Disclaimer: I think it is clear at this point that the these are dolls.
If it’s human (or another known organism) and only about 30% of it is unknown, then the organism has an evolutionary relationship to organisms in earth.
Neither the presence of human DNA nor a humanoid anatomy necessarily determine that a species must have an evolutionary relationship with humans. If an advanced alien species had reached our planet long ago, they could have engineered a biological lifeform to interface with life on our planet, not entirely unlike we sometimes send animal-mimicking robots to a colony in order to study animal behavior.
I’ll reword then. If an organism has 70% DNA similarity to humans, the simplest and most reasonable explanation is that they’re evolutionarily related to us.
If that’s not the conclusion you draw, then you could just as easily say that an organism whose DNA was 99% similar to yours (me, for example) isn’t evolutionarily related to humans.
He asserted the claim of them not being evolutionarily related to us, but gave us evidence that would make it easier to assume the opposite. He gave us no DNA evidence that they’re truly alien. And this all presupposes that what he said was accurate.
I agree it is, by far, the simplest explanation. Simplest explanation doesn’t mean only explanation, and I prefer to not entirely dismiss other options just because they appear unlikely to me. Let’s not forget the samples could be contaminated.
In this instance, after looking at the analysis that other folks have done of the MRI scans and x-rays, I am personally sufficiently satisfied with the hypothesis that these are dolls made with a hodgepodge of animal and human remains.
Disclaimer: I think it is clear at this point that the these are dolls.
Neither the presence of human DNA nor a humanoid anatomy necessarily determine that a species must have an evolutionary relationship with humans. If an advanced alien species had reached our planet long ago, they could have engineered a biological lifeform to interface with life on our planet, not entirely unlike we sometimes send animal-mimicking robots to a colony in order to study animal behavior.
I’ll reword then. If an organism has 70% DNA similarity to humans, the simplest and most reasonable explanation is that they’re evolutionarily related to us.
If that’s not the conclusion you draw, then you could just as easily say that an organism whose DNA was 99% similar to yours (me, for example) isn’t evolutionarily related to humans.
He asserted the claim of them not being evolutionarily related to us, but gave us evidence that would make it easier to assume the opposite. He gave us no DNA evidence that they’re truly alien. And this all presupposes that what he said was accurate.
I agree it is, by far, the simplest explanation. Simplest explanation doesn’t mean only explanation, and I prefer to not entirely dismiss other options just because they appear unlikely to me. Let’s not forget the samples could be contaminated.
In this instance, after looking at the analysis that other folks have done of the MRI scans and x-rays, I am personally sufficiently satisfied with the hypothesis that these are dolls made with a hodgepodge of animal and human remains.