On the other hand, there is not one scene in Kabali that shows Pa.Ranjith’s commitment to his vain enterprise. Mishmash of aerial camera work embellished with slow-motion scenes doesn’t make an engrossing film, if that’s his idea of a captivating movie, then he should consider changing his profession.
Sunday, July 24, 2016
On the other hand, there is not one scene in Kabali that shows Pa.Ranjith’s commitment to his vain enterprise. Mishmash of aerial camera work embellished with slow-motion scenes doesn’t make an engrossing film, if that’s his idea of a captivating movie, then he should consider changing his profession.
Monday, March 7, 2016
Friday, December 12, 2008
On this politically correct backdrop the fact that has been blissfully ignored is that the Hindus as an Indian majority, have always celebrated and even eulogized the achievements of Muslims in many fields. Take the case of Bollywood and the likes of Shar Rukh Khan, Salman Khan and my personal favourite Amir Khan, have always enjoyed similar success and even in some cases more than that of their Hindu counter parts, which couldn't have been possible if not for the fanfare of the Hindu majority. Mohammad Rafi is considered as one of the most melodious singer India has been blessed with and he enjoyed the same success to that of his contemporary, Kishore Kumar. Naushad, the veteran music director and A.R.Rehman, the most influential musician of our times, are both Muslims and they have always enjoyed special place in the hearts of the Indians. Let alone Indian Muslims, even the Pakistani musicians such as Adnan Sami have been heartily welcomed and celebrated by the Hindus. The Indian classical musicians, such as Ustad Bismillah Khan, Ustad Zakir Khan and his father Ustad Allah Rakha, the great Ustad Bade Ghulam Ali Khan and Parween Sultana have always enthralled the audiences with their soothing music and they always occupied similar place to that of their Hindu musicians such as Pandit Bhimsen Joshi and Pt.Hari Prasad Chaurasia.
Of the 41 Bharat Ratna recipients, the highest civilian award conferred to Indians, five of six have been awarded to the Indian Muslims and the other one went to the Pakistani national, Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan, also known as Frontier Gandhi. Moreover, three of the Indian Presidents- Dr. Zakir Hussain, Fakruddin Ali Ahmed and Dr.A.P.J Abdul Kalam, have been Muslims. Infact, Dr.Abdul Kalam has been voted the most loved president of India in a CNN poll, which would not have been possible if not for the love of majority Hindus. And finally, the Muslims have rarely been discriminated on their religious grounds in Cricket, the nations most loved sport. Mansoor Ali Khan Pataudi and Md.Azharuddin have captained India, let alone playing for the country and the contributions of Zaheer Khan, Yusuf and Irfan Pathan have been greatly appreciated by the Indian cricket lovers. From the above, we can say that Indian Muslims cannot be seen as oppressed, at least not to the level as portrayed by these critics. India firmly disagreed on George Bush's war on Iraq and a resolution was passed unanimously condemning the action of coalition forces and refused to allow the US to use its military bases and this has been barely mentioned by these critics nor has been seen as good gesture by the Islamic militant groups. And this resolution was adopted when the BJP led NDA government, considered as a communal Hindu party, was in power.
It is a common knowledge the militants groups such as JeM, LeT and Al-Qaeda have Pan-Islamic agenda, and Kashmir and Palestine are their trump cards. When it comes Kashmir, in my personal opinion, they still should be given an option for a plebiscite according the UN Mandate but a 60% turn-out to the local assembly elections, rejecting and sometimes even braving the calls of separatists, is an ample proof of their affinity towards democratic India.
And the reason why India has been often targeted is because it is a soft target, as I discussed in my previous article, thanks to our bickering and toothless politicians, who could not the address the internal security of this country despite several attacks.
And when it comes to oppression, in my view the dalits are more oppressed than the Muslims and as a Hindu I acknowledge the problem with our caste system which I strongly opposed in my one of my previous article: India needs a real change. It is time that Muslims take some responsibility for their backwardness and start addressing them and stop playing the victim.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
The memories of mayhem are indelible and the wounds of carnage are still fresh. The Mumbai attacks have re-ignited the nationalism that has been dormant since our independence and justifiably, the failure to prevent this massacre was swiftly shouldered on to our cosy politicians and never in the Indian political history are the politicians so vehemently vilified. This attack has slapped every thinking Indian on their faces, a strong gesture to wake up from the complacency and apathy and confront the stark reality of the dysfunctional and dangerous world that we are living in. The slap sobered up the drunken state that we are in and reminded us of the true colours of our lackadaisical and hopeless politicians. The slap was so resounding that we frantically started searching for answers for the thorny questions that we should have posed decades earlier. Sixty years after independence, the voter for the first time realized that he shot himself in the foot.
To give the fair share of credit to the politicians, could they have done any better? No government however efficient they may be cannot fully prevent a terrorist attack and 9/11, 7/7 and Madrid train bombings are few examples. But, there hasn’t been attacks on this scale since these happened in the west because the Western democracies have made the homeland security their national priority, and the key word here is PRIORITIZE. Where as in the case of India, some politicians can hardly spell the word let alone action it. While some of rabble-rouser politicians are busy prioritizing trivial communal issues for their narrow gains, a percentage of them have other priorities such as preparing to fight the impending criminal convictions that are pending in the higher courts. Shamefully, six of our politicians, the so-called MPs from hell (Shahbuddin, Pappu Yadav, Surajbhan Singh, Atique Ahmad, Afzal Ansari and Umakant Yadav) are serving jail sentences for crimes ranging from kidnapping to murder and they have other priorities as we can see. The Congress party’s priority since time immemorial has been to make sure that Nehru-Gandhi dynasty’s bloodline continues to lead the party and where as BJP’s priority has been to play to the tunes of the majority Hindu vote-bank .On the other hand all other parties’ sole agenda has been to make hay when the sun shines. In a nutshell our politicians cannot and did not get the priorities right.
The Indian poor is still precariously clinging to the poverty line by the barest of threads and on the other hand our judicial system is crumbling with overloaded cases that are decades old. A decent health system is virtually non-functional and beyond the reach of a common man and the police institution corrupt with thier infrastructure dilapidated and archaic. While the political system is rotten to its core, the internal security is in such a despicable state that terrorists can create havoc at their will and yet our bickering politicians have managed to prioritize none of the above. Thanks to the Mumbai attacks, the dissatisfaction among Indians has now reached overwhelming levels and it has now over flown in the form of anger and disgust against the politicians. This change is a welcome sign, a change which is long overdue. This is a slap in the faces of our imbecile politicians who for so long were in a long slumber, completely oblivious to the problems around them.
However, it would be a mistake of biblical proportions if we as citizens of India abdicate our moral responsibility for these attacks as we are to an extent accountable as any politician is. The politicians are what they are because of our vote. Like the turkeys voting for Christmas, we have voted for our politicians and we will have to bear the consequences. Moreover, the anger and frustration of the public against politicos that is so positively and frequently reiterated in the media is another positive change and the longer they manage to keep the wounds fresh the better, as this keeps our politicians under intense pressure. But amidst the fervour and jingoism, we are missing something here. The voices of change in the governance that we are frequently hearing in the aftermath of the attacks are the voices of the educated, english speaking working class which although a considerable representation, is not significant enough to bring about change in the political setup of India. More than sixty percent of Indian population live in villages, most of them unprivileged and socially deprived of the comforts we otherwise take it for granted, for whom terrorism is relatively insignificant compared to the penuries and hardship they face everyday , and their voices haven’t been heard at all amidst this turmoil. It is in fact their share of votes that actually plays a major role in deciding the fate of our country and our opportunist politicians have 60 years of experience and expertise in taking full advantage of their situation. Until, we do not succeed in bringing about a change and uplift this under privileged class, any noteworthy change in our political setup, would be a distant dream. Such an upliftment of our poor is only possible by a diligent, conscientious and visionary political governance and this is where we have the chicken and the egg problem.
It wouldn’t help to be pessimistic in these difficult times, but on an optimistic note, I have to admit that we have made a decent start. But we need to keep the crank shaft moving until it catches enough momentum so as to bring about a change we have been aspiring for so long or else we would not do be doing any justice to the innocent lives that were lost in one of the most heart-breaking tragedies ever witnessed on the Indian soil.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Such a blind fidelity is benign is some instances such as sports, but in most other this attitude is pushing India on a retrograde path. Especially in political arena whose dear siblings are money, caste, regionalism, corruption and political correctness, such an unquestioning loyalty gives free access to that party or its leader to adopt policies that are unconstitutional, tyrannical and dictatorial that could lead our country on a detrimental path. History has taught us two great examples of after-effects of such a fundamentalist and blind allegiance to its leader- the defeat of Japanese imperialism and destruction of Nazi Germany and on both these occasions the results were catastrophic. While Germany and Japan put behind their violent past and rose from ashes to become the most advanced countries of the world, we on the other hand are selling our souls by putting our beloved leader before the country. The people of India are unable to distinguish between the reel world and the real world as evident from the southern states of Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh, where chief ministers have usually been movie stars in their hey day. It took MGR and NTR, the late film veterans, a couple of hip movements in a rain song and a string of fake punches on few imaginary goons to seize power of these states. Once the power was seized, it was ever to stay in the same house.
We would like the head of the family to be a fair person and a role model but when it comes to choosing a leader of our state we blissfully ignore such questions by pledging adherence to someone we happen to admire, not because such a person is good thinker or a great leader, just because he has been an entertainer or in some cases, such a person happens to belong to same caste. This has been the trend not just with illiterate masses but even with university educated people. And if this continues and it is what likely looks like the case, India has a bleak future.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Vj ~ What idiot would write of the evolution of any kind of life before knowing the origin of the soul and its purpose and the material cause of the universe? Well, if reading(Light of Truth) didn't do the job, then shouldn't that tell you how important practice (yoga) is necessary? I can honestly say, you are not looking for answers but to show off the ego, like all evolutionists do. Pandit Vishal was an Aryasamajee also, he claimed to have read all of Swami Dayanand's work, but on reading the Vishnu Puran he immediately returned to the fold of Hinduism. Wow! This shows that, the most abtruse science of the Divine is called WISDOM, it cannot be taught in any educational institution, nor can it be found in a science lab or a book, but can only be acquired through the practice of yoga (self-study by stenuous effort and practice).
Raj~ Sorry VJ for taking time in replying as I was busy with other things. I was never an aryasamajee in the first place. Anyway, I have shown in my previous discussion that laws on which you discarded evolution are not sound enough to debunk evolution and I came with examples to show you, but you weren’t convinced. You didn’t say what’s wrong with those arguments and your argument was that you have had similar arguments before. And you accused me of showing off my ego like all other evolutionists. Now, I am not an evolutionist although I subscribe to evolution, and evolutionists ,on the contrary have the humility to digest and accept the fact that humans are the 5th ape, and that we are no way different to any other animals. Any one who understands evolution will accept the fact that it takes one mutation of deadly virus like ebola to wipe out humans overnight and hence they immensely respect the power of nature.
It must be in harmony with science.Modern science has proven creation to be more than 6,000 years old, the earth is spherical and it rotates and revolves, contradictions to the Torah, Bible and Quran.
Actually, modern science has proved that the creation is 14 billion years old. Now, the same modern science has also proved that viruses and bacteria become resistant to a drug, and the underlying principle for this is one of the principle of evolution – A random mutation of virus into a drug resistant strain. Although experts agree that this is only the proof of Micro-evolution(changes with in the species) in action, not the Macro-evolution(Change of one species to another), nevertheless mutations such as these can give a logical idea of why Evolution makes sense.
What doesn’t make any sense is the fact that which according the Vedic religion, is that Man has always been there since day one of the creation and Vedas have been revealed to the purest of the men, the altruistic sages of Himalayas at the start of creation. As I have replied in my earlier mail that Swamiji’s The Light of Truth is a good book when it comes to debunking other religions. But, there are things in that book that makes little sense to me, and you think that is because I haven’t been practicing Yoga. I don’t need to know yoga to doubt anything, all it takes is a prejudice free inquiry and rational mind. For example, let us consider the following from the Chapter 8: Creation sustenance and dissolution of universe. The paragraphs in red are from the book and my objections are in green and please tell me how the practise of yoga could have changed my opinion.
PAGE 262 -263
29. The wonderful creation of the earth.
The earth studded with various kinds of precious stones and metals, the seeds of trees of a thousand different kinds* with their wonderful exquisite structures, leaves with myriads of different colours** and shades, flowers, fruits, roots, rhizomes and cereals with various scents and flavours*** none but God could create. Nor could any one except God create myriads of earths, suns, moon and other cosmic bodies, and sustain, revolve the regulate them.
An object when perceived produces two kinds of knowledge in the mind of the observer, viz., of the nature of the object itself and of its maker. For example, a man found a beautiful ornament in a jungle. On examination he saw that it was made of gold and that it must have been made by a clever goldsmith. In the same way, the wonderful workmanship and execution of this wonderful universe prove the existence of its Maker
Raj ~ So, the premise here is that, when you look at anything in this world, it raises two questions. The nature of the object and its maker. Applying the same logic, I could ask the same two questions about God: His nature- who is He? And what is he made of and his attributes etc. Secondly and more importantly, Who is his maker? If this intelligent universe needs a super-intelligent creator, the super-intelligent creator should have ultra-super-intelligent creator and hence we are in an infinite regress.
If you say that God doesn’t need a maker, then at least you agree in principle that not everything needs a maker and that is contrary to the initial premise .
Q.What was first created, man or earth, etc.?
A - The earth, etc., because without them where could man live and how could he maintain his life?
The above statement makes a supposition that Earth was created for man to live and to maintain his life. Hence, we see a purpose of creating Earth and other celestial objects, hinting a anthropocentric purpose of creation. I have always pondered, what is the need for creation of millions of galaxies, each galaxy consisting of billions of stars just like our sun with uninhabitable environments and the notorious blackholes, when all it needs is one big Earth and one big sun to place humans and no scriptures including Vedas, will never account for nor explain this. As the existence of such vast universe was only known in this century, it is hardly surprising that such a grand universe was beyond the imagination of authors of these scriptures.
Having said that the extent of knowledge of the solar system that our ancestors developed by the likes of Aryabhatta, Varahamihira, Bhaskara, Brahmadeva and other great Indian astrologists cannot be underestimated. We have developed our science on the accumulated intelligence of our forefathers and it would be a mistake of gargantuan proportions to forget their contributions they made to the world of science.
30. Was one man created in the beginning of Creation or more than one?
A - More than one; because souls, that on account of their previous good actions deserve to be born in the Aishwari - not the result of sexual intercourse - Creation, are born in the beginning of the world. It is said in the Yajur Veda, "(In the beginning) there were born many men as well as rishis, i.e.., learned seers of nature. They were progenitors of the human race." On the authority of this Vedic text it is certain then that in the beginning of Creation hundreds and thousands of men were born. By observing nature with the aid of reason we come to the same conclusion, viz., that men are descended from many fathers and mothers (i.e., not from one father and one mother).
Raj ~ So, it is technically possible for a man to be born without a sexual intercourse in the Aishwari, if a soul accumulates enough points through good actions so that you look into his DNA and you would see blanks. This is in breach of your natural laws and substantiates claims of Jesus Christ’s virgin birth.
31. In the beginning of Creation were men created as children, adults or old people or in all conditions?
A - They were adults, because had God created them as children they would have required adults to bring them up, and had created them as old men, they would not have been able to propagate the race, therefore He created them adults.
Raj ~ This completely threw me, VJ. So, one fine morning when God created Earth and Sun, guided earth on its orbit around sun, and created men from souls with previous good actions. So few hundred fully matured healthy humans descended onto Earth around Tibet. And I would assume they can read and write, probably Sanskrit . How do you then account for the Neaderthals and other prehistoric tools such as flint stones found in the caves of ancient human dwellers. If these well learned seers of nature are progenitors of the human race, how do you account for the bush tribes and pygmies of Africa. Please do not deny existence of Neanderthals, there is enough evidence that they exist.
33. Does not the belief of souls in lower beings impute partiality?
God put some souls in human bodies, while others he clothed with bodies of ferocious animals such as tigers, others with those of cattle, such as cows, others with those of birds and insects, other still with those of plants. Does not this belief impute partiality to God?
A - No, it does not impute any partiality, because He put souls into the bodies they deserved according to deeds done in the previous birth. Had He done so without any consideration as to the nature of their deeds, He would have been unjust indeed.
Raj ~ So, the impure souls were animals and pure souls were ancient sages, is it?
And how about microscopic organisms? Viruses and bacteria reproduce and kill humans, and we with our science try to stop their reproduction and kill them by using drugs. So what about souls of these viruses and bacteria? They are living entities how ever microscopic they may be and they get killed. Do they have souls? If they do, are they different to our souls and if they are not different , do they comply with the Law of Karma.
39. What are the sun, the moon and the stars?
Q. Are they inhabited by man and other living creatures or not?
A - They are worlds inhabited by men and other living beings, The Shatpatha Braahman 14:6, 9, 4. says., "The earth, the water, the heated bodies, the space, the moon, the sun, and other planets are all called Vasus or abodes, because they are abodes of living beings as well as of inanimate objects." When the sun, the moon and other planets are abodes like our earth, what doubt can there be in their being inhabited? When this little earth of God is full of men land other living beings, can it ever be possible that all other worlds are void? How can myriads of other worlds be of any use unless they are inhabited by man and other beings? It follows, therefore, that they are inhabited.
Raj ~ This is where I almost started to think, this book is useless when it comes to science. So moon, sun and other planets are called vasus and swamiji here thinks they are inhabited as well. To be honest, I would give full credit to swamiji for taking a scientific approach of assuming a possibility of life somewhere in the universe but the idea that stars and sun could be inhabited is farfetched. Even moon and other planets in our own solar system are uninhabitable. But, again swamiji was coming up with ideas relating to the scientific knowledge of his times. But his conclusion follows the logic that is evident in the last two lines of the above paragraph. He asks-“ How can myriads of other worlds be of any use unless they are inhabited by man and other beings? It follows, therefore, that they are inhabited.”
This is exactly what I argued before, we know that myriads of universes and planets and moons in our solar system are uninhabitable and only logical conclusion is that they were not created for us. And I have no reason to believe that GOD created all these billions of stars.
Having said that, I believe that there is real possibility of extra-terrestrial life in this universe which takes us to the next question.
40. Do they have the same bodies?Would men and other living beings in the other worlds have the same kind of bodies and bodily organs as they have here or different?
A - Most likely there is some difference in their form and the like, just as you see some difference in form, countenance, appearance and complexion among people of different countries as the Ethiopeans, Chinese, the Indians and the Europeans. But the creation of the same class or species on this earth and other planets is identical. The class or species that has its sense organs (as eyes) in some definite place in the body here (on this planet), will have them in the same place other planets; for it is said in the Veda, "Just as God created the sun, the moon, the earth, and other planets and the objects therein in the previous cycles of Creation, the same has He done in the present Creation." RIG VEDA 10: 190. He does not make any alteration.
Raj ~ The above logic makes sense in 19th century, but has no place in 21st century. Because even if life exists in another place in the universe, i would still think the life will have to evolve. It is statistically improbable for the life here to be similar to that of on the Earth.
41. Are the same Vedas revealed in the other worlds as in this?
A - Yes. Just as the policy of a king is the same in all the countries under his rule, so is the Vedic system of Government of the King of kings identically the same in all the worlds over which He rules.
Raj ~ This question doesn’t even arise unless we find the proof of extra-terrestrial life. And even if we find it, the chances of Vedas being revealed in the other worlds are as good as Christopher Hitchens going back to thiesm.
VJ ~ And you asked who would write of the evolution of any kind before knowing the origin of the soul and its purpose?
Raj ~ Well, I would say Physics comes first and then Metaphysics.
Finally, Swamiji says:
"The man who resolves, to stick to the truth at all costs, steadily rises in virtues. When his virtues raise his reputation and prestige, he becomes all the more a devotee of truth. This devotion to truth becomes an unerring source of power and greatness."
Raj ~ I absolutely believe this. Swami Dayanand Saraswati was one of the most prominent thinkers and reformers that India ever produced and his works were based on the knowledge that he had during his times. Science has advanced and so did we, and his book is not different to other scriptures, all written in light of limited knowledge our ancestors had possessed during their time. To claim a book to be true for all times is asinine, and this hold good for Gita, Koran, Bible, Vedas and even Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species. Who knows, a major breakthrough in science could prove Darwin wrong and as swamiji says, we have to stick to truth at all costs.
Monday, October 6, 2008
Vj ~ Fantastic, my friend. I see you have made some progress - from dogma to atheism - very good!
Raj: Thanks, VJ. But, I was never really dogmatic, although I am a Brahmin I never could come to terms with the superiority of Brahmins as laid out by Hindu texts.My school was an Arya Samaj School named after Sanskrit Grammarian Panini, and thanks to the Sanskrit subject, my moral principles were firmly based on sayings of Bhartruhari, Vidhura and other scholars of Nitishatakas but not really on scriptures(Vedas included). Being an Aryasamaj school, there used to be a yagna(havan), every week, with the same vedic verses repeated again and again, of them we hardly understood. We didn’t have a slightest of clue what that was about and was boring as hell. That was as dogmatic as any other ritual that we commonly see in all other religions.
Vj ~ Way to go, man, it is better to be an atheist than a hypocrite.
Raj- Can't agree more.
Vj ~ Evidence is what will eventually lead to the truth, but that evidence must be by your own effort (study and practice) and not from anyone else. I can only show you the way as Swami Dayanand did for us all.
Raj - Truth based on solid evidence is truth irrespective of where it comes from. There are some evidences that we can verify and understand that are within our domain knowledge e.g. as in the case of gravitation. There are evidences that we cannot possibly see and understand fully well because we cannot master every subject, e.g. atomic theory, which can only be accepted as truth, because it has been firmly established as sound theory by expert scientists, Neils Bohr etc. Now how do I believe atomic theory is sound, because if it wasn’t, we wouldn’t be able to generate nuclear power if the fundamental principles of atomic theory were flawed. The Large Hadron Collider, a £5 billion experiment, successfully fired protons at speed of light to simulate an environment seconds after a big bang. This takes us to my next point, the big bang theory, which if it was just a maverick scientist’s imaginary theory, we will not have been able to simulate in a controlled experiment. I have no problem accepting evidence if it comes from someone else, if the evidence sounds logical.
Vj ~ I hope you still find it influential for it is the only way to the evidences you seek.
Raj – Your site is logical when debunking other religions. . Paradoxically, you claim your religion is in concordance with science, but it looks like you cherry pick scientific principles that supports the vedic religion and disregard other which clashes with yours.
Vj ~ "The less you know the more you believe." Bono. Belief belongs to dogmas like the one you just abandoned, so strive to know, instead.
Raj- Absolutely, and the more you believe, you believe even more. I have absolutely no qualms in accepting that the religion I left was dogmatic. It was a painful experience drifting away from the religion I was born in, but Truth is bitter, and I have the guts to swallow the bitter pill.
Vj ~ Study evolution as discussed by me carefully and you will see that I have very good reasons for disregarding it.
Raj – I did.This is what separates us and I have very good reasons not to disregard evolution. This makes the discussion more interesting, but if I can find truth, I do not mind losing the argument. Because, what matters is the Truth. Let us look at your claims of breach of natural laws.
VJ ~First breach of natural laws:If man had really evolved from a lower creature, then it was, as it were, a fact - a law which according to evolutionists, was unceasing in its operations under any conditions whatsoever. If the law was of a constant and permanent nature, ever working itself out, how was it that for thousands of years past, no lower creature had evolved into a human being.
There are two aspects in your argument that I see as flawed.
First, there is no law in evolution, which says every species out there on earth, eventually evolves and evolves, until it reaches its culmination point – ‘The Human Being’. I mean, there are no evolutionists out there, who propose a linear theory, Rat turns into Cat, Cat into a Dog, Dog into Donkey, Donkey into a Chimpanzee, and chimpanzee into a Human Being. As a matter of fact such an asinine theory is possible according to metaphysical laws of oriental philosophies(law of karma), where past and present deeds may dictate what one will be in next life but it holds no place in evolutionary biology.
Evolution produces a pattern of relationships A B C D among lineages that is tree-like, not ladder-like.
Secondly, The variables in the equation called evolution are Time , the Environment and the Random mutations. The environment itself is constantly changing. For example, at point in time called T1, let us say the environment is E1. But the environment is a complex equation in itself , made up of further randomly changing variables( Let us say atmospheric conditions -Rain, Sunlight, Wind, Snow, Magnetic field, the ecological parameters such as population of other species and number of different species etc.). At a different point in time say T2, Environment E2 is no way same as that of E1. Hence, any minor change, or a random mutation R1 in the characteristic of a species that helped that species to dominate in the environment E1, could actually be so pernicious in environment E2, that it could make that species extinct. That could give a great competitive advantage to other species and they start to dominate. Moreover, it is highly improbable, the same random mutation R1 will happen at time T2 in an environment E2. Hence, you cannot expect the mutations to proceed along the same line every time in every environment, ultimately trying to push every species towards mankind.
But, given enough time(which we had about 4 billion years), in right conditions, mutations in radically different sets of environments have produced almost the same kind of species. This is called convergent evolution.
**For example, birds and bats both have wings, while mice and crocodiles do not. Does that mean that birds and bats are more closely related to one another than to mice and crocodiles? No. When we examine bird wings and bat wings closely, we see that there are some major differences.
Bat wings consist of flaps of skin stretched between the bones of the fingers and arm. Bird wings consist of feathers extending all along the arm. These structural dissimilarities suggest that bird wings and bat wings were not inherited from a common ancestor with wings. This idea is illustrated by the phylogeny below, which is based on a large number of other characters.
Bird and bat wings are analogous—that is, they have separate evolutionary origins, but are superficially similar because they evolved to serve the same function**. Hence, there is a chance, very highly improbable it may be, that given enough time and provided environmental pressures allow for it, one or some of the species out there may at some point in time can evolve into species similar to that of human. But, as we dominate the earth and with deforestation and animal extinction at its highest rates, the chances of such a convergence is near impossible. Finally, even in the unlikely event of such a convergence say in 10 billion years time, our lifespan will not permit us to witness it.
VJ -Second breach of natural laws:The theory of natural selection is indicative of nature's imperfections. According to it Nature is still improving. This theory points out the absence in Nature at present of the best forms that it will produce in the future. Progression is always downward, a law.
Raj – No, VJ. Nature is constantly changing not improving. Theory of natural selection is a mindless machine, and it has no purpose.
Let us take this example of, peppered moths. Moths in England usually come in two colours, dark and light, and during the industrial revolution , because of the pollutants released into the atmosphere, the barks of the trees were covered in black soot. This gave the advantage to the dark moths, as the darker moths are harder to see by the predators on the dark backgrounds and lighter moths are conspicuous to the predators. Hence, the number of lighter moths started to decrease. In the later years, due to stricter climate control measures and advent of alternative power generation techniques, the cleaner environment gave the advantage to the lighter coloured moths, as the darker moths are easily vulnerable on relatively lighter backgrounds.
In this example, nature didn’t have a grand plan or a direction, it is not biased against any one moth, it just gave an competitive edge to the darker moths because of the man made industrial revolution, and gave an edge to the lighter moth when the green revolution started. Theory of natural selection gives the advantage to those species that can adapt well in a particular environment. As I pointed out earlier, as this environment always changes, sometimes drastically, even the powerful species become extinct in one shot. Take another hypothetical example, all it takes is one drug resistant mutation of the flu into a powerful ones, and you and I could be discussing this on our deathbeds. Nature just favours that virus over us, and there could be some people who are resistant to that virus. All the others will perish, and rest will pass on their resistance to their generation , and nature hands back the advantage to us. The progression is neither downwards nor upwards. In the case of computer industry, progression is always upwards, memory devices are getting better and better. A 1GB hard disk in a computer used to be man made wonder 15 years ago, and now I have a 32 GB external hard drive in my car keys. Our knowledge is getting better and better contrary to what you claim.
Vj ~ It makes no sense at all to the wise, since it is a total breach to natural laws
Raj – Just because one is wise doesn’t mean one has an open mind. Minds are like Parachutes, they only function when open. It needs guts and wisdom just not to know, but digest the truth. Evolution is a natural law in itself, let alone, breaching the other laws.
Vj ~ I don't "think" it is, I KNOW it is. I haven't found any yet who can contradict it. It is free of historical references and erroneous views.
Raj – That is your subjective experience. What historical references, VJ? I have no evidence to believe man existed in the Jurassic age, let alone, Vedas.
Vj ~ If the God or the Vedas failed anyone, it is one's own fault and not God or the Vedas.
Raj – Sorry VJ, but you could use this same argument to prove any scripture and any God. Let us say there was religious book called Jedi’s commandments, whose God was Darth Vader, the above argument looks like this.
If Darth Vader or Jedi’s commandments failed anyone, it is one's own fault and not Darth Vader’s or the Jedi’s.
Raj ~ The rebuttal I wrote in my is site is on the grounds on which you discredit Evolution.