Expert Claims That We Were Brought to This Planet Thousands of Years Ago!

Avatar EWAO | January 3, 2018

Is the Human Species from Another Planet or Another Solar System?

Ancient astronaut theorists have long claimed that humans were crossbred with a different species from the Alpha Centauri solar system hundreds of thousands of year ago. It has been argued that the 3,500-year-old tablet of Kish may hold firm answers to these questions and issues; it was unearthed where the ancient city of Sumer in Mesopotamia used to be located, and where the modern city of Tell al-Uhaymir in Iraq is found.

This ancient document is thought to predate Egyptian hieroglyphs, and the cuneiform writing of the Sumerians. It’s fascinating to think that humans are the only species on Earth to express themselves by way of written language. Could it be that the Earth is merely a prison planet for castaways from another solar system? The human species is an exceptionally violent one, after all. Robert Sepher believes that humans were transported to Earth around 200,000 years ago, and he contends that human beings are a hybridized species. As proof, he cites the strange fact that not all human blood is compatible with that of other human beings; where did Rh-negative blood type come from, if not from elsewhere in the Universe?

However, it must be said that proof for the above hypothesis is still severely lacking. Yet, more and more proof is mounting that the human species could have originated on Mars rather than on Earth. As per Steven Benner of the Westheimer Institute for Science and Technology in Florida, the stuff that made human beings was likely transported to Earth by way of meteorite. An oxidized form of molybdenum—which is probably crucial to creating life—would have been present on Mars much sooner than it would have been around on Earth. Checkout these images to get a better grasp of these insights.

Benner explains that, “It’s only when molybdenum becomes highly oxidized that it is able to influence how early life formed. This form of molybdenum couldn’t have been available on Earth at the time life first began, because 3 billion years ago, the surface of the Earth had very little oxygen, but Mars did. It’s yet another piece of evidence which makes it more likely life came to Earth on a Martian meteorite, rather than starting on this planet.” Indeed, organic compounds are the building blocks of life—but they are only the foundation.

Oxidized molybdenum (or boron) enables organics to begin the transformation toward life: “Analysis of a Martian meteorite recently showed that there was boron on Mars; we now believe that the oxidized form of molybdenum was there, too.” Furthermore, it would have been virtually impossible for life to spawn on early Earth because the planet was probably submerged in water. Conversely, Mars likely would have had many dry areas in addition to wet ones, and this would have boded exceptionally well for early life. Boron is only normally found in very dry places on Earth, and water is corrosive to RNA (the first genetic molecule, before DNA forms). So, the odds could very well be in Mars’ favor when it comes to which planet harbored life first.




Main image: NASA




Written by EWAO

  • Didi the Daring

    Sure, that is why we humans share 96+ % of our genes with Chimpanzees and something like 70% with fruitflies, because we were brought here and they were not?

    • Fernanda Vulcanis

      Why not?

      • Didi the Daring

        Do you believe there would be such a coresponding evolution of genes on two planets? Rather unrealistic, no the sharing of genes to such an extent is a very strong proof of common ancestry. So either all life was brought here a couple of thousand years ago or none, but definatly not just we humans.

    • luc

      we are a crossbreed,,,,3 % of our dna is not to be found on this planet

      • Didi the Daring

        Oh BS. Or do you believe alien DNA would just by chance use the same four molecules and 20 amino acids as terrestrial DNA? And how is this 3% DNA not to be found on this planet if it is within humans. Afterall they are found on this planet.

        • luc

          THIS 3% of our dna is found only in us, a fact that is not logical, if we evolved on earth…our dna has split chromosones, something that DOES NOT occur in nature

          • Didi the Daring

            Split chromosomes? What are you talking about? During meiosis and mitosis all chromosomes split. In every cell division, in every living organisms chromosomes split to be replicated and then divided into the two daughter cells. Please give a source for what you post because it doesn t make any sense, maybe you misunderstood or maybe it was some pseudo scientific mumbo jumbo.

          • Didi the Daring

            We share 97% of our DNA with Chimpanzees but that also means Chimpanzees have 3% DNA not found in humans. And that chromosomes are duplicated and then split happens in nature often enough.

    • luc

      it has been proven that 3 % of our DNA is not to be found on this planet..we are modified monkeys..not to stupid, not to bright, just enough to be a slave, and we still are

      • Didi the Daring

        Lol if the DNA is found in humans it is found on earth. Do you mean ifound n no other lifeform on this planet? If yes, so what, nothing unusual about that. Probably in all life forms on this planet you will find DNA not found in other lifeforms. And if we have been modified, when? Before Ho mo Sapiens crossbred with Neanderthals and Denovians (and maybe other Ho mo Erectus subspicies) or afterwards. That would be 3-5 million years ago as the human line split with the Chimpanzee line (modified monkeys), but why are all those fossils of intermediate homonidaes like Australopethecus, Ramapithecus, Ho mo Erectus, Habiles, Heidelbergensis, Neanderthalensis and Donevian to be found? And if it happened later when because Ho mo Erectus ~250.000 years ago definatly were not monkeys. They used fire, made tools and probably had speech.

error: Sorry, If you need something contact us.