Popular Posts

Wednesday, July 29, 2009

Darwin Is Dead!-Darwinism Extinct

Excerpted from "Life Comes From Life"

From the morning walk of April 19, 1973 in Los Angeles, California
On the walk are Srila Prabhupada, Dr. Singh (HH Bhakti-Svarup Damodar Maharaja), Karandhara Dasa, Brahmananda Dasa, and other students.

Darwinism Extinct
Prabhupada. This material world is a composition of three qualities—sattva, rajas and tamas (goodness, passion and ignorance)—which are working everywhere. These three qualities are present in various proportions in all species of life. For example, some trees produce nice fruit, while others are simply meant for fuel.

This is due to the association of particular qualities of nature. Among animals also, these three qualities are present. The cow is in the quality of goodness, the lion in passion, and the monkey in ignorance. According to Darwin, Darwin's father is a monkey. [Laughter.] He has theorized foolishly.
Dr. Singh. Darwin has said that some species become extinct in the struggle for survival. Those which are capable of surviving will survive, but those which are not will become extinct. So he says survival and extinction go side by side.
P. Nothing is extinct. The monkey is not extinct. Darwin's immediate forefather, the monkey, is still existing.
Karandhara. Darwin said there must be a natural selection. But selection means choice. So who P. That must be a person. Who is allowing someone to survive and someone to be killed? There must be some authority with discretion to give such an order. That is our first proposition. Who that authority is, is explained in Bhagavad-gita. Krsna says, mayƤdhyaksena prakrti: "Nature is working under My supervision." (Bg. 9.10)

S. Darwin also says that the different species were not created simultaneously, but evolved gradually.
P.Then what is his explanation for how the process of evolution began?
K. Modern proponents of Darwinism say that the first living organism was created chemically.
P And I say to them, "If life originated from chemicals, and if your science is so advanced, then why can't you create life biochemically in your laboratories?"

In the Future
K.They say they will create life in the future.
P. What future? When this crucial point is raised, they reply, "We shall do it in the future." Why in the future? That is nonsense. "Trust no future, however pleasant." If they are so advanced, they must demonstrate now how life can be created from chemicals. Otherwise what is the meaning of their advancement? They are talking nonsense.
K. They say that they are right on the verge of creating life.
P. That's only a different way of saying the same thing: "In the future." The scientists must admit that they still do not know the origin of life. Their claim that they will soon prove a chemical origin of life is something like paying someone with a postdated check. Suppose I give you a postdated check for ten thousand dollars but I actually have no money.

What is the value of that check? Scientists are claiming that their science is wonderful, but when a practical example is wanted, they say they will provide it in the future. Suppose I say that I possess millions of dollars, and when you ask me for some money I say, "Yes, I will now give you a big postdated check. Is that all right?"

If you are intelligent, you will reply, "At present give me at least five dollars in cash so I can see something tangible." Similarly, the scientists cannot produce even a single blade of grass in their laboratories, yet they are claiming that life is produced from chemicals. What is this nonsense? Is no one questioning this?
K. They say that life is produced by chemical laws.
P. As soon as there is a law, we must take into consideration that someone made the law. Despite all their so-called advancement, the scientists in their laboratories cannot produce even a blade of grass. What kind of scientists are they?
They say that in the ultimate analysis, everything came from matter. Living matter came from nonliving matter.
P. Then where is this living matter coming from now? Do the scientists say that life came from matter in the past but does not at the present? Where is the ant coming from now—from the dirt?

No comments: