Q: Why do you support the theory of evolution? It is a theory. It may be disproven someday.
A: Theories in science can be disproven. But when a theory has had ample opportunities to be disproven, and still has stood the test of time, then it is as good as established truth. Evolution is a ‘theory’ in that sense. There is all kinds of evidence consistent with it, and no real conflicting data that contradicts it.
Q: Michael Cremo’s book Forbidden Archeology refutes the theory of evolution.
A: The book has been called pseudo-science by mainstream archeologists. You can read more about the detailed critiques of the book and its claims on wikipedia.
Q: What is the proof of the theory of evolution? Monkeys are still on earth, so how could humans have come from monkeys?
A: Start with a group of monkeys. Suppose some of them got separated into a different environment. Through the process of genetic variation and natural selection, this second group could accumulate enough gradual changes that they could result in a new group that would no longer mate with the original group. The original group, being in the original environment, may not undergo much change. Why would the original monkeys and the new species not co-exist on earth somewhere?
Q: Why are there so many different life forms on earth if evolution is always producing better forms? If humans are the most evolved, why can’t we survive in the wild?
A: It is a mistake to think that ‘evolution’ means an overall improvement. Evolution involves an adaptation to a new environment. An organism may be well-adapted to a given environment, but it may be poorly adapted in another. We cant survive in the water- we are adapted to live on land. So humans are not ‘perfect’ – that is not the sense of the word ‘evolved’.
Q: What is the proof for evolution?
A: There is all kinds of evidence. There is evidence from the fossil record, from similarities of developing embryos across species, the presence of vestigial structures, evolution in the lab, geographic speciation, genetic similarities .. the list goes on and on. Tens of thousands of papers have been published recording all kinds of evidence.
Q: Evolution contradicts the scriptures. Our scriptures state that the lifeforms were created by the sages.
A: The scriptures do not say how they were created. Maybe the laws of evolution are the engine by which these organisms come into being.
Q: Scriptures do not mention evolution. So why should Vaishnavas accept it?
A: The scriptures do not mention electricity or smartphones. So should the Vaishnavas accept them?
Q: Electricity is not against the scriptures. Evolution is. It denies God.
A: Do the physics textbooks on electromagnetism discuss God? So should we now reject electromagnetism which is the basis for generating electricity? Why would any scientific book discuss God? And if it does not discuss God, it should be rejected?
Categories: Science
Do Vaishnavas reject jati?Any thing can come from anything under different environments?
Anything does not come from anything. Transitional fossils show a gradual evolution. Over long times – millions of years, forms can change substantially.
Kasyapa muni fathered birds, snakes and tigers. Your critique is more applicable to this account as anything is coming from a human.
Pls provide just one example of evolution in lab
Read just one of many papers in this journal
https://academic.oup.com/mbe?login=false
Or this one for research into ecology and evolution
https://www.nature.com/natecolevol/
Although evolution usually takes a very long time for significant changes, there are experiments on small organisms like bacteria in which evolution has been shown to occur in a lab. Of course evolution is simply defined as a change in the alleles of a population over time. This obviously occurs.
I’m not averse to the possibility that the Prajapatis used an evolutionary process, but how would it fit with the Bhagavatam’s description of creation? The souls are injected into the material world along with their natures and karmas from previous lives. They do not all begin as microorganisms. The Bhagavatam also describes a process of populating the world beginning with higher beings, among which are the Prajapatis themselves. So human life forms began the process. They did not gradually evolve, according to sastra.
Where in sastra does it say that all souls simultaneously start in the creation? Where does it say that in the beginning there were no microorganisms? It seems to me that you have a particular interpretation of the sastras, which I don’t share.
Maybe reading this helps
https://www.jiva.org/theory-evolution-dialogue-scientist/
And this
https://www.jiva.org/theory-evolution-throw-god/
Tusk
Thank you prabhu. I found the links helpful. I’m not suggesting that microorganisms did not exist in the beginning, but that not all souls who enter the creation have that karma. At the time of annihilation they enter Vishnu and then resume in the next creation where they left off. So some will be microorganisms but some will be humans, if it not? The Lord injects us back into the cosmos via his glance, so it seems we all emerge at the same time, but that may not be the case, it is hard to say. If we accept evolution then some souls will need to wait until the appropriate body evolves.
Not all souls are active or have bodies. They can lie dormant in prakrti for eons. This is known.
Many, with good reason, will find it easier to consider the Bhagavatam, in some regards, like the case here, to simply be an attempt by earlier, pre-scientific man to explain how diverse species arose. And subsequently dismiss it as archaic and pretty much demonstrably wrong.
I feel confident Krishna Dharma would object to such an approach, but I don’t know how T. Krsna dasa would reply to such a dismissal.
Everyone is free to think what they want. I have no desire to reply to those who dismiss the Bhagavata.
not really u can search 1000 scientists against evolution ,more and more scientists are coming up against evolution ,What about missing links? also can u provide even one observable evidence for evolution,also in the 2nd point about monkeys,enviromental factors can lead to adaptations and speciations but not change of kinds as dawkins claimed ,also evolution rejects need for a God ,and prove life came from nothing
there are channels like daily dose of wisdom and answer in genesis theyve too done good work in debunking evolution
You wrote, “not really u can search 1000 scientists against evolution ,more and more scientists are coming up against evolution”
Check this for the level of support amongst scientists for evolution. It is 97%. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_support_for_evolution
“What about missing links”?
What about them?
“can you provide even one observable evidence for evolution”
Sure. You can check papers in the two journal links I provided above.
“Environmental factors can lead to adaptations and speciations but not change of kinds as Dawkins claimed”
Dawkins? You mean Darwin? Darwin put forth the idea of speciation. And why should I believe you? You have published some papers to show that cannot happen?
“there are channels like daily dose of wisdom and answer in genesis theyve too done good work in debunking evolution”
I just looked these two youtube channels up. I will provide some information below on them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Answers_in_Genesis
Answers in genesis is a young earth creationism group. They contradict the Bhagavata which states that this kalpa is more than 4 billion years ago. I disagree with practically everything else they say.
I did not know about the daily dose of wisdom channel. It reminds me of members of some Gaudiya sects today who, pretending to be ‘spiritual scientists’, criticize science openly or compliment it in a backhanded way. The daily dose channel hosted James Tour from Rice university- who appears to be very incompetent: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvGdllx9pJU