Email Updates - Get notified each week via email of the best new documentaries      Sign Me Up!
Processing your request, Please wait....

Enjoy this Documentary? Express your views below!!

Homo Futurus

Science|27 Oct, 2012|11 Comments |
Click Stars Below to Vote!
VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 4.2/5 (11 votes cast)

An interesting documentary about the future of the human species.

This is a documentary about a controversial theory about the mechanism that led to the evolution of humans from primates to modern man, challenging the currently accepted premise of evolution. There is also speculation about the future evolutionary path of mankind.

Homo Futurus is controversial because it presents a theory on the mechanism for the evolution of humans from primates to modern man who is clearly non-Darwinian.

The theory proposes challenges currently accepted evolution premise that genetic mutations and environmental pressures are the main influences for natural selection. There is also speculation about long-term future evolutionary path of mankind. So get ready to take a look at the faces of our children.

Homo Futurus, 4.2 out of 5 based on 11 ratings
Subscribe via RSSPlease subscribe to our RSS feed to have new doc's delivered straight to your reader.
This Video is Tagged With:

, , ,



  1. Enjoyed that:)A simple thought experiment on the impossibility of measuring Alan’s string.(No need to venture into the tricky quantum world!)Glue the string ends together perfectly (so we don’t alter the length).Form a perfect circle with this loop.Don’t ask how you’ve measured it, but assume that you know the exact diameter of this circle.The length of the string is now Pi x Diameter – Easy!But hang on, see the problem? Pi itself is another piece of string we can’t “measure” exactly!!

  2. WickedSlum says:

    i suppose that the point is to teach and entertain, i just found it a bit dumb really. but i really do appreciate some of the movies they have put on youtube. But maybe you’r right, maybe i dont get it, this really wasen’t for me :)

  3. @WickedSlum These issues might seem like nit-picking when measuring a piece of string, but if you ever design a microprocessor you’ll find that some of these issues are important. So you’re right: it’s not “a real problem” for the challenge of measuring a string, but it does provide an excuse to introduce some genuine facts that are at odds with the “common sense” way that people picture reality.

  4. WickedSlum says:

    i usually like programs like this, but these guys are just making up problems.. and it’s not even a real problem. they should’ve called this program “how long can i measure this string”Cause his string is 319 mm and 442 micro meters, the machine said so

  5. HopkinsFred2524 says:

    BEST DISCOUNT j.mpxY0iRBCustomer Reviews:I shopped for several months and tried out lots of bikes including Golds Gym’s recumbent bikes. I tried the R3 at Sam’s Club and knew it was perfect! I am a big guy at 292 pounds and over 6′ tall. I have had the bike for two months and with a low calorie diet have dropped 25 pounds so far! I have had five right knee operations to date …For more details please copy the Amazon link below in your browser:j.mpxY0iRB

  6. MrJantjesmit says:

    the length of the string is the maximum straight distance between the most extreme points on the string. The roughness (coastline analogy) is not relevant, though interesting. The most accurate you can get is limited by the heisenberg principle… end of story…i think…. ;)

  7. it’s interesting how different people from different fields answer it differently. i came to it from a philosophical point of view, because i’m interested in philosophy. 1st from a metaphysical point of view, then a language point of view, than a psychological point of view, i think i settled on the psychological. the mathematicians have a more hands on approach, they want to compare it with something physical.

  8. if you ask me how many rooms a house has, i can say 1 to ?if you ask me, does a house have walls. the answer is a resolute yes. a house has to have walls in order to be a house, 4 walls and a roof, i would think. but as to what color, what size, it varies considerably.

  9. i define schmmog as a marshmallow with one cherry on top of it, if you ask me how many cherries are on top of a schmmog, i can answer one, if you ask me how wide a schmmog is, i will tell you it depends on the schmmog, for i did not specify a width requirement for defining a marshmallow with one cherry on top of it as a schmmog.thus, the answer to the question is— (according to how we have historically defined string), there is no specific length requirement for string, it can be any length.

  10. if we defined string as being 2 inches long, then any string that exceeded/or fell short of 2 inches long, could no longer be defined as string without confusing/contradicting ourselves. then the only correct answer could be, 2 inches. but there is no specific length requirement of string, it can be any length. it depends on how you define the word, ah that’s it. and since words are constructs, we can make them what ever we want them to be.

  11. in a practical sense, the question is ludicrous, in a theoretical sense, though, it is meant to provoke philosophical debate, and thought, about the nature of reality itself, logic and language, and in that sense, it’s a good question.

Leave a Comment