Teach the Controversy: Humans Resulted When Angels Mated with Apes

Galloping out of Stilwell, Oklahoma comes a bold new "theory" to explain human origins. John Sparacio has discovered that humans are really reptilian creatures that resulted when angels mated with apes. Contradicting the claims of Young Earth Creationists, Sparacio reveals that the world was created 29,000 years ago, not a mere 6,000. Humans weren't created by God, though. We weren't part of the plan; we're the product of evil and so tainted with original sin.

Why isn't this being taught in schools yet? Evolution is just a theory, and so is this. I'm sure some schoolteacher in the great state of Louisiana will pick this up and run with it someday.

Buckle yourself into your chairs before reading this, people. I nearly fell out of mine.

The First Born; my reptilian roots

Man is a derivative of a reptilian and mammal species. The story of genesis was passed down and mistranslated by the Hebrews. They had taken bits and pieces of ancient verbal and written fragments and joined these writings together into a narrative which by no fault of there own is misleading. We, humans that is, where created by evil and in evils image. Look at the passage in genesis where "the sons of gods had taken the daughters of men and defiled them" defiled means mated with.

Right. Shouldn't we be explaining this to our kids when we teach them the facts of life? "When a man and a woman love each other very much, the man defiles the woman, and that's where babies come from."

Concerning our interpretation of good-looks. I reason that men and women at there highest state of beauty, according to us, derives from Lucifer who was said to be the most handsome and charming of all angels, this is where we get our idea of good-looking but I say to you look at each other very closely you will start to see the reptilian resemblance. This reptilian DNA comes from millions of years ago which is latent in all living thinks on earth. The angels inseminated their blood into the ape blood which houses this reptilian DNA and created the human form. I surmise that the creation took place approximately 29000 years ago. After the creation process the angels started to mate with humans and bare children who are the modern day people of this earthly world. This explains why we are so physical and deadly as for the gentle side we also have the DNA of rabbits and flowers but this gentler side seems too be over powered by the reptilian blood. Sometimes it causes such confusion that some of us end up in suicide or malfunction like serial killers and rapist. Why the reptilian blood seems to dominate the mammal blood is a mystery to me but the physical signs are extraordinary.

Hmmmm. Anyone get the impression that Sparacio doesn't get out much? I don't imagine he's very popular with members of the opposite (or same) sex. "My, but you're looking scaly tonight" is a compliment most potential partners don't take very well... unless one is attempting to "defile" an alligator, I suppose. That opens up a whole set of problems that I don't have time to discuss here.

Here are a few key points concerning our reptilian side; we have reptilian brains which form during fetal development, our skin is microscopic scales like snakes, we shed our skin like snakes; women especially, like to wear high-heals hence walking on there toes like the dinosaurs who walked on there toes, this is a subconscious emulation; women and men like to grow there nails long but women especially because of there instinct to protect, we have tail bones and our legs resemble in muscular terms those of amphibians such as frogs.

It's true that we have brain structures inherited from our reptilian ancestry, of course, and they do develop in utero. So do all the other parts of our brain, of course. Our skin isn't really all that much like that of a reptile, though, and I'm very familiar with the manner in which reptiles molt. When a lizard sheds, as Tycho has demonstrated for us many times, the skin comes off all at once to reveal the new skin beneath. Humans and other mammals continually shed dead cells individually. The only time we shed like reptiles is when we're recovering from a bad sunburn. It's possible that Sparacio made his observation after being out in the sun too long. I find it a bit of a stretch to equate a woman in high heels with a therapod and am of the opinion that our legs resemble those of frogs — which, if anybody was wondering, aren't reptiles but amphibians, so I don't know why Sparacio throws them into the mix — because both amphibians and mammals share a very distant common ancestral tetrapod and thus share some similar structures (what biologists who haven't been eating the blue-staining mushrooms call "homologous structures"). Still, all of my objections amount only to a "theory" and so are no more credible than John Sparacio's "Apes and Angels" theory. Teach the controversy!

I really don't believe that God, as we think of him, would of made such a blunder. I do believe that these fallen angels did have the Holy spirit in there blood since they came from heaven(another name for the universe) and it was transmitted at the formation of us to us. But it lies deep down under thousands of years and millions of generation in our subconscious. The only way to release it is through the teachings of the Holy Bible. This book acts as a key would to a lock and streams hidden bits of electrical data into our minds opening the door and path to our savior, God...

Thousands of years and millions of generations? I haven't spent much time in Oklahoma, so maybe things work differently there. Can someone currently in that state confirm for me, please, whether humans can reproduce successfully there at less than one year of age? One thousand is one one-thousandth of a million. Assuming that a generation occurs every twenty years, for there to be one million generations in one thousand years would require that humans started popping out babies at an age of one one-thousandth of twenty years... or 0.02 years old. That's approximately 7.3 days. Are week-old babies giving birth in Oklahoma? I can't see offhand how this could be possible, but perhaps if I read the Bible so that hidden bits of electrical data streamed into my mind then it would all make sense. Teach the controversy!

...Jesus came not to save the world for he and all the prophets before him knew it was of evil and couldn't be saved but to tell men of there roots in the Holy Spirit. That they have the ability to open the locked subconscious mind and have everlasting life beyond this world of pain and torment.

This explains why there are so many mentions of women in high heels and apes mating with angels in the New Testament, of course. The psychological seat of millennial ideas is revealed in spades when Sparacio informs us that we live in a world of "pain and torment" (which is kind of odd since just a couple of paragraphs before he told us that "heaven" is a word that means "universe." I was under the apparently mistaken impression that the world we live in is part of the universe, and that would make it part of heaven. I didn't think that pain and torment were supposed to go on in heaven, but I make no claim to understanding Sparacio's theology. I'm having enough trouble with his biology). Sure, there's suffering in the world, but there are plenty of joys and pleasures to be had, too. Then again, I'm the sort of fellow who routinely "defiles" those dinosaur-like women and who can appreciate a good walk in the woods or a bad horror flick, too. Perhaps Sparacio's vision of the entirely terrible world would change if he tried some of those things, too.

Man should never have been created this way. This is why we suffer so since our creation was not according to Holy law but done as an act of dishonest and secretive manipulation by disobedient beings. Anything derived from a lie or untruth ends up in disaster just look around you at the human world in its entirety and you will see the disaster coming.

I do see disasters created by humans, of course, but those human-created disasters are quite often the result of exactly the kind of ignorance that Sparacio himself displays. As a millennialist, Sparacio sees the world as evil, sees humans as inherently evil, and aspires to be one of the privileged few who benefits when some divine hitman descends from heaven to destroy everything that he doesn't like. It's not terribly different from what Ron Graham wrote earlier this month about 13 foot tall superhuman hybrids and the end of the world.

But leaving aside the theological aspects of Sparacio's ramblings, what's so wrong about it in terms of a theory to explain human origins? It's no crazier than what's put forth under banners like Creationism and Intelligent Design. There's been just as much research that has uncovered evidence for Sparacio's ideas as there is for those two "alternative theories" and it doesn't contradict the evidence that has come forth from evolutionary biology anymore than those, either. There's no empirical reason, then, that Intelligent Design and Creationism should be taught alongside evolution while Sparacio's theory is excluded from the classroom.

Teach the controversy, I say!

According to his profile, John Sparacio is 47 years old. How can we have people in this country who can reach that age and still come up with this stuff? Something is profoundly wrong in America if we can have this kind of scientific (and linguistic!) illiteracy in those who have managed even to graduate from the eighth grade. If this were something isolated then it would be understandable as a sort of cultural and societal outlier. The fact is, however, that a majority of Americans buy into ideas that are every bit as outrageous and unevidenced and which fly in the face of what we know about the universe as does the stuff quoted above. How, in the 21^st century, can this be?

Sphere: Related Content