The Mysterious Origins of Man

The Mysterious Origins of Man

1996, Conspiracy  -   224 Comments
Ratings: 6.86/10 from 140 users.

This documentary presents ancient artifacts that contradict the official historical perspective that mankind has advanced scientifically since the beginning of human history.

It’s not necessarily a deliberate conspiracy in the sense that some people getting together in a smoke filled room and saying "we’re going to deceive people". It’s something that happens automatically within the scientific community.

So when a given piece of evidence disagrees with the predominant theory, then automatically people won’t talk about it, they won't report it and that means that science fails to progress in the way that one would hope.

Although a lot of the evidence in this presentation has been highly debated and disproved, there is some evidence that is very difficult to dispute. The main purpose of this presentation is to show that the official view of human history is very questionable, especially the progression of knowledge in the sciences, mathematics, and spirituality.

More great documentaries

224 Comments / User Reviews

  1. It is very easy to know where we came from, just read your Bible. "How" is none of our business. Trust God is all you have to do.

    1. spoken like a true bot

  2. who walks one foot directly in front of the other?

  3. Excellent documentary.

    I don't buy the argument that this was made by bunch of Christians trying to justify religious dogma in the face of contrary scientific evidence. If it were, it wouldn't respectfully present the work of many different researchers who claim civilization and modern man may go back tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions, or even billions of years. Instead, it would highlight only research/theories supporting the notion that human history only goes back several thousand years.

    Contrary to popular belief, Science is as politicized as any other institution on this corrupt planet. When it's clear that the established power structure is lying about so much else, is it really a big leap to imagine that they might be doing the same with Science and History?

  4. to all those interacting with the jackrabit,
    Never argue with a fool
    for those around you watching
    will have trouble determining which of you it is.

  5. Honest discovery is labeled anomaly while the ape theory continues to dominate, despite the evidence of sophisticated civilizations pre dating 12,000 BC. This is a good documentary. Kudos to those who look beyond the "imposed received wisdom" to open our minds and question it.

  6. Who walks one foot directly in front of the other as this picture shows - my guess, it's one big footed runway model!

  7. Whilst it is true that stupid people tend to believe stupid things when they can't explain what they see, it is also true that intelligent people tend to believe stupid things when there is a societally accepted scientific theory to back them up. Michael Cremo and Richard Thompson's book "The Hidden History of the Human Race" demonstrates irrefutably the way theory can take precedence over facts in scientific and academic circles, whilst proving that the accepted model of human evolution is not correct. Similarly, erosion on the Sphinx caused by heavy precipitation proves that it is much older than Egyptologists claim. Look at the evidence and fit a theory to that, not the other way round.

    1. It seems the more intelligent someone is the more capable they are of being stupid. Great comment by the way.

  8. People who believe in Gods have a tendency to have a lower IQ then people who do not. People on remote islands outside of Japan thought Americans where Gods too during the world war 2. Are Americans Gods? No. Stupid people tend to believe in stupid things when they cant explain what they see =)

    1. "Stupid people tend to believe in stupid things, when they can't explain what they see."

      Hmmm, such as the belief in "God", perhaps.

    2. You've been told intelligence can be tested and you've complacently accepted it. We can't even prove our best theory on how long term memory works. Fair enough in the absence of proof, we tend to go with the favoured theory or the one with the most evidence. But said best theory doesn't and can't account for photographic memories. We can't even define intelligence, particularly when a wren can outsmart a 6 year old human child. Or a chimpanzee can beat some damn smart scientists in a memory game. There is no standardised I.Q test and some countries like America Like to throw in nationalised general knowledge questions. Democritus living in 460 - 370 BC theorised the Atom, if you flew of his house in a shining loud sky boat I'm sure he'd think your a god too. The problem is the people in the know lie a lot about a lot. That's given rise to all this. When people can't be sure on whether they'll be told the truth, they won't know it when they see it. More to the point you can't possibly know the truth until you've invalidated all the fallacies.

    3. LoL, i think 'jon' is very young ( :

  9. I am amazed at the blinkered minds of so many people. There is so much on this earth that has no rational explanation. Is it not possible to allow one's mind to expand to take in the maybe's, the what if's, the could it be's?
    But no, this is just dismissed outright as being total rubbish. I seem to remember that a certain Charles Darwin's theories had the same effect on 'educated' people in the 1800's. Please allow some of us the space to question the currently accepted theories and to have conjecture without being belittled.

    1. You remember the 1800s?? How old are you??

    2. His name is Methuselah, that might give you a clue. Just becoz scientists cant explain everything, now, doesn't mean they're wrong. ALso theorys get modified as time goes on. Meanwhile, I'll keep breathing the de-phlogisticated air for now.

  10. i love comedy lol, a group of crackpots with their leader Charlton Heston
    funny stuff

    1. Maybe it's better, the origin of mankind is and ALWAYS will be a MYSTERY!

  11. id like to know what exactly was disproved in this video

  12. Personally, I don't feel this need to pick out one possible line of human history and tell myself it's the truth until I believe it. People are so scared of an alternate truth. Sweep the evidence under the rug. Whatever helps you sleep at night. The world is more than we know.

  13. I seriously thought it was going to be an interesting and serious approach to anomalies found in layers of rock. But its so obvious its just presenting stuff and then mentioning some flaw in evolution theory and science.
    To people that can't pick that up, it shows that this video is a video with an agenda. And when I scrolled down the comments and search for some of the background of the people in the video sure enough they are all non scientific religious lunatics.
    These types of videos that can easily be taken for a serious informative video should be banned. Seriously what F! year are we in?

  14. Religious propaganda again.

  15. Look it's Moses! it must be a true right. Give a break!

  16. Well that took all of two minutes with first suspicions when Charleton Heston appeared.

  17. too bad its not working :|

  18. its funny how the human brain works. theres already an answer to this. earth humans were dumped here by other humans from other star systems..its simple as that. some say we were genetically designed to live these conditions which if fairly considerable. But i'd say personally that its the most realistic possibility one could ever come up with without bias to a certain belief, or which science has proven more or what not. Back in the day when it was empty, this planet had some good spots to raise "humans". These guys from the outside, navigating along on their "advanced" method of travel discovered this, so they left a few of their own designs. and so on and so forth..same with any other living organisms. same with most of the technologies that we have, same with the systems of society and all that. it was never from the mind of the "earth human", well at least most of it wasn't..I better watch this video now. what up Vlat... :)

    1. Did they drill for oil and poison everyone everywhere with pollution and plastic? No. Modern scientists are so bought! Modern man is a scrap of junk compared to previous civilisations. How I think right now.

  19. Was a very interesting video to watch, however with most things i'm not going to jump in whole heartedly and believe what's been presented.

    There were a few things that didn't make sense to me, such as the guy talking about geological years could be much shorter than our years so that it's possible for dinosaurs to coexist with humans (or something like that? i'm thinking time travel for sure would be a better explanation and much more exciting haha). What was the basis of this? and how does that work??

    and also what Jani said
    "Very interesting document here... but one thing in it was very disturbing to me.. First they calculated the dating of the old structures by comparing the position of how the stars would have been back then.. and at the end they say that earths "skin" shifted 2000 miles about 12000 years ago.. if this happened those old strucktures shouldnt be anywhere near on lineing up with those stars.."

    just a little inconsistent...not good for a documentary.

    1. I took it that the structures were built after the cataclismic event as a positional marker and for anti quake and flood safety reasons. Still a mystery as to how...

      But yes, those two theories which you picked up on do contradict each other.

      Off to chew that over.☺☺

    2. about 12,000 years ago he said.

  20. In my studies I have found origins of different peoples that are backed up by science and ancient writings. Remember the truth is written and witnessed. The Bible in the 6 Ages of re creation (Gen.1:28 "replenish") tells of all of the things created. It is a synopsis in English which is translated from various ancient languages. Studying the words translated to English shows many errors from the scribes, just as the Bible said there would be. The word, "generation" is a word that means "races" of people. Gen 2:4, "These are the generations of the heavens and the earth." In Gen 2:5 the Hebrew word, Adam, appears for the 1st time. It says man in this passage but it is Adam.
    Who is Adam? Adam is the son of God. Luke 3:38. Adam man is the only one of his kind. See Strong's Exhaustive Concordance and Gensenius' Hebrew Lexicon #120.
    In that the Genesis tells us 10 times that kind begets like kind then Adam can only produce Adam kind. Adam is ruddy, red and able to show blood in the face. Biological law tells us that kind begets like kind. So science proves the Bible in this instance.
    Archaeology shows the bones of the Negroid on Mt. Kilimanjaro carbon test back 73,000 years. The Voodoo priests in Africa pray to the Great white God to put them back on the planet where they came from as they were seduced by Lucifer and are not happy here. Also take a look at what the Dogon people say. Again 2 witnesses.
    The Sumerian histories go back hundreds of thousands of years and they, as well as the ancient Books of Enoch tell of the Satanic warring ships of heaven crashing to earth and on board were the black headed ones. The Bible tells of the wars in heaven in the Book of revelation Chapter 12. The Book of Jude calls them "The Angels who lost their first estate." So all of these different people arrived on planet earth at different times. Lest I forget, Adam man's bones cannot be found before 7500 years ago. The Scriptures tell of this also. God told Adam He would come in 5 1/2 days. A day is a thousand years so that is 5,500 years. Jesus Christ (God in the flesh) came at that exact time. We are 2,000years AD so Adam is 7500 years old and the last people to arrive to bring in the Kingdom (government) of God.
    There is so much more about this subject but these are just high lights to awaken you. Many are called but few are chosen. Study to be approved.
    The Bible says that it is the Book of the generation (race) of Adam. It is only to Adam man. It tells of the continuing war on earth against satanic forces. As above so below. The word, hell, is meaning the grave, hades, in the Hebrew language. Hell is death and death has been conquered by Jesus Christ. Adam man cannot die. When he leaves this body his Spirit immediately goes to Heavenly Plains (The Pleiades) where the throne of God is located. So this hell business is a scare tactic of the business religions to get more money.
    I will write more later if you would like to hear it. Bye for now.

    1. @Mike:

      Here we go again, what in the world has religion and the bible/bibles got to do with anything in this doc? except maybe from the word spirituality.

      Where did you get all the unproven gunk from? can't believe that grown men can write and believe this drivel, I betcha if you told this to children they would not believe you, it is beyond me how any adults could believe this, especially where you said "science proves the bible in this instance"

      Good grief is all that I can say!

    2. right about science proving the bible i mean

    3. I cant really say either way about the "facts" you have here because my knowledge of these is limited. but as for what your saying I mostly agree. What are your beliefs? Im kinda confused about what said about Adam being the son of God though. could you explain more and point me to where you getting it?

    4. Luke 3:38, "Adam is the son of God."

    5. *sigh* I'm going to ignore the multitudes of evidence that show your claims for the farce they are by leaving you with this simple but important point: if humanity did not share a common Central African ancestor then we would be unable the produce fertile offspring with each other.

  21. this is so funny . a picture of child playing with a lovely dinosaur
    This peaceful paintings are typic of some religion magazines they sell when buggin on you door.

  22. Also keep in mind the age of this documentary. The description, itself, admits a lot of the evidence presented has been disproved. That's what happens when you watch a documentary decades after its production. Cut them a little slack, they didn't have the knowledge of technology we have now.

  23. Fact or false, I personally still found the video rather fascinating.

    In the end, even science all chalks up to mostly speculation. The amount of legitimate physical proof to back up what we scientifically "know" to be our history is ridiculously rare.

    I say until you can prove it wrong, you can't claim to know definitively the answer to ANY of the questions of our history's origins--because if you can't prove it wrong, that means you can't prove your own theories right, either.

    1. but we cant prove it wrong that a god thing didnt create the universe 5 mins ago and just made it look old. does that mean we should entertain the idea?

      what about that the universe is the result of a farting unicorn?

      we cant prove that gravity isnt caused by gods loving holding us to the ground.

      do you see what im getting at?

  24. lol, this guy

  25. "for every st*pid idea, there's an id**t ready to signed under it" - I say this to both sides. Learn to think by yourselves! and don't fall in the other extreme of accepting all that it's being fed to you.

    1. Really? Did you censor the words "id**t" and "st*pid", or did the mods do it? Either way, I'm pretty sure it was COMPLETELY unnecessary LOL.

    2. my astonishment! There might be kids under 6 reading this... shhhh! :)

  26. This film is full of LIES and outrageous BULLS***! This kind of offensive junk is exactly what makes this website a useless waste of time. Films should not be censored just because people don't like them, but they very definitely should be censored when any sane, rational person can see they are obviously outrageous lies, propaganda and pure harmful nonsense.

  27. lol!! how ridiculous.. its one error after the other! only the ignorant could be impressed by this 'evidence/'

  28. Ok, so I just wasted my time watching this, but it was my decision and it didn't cost me anything except 47 minutes of my time. The question I have is why would time and effort be put into creating this program? I'm surprised no one said, "This is bulls***!" and stopped production.

    1. 2 reasons , God and Charlton Waco

  29. One of the worst piece of s*** movies ever made. Could be debunked by a 12-year old armed with wikipedia. A complete joke.

    1. Or a Mad magazine .

    2. A 12 year old could arm Wikipedia ;-)

  30. @ tariqxl

    I believe that when National Geographic says "Seafaring peoples" they mean people who built a civilization around the idea of sea exploration and trading and things of that nature. When the Aborigines migrated to Australia and crossed the sea, they were just Migrating, and never really developed an Industry and Empire based around Sea Voyages. Yeah they have their fishing boats and small distance boats, but it was the Phoenicians who first really started expanding that stuff. According to most scientific and anthropological texts most cultures just stayed "Local", even though some evidence provides for native Europeans and Chinese peoples making sea voyages, but nothing in substantial Numbers and none of them made an empire out of these chance voyages.

    However I'd also like to point out the theory that some geologists and environmental Scientists, (The REAL ones, not the global warming disaster freaks) believe that around the previous ice ages the sea levels dropped low enough that the Philippines, Asia, and all of that area were connected by land. So its very possible a number of the population may have migrated there during that time, but there was also the portion that arrived via the sea. So I believe that to be the MAIN difference between those two cultures.
    And to answer your question about the Glaciation on Australia and what not, according to this article I'm reading on Wiki about Australia, there was a period of Glacial erosion about 280 MYA and that half the continent was covered in them. So maybe your informant was wrong or or misinformed. Nothing wrong with that, I had no idea Australia ever had glaciers until I looked it up just now. So I hope my mini college thesis was of assistance to you, and if any of my info is wrong I would LOVE if somebody could correct me :)

  31. This is a f*****g joke!

    They use evidence out of context! They even say the discoverer of java man admitted it was wrong and was an "accident" which is not true! Java man was a hoax and was exposed by the scientific community.

    It pisses me off knowing these m*rons are allowed to lie and brain wash a generation of kids unfortunate enough to grow up in a Christian family and in doing so are protected by freedom of speech.

  32. The part I like the best is the North Pole getting so heavy it tipped the earth over . Comedy for sure . Remember guns don't kill .

  33. this bullshit video is created by religion protectors, it is all fake actors as scientist

  34. This was bad, A real waste of time. I feel like i was watching "most haunted".

  35. I have a theory about the last ice age which happen (i believe) 10,000 years ago. What if the civilization they refer to as 'Atlantis' was thriving during the time when the North American Continent was under neath ice. While Neanderthals were fight with Early man, Atlantis may have been the continental bridge between South America, and Africa. (I am not referring to Pangaea. More over an Accidental bridge made by tectonic plate movement.) This would explain why the Aztecs and Egyptians had similar methods of building, and also explain Atlantis. Again I'm not proposing this idea to be true, but much rather trying to rationalize the evidence presented in this video. Anyone think there is any merit to this theory?

    1. 10,000 years ago?? BwaHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    2. Besides there being absolutely no evidence for Atlantis you'd have to explain why we've been able to document a clear chain of human movement from Asia into North and South America by studying haplogroups. The indigenous peoples of the Americas would have a much stronger similarity to Africans than northeast Asians, which is simply not the case.

  36. This was a great documentary every researcher in the film top shelf and charleston heston himself.

    1. Belief without evidence = Bullsh*t!

  37. Funny! :)
    This documentary should be under comedy, or at least conspiracy.

    1. All total s***, the science they tried to use is totally wrong and the explanations are subjective at best!!! (i mean astrology to prove their point!!!)
      Heston is a "text-book" conman with the attempt of making people believe him, which is why he is used for this rubbish.

      And they say anything outside the known theories of evolution are discarded by the scientific community, thats just a blatant lie, the scientific community is the most open of all.

      To prove my point watch a documentary about the end of the world happening in 2012 (cant remember the name), they put all this evidence together, to the point where you don't know where to question their logic, but as we all know it didn't happen, it just shows how anyone can spin the truths and make wild conspiracies seem true to the stupid, maybe the Neanderthals didn't die out most of them seem to be in this video or believing this video!!!!!

    2. Chuckles Heston was used because he is Moses, and therefore in DIRECT contact with GAWD which makes him the "official" earthly authority.

  38. Great documentary, look beyond the signs and evidences.

    1. lol@ look beyond the evidence

  39. the most stupid documentary i ever watched

  40. Darwin has been disproven...a little research in the universe and math will tell you that. but most people will believe any "theroy" that comes along..remember the "lucy" thing, that was a big joke and most believed it.If science can't explain it they make it up, simple as that. Do some research.

    1. This has won the award for the most incorrect and insane comment i have read all week!! I wish there was an option to dislike comments....

      Darwin has not been disproven. Natural selection has been proven, and so has evolution.

      Lucy is Australopithecus afarensis and there have been many other fossils of the same species found all showing bipedalism and dating to around 3.2 million years.

      what proof do you have to show that any of this is wrong?

    2. ok where is your proof? you make a statement but can you back it up with facts?

    3. Ten to a doughnut, you picked up your erroneous information from some ID or creationist site? "I betcha, I betcha". Religee's everywhere!

    4. dick

    5. I love how you creationist people argue without a shred of evidence....FAIL!!!!!!!!

  41. Wicked. I believe a lot of these docs. Along with Ancient aliens the Series, the world is full of wonders that no Darwinian fanatic or anyone else can explain or disprove. I believe in Darwin's theory of evolution, but just because this theory is universally accepted that doesn't mean it's complete. There is could be much more to discover. Even after discovering the human genome, we still have much much more to discover and learn. Therefor we cannot stop there and must be open to the possibility that there is more evidence to discover that very likely could rewrite history as we know it.

  42. Its one of the most incomplete documentaries I have ever seen. There is so much of info jst waiting to be interpreted but instead its only seen through the eyes of a typical ill informed explorer with his Bible. Since, all most all of the interpretations of our history have been made by the European elite , one can also say they were all done by Christians. All their notions about God come from Bible , which is now known to be manipulated by the court of Rome. Many instances and references to non humans beings with intelligence have been either removed or given the status of angels, giants etc . So , wen a Christian encounters new polytheist religion(ones in Americas)while exploring, he stamps their stories as Myths. Then begins to analyze them after ruling out so much of data. Scientists have a subliminal fear of rejection from the Public as well as his mates. For, no one wants to be proved wrong. This fear is regulated by religion(Christianity in particular) and then it percolates down to the Scientists who are not affected by it. With time the stakes go up , en the truth is forever buried. All the 'whys' have been fixed up by the 'Ancient Astronaut Theory' but the science is too scared to admit to it, cos it will again dig out much older lies told to the public.

    Scientists are willing to make the most weirdest assumption in physics like 11 dimensions, strings constitute everything bla bla, jst cos faith is not involved. But wen it comes to history en archeology, no one wants to smear the image a dead Scientist becos he is Father of Bla Bla, Nation's Pride, Most celebrated intellect of his time etc etc.

  43. We shouldn't let facts get in the way of the truth. As all true scholars know, the facts obscure the truth. The truth can only be found when all facts are discarded and rumor, innuendo and a lively imagination are allowed to flourish. Nothing has greater honesty than the imagination of a five year old. The people who brought us this doc have never lost touch with their inner child.

  44. its just made for convincing the grandma. but i'm sure even she going to believe it.

  45. Should be in the comedy section.

    1. You should be in one instead.

  46. Even the introduction above the video says that most of what is in the film is completely disproved. What is the point of putting this up?

    1. Disproved by whom en how ?

  47. This documentary is so full of Fail that it's embarassing to think it was even made.

    Crock-umentary is more like it.

  48. Planet of the...Humans

  49. the bit on the earths crust moving is rubbish. Gravity isn't pulling down its pulling into the earth. lets say there 2miles of snow on top or even 10miles of snow. the crust in the northern india is more than 150miles thick???and its rock so alot heavyer. does bring up some good points though.

    1. Its called liquifaction, when soil is pressurized, it gets heated, turning into a semi-liquid state, this happens frequently in valcanos. Im not trying to say this doc is "sweet dude" but recently a city off the coast of japan, that was above the water line 50,000 years ago was discoverd by divers, its just trying to give an alternative view view that is desperatly needed in the theory of pre-history. its sad to think that evoulution is still only a theory, but has no competition, you need competition if you are not reckognized as fact yet. and plus mainstream science is way to bias, whenever city's like the one in japan, or the two off the coast of india come about mainstream science always wants to dicredit them by saying "oh those are just natural formations" 90 degree cut stones? natural formation? o.k. buddy, whatever discovery channel feeds you. sorry for the mispelling i got this damn add blocking my view!!! lol

  50. This is one of my all time favorite documentary.

    1. Evolution is a fact............get over it.....ok

  51. There is loads of information being hidden about the origins of man. Due to Archeologist connected to governments that are also connected to theology.
    They will not allow certain things out to the public about our origins. Because it does not match the current history we are being told about in school.
    The way I see it. They are teaching old and false ideas in children today.
    They need to stop hiding so much information.
    And stop acting like a religion.
    Evolution has lots of grounds to stand on.
    But they are starting to build walls like
    the religious institutions and political institution have.
    Which will be the destruction of great work and
    much appreciated hard evidence found by Archeologists who
    have been fired due to wanting to let the truth out.
    You guys have no idea the games that are being played.
    Dont find anything a fact until you yourself have studied
    and come to a conclusion like I have.
    The victors are always the ones who have written History.
    So you can only imagine the amount of information that has
    been altered or even expendable to especially
    the institute that run the world today.
    Knowledge is power, and power is corrupt.
    Individual truth should be a more enlightened
    motive. Until this happens. We are never going to understand
    why we are being lied to every single moment of our lives.
    We should respect those who have lost their careers to
    these corrupt political and religious expectations.
    And help what they have found go viral!

    1. Knowledge is power and power is corrupt. Well, did you not study the facts and from those studies gain knowledge? Now that you have knowledge, it would follow that you are also corrupt. I dismiss your entire post as the propaganda of the intellectual elite.

  52. pseudo-science?
    as an indigenous american (taos pueblo/comanche nation represent!), i believe that westernized version of history that we're force fed is better categorized as "pseudo-history."
    Comanche people always knew about those prints in texas. that was a sacred place for us. i learned this on a trip through the former Comanche territory with a busfull of elders. when ancient comanches found dino bones, they believed that they could be used for their own bone ailments. we were not taken to the actual site where these prints are found, but we were able to explore the park area near or around it.
    i could go on and whine about the ancient indigenous being presented as primitive to the point where they never traveled, or had technological innovations, or "scientific" societies. crazy stuff happened. stuff you'd never dream.

  53. the truth is somwhere in the middle!!!

    1. No, the truth is not somewhere in the middle. The truth is that just about everything in the above documentary is rubbish. Far from a conspiracy of silence, these things have been brought up and shot down numerous times by actual fact.

  54. The only real god is Mother Earth, we blame everyone else for being different and not believing in the right invisible man and my way “religion” is the right way. Mean while we fight, cheat over populate and pollute the only real place that has supported us for as long as we have known it. Stop waiting for a super god or gods to save the day. Time we are all done waiting for a "judgement day" there will be no liveable planet left to support us. And we are on it the Catholics are the worst starters of wars and you can just pay to get out jail free, ask a priest seem to make the news allot these days. (yes, you should not have to pay for your god). The Christians’ would not even be a large religion if it had not been for a power hunger Emperor of Rome Constantine. And the JW’s isn’t the bus full by now 144,000 or did someone make some more room. There is way more to the story than just the one bible that is for sure. I’m glad the internet over the last few years has allowed people to share and see there is more to this big puzzle. Science know DNA to date are or most are from out of Africa 350K ago. Good luck in finding a solution.
    BS: Logging one planet at a time

  55. I don't care if it was NRA President, Moses, or Lucy's lost uncle who narrated this documentary the material presented here is real and can only be understood by taking a second look at prevalent, accepted theories and consumer oriented science and its assertions. Moreover, this has nothing to do with evolution, creationism, or even God and religions. It has all to do with Man, his origins on this planet we call Earth and how little know about it.

    1. Thanks for this comment.

  56. Very Funny, should be under comedy.

  57. @Randy....I've read your argument with Jack and really envy your patience; I wonder how you are putting up with Jack's way of argument. When I read Jack's arguments on why there are so many ape species around while there's only one human species? I thought you are gonna give up now because it obviously shows that Jack doesn't have the slightest of clue how evolution works; I would've lost at that point. :)

  58. Just because this documentary doesn't support Darwanism does not mean that it is a product of creationism!
    In fact, no where in this documentary does it even imply the theory of Intelligent Design, and neither does it try to disprove Darwanism. All it is simply conveying is that Darwanism is not a solid and complete theory by all means. Obviously Darwanism provides a credible explanation of the origins of man, and is supported by overwhelming evidence (which is why it is taught in schools and globaly accepted), however, if you do your own research with an UNBIASED mind, you will find that there are still holes in the theory and contradicting evidence that cannot be fully explained. Such evidence is not conclusive enough to raise any serious debate against the theory of evolution, and so far, cannot be explained by any other scientific theory, therefore it recieves little recognition. But that is why this documentary is called the MYSTERIOUS Origins of Man -it is simply sharing with viewers some of the mysteries yet to uncover in evolutionary history.
    Stop being so ridiculously critical and just enjoy the film if you like mysteries -or don't watch the film at all if you hold such strong beliefs in Darwanism.

    1. Very true Yuri. Darwin wasn't sure either about many of his theories and he was grieved about his loss of appreciation for nature at the and of his life.

  59. The documentary was obviously made by people whu want to keep the 'theory' of Adam and Eve alive, and cast doubts into the minds of people who believe the 'theory' of evolution.
    I enjoyed the film, although I should have know some nut-case would have scrolled down to the comments and started posting things from the Bible!
    "Oh look! Evidence that doesn't agree with Darwins 150 year old work, the Bible is right!"
    Get a life

  60. I just want to say (Jack) that, I do not need a 'god' to have a conscience. I do not need a 'god' to to tell me to respect human life (and I'm sorry that you so sorley do).
    I do not want to beleive in a 'god' that thinks that human life is supirior to the rest, or in a 'god' that would tell me that my life, and my beleifs are more important than anyone else's at the cost of their culture/dignity/existance.

    Science is, as a species, our attempt to find out what is happening around us, from a molecular to galactic scale (and even further in both directions).

    I was brought up religious, but I asked too many questions where beleif was the only answer. Sceince on the other hand admits its faults, admits there are holes in its theories, but as the colabiration of a species we are trying to find the answers, by hypothesising, checking, disproving, and hypothesising again, trying to discover the answers to the questions we have wondered and asked for surely aslong as we could communicate.

    Seeing the wonder in the complexity of our planet, galaxy, and known universe, only as a hobby some 'god' had once when 'he' had a week off doing whatever it is he does the rest of the time (or what 'he' was doing in the first place) to me is simply not seeing the the true awe in our surroundings.

    I put it to you, that if 'god' created the planet and adam named all the animals, why are we still finding thousands of new species every year? (yes, entire new species! and no, they aren't these infamous fossils, they are alive and well)

    [p.s. I appoligise for my elaborate spelling]

  61. If you believe in God and don't know anything about science, I understand the appeal of this 'documentary'. If you're agnostic or atheist and have some rudimentary understanding of cosmology, geology and biology; this all looks like creationism espoused by an NRA gunnut. Planet of the apes was a good movie. But there was a reason why it wasn't called planet of the whales. We have awesome primate ancestors. Truely awesome. Read books other than the bible and be awe inspired.

  62. Same problem as chris can someone get it to play for me please?

  63. the documentary talk about advance civilization making stone calenders bieng very percise.this is sorta true. aliens made the artifacts as they made us.the reason theres no missing link is because we were bred in the lab to mine uranium. the map from 1513 ( i have forgot the name of it) was very accurit,like from sattelite images.

  64. I agree with Karen and a few others who commented. Although this documentary was very interesting and brought up some good points, It's not such an easy thing to accurately date artifacts. The thing that stood out the most for me was the human footprints next to the Dinosaur prints. If the strata above the dino prints can erode enough to make them visible to us today, then isn't there a chance it could have been eroded long ago when we first started traversing these lands? Perhaps a soft layer of mud was thinly distributed over the dino prints and our ancestors walked on that. Everything we see is open to speculation and interpretation and people will believe what seems most logical to them I suppose.

  65. Found this documentary to be offensive. Once again the church attempts to bring in folllowers by creating false truths. When is the world gonna wake up and realise that all this religious mumbo jumbo is the biggest mass delusion in history.
    Really... lol... man co-existing with the dinosaurs...

  66. Very interesting document here... but one thing in it was very disturbing to me.. First they calculated the dating of the old structures by comparing the position of how the stars would have been back then.. and at the end they say that earths "skin" shifted 2000 miles about 12000 years ago.. if this happened those old strucktures shouldnt be anywhere near on lineing up with those stars..

  67. Biased documentary, there is a key argument that fails big time.

    If evidence that humans existed million years ago was found, no one would lose or win especially much admitting that, so there is a high chance the scientific community would accept it.

    It's not like atheists or scientific people worship darwins theory, they just observe that it seems to be a very logic explanation.

    One reason why I got no respect for people that totally flame the theory of evolution is because:

    if the person you love the most got really sick and therefore needed hospital care dependent on the theory of evolution, there probably would not be so much hate against Darwin and the theory of evolution...

  68. Wonderful I want more I have seen other documentaries disbelieving this theory but in me heart I feel this is the truth I plan on doing more research on the fascinating topic. Thank you Top documentary for inspiring us to think about things differently.

  69. What do you mean we haven't found a missing link between man and ape? He's narrating the documentary!!! Those critical reasoning skills must i repeat MUST pre-date modern man...

  70. Hilarious!

  71. This was just a bunch of unscientific nonsense.
    If you believe in God and creation just say so.
    Dont argue like a scientist when your not!

  72. This is just a bunch of unscientific c#$%, and badly
    argumentaded. If you believe in God and creation just
    say so and dont argue like a scientist!

    1. first one was better

  73. Creationism at it's best. My advise, don't waste your time watching this. Check the credentials of these clowns before you chose to accept any of their ridiculous claims. LOL

  74. Man I was tipsy this night I watched this and my comments were poorly written out. Shame on me.

  75. @Jasper do u have any sort of evidence to disprove the claims in this documentary.u explanation is merely based on what u have learnt and not what u have researched.what about the carbon datings of mayan civilistaion and egypt???and carbon datings of foot prints,have you found any sort of evidence to disprove these evidences???

  76. @ Ron

    Dude- at least understand what youare trying to discredit. You say that according to evolution we should have many species of Ape (I assume you meant to say primate) evolving into Man (I assume you meant to say Hominid). That is not true at all. Evolution plainly says that mutations are random and without purpose. Every once and a while this random process creates an attribute that is not detrimental but helpful toward the continuation of the recipients genes. Meaning the mutation made it easier for this particular individual to reproduce. The off spring then have the mutatiuon as it is genetically passsed on and again it makes it easier for them to reproduce, after a while the whole species has this mutation as those who did not have not reproduced and died out. So to say that a certain mutation should occur, no matter what mutation you are refferring to is wrong. Mutations happen at random and with no purpose or set goal. To believe otherwise is to believe in some cosmic power that guides evolution toward a preset goal. Natural selection takes place after the mutation is manifest, deciding wether it is a good or bad mutation. Most are bad resulting in the premature death of the poor individual that they manifest on. Read a science book man, stop listening to popular opinion.

  77. Yay, pseudo-science.

  78. i can't believe this doc turned out to be creationist propaganda! i thought from the title it would be about the possibillity of humans evolving outside africa, but no!
    there is no foot print evidence of either people or dinosaurs in texas-fact!
    people have been transporting giant granite slabs for thousands of years-fact!
    the piri reis map was made by the chinese in the early 1400s during their exploration of the world by sea and is unremarkable-fact!
    if oliver the chimp was dug up now we would know that it wasn't fossilized and dna would show it to be a chimp-fact!
    there is no evidence anywhere that supports creationism, there is unlimited evidence that proves evolution is a fact!
    human history of civilization goes back 20,000 years to the beggining of agriculture(probably further in tribal societies), and the oldest living human dna is over 1.5 million years old(andaman isles), and all evidence shows a slow evolution from early upright primates taking place over 30 million years. it is very difficult(sometimes impossible) to distinguish between early human ancestors from certain bones as the important defining bits like teeth and throat parts are the most delicate and least often preserved, but over the last 150 years we have used scientific evidence to prove that all living creatures have extinct relatives and that the driving force for any healthy population is evolution, without which all species eventualy die out.
    science has had to fight against the constant and psychotic tide of religious authorities outright denial of the facts since the beggining of recorded history and at no point has any science v religion debate ever been settled by the provision of evidence supporting a religious point of view, whereas endless debates have been ended by science proving its case. there is no more 2-way debate, the reality is a scientific, democratic, calculated understanding of the world v a rabid, extremist, intollerrant and often racist dogma of the uneducated who are still clinging on to power in the intellectual backwoods of the world.

  79. The best part was hearing Chuck Heston do an Albert Einstein impression. PRICELESS!

  80. @ Ron:

    To talk about something of this nature, you should know what you are talking about!

    Humans did not evolve from Apes! Humans share a common ancestor that existed some 5 to 8 million years ago, the species diverged into two separate lineages, one evolved into Gorillas and Chimps, the other into early humans called Hominids, that became us!

  81. jack the rabbit04/30/2010 at 10:37 @Randy: I said theory because it is not fully understood yet.

    Take human evolution theory for example, it is the theory that human has evolved from an ape species. Now look around the world, how many species of apes are there? Are you telling me that over million of years, only one type of ape evolve to walking and evolve to become human while the rest of the apes evolves into just more apes? Why is that? If we follow the theory of evolution, there should be more than one species of human walking around the world because the different varieties of apes will each evolve into different looking humanoids. Just like you see there so many different cats species, so many different bird species, but curiously, there’s only one human species. Very curious, and that is the fact. Now, is it wrong then to say maybe the theory need more work before calling it a fact.
    So why don't all humans look alike then? Different races and predominant features. If god created man...and from dust I might add....why don't we all look like adam and eve? How come we can have a blood transfusion from a chimpanzie if our blood types match? Jane Goodall let me in on that one. We now find out that there are genetic links via genes to diseases that will kill us over time. Yet some think that god is at work in those endeavours. It starts when we are born with a gene and god has absolutely nothing to do with it. And from someone who has lived in many cultures and religions over the planet tell me who is right? Is it the budhists? The Hindu's? The Muslims? The Christians? etc etc. Seems to me like cultures liked to find meaning of that which they did not understand and thus religion was born. And to preserve that religion it needed to contain elements fo superiority over all other beliefs and just like human have feelings of pain and fear we also have feelings of faith and belief and compassion. Which will most likely be proved to be genetic one day as well and not the result of the fear of a god punishing us if we are not compassionate or if we are cruel to each other etc.

  82. so when I watch a good scientific documentary on Evolution I am presented with a lot of eveidence on screen. I only watched the first 5 min or so of this and some guy is saying what if a human skull was found millions of years ago? Show me the skull. Show me the proof. Show me the items found under table rock. Then I can see where they are going with this as well. Aliens came and helped the Mayan's move rocks? Funny how all the miracles and things the aliens did never happen in modern times. Seems like a good mystery to me and great irony. Two guys start this doc off with no physical evidence saying that aspects of what has been found are under a conspiracy of rejection by the scientific community. Bring forth the hard evidence.

    Richard Dawkins inundates his viewers with evidence and scientific opinion. The human genome project proved what is what and how it all works and came into being. WE ARE ALL LINKED GENETICALLY. EVERY LIVING THING ON THE PLANET. Its a fact that cannot be disputed. Its a fact. Maybe this doc should have tried to bring forth facts.

  83. A legitimate documentary would provide not just the name and degree but the university affiliation of each "expert." I suspect that some of the so-called experts presented here are really doctors of divinity rather than scientific-disciplined Ph.D's. "Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof," which is not provided here. The examples sensationalized here are debunked by other documentaries here on topdocumentaryfilms, such as Dawkins', for one example, on the Glen Rose phenomena. What the mind sees and what objective study proves often turn out to be quite different; mankind required thousands of years to realize that the sun did not revolve around the earth, for instance. Some findings will forever remain a mystery, open to any bizarre fantasy one wishes to make of them, yet scientists search for the truth and constantly uncover more truth with study.

  84. @John Seals

    I noticed that and I never said anything about it out of respect.

    But, I have, as everyone has noticed from my ramblings, the same problem. Spelling... I try so hard...

    And, I DID read for context. Your stuff is great and I want you to succeed mightily!

  85. Well, I seemed to have mispelled my own name on the previouse post. Kind of hard to seem as if you know what your talking about after a mistake like that, huh. Oh well, read for content mates- "cuz spellin aint my stron point."

  86. Man, I thought people from around here where messed up but this Jack guy is awfull. Guilt is a perfectly normal human experience that people who have never even heard of christianity or God feel every day. I wonder if christianity as a whole feels any guilt for the thousands of people that have been brutally slain, robbed, tortured, molested, evicted, extorted, and/or raped in its name? Or perhaps the guilt of knowing that it has single handedly deprived many more thousands of a sound scientific education. No I'm sure they are to busy patting themselves on the back for having figured it all out. If your pathetic mind is still in need of a constant then learn the speed of light, the standard luminosity of certain super novi, maybe the rate of acceleration produced by gravity... But quit making shit up just to have something to hold on to. Let me add to the little list somebody had going earlier about when to believe a god is really God.
    1. If your program of study claims anything that can not be reproduced by others under controlled conditions-Its rubish.

    I find this is the only rule one needs to recognize truth.

  87. @Leoni, who wrote:

    "Origins of Man
    Interesting doc and does match up with some of the scientific evidence that has been corroborated with other ancient texts and data including the Hebrew Bible and the Old Testament and then combined with modern scientific discoveries. You need to read the full series of the Earth Chronicles by Zecharia Sitchin to get the full picture of what he believes with astounding evidence from other sources as well, (I certainly believe it well could have happened) that the Earth was inhabited just over 450,000 years ago by the Nelfilim (Anunnaki) These God’s (men) or extraterrestrials from another planet guided the evolution of life on Earth, determining the existence and nature of humankind to what it is today. These are fascinating books and I have never believed that “man” build and constructed the pyramids or built some of the cities back in antiquity. Even if you are a non-believer in this sort of “out there” information you owe it to yourself to read the first book “Earth Chronicles” – you may be amazed!"


    Absolute tripe! I know of all of that work and it is, as I say, absolute tripe! Do you know what tripe is? It is a fairly indigestable mound of animal intestines that we Irish eat when there is nothing else around to eat... (because the Anglish stole all of our potatoes! That was a joke...)

    Consider that statement very carefully... (not the joke...)

    The other problem with all of that "scholarship" that you mention, is that it is, inherently, racist. All of the ancient mega-lithic sites all around the world were built and concieved by men and women that were very, very intelligent, most likely, more intelligent than you and I, distracted as we are by cable TV and the internet, and movies... and no aliens or gods need apply.

    The simplest explanation, is probably, (I would say always) the answer.

  88. Vlatko wrote, brilliantly:

    "Science has no limits and boundaries. Science does not recognize nations, states, religions and every other divisions made by man. It speaks universal language. Isn’t that marvelous?"

    Yes. Yes it is.

  89. @RANDY that "Crack the "Rabid" ................. will always see god as the answer... but thats sadly typical of people from religion.............. just pity him and let him waste his time defending his superstitions w/o anything but blind faith to back it up ..... oh and he has hope .... hope he sees the facts one day and sees that we all go to the sam place , which could be just dead , but i have never died so idont know either...... but i bet ole jack likes to be stubborn and hopefully not stupid......... i wouldnt say that but............ no disrespect intended..... and im trying to keep it in moderation Vlatko.......... great site ...... turned a few brothers on to it ...... thankx and slainte

  90. Um... Epicurus quoted this from Jack the Rabbit, and rightly called it insane... but it has taken me some time to really realize the level of insanity, even as it was pointed out by Epicurus... I think because I just blanked on the horror of it... Um... wow!

    Jack the Rabbit (or should I say, Rabid" in light of this post!) wrote:

    "Quote from Randy: “We don’t need a god to solve all of our problems. There is a simpler, and more interesting explanation.” You would like that wouldn’t you Randy, that way you can do whatever you want without any guilt. You can screw your sister or your daughter, you can abort your unborn babies that you conceived from sex with so many different women, you can have sex with other men or even horses and dogs and you wouldn’t feel any guilt, you can kill a man so that you can sell his kidney, you can sell your daughter to be a prostitute, you can experiments on patients and kill your patients in the name of fame and fortune and you would sleep in peace at night wouldn’t you Randy, after all, no God = no right or wrong, is that right Randy? As long as you can get away with it, no problem right Randy? I feel so much safer knowing that you and others like you are around Randy."


    This is terrifying. Jack, honey, I feel the world is a much more dangerous place with you in it. But, if I was looking out for you, you would never lose a minute's sleep. I would watch over you like a brother.

    I might hate christianity, and humanity, but I still have a moral compass, and I could never hurt a living creature, (even spiders, although I am world-class arachniphobe!).

    And that is without any god, it is simply because I know we must look out for each other, (even the really, really stupid ones...), if we mean to survive as a species. That's also, part of evolution, but obviously, not part of christianity.

    Holy Batman, your religion is ugly...

  91. @Jack.... What do you know of human nature? Im curious as to how you know so much about something you seem to haven't seen much of. what besides religion are your "facts and knowledge "based on? What experience makes you a human nature expert? just wondering.

  92. Hilarious!

    Love the comments, Kudos to Epicurus!.

  93. @Vlatko - "science" is a front used by the devil to instill doubt during the end times. If you opened your mind you would know this.

  94. @jack the rabbit - Your god sounds boring. Im going to stick with

    - cut off part of your “little bro”
    but you have to do it at 18 not at birth, this helps separate the unfaithful

    - claim you must kill his enemies, asked you to go to war
    But I will only kill the ones the god has "marked" as his enemys. Like the ones that look different or have more money then me.

    - so called god has a picture
    Ahh Hello, If he doesn't have a picture how will the illiterate masses i convince to follow me know how is going to send them to heaven.

    You really should rethink your idea of god, there is no way your going to make any money with your god.

  95. @Epicurus - I dont know man... dudes and horses seem pretty hot. Im glad I have god around to keep me from acting on my natural urges to bang farm animals.

  96. @Epicurus: Why don't you grow up? If you think that's just my thinking, then you're too naive or just plain lying to yourself. You maybe more knowledgeable about evolution theory but you know sh*t about human nature from what you're saying.

  97. @WTC7: If you're talking about the priests that abused children, they're no better than the scientists that abused their patients and test subjects and should be hanged at the very least. Like i said, knowing human nature why would i believe a man made religion? especially where they forbid man with sex drive to marry? and then when they commit bastards acts they tried to hid it away? Man made religions of this world are fiction made by man either to make easy money or to oppress or rule of the population. Here's a "man made religion" guideline I follow:
    -If the so called god claim you must kill his enemies for him, then that's not God.
    -If you have to feed or clean your god, then it's not God.
    -If you have to give money to your god, then it's not God.
    -If the so called god asked you to go to war, then it's not God
    -If you have to cut off part of your "little bro" to be in the religion, that's not God.
    -If the so called god has a picture, that's not God
    -If there is a lot of gods in your religion, then they're not God as God don't create each other or need help

  98. @JACK...THIS is what is wrong with YOU...not wrong with any atheists but wrong with YOU

    THIS what im about to post that YOU wrote is what shows you are an immoral disgusting insane human being who doesnt understand morality or ethics or social responsibility. this is what you said.

    Quote from Randy: “We don’t need a god to solve all of our problems. There is a simpler, and more interesting explanation.” You would like that wouldn’t you Randy, that way you can do whatever you want without any guilt. You can screw your sister or your daughter, you can abort your unborn babies that you conceived from sex with so many different women, you can have sex with other men or even horses and dogs and you wouldn’t feel any guilt, you can kill a man so that you can sell his kidney, you can sell your daughter to be a prostitute, you can experiments on patients and kill your patients in the name of fame and fortune and you would sleep in peace at night wouldn’t you Randy, after all, no God = no right or wrong, is that right Randy? As long as you can get away with it, no problem right Randy? I feel so much safer knowing that you and others like you are around Randy.

    THAT WAS WHAT YOU WROTE, you ADMITTED that without god YOU think these things would be permissable..would you like to explain why?

    Randy never said that. in fact i bet Randy wouldnt behave that way, but since YOU said thats how you think the ruyles would be without god it shows that without god YOU ARE INSANE.

    if you need a magical man standing over you to tell you not to do those things you are crazy and need help.

    Jack you know what = no god....the claims made for this god thing are inconsistent, and plain wrong.

    god could exist with evolution, but until you show some evidence for this god thing keep your fool mouth shut.


    basically grow up and start using your brain...the one that if your god is real he gave you to use, so put it to use.

    1. Yes, and a god that knows everything, has always been and will always be and is "Loving and compassionate" will "send us to hell" is we do something it doesn't want us to do. You, are ******.

    2. what are you talking about??

  99. @vlatko: i'm not saying all the scientists are up to no good, but it's hard to know who's telling the truth sometimes. I think I mentioned that i'm not against the theory of evolution, i think it makes perfect sense but it doesn't provide a complete picture at the moment and still need works. I personally think evolution and a Creator doesn't contradict at all. Evolution theory can explain come part on how this Creator created the universe. It's when these scientists insists that evolution = no God, then that's when my spider sense is tingling that they're up to no good and have an agenda by saying insisting on it.

  100. 'Theory' means something different in everyday speech than it does in science. It sounds like a quick thought somebody may have come up with while under the shower. But a scientific theory is only considered as one after thousands of experiments that are repeated thousands of times, as Vlatko already pointed out.

    I could find around 5-10 VALID arguments from the top of my head that criticize the weak spots of science - but it seems people with no knowledge on the topic whatsoever never seem to find these arguments.

    Again, to the topic of evolution: if you find some evidence against evolution, please publish it! Formulate your idea, find empirical evidence for this idea, plan and execute experiments to support the evidence, write a paper about it (~200 pages should suffice) and put it to the test by publishing it and let it be validated through scientists all over the world.

    I'm waiting.

  101. Dear jack the rabbit,

    Thank you so much for giving me such a good laugh :-D. Btw, I'd like to hear you opinion on all these god-fearing creatures in the Mother Church we hear so much about recently, do you think they feel guilt after they abuse those kids? I'm certain they are feeling very guilty, poor souls, and I'm sure that really helps a lot to the young boys they abuse. But, what the heck, they're gonna say a few Hail Maries and all is forgiven, thank god :-).

    It's so good god is in their hearts and they can see the difference between right and wrong. Not like them the ungodly rapists, who go to prison when they do the same to some kids. Isn't that so sweet Jack?

  102. Geez Randy, you can protest and whine all you day long but I don't think it'll change the fact that geology, anthropology and archeology are not the fields where the finest and brightest people work. It is fields where people who don't get in to real science go to. Good to see you stoop to personal attacks, i must have hurt your feelings, ooooh... poor baby.

    Quote: "Neanderthal sites in France and Germany have been carefully excavated and it has been found that they had a very rich culture." Excavated by who? the same people who probably put the stuff there in the first place.

    Why am i considered unintelligent because i question the work work of these people? Knowing human nature requires me not to trust anything without facts, if a man can get a way with lies, he will, especially when it comes to money. These scientists will be given lots of money to do their research and digs, it is in their interest to lie. Maybe it's you who are uninformed enough about human nature, you who reads a book and believe its content just because it's your hero the towering intellect wrote the books without checking the facts.

    Quote from Randy: "We don’t need a god to solve all of our problems. There is a simpler, and more interesting explanation." You would like that wouldn't you Randy, that way you can do whatever you want without any guilt. You can screw your sister or your daughter, you can abort your unborn babies that you conceived from sex with so many different women, you can have sex with other men or even horses and dogs and you wouldn't feel any guilt, you can kill a man so that you can sell his kidney, you can sell your daughter to be a prostitute, you can experiments on patients and kill your patients in the name of fame and fortune and you would sleep in peace at night wouldn't you Randy, after all, no God = no right or wrong, is that right Randy? As long as you can get away with it, no problem right Randy? I feel so much safer knowing that you and others like you are around Randy.

    Very convenient and no guilt. No wonder world leaders and scientists insist to say that evolution is a fact, it's because it removed any slight of guilt when they do their experiments on their fellow human beings. If you want example, search a doc by the name of Dr. Money in this site. With this kind of mindset in scientists, any wonder why they could fabricate evolution? It's possible.

    1. @jack the rabbit you're implying that all the scientist in the world made a plot to sell the evolution as a lie.

      The very intrinsic characteristic of science is constant testing and believe it or not disproving rather then proving the hypothesis, theories, theorems proposed by a scientists, universities, faculties etc.

      When a scientist publishes a theory there are hundreds of scientists all around the world (everyone within their own branch) who are testing, validating, repeating experiments, reexamining the evidences and so on just to find a bug or inconsistency in that theory.

      When a theory goes through a rigorous testing across the world only then the scientific community accepts that theory as valid.

      So if an American scientist publishes a fabricated theory, based on false evidence, false findings, false interpretations you think that a scientists in Russia, China etc. will approve that theory after they discover it has been fabricated. Not a chance.

      Science has no limits and boundaries. Science does not recognize nations, states, religions and every other divisions made by man. It speaks universal language. Isn't that marvelous?

  103. Jack the Rabbit wrote:

    "Oliver the Chimp is one evidence but you brushed it off. The theory of evolution of man from ape is based on the finding of skeleton of apes that resembles man or finding of skeleton of ape that walk upright..."

    There is a documentary on this site which Jack the Rabbit mentions, several times, and I will offer my thoughts on the subject here, as I copy them from the thread onto which I posted on the "Oliver the Chimp" docu'... that was a terribly redundant sentence.... but this is interesting, I think...

    Randy wrote on the "Oliver the Chimp" thread, with slight modifications (editing):

    "I haven’t watched this doc, but I have heard of Oliver before, years ago. I knew about it peripherally, but never paid it much mind, assuming it was a trained chimp, (knowing they can walk upright for short periods, even in the wild.)

    Years later, I saw him briefly discussed, on ANOTHER documentary on evolution and went, “hmmmm…” but then didn’t really pay it any more mind.

    Since then, I have learned about the Bonobo (I am spelling it phonetically), chimp discovered by Dr. Jane Goodall in… I’m gonna say, mid to late 90’s? Very recent, in any case.

    The Bonobo’s were an exciting find because they seem, characteristically, [behaviorilly], at any rate, much closer to humans. They walk upright for a much longer time and more frequently than other chimps. They use and fashion tools, [and, interestingly, they are matriarchial... I find that compelling, only because some of the earliest archeological finds of civilization are the Turkish Ouruks and they seem very matriarchial, (woman-centric)...]

    But more importantly, they have sex with each other for comfort, (year 'round), rather than only when the females are in estrus (I know I spelled that wrong so I’m gonna use the more vulger term, “in heat”), and are the only other mammals besides us that do so.

    They also engage in ORAL SEX, homosexual behavior, and, creepily, sex with pre-pubescents… (nature is sometimes very ugly…).

    Dr. Goodall never noticed them before, she says, because she always focused on specific troupes of chimps, and when she noticed the Bonobos she assumed they were just another troupe of the same species she studied.

    I submit, just off of the hip here, that perhaps Oliver was a Bonobo. Which, as I say, wasn’t discovered until very recently.


    So, Jack the Rabbit, what are your thoughts on Bonobo chimps? Have you ever heard of them? Do you know who Dr. Jane Goodall is? Anything...?

  104. Again, @Jack the Rabbit who wrote, staggeringly, and mind bogglingly...

    "It’s done not only to find hoaxes but also to find mistake by incompetence because lets face it, geology, anthropology and archeology are not the fields where the brightest and smartest people go to work."

    Oh! Oh, I must protest! I have known and loved geologists, anthropologists, and archeologists and I must say to you, sir, these men and women were towering giants of intellect compared to the drivel you have been drooling all over my computer screen!

    I have tolerated your lack of intelligence and "American Idol", "trailer-park-trash" ideologies and even tried to stoop to your level with "The Highlander" reference but when I read that, I must say... you are a low class, no reading, uninformed... stuff to fill a grave!

    Please do not procreate! Although if he's over 14, it's probably too late...

  105. @RANDY That was funny as shyte man...... great reference considering where the analogy came from and what you were trying toget at............. Kind of like praying...... or doing a rain dance and when it rains its all because you prayed/danced............offerings/sacrificed etc........

  106. @Will wrote:

    "SOME of them… sure. But that’s not what you’re saying. You’re saying that because SOME of them MIGHT be hoaxes that we shouldn’t trust ANY of them. The ultimate unspoken conclusion being of course that we can’t use fossils for evidence of evolution.

    Any first year philosophy students out there wanna handle this one?"

    Are you talking about, "Specious Reasoning"?

    Wherein, some guy from north America will say, "Hey! I got this rock that keeps tigers away!"

    And the dupe will say, "Really? How do I know it works?"

    And the rock-bearer will say, "Do you see any tigers around here?"

    Is that what you are talking about? (All apologies to "The Simpsons" episode in which Lisa duped Homer in this way...)

  107. I guess they wanted me to be more moderate.......WTH?

  108. @Randy I agree with you on the adaption issue……thats just how it is.why do people think our physical features are so different around th globe and not just with humans?Adaptability.Simple as that and one more score for proof of evolution ! If we were created all the same by god there would be no change ,Im sure if there was a god and he is perfect ,than why need to change perfection? Wouldnt a perfect enity be capable of prediction ? Or capable of stopping /never making the circumstances arise to where change is needed? etc…. holes everywhere w/ creationism and no proof. ..l……… I being an atheist ……… you dont have to do any guessing when you have cold hard facts.

  109. @JACK it all goes back to natural selection..... im a muay thai trainer and doest mean anything. And has it never occured to you that maybe there was no "wiping out " perhaps a virus or lack of breeding or many other explanations could be also plausible ....... " If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle. " SUN TZU----- size means 0 and intellect a little .... strategy the rest remember Sun was extremely outnumbered as were the japs and the vietnamese and look at the results.Not to mention Carthnage or the 10000000 other times this has proven true

  110. @Jack the rabbit (a very cute screenname, by the way!)

    Listen, I get that you don't want to give up your god, for whatever reason! I get that. I've been there. It's scary, but seriously... I know all of this stuff very well... much better than you.... you cannot hope to out reason me on my home-turf. I live eat and breathe evolutionary biology!

    Let me just say this, Neanderthal sites in France and Germany have been carefully excavated and it has been found that they had a very rich culture. We dicovered burial sites showing a powerful respect for the dead, including adorning them with flowers (as evidenced from the crumbling remains of flourocarbons around the necks of the interred), complex tool, clothing, and artwork creation, which indicates a highly advanced culture.

    They were really close to us in every way, we were just smarter. We wiped them out because they were ugly, basically, although alot of paleantologists don't agree, they think we "bred" with them. I think that's silly, and so do other scientists, but the bottom line is, here we are and they are gone.

    We as Homo Sapiens, probably never met Gigantopithicus, they just died off because of the last Ice-Age they couldn't adapt to as we did. But, maybe they didn't? Maybe some small colony survived and is living in the pacific northwest! Fun to think about!

    But, after all of that, what we see in nature is, something like, "The Highlander" movies and TV shows, you know? "There can be only one..."? The top species of any paleantological age must wipe out all the rest, as the dinosaurs did before us, and the insects and arachnids did before them, and the warring plant species did before them, and the bacterium and paramecium did before them... etc.

    We don't need a god to solve all of our problems. There is a simpler, and more interesting explanation.

  111. @Will: It depends on where the hoaxes are done isn't it. If the hoaxes are done on the foundation of the theory, then you might as well use that particular textbook as a doorstop. The conclusion is that we should test the so called fossils and evidences again, not by the same people who done them before but by an independent third party to verify those finding starting from the beginning, especially for the carbon dating of fossils and evidence. It's done not only to find hoaxes but also to find mistake by incompetence because lets face it, geology, anthropology and archeology are not the fields where the brightest and smartest people go to work.

  112. @Randy: The mystery is there aren't any other living humanoid coming from apes other than the myth of bigfoot and yeti. We don't even sure whether bigfoot or yeti are humanoid or just big apes if they in fact exist. It's very convenient that the only evident of other humanoids are fossils of the so called neanderthal. I don't think they were even sure whether neanderthal were apes or humanoid except for the findings of tools near where they found the neanderthals, which is used to verify the theory that neanderthals are humanoid because they are capable of making tools. Neanderthals could be just a distant cousin of current Orang Utans. This is just what I have been arguing, if a group of experts planted the tools or mistakenly dated the tools that were found and then BS-ed their way about neanderthals, how many people could have verified that at the time? All the evidents and fossils are kept in certain location with limited amount of people have access to it. All the rest of us just know about it from textbooks or science teachers who got the info from the same textbooks. About gigantophiticus, I doubt that humans can wipe them out considering their 2 feet taller and bigger than general humans at the time where they're fighting with rocks. How could humans wipe out a species as smart as human and stronger than human too? Maybe it's because gigantophiticus is just a really big apes, big but now smart?
    Then there is the question why the spread of neanderthals and gigantophiticus are not as widespread of humans? Maybe because it's too hard to plant hoaxes in too many different locations?

  113. HA HA HA!!! @ JACK ------ Do a little homework before saying such narrow things about Darwinism... shyte man just because there are things we havent quite nailed down yet (LOL except JC) doesnt mean that the vast amounts of physical evidence we do have are all the sudden insignificant or somehow bs ....... it just means we havent found every piece of the puzzle yet..... If you have a jig saw puzzle , just for the sake of argument , 90%done would you not still be able to see that it was a farm house or whatever ?you might not see the chicken or the wheel on the wagon but you still "Get the picture" so to speak................. no pun intended....... still kinda funny though.

  114. who does't love a good mystery?

    unfortunately, this isn't one.

  115. Also, one of the quoted dates for the tool bearing strata at the Hueyatlaco (Steen-McIntyre) site was 370,000 +/- 240,000 years BP! At two standard deviations (error) this age overlaps modern times! Please. The site was probably disturbed in some fashion.

  116. This video is patent rubbish. For example, if dinosaurs and humans coexisted then why aren't fossilized human bones found in the same strata as fossilized dinosaur bones?

  117. @Jack

    SOME of them... sure. But that's not what you're saying. You're saying that because SOME of them MIGHT be hoaxes that we shouldn't trust ANY of them. The ultimate unspoken conclusion being of course that we can't use fossils for evidence of evolution.

    Any first year philosophy students out there wanna handle this one?

  118. Jack,

    You shouldn't try to argue evolution if you don't understand it. All of your points are just WAY off base already answered by fairly basic evolutionary evidence.

    There HAVE been other apes that evolved to nearly human characteristics. Namely, the Neanderthals. They weren't related to us, Home Sapien Sapiens, they were an offshoot that went extinct. More likely, we killed them off.

    Gigantopithicus was a similar species that walked on two legs and was a big fella', 7 or 8 feet tall, but he died out even before the Neanderthals did. Note: alot of cryptozoologists believe that Bigfoot and the Yeti are descendants of Gigantopithicus. No evidence, but fun to think about.

    And there were others, probably a lot more, but fossils are very hard to make. The creature has to die in the right conditions to make a fossil. The fact that we have so many fossils from so many species is a testament to how very, very long the Earth has been around. But there must have been thousands upon thousands of species of animals that existed on this planet that never left a fossil and we will never know about.

    And we are primates of the same order and family as all other apes in the world. We are as related to apes and monkeys as are all the species of birds and cats are related to each other. We look as different from most apes and monkeys as a lion looks different from a cheetah or a lynx. Lots of primates-- we are part of that family, all of us look different.

    There are many unanswered or inadequately answered questions in Darwin's theory of natural selection as the origin of man, but the fact is clear, we did evolve as all other animals did. Because I say again, EVOLUTION IS A FACT, there is no question.

    And stop writing "the theory of evolution" it is not a theory, even if your mom, or your teacher tells you it is, they are wrong. Even the media gets it wrong most of the time. Everyone confuses the theory of natural selection with the fact of evolution. One is fact one is theory.

  119. @Randy: I said theory because it is not fully understood yet.

    Take human evolution theory for example, it is the theory that human has evolved from an ape species. Now look around the world, how many species of apes are there? Are you telling me that over million of years, only one type of ape evolve to walking and evolve to become human while the rest of the apes evolves into just more apes? Why is that? If we follow the theory of evolution, there should be more than one species of human walking around the world because the different varieties of apes will each evolve into different looking humanoids. Just like you see there so many different cats species, so many different bird species, but curiously, there's only one human species. Very curious, and that is the fact. Now, is it wrong then to say maybe the theory need more work before calling it a fact.

  120. @Will: Is it hard to believe that some of them are hoaxes? We live in a world where information fed to us is centrally created. Don't you ever question why when you watch the news you get everything but the news? For example: you're told that there's a riot in place where the leaders of G8 countries are meeting but you're neither told what kind of people were rioting and why were they rioting. You're not told whether they're rioting for righteous reasons and whether they're fighting for your rights. You're just told the police and the rioters clashed and some injured. Not sure whether u'll understand the example but at least i tried.

  121. sigh... I keep repeating myself...

    Evolution is a FACT. Evolution is not a theory. We can see evolution happening around us everyday in lving organisms like, viruses, bacterium, insects, and mega-generational mammals like rats and mice.

    Natural Selection is a theory OF evolution. Darwin's theory was natural selction, not evolution. It's Darwin's theory of NATURAL SELECTION as the engine, or driving force, of evolution.

    The idea of evolution is almost 2000 years old. All of Darwin's colleagues at the time knew about it, they just couldn't figure out what "made it go".

    Darwin's theory of what "made it go" was NATURAL SELECTION and, it has some holes in it. But evolution does NOT have any holes in it. Fact.

  122. @randy: i was saying that the fossils they claimed to be the missing link, may just be from a mutant ape like Oliver that died many many thousand years ago. Oliver was just an example.

    I agree that science is a work in progress that keeps correcting itself be each increase in information, but I do believe a lot of information and facts that contradict or could not be explained by the theory of evolution that we are taught in school was either ignored or omitted by scientists who are in authority. If facts or information omitted than science could not improve itself.

    Yes, there are rigorous testing routines that are placed on fossils and other evidences, but again this is happened in bottleneck situation. What i mean is that only few people will ever see the fossil or evidence and will conduct research on it and make conclusion from it. You mentioned that multiple scientists in different location checked it, maybe true but how many is multiple? 20 people? 20 people deciding what we all should believe? If they're honest, everything is fine but if they're dishonest than it would be easy to convince the public since they're considered experts in their fields.

    I'm not against theory of evolution, it's a good theory in place of something we don't know for sure. But I just think it's still a working theory, but recently evolution has just become a religion. If you want to be thought of as serious scientist, you cannot question it, just have to accept it like a good boy you are. Scientists who question the theory is shunned and ridiculed just like a catholic that question the role of the pope is treated. Why can't you question evolution, it's a fact? No, it's a theory. It might possible that it's 95% correct already but if there is still 5% we don't know about it, it should be corrected.

  123. @Jack The Rabbit

    Are you seriously suggesting that the reason why we have fossils is because desperate archeologists put them there to get famous, and that there is now a giant conspiracy in the paleontological and archeological community to continue getting rich by planting false fossils?

    Are you seriously postulating this as a real explanation?


    Oh, please say yes, please, please say yes, you're actually furthering this notion as a plausible explanation for why there are fossils.

  124. @jack the rabbit

    Repsectuflly, that is ridiculous. Any run of the mill forensic pathologist of any medical discipline would be able to tell the chimp bones in your example were recent and not millions of years old.

    An archeologist would know that instantly. But even if he didn't, a two hour carbon dating test would prove it, (is it still two hours? I'm sure the process has sped up since I saw it demonstrated years ago... anyways...).

    There are rigorous testing routines that these fossils and other evidences have to go through, most for years, tested by multiple scientists in many different locations, before they are called legitimate finds.

    Mistakes do sometimes happen, and sometimes the very human scientists, in their excitement and zeal, will announce their theories about them too early, before all the robust testing is completed. But, it is always found out, eventually, and the mistakes are corrected.

    That's what GREAT about science, it's not a failing that they can make mistakes. That's religions's failing. Religion CAN'T make mistakes. Science is a self correcting system.

  125. @Epicurus: you make compelling argument.
    A lot of people commenting that the findings in this Mysterious Origins of Man documentary are hoaxes, I'm neither for nor against that. But, if it is possible for a creationist or a hindu to create hoaxes, why do you think it's not possible for archeologists to create hoaxes too? Especially when his job, his future and his mortgage depends on it. Let say in the past, an archeologist, A been working for 10 yrs for no result and his funding is drying up, then he did the unspeakable and create fake bones and fossils, he suddenly becomes famous and considered an expert, not to mentioned having secured his funding, his job and his mortgage. Why is that not possible? Let say another archeologist, B create another hoax on a separate occasion, they would call A who is now considered an expert to verify the finding. Now, do you think A will declare B as a fraud but in doing it admitting that he himself a fraud? Or do you think A will play the game and verify B's finding as genuine? Now A and B both famous and considered as experts. Is it that hard to believe?
    Knowing human nature, it's no surprise. Impossible you say? Well NASA has managed to convinced the world that they land man on the moon. Most recent example is Bernie Madoff, he managed to con $65 billion from lots of very rich and very smart people that he can multiply their money with no risk for 20 years.

  126. Jack how many fossils do you think we have found? what about ALL the fossils from ALL branches of life which show progressive evolution from simple to more complex organisms as we go through the strata?

    what about the genetic evidence Jack? what about endogenous retroviruses? or chromosome 2? what about all the fields of science which have been unified using evolution....the food you eat, the medicines you take ALL base their ability to work on our understanding of evolution.

    try again?

  127. @Ned - how was Copernicus "silenced or ridiculed and demoted"

    I guess in the same manner as Hawking and Einstein.

    I think you are naive Ned. When "newcomers with information threatening to the official status quo" they are in fact "given a prize and promoted". This is usually followed by tenure, speaking engagements, more awards, and lots and lots of grants.

    Academia and science rarely reward status quo. Pretty much every professor, researcher, and scientist in general wants to have that new great idea.

    A large portion of science is driven by the consumer. Cell phone companies do not subscribe to the status quo. Or at least not for long. Intel doesnt. Even things you normally do think about like the psychology of marketing. Pfizer and Monsanto have been making new products for years and years.

    It is laughable to think that some sad scientist has the next million dollar idea and wont publish because he is scared that the big bad mean scientists will scoff at him.

    What world do you line in Ned

  128. I'm all for a healthy debate but this doc does not merit. EVERYTHING here has proven to be false. Creationists try very hard to distance themselves from the "evidence" presented in this doc.

  129. Oliver the Chimp is one evidence but you brushed it off. The theory of evolution of man from ape is based on the finding of skeleton of apes that resembles man or finding of skeleton of ape that walk upright. Oliver the Chimp is a living mutant ape that walks upright. So it is possible that the skeletons that archeologists have found are mutant apes and because they did not know ape can mutate to walk upright, they decided that they have found our early ancestors. If you consider that fact, then there's so many holes in the theory of evolution of man from ape.

  130. I did said "probably", I'm not in those fields and i'm only guessing the numbers by estimation. Maybe you will be able to enlighten us with the correct figure?

  131. @Ned, your examples were not of modern science, other than the electric universe theory which is just another example of pseudoscience but you will just say anything i say isnt science is only decided as real by some conspiracy.

    the church refused to accept copernicus' claim, and the hemp thing is not a science issue but an economy one.

    but if everyones only claim now is that evolution is a conspiracy...SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE AGAINST IT. and show me any hole in it.

  132. all your numbers are absolutely wrong. where did you pull them from?

    if a scientist came out tomorrow saying the earth was flat and babies were brought by storks we would certainly "outcast" them. they have no place in serious conversation.

    if you honestly think those numbers you cited were accurate i have to laugh...just laugh.

  133. @Epicurus: Those 500,000 scientists worldwide you mentioned, most of them don't work in archeology or geology or palaeontology fields. The number in these fields probably around 2000-5000 worldwide. Out of those 2000-5000 maybe only 1000-2000 resides in prominent countries such as US & Europe. Out of those 1000-2000, probably only 200-500 people considered experts who leads expedition and makes theories on their findings and decide where the research are going. The rest of the scientists rely on these 200-500 experts with their finding and theory.

    The fact is there are some scientists who challenge the views of the mainstream views but they're mainly outcasted by the rest of the mainstream scientists as what happened to Virginia Steen-McIntyre in the documentary. New scientists are coming all the time but they have been educated by the mainstream and work under the old guard who teaches mainstream theory and force them to work under mainstream guideline, you know what happened to people who challenge the mainstream, they're driven out, so the only ones left all have the same mainstream views. Like Ned said, this happens time and time again in human history, no surprise there.

  134. @Epicurus

    you said:

    "absolutely wrong. if the found anything that went against evolution and proved it false they would be given BILLIONS of dollars in grant money to formulate what ACTUALLY happened, and they would be given a Nobel Prize."

    I just saw that statement and wanted to comment on how naive that idea is. Not anything against you, but against the idea itself.

    Time and time again, when newcomers with information threatening to the official status quo come and share their findings or data, they are not given a prize and promoted, but instead, silenced or ridiculed and demoted. This happened with Copernicus when he found that we revolve around the sun and not vice versa when he was jailed for heresy. This happened with the many industrial uses of hemp. This happened with all of the whistleblowers on recent events like the corruption involved in the "War on Terror" and contractors there, it happens in astrophysics when increasing evidence of the Electric Universe theory is presented, and the papers are dismissed or ridiculed and the people who present them fired or forced to leave their positions at major universities.

    People are much more susceptible to peer pressure and group think that many realize. When you are in a group, especially a group which has the power to vote down or choose what gets presented to the public and what does not, there are oftentimes powerful motives to go along with what will be best for the group. Especially when you see what happens to those with unpopular views (loss of the respect of their colleagues, loss of employment, loss of chance for awards or recognition, loss of chance of promotion, being pigeonholed into a position with little visibility or future).

    People tend to value their personal things more than the overall good of what they might have to share. Not everyone--there are always pioneers who don't care how many don't like what they have to say--but for many, they don't want to take the risks that being bold and brave with new data or ideas entails. They feel it's better to be quiet about that thing, follow in line with everyone else, and this is how new truth encounters much resistance on the way to finally becoming widely accepted.

  135. you are telling me there is a collaborative conspiracy between ~500,000 scientists (new ones EVERY YEAR) that are all working together to make up all these bits of information like fossils and genetic evidence to trick us??? for what purpose?

    not only is it not likely but there is no motive. like i said every year many new people graduate from school. they are completely able to show ANY false information in evolution. but your conspiracy theory is just that....a conspiracy theory.

    maybe you should take some evolutionary biology classes and check out the information for yourself.....?

  136. @Epicurus: granted you may be correct, but they won't give those billions of dollars to the same people who tried to cover up the fact on the evolution for so many decades (the current archeologists). So they will lose their jobs but you're correct, new jobs will be created for other people. So you see it's still in the interest of the old guard to keep the secret as long as they can, after all they get paid every year to do basically nothing.

  137. @Jack. absolutely wrong. if the found anything that went against evolution and proved it false they would be given BILLIONS of dollars in grant money to formulate what ACTUALLY happened, and they would be given a Nobel Prize.

  138. sorry, no offense for people I called rejects, in fact I'm one of the rejects and working not on those fields above. I just think anthropology, archeology, paleontology fields need smartest and brightest people, not the dumbest people in a class which what I found happening in the past. These anthropology, archeology, paleontology jobs normally a lifetime jobs, so for these people it's in their interest to only reveal the facts and information that will make sure they have a job to last. If they suddenly come up with the fact that there was no evolution, they will lose their job as there is no need to dig anymore.

  139. @Pamela

    Respectfully, you are completely, utterly, and mystifyingly wrong about... well, your entire statement.

    Short, tall people at the same time? Well, you know of course, that there were many primate species that got pretty close to our, (Homo Sapien Sapiens') evolutionary development. Gigantopithicus, for example, a huge bipedal primate that grew up alongside of us for awhile. Went extinct, (unless you believe the Bigfoots and Yetis are their descendants- cue sci-fi music!). Neanderthals competed with us in Europe for awhile. Went extinct. There are many evolutionary, primate culdesacs. Some short, some tall, some smart and some lucky. We just got lucky, got further along, but our own extinction is coming up, no worries there!

    Diversity? Diversity is BUILT-IN to Darwin's work! The Theory of Natural Selection, as the engine of evolution, basically states that refined randomization is at its heart. In other words, Nature randomly jumbles the elements of life through mutation and the mutations that work in the environment breed true, the ones that do not, fail. In that framework, can't you imagine the diversity that would spring forth? I mean, I think Darwin probably thought he didn't have to expicitly explain that concept as "Natural Selction" should bring the synonym of "random selection" to mind.

    Finally, I would like to put this out there, because it is not said enough, even by evolutionary scientists and naturalists of all kinds. Darwin did not come up with idea of evolution. It is NOT Darwin's theory of EVOLUTION; it is Darwin's theory of NATURAL SELECTION. The idea of evolution had been kicked around for almost 2000 years before Darwin. In Darwin's time, many, many of his peers knew about evolution as a fairly solid factual conclusion to the origin of species. They just couldn't agree on the method, or what was the driving force. The Engine.

    It was Darwin's Natural Selection ideas that blew the case open. However, it could very well be that Darwin could have been completely wrong. Yes. Then we throw out natural selction as the engine of evolution, but NOT evolution. Evolution is a fact, natural selction is a theory still being tested.

    That is why newer models of evolution still crop up from time to time, and they are worthy of consideration, as well. These challenges to Darwin do nothing to the fact of evolution, just to Darwin.

    It is important to seperate the two ideas because the christy-folks can poke holes in Darwin's work and THINK they are busting up evolution. In fact, they are just poking holes one particular scientists theory when there are a half a dozen others floating around out there that are just as valid. Evoltion is a fact, we see it happening everyday, all around us. How it happened, however, we may not ever have all the answers to, (at least in our lifetime...)

  140. Look,the saddest thing is a theory is formed by Darwin and who thought so linear about development of life,and so far no uniform linear model can be constructed from all the fossils. Eg. there are very short, very tall people at the same time. The only truth that has been discovered is "DIVERSITY"! Why diversity? Darwin doesn't explain why diversity, only, now don't cry, a theory of why some lifeforms became extinct!

  141. What a load of complete nonsense with none or twisted scientific base.

    Heston as usual sells out to the higest bidder. Riduculous creationist/cult propaganda.

  142. Origins of Man
    Interesting doc and does match up with some of the scientific evidence that has been corroborated with other ancient texts and data including the Hebrew Bible and the Old Testament and then combined with modern scientific discoveries. You need to read the full series of the Earth Chronicles by Zecharia Sitchin to get the full picture of what he believes with astounding evidence from other sources as well, (I certainly believe it well could have happened) that the Earth was inhabited just over 450,000 years ago by the Nelfilim (Anunnaki) These God's (men) or extraterrestrials from another planet guided the evolution of life on Earth, determining the existence and nature of humankind to what it is today. These are fascinating books and I have never believed that "man" build and constructed the pyramids or built some of the cities back in antiquity. Even if you are a non-believer in this sort of "out there" information you owe it to yourself to read the first book "Earth Chronicles" - you may be amazed!

  143. Exellent and thought provoking

    More stuff like this is needed

  144. @Ned the footprints have been shown to be FALSE. 100% false. you can do a google search.

    number 2 it wouldnt be too hard for humans to do that.

    Number 3, is false and a hoax,

  145. I only watched the first few minutes as I'm about to watch a documentary on Jupiter. Here are some claims made by the video in these first few minutes:

    #1: human footprints resembling modern man's in Texas, side-by-side dinosaur footprints (T / F)?

    #2: 70-ton red granite blocks at a peruvian mountain temple, when only source of this granite was on the top of a mountain peak, 5 miles away (T / F)?

    #3: Piri Reis map, showing Antarctica in the 1500s (T / F)? [after looking on wikipedia, it seems this might be F]

    I'm not biased either way. I just want to get to the bottom of even these very few claims.

  146. In a word... Propaganda
    In two words... Evangelical Propaganda

  147. This should be under popular docs, even if only to further the debate in the comments section.

    I waited for a damn dirty apes quote when they got to evolution, but I guess Heston had to bite his tongue...

    There is only one thing left to do people: continue global warming to the point where the alleged atlantis is uncovered from under the antartic ice. Yes we can!

    Great doc: very intertaining, mildly thought-provoking, lots of Heston, John Anthony West reference... 10/10

    Even if it's all BS, at least it got my mind off Quantum Communication for a minute... Ah, cr^p.

  148. An eclectic banding of exotic curiousites that collectively fail to reveal anything abot the 'Mysterious Origins of Man'.

  149. The Mayans have stones in their structures estimated to weigh over 10,000 tonnes. The cranes of today max out at 3,000 tonnes. How did a civilization that old move these big rocks? They must have been technologically advanced. Are we more superior to these Ancients? We would like to think so.

  150. Abviously, this is a documentary attempting to counter evolution theory with a small amount of suspecious evidence pointing towards creation of some sorts. There is simply not enough evidence shown here, or many credible experts (only one or two have phds) to convince me.

    That being said, this is also not a documentary promoting christian creationism. Hare Krishna Hinduism and its creation myth more like it. Just look at the source 'krishnatube'. The hypothesis of destruction to contruction and destruction agian is central to Hindu belief of creation and cyclical time. I believe the hindu god in charged of this is Shiv. Read up and judge for yourself.

  151. Rather funny than scientific...
    I think I am going to watch something else.

  152. All of the "facts" presented in this doc have been discredited, and abondoned by those who defend them in the film.

  153. Scam.

    Charlton Heston: seriously.! you just cannot see him in a scientific context.

    Check the bios of the scientists. All seriously religious and creationists. Expecting them to come up with real scientific work is tough to digest.

  154. This documentary doesnt play all the way to the end! it stops at like 14 minutes in, why is that Vlatko?

  155. I think the comment section was far more entertaining than this "doctumentary" (although I think its safer to label it a mockumentary as it's mocking everything science and documentaries stand for; like research and credibility).

    I love this gary character, we need more of him. Bartender, can we get this fellow another round?


  156. n jasper.....its clear ur jus a sheep...folowin da herd. non of ur statements ave any validity.

  157. to ben newman: wat phd ave u got to be makin those judgements den? do ur research....dnt blindly follow main stream media/science.

  158. You can take his gun from his cold dead hands. After that please be so kind as to bury this sack of kack.

  159. phenomenal!!! fills in so many gaps that always existed in my head :) obviously accepting paradigm-shifting hypothesis is very difficult to swallow, so obviously those who don't enjoy stepping out of the comfort zone will be highly closed towards these anamolies....but come on, you have to accept there are HUGE unanswered questions everywhere around isn't totally seamless and even religion not completely whimsical...

  160. Well I would have to say that to claim this information is wrong or right would require at least some study of the claims. To come on here and claim this information is wrong or right is simply ignorant. This video is only information, you have the choice to believe or not believe, to investigate or not. If you are in the party who does not agree with the video, I suggest you post a video of your own disproving it.

  161. An excellent video. There is way too much here to categorise it as all loony science. The naysayers ought to open there eyes and get out there and check these anomalies for themselves rather than listen to accepted 'science'.

  162. What a load of BS

    This documentary is pathetic. I dont even know where to start but lets just say anyone who takes any of this serioucly needs to have a hard look at there reasoning abilities.

    That narator has not a hint of credibility, he looks and sounds as educated as a UFO conspirisist as is how this whole rat tag doco is strung together.

    Its laugable

    Sceince claims requires peer revisons before anything can be published as science. If there is contradictive evidence of scientific evidence then it would be looked sericoucely not just thrown out like this douche bag claims

    All these so called sceintists are clearly creationist and dolusional

    Please remove this documentatry its as damaging as those "Anti Imunization" creeps.

    Anyone heard of "Herd imunity" ?

    essential for mans 10billion population stride

  163. some very interesting thing are brought to light and i will want to investigate some of these artifact claims. however some of the science they claim is very wrong. but this documentary must be taken with a pinch of salt, as some of the wilder claims are stupid and clearly wrong.

  164. Absolute Rubbish.

    Richard Thompson is no a real Doctor. He holds no PHD in any scientific field. He' a Hindu creationist, and a conspiracy theorist. Yet, he feels qualified to criticize a widely accepted scientific theory in which the subject of Biology itself is completely based.

    Anyone who finds this poorly put together documentary "enlightening", is probably a scientifically illiterate dimwit.

  165. That's Incredible! But not very scientific. Mostly speculative and imaginative. The earth is constantly in motion so dating becomes a challenge. Even though rocks per say can not be carbon dated and such it is possible to determine which way the particles are aligned which indicates when the rock itself was formed and how the earth's magnetic poles were orientated at that moment in time. I think anyone who took grade 5 science knows that land mass started out as one chunk and peices migraded, so no news flash there. Atlantis was a creation out of Platos mind not a real place. And by the way, none of these findings where hidden when I took Anthropology at university so his premise from the beginning is questionable. Which was what was mostly disappointing because he could have chosen even more curious discoveries like the crystal skull, or Kennewick man, many others.

  166. excellent!


  168. uuuuuu what a nice find!

    I'll make sure lots of people come see this!

  169. This was an excellent scientific documentary Vatko! A 10 from me! There is so much novel information here, I'm not sure what to talk about.

    It's sad that scientists that go against the religion of Darwinism are mocked and in many cases drummed out of thier professions. It's true; it happens.

    The Bible lists ancient cultures and people as having technology so advanced, that God Himself concluded they had to be disrupted as nothing was impossible to them as a united people (the story of the tower of Babel). Even a generation after Adam, the people of cain (Adam's son) were known for thier work with metals and musical instruments. Why are we so surprised when we discover such to be so? Dates are debateable. I'm even quite certain there is a reference in the Bible as to "when the earth was divided" -- (I'll have to check), and could refer to when the continents split. Now isn't that interesting?

    Nonetheless, the facts remain: evidence that contradicts evelution is surpressed and forgotten; that's not science, that's religious and scientific selectionism. And yes, the footprints in Texas are real.

    The scientist that I met in our church showed pictures of gold artifacts taken from coal deposits which everyone says were made from decomposing plants and animals millions of years old. Now I don't think the millions of years is accurate, but certainly, how we think of the past is not entirely accurate.

    Andrew: No, it doesn't cheapen this documentary because they use ancient civilizations to debunk evolution, I think it was incredibly brave of them to do!

    Charlten Heston rocks! Thanks Vlatko for yet another Jewel of a documentary!

  170. Its sad that evidence of ancient civilzations was used to dubunk evolution. That cheapens the whole video.

  171. what? millions of years! may be ten of thousands, but millions.

    Its more probable that the excavations under Table mountain dug in to a previously excavated burial chamber.

    The Texas foot prints are dubious to say the least.

  172. What an excellent documentary. Indeed thought provoking. There are numerous evidence that an advanced pre historic civilization did exist which perfectly explains why all forms of human society shares striking amount of similarities and the differences appear so trivial.

    A must watch for everyone !

  173. wow ! now thats what I like to call great use of technology - thanks Vlatko!! you rock..

  174. Hi Great site - just stumbled on it while researching the origins of man and how long we've been on this planet and found the docu "Mysterious Origins of Man".

    The funny thing is that its not working - can you help, I've tried other videos on the site and they're all working fine...

    Really want to see this :)

    1. There you go Chris. Now it's OK.

  175. This is most beautiful documentary that awake my humanity

  176. Very interesting!