Flawed Big Bang Theory and Darwin's evolution theory

Big Bang Theory Is As Flawed as Modern Cosmologists and Darwin's followers of creation-

As per so called modern scientists, the Big Bang theory is the prevailing cosmological model for the early development of the universe. The key idea is that the universe is expanding. Consequently, the universe was denser and hotter in the past. Moreover, the Big Bang model suggests that at some moment all of space was contained in a single point, which is considered the beginning of the universe. Modern measurements place this moment at approximately 13.8 billion years ago (billions of years taking cue from Srimad Bhagwad Gita – Before 19th century scientists used to rely on earth being thousands of years old, following biblical’s arc theory), which is thus considered the age of the universe based on citings from Vedas.

Thereafter scientists devised that after the initial expansion, the universe cooled sufficiently to allow the formation of subatomic particles, including protons, neutrons, and electrons. Though simple atomic nuclei formed within the first three minutes after the Big Bang, thousands of years passed before the first electrically neutral atoms formed. The majority of atoms produced by the Big Bang were hydrogen, along with helium and traces of lithium. Giant clouds of these primordial elements later coalesced through gravity to form stars and galaxies, and the heavier elements were synthesized either within stars or during supernova.

We Are Taught Wrong Theories on Creation of Universe

Big Bang Theory is False and Full of Flaws
The Somehow Theory of Modern Science extended even to cosmology which Scientists should be ashamed of before claiming to be experts of Science and Cosmology
The recent scientific theory of creation is that there was a big bang, which created the material elements (earth, water, gases, chemicals etc..). These material elements then somehow combined together and created the various planets somehow and one species of living beings somehow. These living beings then somehow changed their bodies and became another species, and so on. In this way the millions of species of living beings we know of were created – SOMEHOW ?!. These unproven theories are backed by another theory termed as evolution, thus one body changes into another and so on.

The scientific theory of creation leaves many unanswered questions.

• What or who caused the big bang?
• How earth, water, gases, chemicals were created, when there was nothing to create them?
• If a big bang created all the Universes and millions of Planets. Then according to this scientific logic, it should be possible to create a small planet or something with a small bang. Can any scientist create anything with a bang?
• Some chemicals mixed together created the first living being. The scientists have all the chemicals in the world; can they mix them and create a living being?
• What gave life to those living beings, how they came to know their natural simulation?
• All the millions of planets are shaped like a sphere, is this by chance?
• The sun has been giving exact amount of sunlight to the various planets including Earth for millions of years. Is this by chance? Too much sun or too little can destroy all life on Earth. Even +/-10 percent rise/drop of sudden change in temperature cause huge climatic change in Earth. How is this managed so precisely by whom?
• If Evolution theory is correct – then why not even single intermediate staged fossil of at least one of the species were found by these Scientists or Physicists – that could have shown that evolution lead to species changing shapes.

It is already shown in previous posts that Evolution is/was a convenient way for the Scientists to shy away from logical explanation of emergence of such vast variety of animals, plants and aquatic lives.

Click on the Big Bang image below for enlarged view

Top Big Bang rebuttals highlighted by Michael Turner

(1) Static universe models fit observational data better than expanding universe models.
Static universe models match most observations with no adjustable parameters. The Big Bang can match each of the critical observations, but only with adjustable parameters, one of which (the cosmic deceleration parameter) requires mutually exclusive values to match different tests. Without ad hoc theorizing, this point alone falsifies the Big Bang. Even if the discrepancy could be explained, Occam’s razor favors the model with fewer adjustable parameters – the static universe model.
(2) The microwave “background” makes more sense as the limiting temperature of space heated by starlight than as the remnant of a fireball.
The expression “the temperature of space” is the title of chapter 13 of Sir Arthur Eddington’s famous 1926 work, Eddington calculated the minimum temperature any body in space would cool to, given that it is immersed in the radiation of distant starlight. With no adjustable parameters, he obtained 3°K (later refined to 2.8°K ), essentially the same as the observed, so-called “background”, temperature. A similar calculation, although with less certain accuracy, applies to the limiting temperature of intergalactic space because of the radiation of galaxy light.  So the intergalactic matter is like a “fog”, and would therefore provide a simpler explanation for the microwave radiation, including its blackbody-shaped spectrum.
Such a fog also explains the otherwise troublesome ratio of infrared to radio intensities of radio galaxies. The amount of radiation emitted by distant galaxies falls with increasing wavelengths, as expected if the longer wavelengths are scattered by the intergalactic medium. For example, the brightness ratio of radio galaxies at infrared and radio wavelengths changes with distance in a way which implies absorption. Basically, this means that the longer wavelengths are more easily absorbed by material between the galaxies. But then the microwave radiation (between the two wavelengths) should be absorbed by that medium too, and has no chance to reach us from such great distances, or to remain perfectly uniform while doing so. It must instead result from the radiation of microwaves from the intergalactic medium. This argument alone implies that the microwaves could not be coming directly to us from a distance beyond all the galaxies, and therefore that the Big Bang theory cannot be correct.
None of the predictions of the background temperature based on the Big Bang were close enough to qualify as successes, the worst being Gamow’s upward-revised estimate of 50°K made in 1961, just two years before the actual discovery. Clearly, without a realistic quantitative prediction, the Big Bang’s hypothetical “fireball” becomes indistinguishable from the natural minimum temperature of all cold matter in space. But none of the predictions, which ranged between 5°K and 50°K, matched observations. And the Big Bang offers no explanation for the kind of intensity variations with wavelength seen in radio galaxies.
(3) Element abundance predictions using the Big Bang require too many adjustable parameters to make them work.
The universal abundances of most elements were predicted correctly by Hoyle in the context of the original Steady State cosmological model. This worked for all elements heavier than lithium. The Big Bang co-opted those results and concentrated on predicting the abundances of the light elements. Each such prediction requires at least one adjustable parameter unique to that element prediction. Often, it’s a question of figuring out why the element was either created or destroyed or both to some degree following the Big Bang. When you take away these degrees of freedom, no genuine prediction remains. The best the Big Bang can claim is consistency with observations using the various ad hoc models to explain the data for each light element. Examples: for helium-3; for lithium-7; for deuterium; for beryllium; and for overviews.
(4) The universe has too much large scale structure (interspersed “walls” and voids) to form in a time as short as 10-20 billion years.
The average speed of galaxies through space is a well-measured quantity. At those speeds, galaxies would require roughly the age of the universe to assemble into the largest structures (superclusters and walls) we see in space, and to clear all the voids between galaxy walls. But this assumes that the initial directions of motion are special, e.g., directed away from the centers of voids. To get around this problem, one must propose that galaxy speeds were initially much higher and have slowed due to some sort of “viscosity” of space. To form these structures by building up the needed motions through gravitational acceleration alone would take in excess of 100 billion years.
(5) The average luminosity of quasars must decrease with time in just the right way so that their average apparent brightness is the same at all redshifts, which is exceedingly unlikely.
According to the Big Bang theory, a quasar at a redshift of 1 is roughly ten times as far away as one at a redshift of 0.1. (The redshift-distance relation is not quite linear, but this is a fair approximation.) If the two quasars were intrinsically similar, the high redshift one would be about 100 times fainter because of the inverse square law. But it is, on average, of comparable apparent brightness. This must be explained as quasars “evolving” their intrinsic properties so that they get smaller and fainter as the universe evolves. That way, the quasar at redshift 1 can be intrinsically 100 times brighter than the one at 0.1, explaining why they appear (on average) to be comparably bright. It isn’t as if the Big Bang has a reason why quasars should evolve in just this magical way. But that is required to explain the observations using the Big Bang interpretation of the redshift of quasars as a measure of cosmological distance.
By contrast, the relation between apparent magnitude and distance for quasars is a simple, inverse-square law in alternative cosmologies. Arp shows great quantities of evidence that large quasar redshifts are a combination of a cosmological factor and an intrinsic factor, with the latter dominant in most cases. Most large quasar redshifts (e.g., z > 1) therefore have little correlation with distance. A grouping of 11 quasars close to NGC 1068, having nominal ejection patterns correlated with galaxy rotation, provides further strong evidence that quasar redshifts are intrinsic.
(6) The ages of globular clusters appear older than the universe.
Even though the data have been stretched in the direction toward resolving this since the “top ten” list first appeared, the error bars on the Hubble age of the universe (12±2 Gyr) still do not quite overlap the error bars on the oldest globular clusters (16±2 Gyr). Astronomers have studied this for the past decade, but resist the “observational error” explanation because that would almost certainly push the Hubble age older (as Sandage has been arguing for years), which creates several new problems for the Big Bang. In other words, the cure is worse than the illness for the theory. In fact, a new, relatively bias-free observational technique has gone the opposite way, lowering the Hubble age estimate to 10 Gyr, making the discrepancy worse again.
(7) The local streaming motions of galaxies are too high for a finite universe that is supposed to be everywhere uniform.
In the early 1990s, we learned that the average redshift for galaxies of a given brightness differs on opposite sides of the sky. The Big Bang interprets this as the existence of a puzzling group flow of galaxies relative to the microwave radiation on scales of at least 130 Mpc. Earlier, the existence of this flow led to the hypothesis of a “Great Attractor” pulling all these galaxies in its direction. But in newer studies, no backside infall was found on the other side of the hypothetical feature. Instead, there is streaming on both sides of us out to 60-70 Mpc in a consistent direction relative to the microwave “background”. The only Big Bang alternative to the apparent result of large-scale streaming of galaxies is that the microwave radiation is in motion relative to us. Either way, this result is trouble for the Big Bang.
(8) Invisible dark matter of an unknown but non-baryonic nature must be the dominant ingredient of the entire universe.
The Big Bang requires sprinkling galaxies, clusters, superclusters, and the universe with ever-increasing amounts of this invisible, not-yet-detected “dark matter” to keep the theory viable. Overall, over 90% of the universe must be made of something we have never detected. By contrast, Milgrom’s model (the alternative to “dark matter”) provides a one-parameter explanation that works at all scales and requires no “dark matter” to exist at any scale. (I exclude the additional 50%-100% of invisible ordinary matter inferred to exist by, e.g., MACHO studies.) Some physicists don’t like modifying the law of gravity in this way, but a finite range for natural forces is a logical necessity (not just theory) spoken of since the 17th century.
Milgrom’s model requires nothing more than that. Milgrom’s is an operational model rather than one based on fundamentals. But it is consistent with more complete models invoking a finite range for gravity. So Milgrom’s model provides a basis to eliminate the need for “dark matter” in the universe at any scale. This represents one more Big Bang “fudge factor” no longer needed.
(9) The most distant galaxies in the Hubble Deep Field show insufficient evidence of evolution, with some of them having higher redshifts (z = 6-7) than the highest-redshift quasars.
The Big Bang requires that stars, quasars and galaxies in the early universe be “primitive”, meaning mostly metal-free, because it requires many generations of supernovae to build up metal content in stars. But the latest evidence suggests lots of metal in the “earliest” quasars and galaxies. Moreover, we now have evidence for numerous ordinary galaxies in what the Big Bang expected to be the “dark age” of evolution of the universe, when the light of the few primitive galaxies in existence would be blocked from view by hydrogen clouds.
(10) If the open universe we see today is extrapolated back near the beginning, the ratio of the actual density of matter in the universe to the critical density must differ from unity by just a part in 1059. Any larger deviation would result in a universe already collapsed on itself or already dissipated.
Inflation failed to achieve its goal when many observations went against it. To maintain consistency and salvage inflation, the Big Bang has now introduced two new adjustable parameters: (1) the cosmological constant, which has a major fine-tuning problem of its own because theory suggests it ought to be of order 10120, and observations suggest a value less than 1; and (2) “quintessence” or “dark energy”. This latter theoretical substance solves the fine-tuning problem by introducing invisible, undetectable energy sprinkled at will as needed throughout the universe to keep consistency between theory and observations. It can therefore be accurately described as “the ultimate fudge factor”.
Anyone doubting the Big Bang in its present form (which includes most astronomy-interested people outside the field of astronomy, according to one recent survey) would have good cause for that opinion and could easily defend such a position. This is a fundamentally different matter than proving the Big Bang did not happen, which would be proving a negative – something that is normally impossible. (E.g., we cannot prove that Santa Claus does not exist.) The Big Bang, much like the Santa Claus hypothesis, no longer makes testable predictions wherein proponents agree that a failure would falsify the hypothesis. Instead, the theory is continually amended to account for all new, unexpected discoveries. Indeed, many young scientists now think of this as a normal process in science! They forget or were never taught that a model has value only when it can predict new things that differentiate the model from chance and from other models before the new things are discovered. Explanations of new things are supposed to flow from the basic theory itself with at most an adjustable parameter or two, and not from add-on bits of new theory.

The entire rebuttal section of Mr Turner is filled with contradictions

If you suggest controlling the parameters of Universe and then further adjusting it even by other means of formation of new and old galaxies – then one basic principle of driving force he is missing…who is controller and who is adjuster ? How can it be logical to suggest theories for infinite occurrences with finite mediums and sources ? When there are billions of creations/annihilations of stars, galaxies, universes happening at a time then how can one-logic-fits-for-all work here – when there are endless different and unique compositions of elements, chemicals resulting in each of the phenomena?
The further rebuttals on logics explained by Mr Turner are basics of Science, some of them, we see everyday in our lives and experiments.
Srimad Bhagvatam is one of the greatest Puran which cover creation of Universes, planets, living beings and dwell into even their destructions.
There are billions of Universes, galaxies with trillions of planets – each occurring under unique set of circumstances. A common man with limited set of materialistic features can only subscribe to theories of dark energy and evolution – as it is impossible to reveal such distant secrets of cosmos with limited mental ability, devoid of consciousness.

Now when the above material science fails, Science of Consciousness takes over.

Lord Krishn in Srimad Bhagvatam clearly states that the knowledge which is relevant to earthly people will be revealed to them – so that they move to higher planets with their good Karmas. On the same lines, the Supreme Godhead suggest not to use your mind while researching for things which are beyond human beings. Submit your mind to Lord Krishn and then began your expedition.
While Vishnu is asleep, a lotus sprouts of his navel (note that navel is the root of creation!). Inside this lotus, Brahma resides. Brahma represents the universe which we all live in, and it is this Brahma who creates life forms.

Click on the Navel of Vishnu (Big Bang) image below for enlarged view

Brahma being controller, represents our universe which has birth and death, (a big bang and) a big crunch from a navel singularity. Vishnu being protector, represents the eternity that lies beyond our universe which has no birth or death and that which is eternal! Many such universes like ours exist in Vishnu.
Vedas say that thousands of brahmas have passed away!  In other words, this is not the first time universe has been created.
This cosmic creation is 155 trillion years old – 1000’s of Brahmas means – 1000’s X 2 X 155 trillion years of creations have passed
“The Hindu dharm (Sanatan dharm) is the only faith in the world dedicated to the idea that the Cosmos itself undergoes an immense, indeed an infinite, number of deaths and rebirths. It is the only dharm in which the time scales goes beyond those of modern scientific cosmology. Its cycles run from our ordinary day and night to a day and night of Brahma, 8.64 billion years long. Longer than the age of the Earth or the Sun and about half the time since the Big Bang or creation. And there are much longer time scales still.” A Modern Physicist
But still to revoke some of the basic apprehensions, Lord Krishn gave great insights through Sukhdev Ji in Srimad Bhagvatam.

• The total lifespan of the Universe is 311 trillion and 40 Billion years. This Universe is 155.522 trillion years old and it will end in 155.518 trillion years time. This calculation is based on the life of Brahma.
• There are millions of Universes with millions of Planets, with living beings. This Planet Earth is simply a drop in the ocean of Planets.
• All Universes have life, are closed, of different size and properties.
• The whole material creation with Millions of Universes constitutes just a quarter of creation. The other three quarters of creation is Spiritual, called Vaikuntha.
• During the lifetime of each Universe, there are partial creations and annihilations. At the beginning of each day of Brahma there is creation and at the end of each day there is partial annihilation. One day of Brahma is 4.32 Billion years; the night is also of the same duration. We are currently half way through the current day of Brahma, thus we have existed for approximately 2.16 Billions years in the current small cycle.

There are 8.4 million species of living beings in the whole of creation.
    900,000 species of aquatic
    2,000,000 species of plants
    1,100,000 species of insects
    1,000,000 species of birds
    3,000,000 species of beasts
    400,000 species of human beings

Not all these species are present on this planet. There are 4 ages or Yugas in which we keep circulating one after another.

Satya Yuga: The age of the truth and true religion. Everyone in the world is truthful and follower of the only religion in the world, the Vedic religion. The yuga (age) lasts 1.728 million years and the lifespan of humans is up to 100,000 years.
Treta Yuga: The introduction of ignorance takes place in this age. The Vedic religion is the only one in the world. The yuga (age) lasts 1.296 million years and the lifespan of humans is up to 10,000 years.
Dvapara Yuga: Increased decline in the truth and religious values takes effect in this age. The Vedic religion is the only one in the world. The yuga lasts 864,000 years and the lifespan of humans is 1,000 years.
Kali Yuga: The age of irreligion and ignorance. Lifespan of 100 years, later at the end of Kaliyuga only 12 years. There is complete decline in religious principles. In the first few thousand years there are many religions, which will gradually completely disappear from the face of the Earth one by one. Only the Vedic religion will survive, but there will be very few followers. By 15,000 years into Kali Yuga, 99.9% of the humans in the world will become atheistic. Things will get so bad in Kali Yuga such that parents will eat their own children. There would be no family tradition – the piouness among parents to children would diminish and they would soon behave like animals. Corruption, loot, deceit, hatred, animosity would be some of the traits of respectable human beings. We are currently 5000 years into Kali Yuga.
The knowledge of Science of Consciousness from Lord Krishn has 1000’s of factual evidences found today in the museums world over in the form of bones, skulls, artifacts, tools used by humans spanning into millions of years, further proving that civilized humans did existed for millions of years.

Till 18th century no Scientist talked with conviction about World being round, billions of years old – leave alone talking about Universes, they didn’t had completely translated Vedas at that time to suggest existence of Universes with scientific proofs.

But later after lifting Vedic theories and Srimad Bhagvatam concepts they changed their stance. So indeed, Human race being millions or even billions of years old as informed to all of us in Srimad Bhagvatam, is true.

What Does the Vedic Scriptures State about the Age of this Universe and Humans.

This Universe has existed for 155.522 trillion years and this is just in the current cycle of creation and annihilation. Before this cycle there were countless other cycles and after this cycle which will end in 155.518 trillion years time. There will be countless other cycles. The cycle of creation and annihilation is based on the life of Brahma, the engineer of the Universe. At the beginning of each day of Brahma, he creates everything in this Universe and then at the end of each day, there is partial annihilation Each day (12 hours) of Brahma is 4.32 billion years. Brahma lives for 311 trillion and 40 billion years, after this time there is complete annihilation of this Universe and the current Brahma dies. Then there is another Brahma and cycle repeats itself. This Universe is the smallest in Gods creation. There are other Universes, which are thousands and even millions of times bigger than this Universe.
Within each day of Brahma, there are 14 Manus. We descend from the 7th Manu. Manu is the first man created by Brahma, and his wife, the first woman is called Satarupa.
There is a vast difference between the teachings of the Vedic scriptures and non-Vedic scriptures. The Vedic scriptures are eternal and the Vedic knowledge comes from God himself. The fact that the Vedic scriptures are the oldest on the Planet proves that it’s the absolute truth. And time and again theories of modern scientists fall flat in front of great teachings of Vedas and Lord Krishn.

source-haribhakta.com

            

SCIENCE OF CONSCIOUSNESS,MIND,SPIRIT,FIVE ELEMENTS,MANY EARTH,UNIVERSE

IS THIS EVOLUTION OR INVOLUTION -
Per  Darwinian account that humans like us came into existence about 100,000 years ago,from apelike ancestors. But the Vedic literature gives us another account of human origins worth discussing.In fact Humans or for any creatures do not evolve from one another or from lower to higher species but come down from spirit.
Per Puranas, bhagvatpurana etc,all creatures including humans have existed on earth for vast periods of cyclical time. The basic unit of this cyclical time is the day of Brahma, which lasts for 4.32 billion years. The day of Brahma is followed by a night of Brahma, lasts for 4.32 billion years. The days follow the nights endlessly and vice versa. According to the Puranic cosmological calendar, the current day of Brahma began about 2 billion years ago. One of the forefathers of humankind, Svayambhuva Manu ruled during that time, and the Bhagavata Purana (Shrimad Bhagavatam 6.4.1) explains that-: “The human beings  were created during the reign of Svayambhuva Manu.” Therefore, a Vedic archeologist might expect to find evidence for a human presence going that far back in time. In a book by Michael A. Cremo- Forbidden Archeology, coauthored by Richard L. Thompson (Sadaputa Dasa) documented extensive evidence, in the form of human skeletons, human footprints, and human artifacts, showing that humans like ourselves have inhabited the earth for hundreds of millions of years, just as the Puranas tell us. This evidence is not very well known because of a process of knowledge filtration that operates in the scientific world. Evidence that contradicts the Darwinian theory of human evolution is set aside, ignored, and eventually forgotten.
In a book by Michael Cremeo-Human Devolution,evolution/devolution is explaned based on information found in the Puranas.
Before we ask the question, “Where did human beings come from?” we should first of all ask the question, “What is a human being?” Today most scientists believe that a human being is simply a combination of matter, the ordinary chemical elements. This assumption limits the kinds of explanations that can be offered for human origins.Human being is composed of three separately existing substances: matter, mind, and consciousness (or spirit). This assumption widens the circle of possible explanations.
What is MIND? a subtle material substance associated with the human organism and capable of acting on ordinary matter in ways we cannot explain by our current laws of physics. Evidence for this mind element comes from scientific research into the phenomena called by some “paranormal” or “psychical.” Here we are led into the hidden history of physics (the knowledge filtering process also operates in this field of knowledge).
We all know about  work of Pierre and Marie Curie, the husband and wife team who both received Nobel Prizes for their work in discovering radium. What we do not read in the textbooks is that the Curies were heavily involved in psychical research, were part of a  group of prominent European scientists, including other Nobel Prize winners, who were jointly conducting research into the paranormal in Paris early in the twentieth century. For two years, the group studied the Italian medium Eusapia Palladino. Historian Anna Hurwic notes in her biography of Pierre Curie (1995, p. 247), “He saw the séances as scientific experiments, tried to monitor the different parameters, took detailed notes of every observation. He was really intrigued by Eusapia Palladino.” About some séances with Eusapia, Pierre Curie wrote to physicist Georges Gouy in a letter dated July 24, 1905: “We had at the Psychology Society a few séances with the medium Eusapia Palladino. It was very interesting, and truly those phenomena that we have witnessed seemed to us to not be some magical tricks—a table lifted four feet above the floor . . . All this in a room arranged by us, with a small number of spectators all well known and without the presence of a possible accomplice.” Pierre Curie reported that on such occasions, the medium was carefully physically controlled by the scientists present. On April 14, 1906, Pierre wrote to Gouy about some further investigations he and Marie had carried out: “We had a few new ‘séances’ with Eusapia Paladina (We already had séances with her last summer). The result is that those phenomena exist for real, and I can’t doubt it any more.
Such results, and many more like them from the hidden history of physics, suggest there is associated with the human organism a mind element that can act on ordinary matter in ways we cannot easily explain by our current physical laws.
Now another evidence of energy of Mind and existnace of subtle mind- Chi Master Puts Animals To Sleep By Channeling His Energy. A True Super-Human-WATCH--

Evidence for a conscious self that can existence apart from mind (subtle matter) and ordinary matter comes from medical reports of out of body experiences (OBEs). During traumatic events such as heart attacks, blood stops flowing to the brain, and the subjects become unconscious. But some subjects report separating from their bodies at such times. They report consciously observing their own bodies. The reality of such experiences has been confirmed by medical researchers. For example, in February 2001, a team from the University of Southampton, in the United Kingdom, published a favorable study on OBEs in cardiac arrest patients in the journal Resuscitation (v. 48, pp. 149–156). The team was headed by Dr. Sam Parnia, a senior research fellow at the university. On February 16, 2001, a report published on the university’s web site said that the work of Dr. Parnia “suggests consciousness and the mind may continue to exist after the brain has ceased to function and the body is clinically dead.” This is exactly the Vedic conception. At death the conscious self leaves the body, accompanied by the subtle material covering of the mind, and then enters another body of gross matter. Memories from past lives are recorded in the mind, and may be accessed by the conscious self in its new body made of gross matter, as shown by psychiatrist Ian Stevenson’s extensive studies verifying past life memories of children.

If the human organism is composed of gross matter, mind, and consciousness (or spirit), it is natural to suppose that these elements come from reservoirs of such elements. This suggests that the cosmos is divided into regions, or levels, of gross matter, mind, and consciousness, each inhabited by beings adapted to life there. First, there is a region of pure consciousness. Consciousness, as we experience it, is individual and personal. This suggests that the original source of conscious selves is also individual and personal. So in addition to the individual units of consciousness existing in the realm of pure consciousness, there is also an original conscious being who is their source. When the fractional conscious selves give up their connection with their source, they are placed in lower regions of the cosmos predominated by either subtle material substance (mind) or gross material substance. There is thus a cosmic hierarchy of conscious beings. Accounts of this cosmic hierarchy of beings can be found not only in the Puranas but in the cosmologies of many other cultures. The cosmologies share many features. They generally include an original God inhabiting a realm of pure consciousness, a subordinate creator god inhabiting a subtle material region of the cosmos along with many kinds of demigods and demigoddesses, an earthly realm, dominated by gross matter, inhabited by humans like us.

This suggests that the universe of our experience should show signs that it was designed by a higher intelligence for accommodating human life and other forms of life. Modern cosmology does provide evidence for this. Scientists have discovered that numbers representing fundamental physical constants and ratios of natural forces appear to be finely tuned for life to exist in our universe. Astronomer Sir Martin Rees considers six of these numbers to be especially significant. In his book Just Six Numbers (2000, pp. 3–4), he says, “These six numbers constitute a ‘recipe’ for a universe. Moreover, the outcome is sensitive to their values: if any one of them were to be ‘untuned’, there would be no stars and no life
The Vedic cosmology also speaks of many universes, but all of them are designed for life, and beyond all of these material universes, with their levels of gross and subtle matter, is the level of pure consciousness, or spirit. Originally, we exist there as units of pure consciousness in harmonious connection with the supreme conscious being, known by the Sanskrit name Krishna (and by other names in other religious traditions). When we give up our willing connection with that supreme conscious being, we descend to regions of the cosmos dominated by the subtle and gross material elements, mind and matter. Forgetful of our original position, we attempt to dominate and enjoy the subtle and gross material elements. For this purpose, we are provided with bodies made of the subtle and gross material elements. The subtle material body is made up not only of mind, but of the even finer material elements, intelligence and false ego (for the sake of simplicity, I have in this discussion collapsed them into mind). The gross material body is made of earth, water, fire, air, and ether. Bodies made of these gross and subtle material elements are vehicles for conscious selves. They are designed for existence within the realms of the subtle and gross material elements. According to their degree of forgetfulness of their original nature, conscious selves receive appropriate bodily coverings. Those who are more forgetful receive bodies that cover their original consciousness to a greater degree. The original conscious being in the Vedic universe (aside from God) is Brahma, the first demigod. His body, manifested directly from Vishnu (the expansion of Krishna who controls the material universe), is made primarily of the subtle material elements. He is tasked with manifesting bodies for the other conscious selves existing at various levels of the cosmic hierarchy. From the body of Brahma come great sages, sometimes known as his mental sons, and also the first sexually reproducing pair, Svayambhuva Manu and his consort Shatarupa. The daughters of Manu become the wives of some of the sages, and they produce generations of demigods and demigoddesses, with bodies composed primarily of the subtle material energy. These demigods and demigoddesses, by their reproductive processes, produce the forms of living things, including humans, who reside on our earth planet.

In the devolution process, our original pure spiritual consciousness is covered by layers of subtle and gross material elements. But the process can be reversed. There is a kind of re-evolution by which we can free consciousness from its coverings, and restore it to its original pure state. Every great spiritual tradition has some means for accomplishing this—some form of prayer, or meditation, or yoga. In the course of chanting mantras, praying, or meditating, the covering elements are spiritualized and removed, so that one gradually comes back in touch with the original source of all conscious beings.

Please visit the Human Devolution website for more details:
http://www.humandevolution.com/
Also read- FORBIDDEN ARCHEOLOGY:
THE HIDDEN HISTORY OF THE HUMAN RACE

DEBUNKED DARVIN'S THEORY

DARWIN'S THEORY OF EVOLUTION DEBUNKED

Darwin's Theory of Evolution, as presented in his book "Origin of Species" has been widely accepted as fact, although it is based on Darwin's fallible speculations. His critics write, "If the theory of natural selection of Darwin is correct, why can't we see the intermediate forms of species, the connecting links?" Darwin did not have the answer nor the archeological evidence to back it up. Although there is ample evidence for many species, fossil records provide almost no evidence for the intermediate connecting links.
Later, scientists revised Darwin's theory with their "Punctuated Equilibrium" evolutionary theory, supposedly making evolution invisible in the fossil record. Yet this theory is not verifiable in any way and is highly speculative.

An interesting article appeared recently in Pravda, in Russia, which gives an excellent argument against Darwinism. The article follows:

---

Where Are All the Half-Evolved Dinosaurs?

BY: BABU G. RANGANATHAM

June 7, RUSSIA (PRAVDA) — Millions of people are taught that the fossil record furnishes proof of evolution. But, where are there fossils of half-evolved dinosaurs or other creatures?

The fossil record contains fossils of only complete and fully-formed species. There are no fossils of partially-evolved species to indicate that a gradual process of evolution ever occurred. Even among evolutionists there are diametrically different interpretations and reconstructions of the fossils used to support human evolution from a supposed ape-like ancestry.

Even if evolution takes millions and millions of years, we should still be able to see some stages of its process. But, we simply don't observe any partially-evolved fish, frogs, lizards, birds, dogs, cats among us. Every species of plant and animal is complete and fully-formed.

Another problem is how could partially-evolved plant and animal species survive over millions of years when their basic organs and tissues were still in the process of evolving? How, for example, were animals breathing, eating, and reproducing if there respiratory, digestive, and reproductive organs were still evolving?

In fact, precisely because of this problem more and more modern evolutionists are adopting a new theory known as Punctuated Equilibrium which says that plant and animal species evolved suddenly from one kind to another and that is why we don't see evidence of partially-evolved species in the fossil record. Of course, we have to accept their word on blind faith because there is no way to prove or disprove what they are saying. These evolutionists claim that something like massive bombardment of radiation resulted in mega mutations in species which produced "instantaneous" changes from one life form to another. The nature and issue of mutations will be discussed later and the reader will see why such an argument is not viable.

The fact that animal and plant species are found fully formed and complete in the fossil record is powerful evidence (although not proof) for creation because it is evidence that they came into existence as fully formed and complete which is possible only by creation.

Evolutionists claim that the genetic and biological similarities between species is evidence of common ancestry. However, that is only one interpretation of the evidence. Another possibility is that the comparative similarities are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes in all the various forms of life. Neither position can be scientifically proved.

Although Darwin was partially correct by showing that natural selection occurs in nature, the problem is that natural selection itself is not a creative force. Natural selection can only work with those biological variations that are possible. The evidence from genetics supports only the possibility for horizontal evolution (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, horses, cows, etc.) but not vertical evolution (i.e. from fish to human). Unless Nature has the ability to perform genetic engineering vertical evolution will not be possible.

The early grooves in the human embryo that appear to look like gills are really the early stages in the formation of the face, throat, and neck regions. The so-called "tailbone" is the early formation of the coccyx and spinal column which, because of the rate of growth being faster than the rest of the body during this stage, appears to look like a tail. The coccyx has already been proven to be useful in providing support for the pelvic muscles.

Modern science has shown that there are genetic limits to evolution or biological change in nature. Again, all biological variations, whether they are beneficial to survival or not, are possible only within the genetic potential and limits of a biological kind such as the varieties among dogs, cats, horses, cows, etc.

Variations across biological kinds such as humans evolving from ape-like creatures and apes, in turn, evolving from dog-like creatures and so on, as Darwinian evolutionary theory teaches, are not possible unless Nature has the capability of performing genetic engineering.

Biological variations are determined by the DNA or genetic code of species. The DNA molecule is actually a molecular string of various nucleic acids which are arranged in a sequence just like the letters in a sentence. It is this sequence in DNA that tells cells in the body how to construct various tissues and organs.

The common belief among evolutionists is that random mutations in the genetic code over time will produce entirely new sequences for new traits and characteristics which natural selection can then act upon resulting in entirely new species. Evolutionists consider mutations to be a form of natural genetic engineering.

However, the very nature of mutations precludes such a possibility. Mutations are accidental changes in the sequential structure of the genetic code caused by various random environmental forces such as radiation and toxic chemicals.

Almost all true mutations are harmful, which is what one would normally expect from accidents. Even if a good mutation occurred for every good one there will be thousands of harmful ones with the net result over time being disastrous for the species.

Most biological variations, however, are the result of new combinations of previously existing genes - not because of mutations.

Furthermore, mutations simply produce new varieties of already existing traits. For example, mutations in the gene for human hair may change the gene so that another type of human hair develops, but the mutations won't change the gene so that feathers or wings develop.

Sometimes mutations may trigger the duplication of already existing traits (i.e. an extra finger, toe, or even an entire head, even in another area of the body!). But mutations have no ability to produce entirely new traits or characteristics.

Young people, and even adults, often wonder how all the varieties and races of people could have descended from Adam and Eve as the Bible teaches. Well, in principle, that's no different than asking how children with different color hair (i.e., blond, brunette, brown, red ) can come from the same parents who both have black hair.

Just as some individuals today carry genes to produce descendants with different color hair and eyes, our first parents, Adam and Eve, possessed genes to produce all the varieties and races of men. You and I today may not carry the genes to produce every variety or race of humans, but Adam and Eve did possess such genes.

All varieties of humans carry the genes for the same basic traits, but not all humans carry every possible variation of those genes. For example, one person may be carrying several variations of the gene for eye color (i.e., brown, green, blue) , but someone else may be carrying only one variation of the gene for eye color (i.e., brown). Thus, both will have different abilities to affect the eye color of their offspring.

Science cannot prove we're here by creation, but neither can science prove we're here by chance or macro-evolution. No one has observed either. They are both accepted on faith. The issue is which faith, Darwinian macro-evolutionary theory or creation, has better scientific support.

What we believe about life's origins does influence our philosophy and value of life as well as our view of ourselves and others. This is no small issue!

Just because the laws of science can explain how life and the universe operate and work doesn't mean there is no Maker. Would it be rational to believe that there's no designer behind airplanes because the laws of science can explain how airplanes operate and work?

Natural laws are adequate to explain how the order in life, the universe, and even a microwave oven operates, but mere undirected natural laws can never fully explain the origin of such order.

The law of entropy in science shows that the universe does not have the ability to have sustained itself from all eternity. In other words, the universe cannot be eternal and requires a beginning.

It is only fair that school students be exposed to the scientific arguments and evidence on both sides of the creation/evolution issue.

---

REAL KNOWLEDGEWe suggest that a body of knowledge does exist which provides sufficient explanation of the nature and origin of the universe and the living organisms that inhabit it. We refer to the ancient sanskrit Vedic literatures of India, an internally and externally verifiable and consistent presentation of information. Herein we find profuse descriptions of an intelligent creator god and his creation.

Perhaps the most well known of these literatures, The Bhagavad-gita explains the nature of the conscious soul as an indweller in the bodies of various species and it's journey to other bodies after the death of it's present body according to the laws of karma. The living entity has free choice to act properly or improperly and receives the resultant good and bad reactions in terms of success and failure, happiness and distress.

Also encoded within this vast body of literature is a description of the process of bhakti-yoga, a process for obtaining enlightenment and rising beyond the ordinary platform of eating, sleeping, mating and defending. The essence of these teachings may be found in the Bhagavad-gita. Darwin Debunked top



Also available are an article and a video entitled "Scientific Verification of Vedic Knowledge."
FROM vedicsciencenet