Dharmic Religions Only: Evolutionary Science and Hindu/Buddhist worldviews.

[Aupmanyav]

.. is a transformation of fish to fish with lungs, then to salamander like amphibians, then to lizard like reptiles to reptiles that could run on two legs (dinosaurs), to dinosaurs with feathers for insulation, to dinosaurs with feathers for flying (birds).

Well, Sayak83, We know about evolution from fish. That is 'Dashavatara'.
Now you can even produce body parts by 3-D printing. Come out, 'Koopa Mandookas', the world is changing fast.

 

[kalyan]

2) Since humans are apes and evolved from chimpanzee like ancestors, transformation of ape to human (another ape) certainly happened. Such a change within a family is relatively minor and can occur within 4-5 million years comfortably. But vertebrates are a bit more conservative than fungii and dramatic transformations across families (fish to bird) does not happen as animals have more elaborate bodies. What happened (and is well evidenced in fossils) is a transformation of fish to fish with lungs, then to salamander like amphibians, then to lizard like reptiles to reptiles that could run on two legs (dinosaurs), to dinosaurs with feathers for insulation, to dinosaurs with feathers for flying (birds). This process happened over a period of about 250 million years.

So, you are admitting that there is no EVOLUTION observed in any species except from ape to man and you don't have proof.
fish to fish , lizard to lizard is not evolution

3) No. Cloning works quite well. Technology is now well advanced and clones can be made reliably and easily.

I was throwing an idea that cloning when gone wrong can produce different types of species, is this evolution ?
and no Cloning is not easy and does not work well even today, we could see cloned animals die with diseases in very less time

 

[Aupmanyav]

Kalyan, you are the limit of adherence to 'shastras'. My congratulations. Even Nitai Dasa cannot compare with you. He at least acknowledges scince, you just don't.

 

[sayak83]

So, you are admitting that there is no EVOLUTION observed in any species except from ape to man and you don't have proof.
fish to fish , lizard to lizard is not evolution

I was throwing an idea that cloning when gone wrong can produce different types of species, is this evolution ?
and no Cloning is not easy and does not work well even today, we could see cloned animals die with diseases in very less time

No that IS evolution. Ape to man is ape to ape. Evolution creates species that differ only moderately from the ancestral species. It is only with time that reproductive isolation drive their descendants to look more and more different. This has ALWAYS been how evolution is defined as. Whatever you had imagined evolution to be was not anything like what scientists say evolution is.

Also, modern cloning is safe, fairly risk free, creates healthy animals and becoming commercial.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/01/garden/01clones.html
Not sure what cloning (making an identical copy of an existing organism) has to do with evolution. Would you at least read a simple intro book to evolution first before critiquing it?

 

[निताइ dasa]

Fair enough if you do not want to discuss this topic. I will simply emphasize the fact that the rejection of evolution is something peculiar to your branch of Hinduism. Other branches has no problems with it, and you are mistaken in believing that evolutionary theory is not a very well established evidence based scientific theory.
The relations between how similar looking genes act in the bodies of various organs, how muscles and other organs are constructed by slight step by step alterations on common themes to produce what looks like drastically different organs, and how fossils so beautifully track those step by step changes in the evolutionary design , makes the case for evolution extremely strong. Did you know that the gill bones of early fish transformed into the lower jaw, ear and voice box bones of all land animals including us. Did you know that the last gill bone of older flipper-less hag fish became the fins of modern fish and the arms and legs of all land animals. Did you know that we can track these transformations through fossils and also through genes while looking at embroyo growth in lab? The relationship between embroyology, developmental biology, medicine, paleontology and evolutionary biology is extremely well illustrated in the talk below that looks at how flippers became legs and gills became bones in our jaws, throat and ear.

My response for comparative embryology is the same as my comment for comparative anatomy, I don't think it implies common origin. Yes it can support Darwanism, but it can also support a Puranic view (all species emerged at once). I have studied all the various evidences for evolution my whole life (from genetic similarities to the presence of vestigial organs), and I personally don't find it convincing. To me it is not logical explanation of life on earth. It cannot explain to me the basis principles of life (i.e consciousness) adequately, and the worldview in it self is materialistic which I do not believe reality is. As for your arguments, they are simply theoretical explanations of the data, and I do not believe them to be the best explanation. Even in evidence you have provided for transitional fossils (from Wikipedia I may add), not one clear sequence of transitional changes from one species to another can be seen. Even today, scientists accept the fossil record as largely incomplete. Furthermore if humans did branch from a common ancestor (like the Homo Erectus for instance) why can we not find Homo Erectus organisms alive today? Surely there were some individuals from a population who were not exposed to selective environmental conditions and hence did not evolve. Why have they "magically" died out? Lastly the biggest problem I have with evolution is it is essentially based upon chance. Mutations are by nature are completely random and therefore to attribute to them a directional change which would result the formation of more complex and diverse species is to me a huge extrapolation. This is my personal analysis of the data, and combined with the words of scripture, evolution is not something that is logical for me to accept. I hope you understand my position. That being said, I can see why evolution had been accepted as nearly fact by modern day scientists, because the most of the data can be interpreted to fit Darwin's theory and because science as no other logical alternative (that springs from empirical evidence) they must accept it. This does not apply who theists (who accepted the testimony of Shastra).

Therefore I reject it and accepted the worldview of Vedanta which according to the Vaishnav Acharyas supports the theory of Puranic creation. As for the whole Smrti vs Sruti, debate: all Vaishnavs believe that Smrti holds as much authority as Sruti. Both have emerged from the mouth of Brahman in the beginning of creation. I can provide injunctions from Sruti itself to prove this. If Smrti was not authoritative, why would the great acharyas comment of Srimad Bhagavatam Gita (which falls into Smrit)?

cannot directly experience evolution with my senses (hence it is not Pratyaksha). For me it is simply Sabda (what the dominant scientific community tells me) and because it contradicts with Shastric Sabda, I have to accept the shastric version. You may label me unscientific for it, but that is fine. However please don't insinuate that I have not considered the evidence for it. I have. That being said it was nice hearing your views (you seem quite knowledgeable about it, probably more than me).Best of luck I don't really want to discuss further, this thread is already going in circles now, so I will take my leave.

 

[kalyan]

No that IS evolution. Ape to man is ape to ape. Evolution creates species that differ only moderately from the ancestral species. It is only with time that reproductive isolation drive their descendants to look more and more different. This has ALWAYS been how evolution is defined as. Whatever you had imagined evolution to be was not anything like what scientists say evolution is.

Also, modern cloning is safe, fairly risk free, creates healthy animals and becoming commercial.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/01/garden/01clones.html
Not sure what cloning (making an identical copy of an existing organism) has to do with evolution. Would you at least read a simple intro book to evolution first before critiquing it?

Thats evolution into same species einstein, you are hanging by a very loose thread here..And you are just quoting from random blogs and that is NOT science at all......Evolution is a THEORY and even darwin admitted it. Trying to fit in science inside evolution is like trying to put ocean inside a glass.
and here is the link cloning links with evolutin

http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommitte...rinaryMedicineAdvisoryCommittee/ucm127249.htm

There is no shame in admitting that evolution is a theory and there are no proofs for it.....so basically ape to human evolution is only thats happened after all these millions of years.....what a joke....evolution is for people who believe in santa claus and fairy tales

 

[sayak83]

My response for comparative embryology is the same as my comment for comparative anatomy, I don't think it implies common origin. Yes it can support Darwanism, but it can also support a Puranic view (all species emerged at once). I have studied all the various evidences for evolution my whole life (from genetic similarities to the presence of vestigial organs), and I personally don't find it convincing. To me it is not logical explanation of life on earth. It cannot explain to me the basis principles of life (i.e consciousness) adequately, and the worldview in it self is materialistic which I do not believe reality is. As for your arguments, they are simply theoretical explanations of the data, and I do not believe them to be the best explanation. Even in evidence you have provided for transitional fossils (from Wikipedia I may add), not one clear sequence of transitional changes from one species to another can be seen. Even today, scientists accept the fossil record as largely incomplete. Furthermore if humans did branch from a common ancestor (like the Homo Erectus for instance) why can we not find Homo Erectus organisms alive today? Surely there were some individuals from a population who were not exposed to selective environmental conditions and hence did not evolve. Why have they "magically" died out? Lastly the biggest problem I have with evolution is it is essentially based upon chance. Mutations are by nature are completely random and therefore to attribute to them a directional change which would result the formation of more complex and diverse species is to me a huge extrapolation. This is my personal analysis of the data, and combined with the words of scripture, evolution is not something that is logical for me to accept. I hope you understand my position. That being said, I can see why evolution had been accepted as nearly fact by modern day scientists, because the most of the data can be interpreted to fit Darwin's theory and because science as no other logical alternative (that springs from empirical evidence) they must accept it. This does not apply who theists (who accepted the testimony of Shastra).

Therefore I reject it and accepted the worldview of Vedanta which according to the Vaishnav Acharyas supports the theory of Puranic creation. As for the whole Smrti vs Sruti, debate: all Vaishnavs believe that Smrti holds as much authority as Sruti. Both have emerged from the mouth of Brahman in the beginning of creation. I can provide injunctions from Sruti itself to prove this. If Smrti was not authoritative, why would the great acharyas comment of Srimad Bhagavatam Gita (which falls into Smrit)?

cannot directly experience evolution with my senses (hence it is not Pratyaksha). For me it is simply Sabda (what the dominant scientific community tells me) and because it contradicts with Shastric Sabda, I have to accept the shastric version. You may label me unscientific for it, but that is fine. However please don't insinuate that I have not considered the evidence for it. I have. That being said it was nice hearing your views (you seem quite knowledgeable about it, probably more than me).Best of luck I don't really want to discuss further, this thread is already going in circles now, so I will take my leave.

You yourself seem a quite reasonable, polite, honest and sincere person and I apologize if some of my comments have been curt. I was reading up and summarizing certain aspects of the evolutionary theory from lots of sources, a taxing enterprise, which makes it difficult to always express ideas the right way. For me, the theory of evolution is a scientific vindication of the deep continuity among life-forms, our kinship with all the living world and the idea that humans and other animals and plants are partners in a common narrative of emergent and diversifying living ecosystem rather than Man being some specially created isolate who is on a pedestal over all others and can exploit the rest of nature at will. I would have thought that Vaishnavs would be sympathetic to such a view. In Christian and Islam, the creationist movement comes from the need of maintaining the specialness of humans as the image of God and as the master of all the natural world. Certainly that is not what you agree with. So can you tell me (with quote and exegesis) which smriti writings are you using to ground your opposition to evolutionary sciences? It will also be a good way for me to understand how the Purana writings impact your theology.
I would hope that you do not leave the thread. It is only a day old and I hope to move it forward in a way that does not make it too repetitive, and keep it long lived.

 

[LuisDantas]

For further archaeological proof refer to "Forbidden Archaeology" by Michael Cremo. The book provide primary archaeological evidence published later in many scientific journals, of human artifacts and remains which date further back than current evolutionary theory can explain.

Except that Michael Cremo nor his book have no credibility whatsoever in the field of Archealogy. It is, quite simply, pseudo-science with no value except as a reminder of the importance of peer review and of checking the credentials of authors who present themselves as scientists.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/mom/groves.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbidden_Archeology
http://ncse.com/rncse/19/3/review-forbidden-archaeologys-impact

A quote from the last link:

Even if we overlook the implausibility of humans' thriving in an oxygen-starved world without available food sources, think about what it would mean to have people living on earth, eons before the first arthropods arrived. Finding fossilized humans at every level of the geologic column would not be anomalous at all. Those finds would be the rule, not the exception, and a Darwinian paradigm would have never seized a foothold to begin with.

But of all the criticisms aimed at Forbidden Archaeology, Cremo objects most to those who labeled it pseudoscience, which is understandable. Cremo and Thompson toiled for 8 years on this comprehensive reference work, and calling it a pseudoscience is the same thing as labeling it a fraud. But when I read Forbidden Archaeology's Impact's reprinted correspondence that Cremo exchanged with his sympathizers and supporters, he appears too stubborn and sanctimonious to follow scientific rules. For example, if Cremo and Thompson wanted their debut to be taken seriously, they should have first submitted their findings through an extensive peer-review process, but Cremo thinks "peer-review" simply means conspiracy and censorship. Like all creationists, Cremo's not looking for real answers - just believers.

 

[sayak83]

Thats evolution into same species einstein, you are hanging by a very loose thread here..And you are just quoting from random blogs and that is NOT science at all......Evolution is a THEORY and even darwin admitted it. Trying to fit in science inside evolution is like trying to put ocean inside a glass.
and here is the link cloning links with evolutin

http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommitte...rinaryMedicineAdvisoryCommittee/ucm127249.htm

There is no shame in admitting that evolution is a theory and there are no proofs for it.....so basically ape to human evolution is only thats happened after all these millions of years.....what a joke....evolution is for people who believe in santa claus and fairy tales

Ape is NOT a species designator. It is the designator of a family of related species. Chimpanzees (two species), Humans, Gorillas, Orangutans and several now extinct species of other apes ancestral to modern forms. So evolution from ape to ape is NOT evolution within same species. Species is defined by reproductive isolation. All examples I have cited satisfy that.
The General Theory of Relativity is also a THEORY. So is Quantum THEORY, atomic THEORY etc. In science, only the most well-supported body of knowledge and explanation is designated as theory. It is the ultimate dream of a scientist to propose a hypothesis that is accepted by the science community as a Theory. A theory is the gold-standard for scientific truth.

In regards to cloning, perhaps you should look at more recent report. 2003 is 12 years ago! Here's the recent report.
http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/SafetyHealth/AnimalCloning/ucm055512.htm

Myth: Cloning results in severely damaged animals that suffer, and continue to have health problems all their lives.
The vast majority of swine and goat clones are born healthy, grow normally, and are no more susceptible to health problems than their non-clone counterparts. During the early days of what is known as assisted reproductive technologies in livestock, veterinarians noticed that some calf and lamb fetuses grew too large during pregnancy, and had serious birth defects. This set of abnormalities is referred to as “large offspring syndrome,” or LOS. These same abnormalities have also been seen in calf and lamb clones, and have received a lot of attention because they occur at what appear to be higher rates than observed with other assisted reproductive technologies. The syndrome seems to be related to processes that take place outside the body (during the in vitro phase). As producers understand more about the cloning process, the rate at which LOS is observed in calf and lamb clones has been decreasing. The same kind of decrease in LOS rates was observed as people who used technologies such as in vitro fertilization in cattle learned more about the process. LOS hasn’t been seen in swine or goat clones.

Most clones that are normal at birth become as strong and healthy as any other young animals. Calf and lamb clones with abnormalities at birth may continue to have health problems for the first few months of life. But after the age of six months, they’re completely indistinguishable in appearance and blood measurements from conventionally bred animals of the same age.
Myth: When clones are born, they’re the same age as their donors, and don’t live long.
Clones are born the same way as other newborn animals: as babies. No one really knows what causes aging in mammals, but most scientists think it has to do with a part of the chromosome called a telomere that functions as a kind of clock in the cell. Telomeres tend to be long at birth, and shorten as the animal ages.

A study on Dolly (the famous sheep clone) showed that her telomeres were the shorter length of her (older) donor, even though Dolly was much younger. Studies of other clones have shown that telomeres in clones are shorter in some tissues in the body, and are age-appropriate in other tissues. Still other studies of clones show that telomeres are age-appropriate in all of the tissues. Despite the length of telomeres reported in different studies, most clones appear to be aging normally. In fact, the first cattle clones ever produced are alive, healthy, and are 10 years old as of January 2008.

 

[निताइ dasa]

So can you tell me (with quote and exegesis) which smriti writings are you using to ground your opposition to evolutionary sciences? It will also be a good way for me to understand how the Purana writings impact your theology.

I am really happy you understand. You also seem like a polite and sincere person who is only trying to do what you think is correct based upon your view of the world and I respect that. The main basis for our opposition is the words of Srimad Bhagavatam and other Puranas (specifically Visnu Purana) which state that humans have been on this earth far longer than modern day biology predicts. The Bhagavatam asserts that species did not diverge from a common ancestor but were originally created by Brahmadev and have been on this earth for all 4 yugas (Satya, Treta, Dwapura and Kali) which span. In the other thread I posted the exact verses from Bhagavatam which shows this (they are found in 6th Chapter, 6th Canto). Please refer there as I do not want to post here.

have no credibility whatsoever in the field of Archealogy.

generalisation I am afraid. Why has Cremo been invited to speak at multiple archaeological conferences and lectures if his work has no credibility?

A quote from the last link:

Obviously there is huge criticisms of the book (which Cremo expected) because it goes completely against what modern day science believes. This would've been similar to the resistance against Darwin's ideas by the scientific community when he first propagated them. The think is, no matter how hated the idea is, if it is rooted in scientific evidence it must be accepted or at least considered. That is the open mind of science. Many of the evidences that Cremo presents are valid (or at least they appear to be), and so to dismiss the whole book as "pseudo-science" is really illogical. I will also present some positive reviews:

"Michael Cremo and Richard Thompson are therefore to be congratulated on spending eight years producing the only definitive, precise, exhaustive and complete record of practically all the fossil finds of man, regardless of whether they fit the established scientific theories or not. To say that research is painstaking is a wild understatement. No other book of this magnitude and calibre exists. It should be compulsory reading for every first year biology, archaeology and anthropology student--and many others too!
The 914 excellently produced pages of Forbidden Archeology take us through so many anomalies of fossil man--anomalies only according to modern theories that unless every single one of these finds is incorrectly dated, documented and observed, man’s present scientific theories of his own origins must now be radically re-assessed. If only one human fossil or artifact of the 50 or so meticulously documented and discussed from the Miocene or early Pliocene is correctly dated then everything concerning the theories of human origins must return to the melting pot. And the evidence is that a large proportion of them are entirely credible. "

and

"This book made me want to major in archaeology - unfortunately, many of the college professors out there are adamant against anything outside of the timeline that they believe is set in stone, even now, almost a dozen years after this book was first published. This book contains numerous examples of disregarded evidence just because it did not fit into the preconceived notions of how things progressed, illustrating how anthropology and archaeology are not 'sciences' if one repeatedly disregards evidence in favor of sticking with hypothesis that have already been established - and in many cases, without concrete evidence to begin with. Excellent book for anyone interested in anthropology, archaeology, human origins"

So please please please, for the sake of scientific integrity, read the arguments in the book, and make a refutation of them, instead of attacking the authors and labeling them as "non-credible" simply because they disagree with dominant scientific ideology.

 

[LuisDantas]

Sorry, Dasa. Archaeology is not a free-for-all. Peer-review and the scientific method can't be made without just because.

 

[kalyan]

So I would take 'Evolution is without evidence' is the proven point of this discussion as there is no evolved species like from frog developing wings and becoming a bird and the likes.....even billions of years of evolution could not make crocodile develop wings and fly......SAD....Not to mention taking into life spans of chimpis and humans, it makes evolution more a MYTH which has no proven SCIENTIFIC BASIS

/EndThread

 

[निताइ dasa]

In Christian and Islam, the creationist movement comes from the need of maintaining the specialness of humans as the image of God and as the master of all the natural world. Certainly that is not what you agree with

No, never. The type of species is simply the covering known as the body. Within each of these bodies (whether it is a dog, ape, human or even a worm), the jivatma alongside the Supreme Lord Sri Hari (as the supersoul resides). That is why no-one is lower or higher, every living being is worthy of respect. That is why Sri Krsna says in Gita, "Pandit sama darsinah" (the wise see these entities as equal). This principle of Ahimsa is central to all nearly all schools of Hinduism including us. That being said, Human birth is unique because only humans have the sufficient consciousness development to utilize the power of "vivek" (discrimination). Only humans can discriminate between the permanent (God) and the impermanent (Maya) that is why only they are fit to attain Moksha. This is confirmed in Sripad Sankaracharya's Vivekachudamani (verse 3):

"durlabha trayamevaitad
devanugrahahetukam
manusyatvam mumuksutvam
mahapurusamsarayah"

"Very rare indeed are these three things and happen only due to the utmost Grace of God—a human birth, a burning desire for liberation, and the blessed refuge of an Mahapurusha (a realized saint)"

That is why Human Birth is praised in Sruti and Smrti. However that being said, no being deserves to be exploited by humans. Everything is for the pleasure of the Supreme Lord, and He is the only enjoyer and we are the enjoyed. This is confirmed in Isopanisad:

"Om Isavasyamidam sarvam yatkiñca jagatyam jagat
tena tyaktena bhuñjitha ma grdhah kasyasvid dhanam"

"Everything moving or non-moving is owned and pervaded by Ishwara (Sri Krsna). Therefore you should accept only what is given to you (to maintain your life) and refrain from seeking the wealth of others (i.e exploitation of others)"


That being said Lord Gauranga Mahaprabhu was so merciful He gave Krsna Prema (love of God) to even the lions, tigers and elephants in the jungles of Jarkhand by inspiring them to do Harinama Sankirtan.

So I would take 'Evolution is without evidence' is the proven point of this discussion as there is no evolved species like from frog developing wings and becoming a bird and the likes.....even billions of years of evolution could not make crocodile develop wings and fly......SAD....Not to mention taking into life spans of chimpis and humans, it makes evolution more a MYTH which has no proven SCIENTIFIC BASIS

/EndThread

@kalyan ji I can understand why you are so passionate for this topic, but I humbly request you to tone down the insults. Everyone believes what they to according to the level of faith that the Lord awakens in their heart. Even in our perceptive they may be wrong, that faith is still strengthened and provided by Sri Hari therefore we should respect that, and engage in debate respectfully so we can understand the position of others. If we cannot convince others with philosophy, let us try to do so with exemplary Vaishnav behavior. My Gurudeva once said to us, "when you go to take the association of another group who have different views to you, do not correct them, argue with them, or try to push your view upon them. Take the positive aspects of their wisdom and teachings and disregard the negative, just like a swam extracts the milk from water". Perhaps I have not followed this order as well as I could and hence I ask for forgiveness at his feet.

Let us come together in a mood of understanding rather than criticism which seeks to divide. I apologize to everyone in this thread for any offense I or (Kalyanji) may have caused We are simply trying to clarify our position according to what our Gurudeva and Purva Acharyas have taught us.

Daso smi

Nitai dasa

 

[kalyan]

No, never. The type of species is simply the covering known as the body. Within each of these bodies (whether it is a dog, ape, human or even a worm), the jivatma alongside the Supreme Lord Sri Hari (as the supersoul resides). That is why no-one is lower or higher, every living being is worthy of respect. That is why Sri Krsna says in Gita, "Pandit sama darsinah" (the wise see these entities as equal). This principle of Ahimsa is central to all nearly all schools of Hinduism including us. That being said, Human birth is unique because only humans have the sufficient consciousness development to utilize the power of "vivek" (discrimination). Only humans can discriminate between the permanent (God) and the impermanent (Maya) that is why only they are fit to attain Moksha. This is confirmed in Sripad Sankaracharya's Vivekachudamani (verse 3):

"durlabha trayamevaitad
devanugrahahetukam
manusyatvam mumuksutvam
mahapurusamsarayah"

"Very rare indeed are these three things and happen only due to the utmost Grace of God—a human birth, a burning desire for liberation, and the blessed refuge of an Mahapurusha (a realized saint)"

That is why Human Birth is praised in Sruti and Smrti. However that being said, no being deserves to be exploited by humans. Everything is for the pleasure of the Supreme Lord, and He is the only enjoyer and we are the enjoyed. This is confirmed in Isopanisad:

"Om Isavasyamidam sarvam yatkiñca jagatyam jagat
tena tyaktena bhuñjitha ma grdhah kasyasvid dhanam"

"Everything moving or non-moving is owned and pervaded by Ishwara (Sri Krsna). Therefore you should accept only what is given to you (to maintain your life) and refrain from seeking the wealth of others (i.e exploitation of others)"


That being said Lord Gauranga Mahaprabhu was so merciful He gave Krsna Prema (love of God) to even the lions, tigers and elephants in the jungles of Jarkhand by inspiring them to do Harinama Sankirtan.

@kalyan ji I can understand why you are so passionate for this topic, but I humbly request you to tone down the insults. Everyone believes what they to according to the level of faith that the Lord awakens in their heart. Even in our perceptive they may be wrong, that faith is still strengthened and provided by Sri Hari therefore we should respect that, and engage in debate respectfully so we can understand the position of others. If we cannot convince others with philosophy, let us try to do so with exemplary Vaishnav behavior. My Gurudeva once said to us, "when you go to take the association of another group who have different views to you, do not correct them, argue with them, or try to push your view upon them. Take the positive aspects of their wisdom and teachings and disregard the negative, just like a swam extracts the milk from water". Perhaps I have not followed this order as well as I could and hence I ask for forgiveness at his feet.

Let us come together in a mood of understanding rather than criticism which seeks to divide. I apologize to everyone in this thread for any offense I or (Kalyanji) may have caused We are simply trying to clarify our position according to what our Gurudeva and Purva Acharyas have taught us.

Daso smi

Nitai dasa

Nitai, its your perception that somehow you felt tone is harsh, but I was just having a discussion. Is the question of crocodile developing wings not valid ?

 

[निताइ dasa]

Nitai, its your perception that somehow you felt tone is harsh, but I was just having a discussion. Is the question of crocodile developing wings not valid ?

It is valid to them prabhuji but not valid for us. Whether something is valid or not depends on one's beliefs and how one views the world around them. We Vaishnavs have full faith in the words of our purva acharayas and shastra and they is why to us this theory appears illogical, because it contradicts our view of the world. However to them, who don't have such faith in scripture they must accept the other evidences given to them, and therefore they are fully justified in believing it. I must admit Darwin's theory is logically consistent with the definitions and mechanisms it sets out. Validity is subjective and its criteria changes from one group to another. I will give Sri Krsna's words from Gita:

"yo yo yam yam tanum bhaktah
sraddhayarcitum icchati
tasya tasyacalam sraddham
tam eva vidadhamy aham"

"I am in everyone's heart as the Supersoul. As soon as one desires to worship whatever they desire (i.e beliefs/demigod of worship etc), I make his faith steady so that he can devote himself to some particular deity (or belief)."

My point is, let us come to an empathetic understanding, otherwise both sides will continue arguing forever. If they understand our side and we understand their side then there can be peace between us. Haribol!

 

[Aupmanyav]

Furthermore if humans did branch from a common ancestor (like the Homo Erectus for instance) why can we not find Homo Erectus organisms alive today? Surely there were some individuals from a population who were not exposed to selective environmental conditions and hence did not evolve. Why have they "magically" died out? Lastly the biggest problem I have with evolution is it is essentially based upon chance. Mutations are by nature are completely random and therefore to attribute to them a directional change which would result the formation of more complex and diverse species is to me a huge extrapolation.

Old species die out and are replaced by new, this is the way of the world. Where are the Neanderthals now? Here is a list of animals which have gone extinct in recent times: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_extinctions (look for 20th and 21st Century)

Declared extinct after 2010:
2011 - The eastern cougar was declared extinct.
2011 - The western black rhinoceros was hunted to extinction.
2012 - The Japanese river otter (Lutra lutra whiteneyi) has been declared extinct by the country’s Ministry of the Environment, after not being seen for more than 30 years.
2012 - "Lonesome George," the last known specimen of the Pinta Island tortoise died on 24 June 2012.
2013 - The Cape Verde giant skink is declared extinct.
2013 - The Formosan clouded leopard, previously endemic to the island of Taiwan, is officially declared extinct.
2013 - The Scioto madtom, a species of fish, is declared extinct.
2014 - Acalypha wilderi has been declared extinct.
2014 - The Bermuda saw-whet owl has been declared extinct.
2015 - Eastern cougar has been declared extinct.

Perhaps Cremo is invited to Christian universities because his views align with Creationism. All sorts of things happen in the world.

"Michael Cremo is a Vedic creationist responsible for perpetuating much woo and fodder for conspiracy theorists, particularly through his book Forbidden Archaeology, which he co-wrote with Richard L. Thompson, another Vedic creationist. He believes that modern humans, i.e. Homo sapiens, have lived on the earth for billions of years with little or no alteration to their biological characteristics. He sometimes writes books on Hindu spirituality under the pseudonym of Drutakarma Dasa.

According to his own autobiography, Cremo has no scientific education (bet you never would have expected that). .. Cremo is also a "associate member of the Bhaktivedanta Institute specializing in history and philosophy of science." The BI is "the scientific research branch of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness", according to his own website." http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Michael_Cremo

Brother Hare-Krishna. Nitai or non-Nitai?

 

[Aupmanyav]

And Hare-Krishnas pay for the expenses. I understand.

He took a creative writing course in school. "The next year I entered George Washington University. Over the next two years, I became immersed in the counterculture .." http://www.mcremo.com/cremo.htm

He does not specify the subject he was studying at George Washington University. Did he complete an Associate course or not even that?

 

[निताइ dasa]

And Hare-Krishnas pay for the expenses. I understand.

I don't really want to respond to your condescending tone. Furthermore I find the links you posted quite hurtful, quoting Prabhupada so quote of context to the point of distorting his teachings. No true Hindu would do this to another. Oh Nitai what has the world come to?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Nitai Dasa ji, this is Same Faith forum. We are allowed to discuss things here. And if we both are Hindus then how does it become necessary for me to toe your line? Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is OK for Hare-Krishnas but not for me, and Nitai certainly not. Not my view to make every one equal to deities. By thinking himself to be Radha, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu acquired female qualities. I would not like that to happen to Indian youth. We have Pakiistan and China waiting for us to get weakened. I prefer the other images. I do not want my deities to be sissies.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I hope Saint Dawkins doesn't read this thread.