they met the Ancients, the Nox, and the Furlings. It's doubtful the Asgard had the tech to galaxy hop until fairly recently (10,000 years or less). Most of the Asgard episodes have pretty much stated that Thor and his buddies reside in the Ida galaxy, but maintain vested interests in the MW galaxy. Why do you think they would give a rip about Cimmeria and the Red Sky planet and us and the Goa'uld presence if they were from the Ida galaxy? Maybe because this galaxy is their home galaxy? Ya think? Yep, I do, and I'm probably right :) <snarky grin>.

You said:
just consider the evolution of humanity. there are several different subspecies that looked similar to modern humans and if their subspecies survived might've approached our appearance more closely - there's a good artistic rendition of these from the discovery channel hosted by that actor from red october.

Yep, exactly true, but if you did a comprehensive genetic and biological analysis of each hominid, you would be able to tell (well, someone with a clue at least) that each hominid was of terrestrial origin. If Monkeyman B evolved, along a similar pattern of evolution, on Ganymede, then his DNA would be different, his skeletal structure would have some significant structural difference, his ocular orbits would be different...something would be different enough that his extraterrestrial origins would be noticed. The atmosphere on his planet might be thinner, requiring different lung capacity; the gravity might be heavier, which would require stronger muscles and more powerful ligament/tendon attachments.

Remember, no two planets are exactly alike;there will be differences in orbit/rotation, day/night cycle, temperature/climate, seaons, water/hydration, distance from the sun, pull of the tides, moon/no moon, terrain, etc. These planetary differences have a direct impact on the native life forms. It's axiomatic in biology. Things like that make a huge difference and while the differences between Martian Monkeyman and Earth Monkeyboy might be insignificant outwardly, once you cut them up and examined their innards and bloodwork, you'd see VAST differences rather than the minor differences Frasier noted in Ayiana. Remember my fly/bird analogy? To some alien observer, the butterfly and hummingbird might look a lot a like and they seem to be related, sorta-kinda. Once you cut them up and do a thorough analysis, you can see they are totally unrelated in almost every way. Do they teach that in community college bio? :)

You said:
nothing was mentioned in the show that ayiana had any such markers similar to other terran species. only some vague mentions of similar cell structures

Um, I covered this: Frasier clearly said Ayiana was human. Let's do a simple syllogism (you can look that up):
Humans are clearly biologically related to other terran species (vertebrate most notably). Ayiana was determined to be entirely human with minor biochemical differences. Therefore, Ayiana, like other humans, is biologically related to other Terran species. See how that works nicely? :)

You finally said:
still flawed and wishful thinking. C- try again

Ain't that cute? Ya got guts and you made a valiant effort, but you're rejecting my arugment out of emotion, not solid science. What is that makes you resist this theory so much? So often in Sci-fi, the Humans of Earth are portrayed as bumbling, primitive, backward, savage morons who are weak and fall victim to the powerful aliens. I wont list all of the movies/shows that have portrayed this way. Even in the ST universe, the Earth ppl were the last to develop warp tech, etc. Man, even the stupid, war-like Klingons, with little brain power, had warp tech hundreds of years before us. The cool thing about the Ancient-Earth theory is that we have a heritage to be proud of. Our distant ancestors invented the gates, FTL ships, transporter rings, time machines, healing devices, and flying freakin' cities. That's some impressive $h|t. [/I]

[I]I think it's cool that the Ancients were god-like humans. It's a nice twist. :)
Jared :D ;) :eek:

glowingjelyfish
September 16th, 2004, 02:33 PM
Yep, exactly true, but if you did a comprehensive genetic and biological analysis of each hominid, you would be able to tell (well, someone with a clue at least) that each hominid was of terrestrial origin. If Monkeyman B evolved, along a similar pattern of evolution, on Ganymede, then his DNA would be different, his skeletal structure would have some significant structural difference, his ocular orbits would be different...something would be different enough that his extraterrestrial origins would be noticed. The atmosphere on his planet might be thinner, requiring different lung capacity; the gravity might be heavier, which would require stronger muscles and more powerful ligament/tendon attachments.

Remember, no two planets are exactly alike;there will be differences in orbit/rotation, day/night cycle, temperature/climate, seaons, water/hydration, distance from the sun, pull of the tides, moon/no moon, terrain, etc. These planetary differences have a direct impact on the native life forms. It's axiomatic in biology. Things like that make a huge difference and while the differences between Martian Monkeyman and Earth Monkeyboy might be insignificant outwardly, once you cut them up and examined their innards and bloodwork, you'd see VAST differences rather than the minor differences Frasier noted in Ayiana. Remember my fly/bird analogy? To some alien observer, the butterfly and hummingbird might look a lot a like and they seem to be related, sorta-kinda. Once you cut them up and do a thorough analysis, you can see they are totally unrelated in almost every way. Do they teach that in community college bio? :)

how many times must we review this? I'll go slow......unless you have some secret knowledge - there's no reason to believe, including your reasons, that evolution upon another world CAN'T produce similar end organism, given the same situations to confront, the current organism depends on prior ancestors and the niches they are attempting to fill which will craft their genetic makeup




Um, I covered this: Frasier clearly said Ayiana was human. Let's do a simple syllogism (you can look that up):
Humans are clearly biologically related to other terran species (vertebrate most notably). Ayiana was determined to be entirely human with minor biochemical differences. Therefore, Ayiana, like other humans, is biologically related to other Terran species. See how that works nicely? :)

I remember it quite well, however, you can review my past arguments to demonstrate how such similarities might occur and nothing you said undercuts them or advances your theory beyond mine.




Ain't that cute? Ya got guts and you made a valiant effort, but you're rejecting my arugment out of emotion, not solid science. What is that makes you resist this theory so much? So often in Sci-fi, the Humans of Earth are portrayed as bumbling, primitive, backward, savage morons who are weak and fall victim to the powerful aliens. I wont list all of the movies/shows that have portrayed this way. Even in the ST universe, the Earth ppl were the last to develop warp tech, etc. Man, even the stupid, war-like Klingons, with little brain power, had warp tech hundreds of years before us. The cool thing about the Ancient-Earth theory is that we have a heritage to be proud of. Our distant ancestors invented the gates, FTL ships, transporter rings, time machines, healing devices, and flying freakin' cities. That's some impressive $h|t. [/I]

To summarize, your arguments are based upon similar function not producing similar anatomy, cities birds versus insects etc. mine, propose that evolution upon another world could confront similar situations that would generate similar organisms to humanity, and that although the former can be true, evidence exists for real organisms to assume similar shapes and chemistries.
none of your arguments invalidate my theory, simply complement it.


postscript - although I never attended community college I have read of several business men and scientists that operate multimillion dollar businesses or contributed to the scientific knowledge base quite admirably. also several distinguished judges. on their behalf, though i don't know them personally, I want to say that you're a fool and a moron and I hope you encounter someone like them in your career- and they change the course of it for the worse.

that covers everything I think - once again it needs work and is speculative

terraatlantus
September 16th, 2004, 02:48 PM
Wow, it must be hard seeing where you're going when your head is so deeply and firmly wedged in your colon. :) Keep pulling, you might actually see the light of day one day.

only those insecure with their arguments logically need to prop up their own value by degrading the value of others




Um, hehe, she said Ayiana was human in every way except a few minor biochemical variances. What do you think they tested for, Sexually Transmitted Diseases? No, they did a standard CBC, SMAC-21, viral load, and other normal blood work, among other standard tests (e.g., serum bilirubins, serum creatinines, dopamine levels, serotonin levels, etc.). Ayiana was just as human as you (well, that's debatable) and me, with the exception of some unknown biochemical differences. Hence, she was human but had some different blood chemistry most likely due to the geographic, climatic, and other differences found in her time.


what the hell, you are DELUSIONAL, STOP speculating wildly on the nature of the tests done, to my knowledge they only discussed her cell structure similarities in a general way, you CANT fill in the blanks like that and say *I'm* right. blood chemistry differences due to geography, climate etc? my point was that evolution would devise similar chemical, biological differences to solve a problem thus the similarities



Well, yes and no; what I recall being said was that they resided in the Ida galaxy on the planet Othalla and formerly Halla. If you ever saw "revelations", where the Asgard of today were doing genetic experiments on Asgard found in suspensed animation from 33,000 years ago,when they were able to reproduce sexually, Heimdall indicated that the Asgard from 33,000 years ago did not have FTL tech and traveled in slow sleeper ships; they were found in the MW galaxy. I guess reasonable inference here would be that their ship orginated from their homeworld in the MW, not Ida, since that would be one LOOOOOONG sleep. I would guess, and I admit I could be wrong, that they were from the MW, where they met the Ancients, the Nox, and the Furlings. It's doubtful the Asgard had the tech to galaxy hop until fairly recently (10,000 years or less). Most of the Asgard episodes have pretty much stated that Thor and his buddies reside in the Ida galaxy, but maintain vested interests in the MW galaxy. Why do you think they would give a rip about Cimmeria and the Red Sky planet and us and the Goa'uld presence if they were from the Ida galaxy? Maybe because this galaxy is their home galaxy? Ya think? Yep, I do, and I'm probably right :) <snarky grin>.

that epi said the ship was found in the void between galaxies. *your snarky grin is thus interpreted as a fool self satisfaction*



Yep, exactly true, but if you did a comprehensive genetic and biological analysis of each hominid, you would be able to tell (well, someone with a clue at least) that each hominid was of terrestrial origin. If Monkeyman B evolved, along a similar pattern of evolution, on Ganymede, then his DNA would be different, his skeletal structure would have some significant structural difference, his ocular orbits would be different...something would be different enough that his extraterrestrial origins would be noticed. The atmosphere on his planet might be thinner, requiring different lung capacity; the gravity might be heavier, which would require stronger muscles and more powerful ligament/tendon attachments.

Remember, no two planets are exactly alike;there will be differences in orbit/rotation, day/night cycle, temperature/climate, seaons, water/hydration, distance from the sun, pull of the tides, moon/no moon, terrain, etc. These planetary differences have a direct impact on the native life forms. It's axiomatic in biology. Things like that make a huge difference and while the differences between Martian Monkeyman and Earth Monkeyboy might be insignificant outwardly, once you cut them up and examined their innards and bloodwork, you'd see VAST differences rather than the minor differences Frasier noted in Ayiana. Remember my fly/bird analogy? To some alien observer, the butterfly and hummingbird might look a lot a like and they seem to be related, sorta-kinda. Once you cut them up and do a thorough analysis, you can see they are totally unrelated in almost every way. Do they teach that in community college bio? :)

how many times must we review this? I'll go slow......unless you have some secret knowledge - there's no reason to believe, including your reasons, that evolution upon another world CAN'T produce similar end organism, given the same situations to confront, the current organism depends on prior ancestors and the niches they are attempting to fill which will craft their genetic makeup




Um, I covered this: Frasier clearly said Ayiana was human. Let's do a simple syllogism (you can look that up):
Humans are clearly biologically related to other terran species (vertebrate most notably). Ayiana was determined to be entirely human with minor biochemical differences. Therefore, Ayiana, like other humans, is biologically related to other Terran species. See how that works nicely? :)

I remember it quite well, however, you can review my past arguments to demonstrate how such similarities might occur and nothing you said undercuts them or advances your theory beyond mine.




Ain't that cute? Ya got guts and you made a valiant effort, but you're rejecting my arugment out of emotion, not solid science. What is that makes you resist this theory so much? So often in Sci-fi, the Humans of Earth are portrayed as bumbling, primitive, backward, savage morons who are weak and fall victim to the powerful aliens. I wont list all of the movies/shows that have portrayed this way. Even in the ST universe, the Earth ppl were the last to develop warp tech, etc. Man, even the stupid, war-like Klingons, with little brain power, had warp tech hundreds of years before us. The cool thing about the Ancient-Earth theory is that we have a heritage to be proud of. Our distant ancestors invented the gates, FTL ships, transporter rings, time machines, healing devices, and flying freakin' cities. That's some impressive $h|t. [/I]

To summarize, your arguments are based upon similar function not producing similar anatomy, cities birds versus insects etc. mine, propose that evolution upon another world could confront similar situations that would generate similar organisms to humanity, and that although the former can be true, evidence exists for real organisms to assume similar shapes and chemistries.
none of your arguments invalidate my theory, simply complement it.

as an aside, I want to express contempt for your abuse of my intelligence simply because I disagree with you. I don't know what your social experience is, but my mine is that insulting and degrading the personal qualities of the originator of the competing theory never wins out in the end, and it always makes you enemies. but I suppose you won't learn that till you try your style at a few scientific panels discussing research, I know I would enjoy the kind of attitude readjustment they will give you.
:rolleyes:

postscript - although I never attended community college I have read of several business men and scientists that operate multimillion dollar businesses or contributed to the scientific knowledge base quite admirably. also several distinguished judges. [mod snip]

that covers everything I think - you're still wildly speculating :rolleyes:



I second

LordAnubis
September 16th, 2004, 03:17 PM
only those insecure with their arguments logically need to prop up their own value by degrading the value of others



what the hell, you are DELUSIONAL, STOP speculating wildly on the nature of the tests done, to my knowledge they only discussed her cell structure similarities in a general way, you CANT fill in the blanks like that and say *I'm* right. blood chemistry differences due to geography, climate etc? my point was that evolution would devise similar chemical, biological differences to solve a problem thus the similarities



that epi said the ship was found in the void between galaxies. *your snarky grin is thus interpreted as a fool self satisfaction*




how many times must we review this? I'll go slow......unless you have some secret knowledge - there's no reason to believe, including your reasons, that evolution upon another world CAN'T produce similar end organism, given the same situations to confront, the current organism depends on prior ancestors and the niches they are attempting to fill which will craft their genetic makeup




I remember it quite well, however, you can review my past arguments to demonstrate how such similarities might occur and nothing you said undercuts them or advances your theory beyond mine.




To summarize, your arguments are based upon similar function not producing similar anatomy, cities birds versus insects etc. mine, propose that evolution upon another world could confront similar situations that would generate similar organisms to humanity, and that although the former can be true, evidence exists for real organisms to assume similar shapes and chemistries.
none of your arguments invalidate my theory, simply complement it.

as an aside, I want to express contempt for your abuse of my intelligence simply because I disagree with you. I don't know what your social experience is, but my mine is that insulting and degrading the personal qualities of the originator of the competing theory never wins out in the end, and it always makes you enemies. but I suppose you won't learn that till you try your style at a few scientific panels discussing research, I know I would enjoy the kind of attitude readjustment they will give you.
:rolleyes:

postscript - although I never attended community college I have read of several business men and scientists that operate multimillion dollar businesses or contributed to the scientific knowledge base quite admirably. also several distinguished judges. on their behalf, though i don't know them personally, I want to say that you're a fool and a moron and I hope you encounter someone like them in your career- and they change the course of it for the worse.

that covers everything I think - you're still wildly speculating :rolleyes:



I second
Ya know, if you actually had a clue, you would have seen that my initial posts were pretty nice and friendly and opened debate; however, Mr. Jellyfish attacked my "theory", which isn't fact, and went on and on about it. So, I rebutted in kind. Notice my smileys. I am not taking this serious like you two are. I suggest you calm down and take this with an open mind rather than a closed one.

Second, who are you? Are you Jellyfish? You only have one post here. So, unless you have two accounts, which isn't really that cool, and are a faceless/nameless coward who can't use his "regular" account, you have no prior theories and no prior posts for me to compare or note.

Third, I can tell you have no training in the biological sciences. I don't know what your major is, or was, or will be, but it's not biology, biochemistry, or anthropology -- that's for sure. If you're going to discuss your opinions, back them up with facts like I did. Sure, some of my theory is speculation, but jellyfish's theory is pure supposition that goes against Stargate canon and scientific canon.

Fourth, my style can be abrupt and in-your-face at times. I try to be open-minded and love a rational debate, but when people like you and jellyfish come along, I get pissed and feel compelled to point out scientific fact. My arguments invalidate your theory because you have done nothing to advance your point, which is: The Ancients did not evolve on Earth. Why you believe this is your business, and probably no one on this forum gives a crap either way.

Fifth, Heimdall never said it was found in a void between Ida and MW. I don't recall that part at all, however, if I'm mistaken, and Heimdall did say that, then I suppose that would back the Asgard being from Ida argument, which is cool by me. If Friday, they announced the Ancients evolved on Pluto from plankton that came from interstellar spores from the Bunghole Galaxy, I would smile and laugh and say "whatever." I mean, it's just a show. The writers have given us many inconsistencies over the last 8 years. Same with SGA.

In Atlantis, they tell us the Wraith defeated the Ancients with tech that rivaled the Ancients, yet so far, I've seen a bunch of lame goons get their asses kicked every time by a bunch of primitive humans. Hardly consistent, but it's still a new show, so I'm giving it time. I could go on and on about inconsistencies, but the thing is, I don't write the show. If they say something is a fact, I'll go with it. I dont' care. I'm not invested in my theory, but since I'm a biology major at a major four year university, I tend to look at the biological aspect of Stargate from a different perspective.

If I were a physics major, I would look at the technology aspect differently, but physics isn't my strong point, so I just accept whatever Carter or McCay says. In ST, a lot of what they say is pure garbage -- completely made up, but my best friend is a physics major and math minor and he tells me a lot of the stargate technobabble is accurate and true. I respect that. I dont respect when they introduce the Ancients and their Earth links, but don't explain where they evolved.

The main thrust of what Im saying is: calm the hell down and let it go. I could be right (and I am :)), you could be right, or neither one of us could be right. Who knows? Only the writers know.

Maybe I'm a fool and a moron like you say I am, but at least I'm educated and bettering myself and at least I tried to engage your or Mr. Jellyfish in an open, rational debate. You chose to make it personal, which is your preogative. I think you've shown that you're a sneaky, deceptive and hostile person. This is obvious by your need to change account names from jellyfish to terraalanthus. Rest assured, this will be reported. I suggest you seek professional help and leave this forum.

Thanks,
Jared W./Lordanubis

terraatlantus
September 16th, 2004, 03:31 PM
Third, I can tell you have no training in the biological sciences. I don't know what your major is, or was, or will be, but it's not biology, biochemistry, or anthropology -- that's for sure. If you're going to discuss your opinions, back them up with facts like I did. Sure, some of my theory is speculation, but jellyfish's theory is pure supposition that goes against Stargate canon and scientific canon.


how can the theory opposing yours go against stargate and scientific canon when they make no definitive statment about the origin of the ancients. answer: it doesn't there's certainly no scientific canon concerning how alien lifeforms might evolve - it's all pure supposition


Fourth, my style can be abrupt and in-your-face at times. I try to be open-minded and love a rational debate, but when people like you and jellyfish come along, I get pissed and feel compelled to point out scientific fact. My arguments invalidate your theory because you have done nothing to advance your point, which is: The Ancients did not evolve on Earth. Why you believe this is your business, and probably no one on this forum gives a crap either way.

neither points have an advantage or have discredited the other. again, no experience or examples of alien life, just the fossil record and current biological science





The main thrust of what Im saying is: calm the hell down and let it go. I could be right (and I am :)), you could be right, or neither one of us could be right. Who knows? Only the writers know.

agreed. tho the calming down needs to be bilateral here


Maybe I'm a fool and a moron like you say I am, but at least I'm educated and bettering myself and at least I tried to engage your or Mr. Jellyfish in an open, rational debate. You chose to make it personal, which is your preogative. I think you've shown that you're a sneaky, deceptive and hostile person. This is obvious by your need to change account names from jellyfish to terraalanthus. Rest assured, this will be reported. I suggest you seek professional help and leave this forum.

from what I read, you were never insulted during these posts till the last post or so, it was lordanubis who started with the name calling. you need to learn that 'wildly speculative' does not equal 'complete moron'. lastly who cares, report away!
:rolleyes:

GateWorld
September 16th, 2004, 03:35 PM
Let's all take a few deep breaths and calm down. We'll close this thread for a cooling-off period, and to give members new and old a chance to revisit the forum rules -- especially the one about respecting other users and not levying personal insults:

http://forum.gateworld.net/faq.php?faq=faq_cat_basics#faq_rules

We can open this thread later, if there is still interest in discussion the topic within the bounds of the forum rules.

Darren