Please follow the URL to the blog post to share your views



Does it make sense for a court of law to decide whether Darwin was correct or wrong? What ever happened to the sincere pursuit of truth both in intellectual and spiritual circles...?

The gravitational force is not a subject of one’s opinion: how does it matter what who’s opinion is, it is there and that is it, it is a law of nature. Will it matter if a judge rules that the theory is false? That is exactly the problem in this queer case about Darwin’s theory which is subjudice in the American system. Apparently the contestants are expecting a ruling on matters related to teaching the theory in the educational institutions, but waiting for a judge to give a ruling on the validity of the Darwin’s theory… !?

Everyone must be familiar that Science has its basic proposals which are based on empherical facts. They can be experimented upon. Non existence of evidence to the contrary leads to the proposals ending up as laws. Then the so established ‘laws of nature’ lead to very natural conclusions. As long as the laws hold to the validity of experiment the conclusions that follow also hold … and the conclusions themselves can be verified if one is imaginative enough to device experiments to demonstrate them. These of course go under the technical name ‘corollaries’.

          Darwin was a pious man; the results of his study put him into deep spiraling thought. His find was a difficult thing for himself to digest. But a discovery is a discovery and if that is how the laws of nature are – as God has made it – then it was his duty to share that find with others.

          Mutation is an established fact – by experiment (indeed freaks are born in all species). The principle of natural selection is another established fact – by experiment again (positive freak qualities tend to survive down the generations). These can be demonstrated to any straight thinking person who is not a pack of wild dogs in his mind and mannerisms, who is genuinely interested in uncovering facts, in looking at the world without colored glasses. Who is interested in knowing how God has constructed this beautiful world.

          And yes, once these principles have been established… corollaries follow – that man came from monkeys – and when it is something which a dogma cannot digest then who is at fault..? Who, then, is not accepting what God is presenting before him? Who, then, is being untruthful… or to be precise avoiding the truth..?

          But then again shouting rationalists are not angels either.

          One of the most basic principles of experimental science is the fact that a law has a perimeter of influence – a boundary region in which it is valid….. For example, the laws of Newtonian mechanics are valid at low velocities, but the laws break down at high velocities… Applying Newtonian laws in the Einstinian realm of fast speeds is a mistake of the one who is applying it. The law is still a law, yes, but pushing it into relativistic speeds and saying that there can be nothing like E=mc(squared), that mass cannot be the same as energy…  If someone holds this view then that is not an index of a scientific attitude…

Darwin’s theory deals with the physical and the biological, and is a true representation of what we find there… but why apply that to the Meta-physical? Yes, Darwin is right in his sphere, but the meta physical is a different subject all together. The Bible, especially the chapter ‘Genesis’ (creation), deals with things that are beyond the five senses. Shouting down the Bible on the basis of Darwin’s theory is indeed unscientific.

In truth the followers of the Bible and the church should be grateful. Thanks to Darwin we can now focus on the grain in the Bible and not the chaff… What then is the true meaning conveyed through the story of Adam and Eve…. It is a gate that God has opened for his faithful...

          The most convincing pointer that I have yet encountered in this matter is from an American Theologian—calls himself Joe… Let’s say that in a Kindergarten poem it is said “And the cow jumped over the moon”

          The likely response…?

“What rot are you teaching children?”  “You know what is a cow? And do you know what the moon is? Are you nuts?” and to counter this there will be equally spirited faithful, who, so disturbed by the accusation and so motivated to defend, will be yelling back their own responses. And wild dogs easily catch our attention. Public forums meant for the exchange of wisdom get reduced to ego battle zones and the casualty is progress in truth.

          The solution to the cow and the moon is so very simple, a poem is meant for its poetic value. A question “how a can a cow of ‘x’ size jump over a moon of ‘y’ size and billions of miles away …?” is just a waste of time. The question itself is ill directed and meaningless. You cannot ask science questions to a poem, can you? If Darwinian truths are used to counter Adam and Eve theory, and if Adam and Eve theory is used to counter Darwin’s theory, in both cases the researcher is barking up the wrong tree...

There is no conflict: to be blamed are the attributes of lack of comprehension and a compulsive defense of Dogma. And the best way out is to look with open eyes and watch God’s world with an open heart.
Really, can the logic, reason and scientific attitude of the greats of humankind like Ved Vyas, Valmiki, Jesus Christ, Mohammed the prophet, sage Vashist, the authors of the Bible, the Vedas, the Granth… and honest thinkers like Darwin be doubted? If this fact is missed then is it not a reflection of the fact that people are either too busy to find out the truth or they have the tendency to be content with the little gets fed to them?

          Wasting useful court time on such a matter is probably just a game for lawyers to make money. One wonders what will happen if the American court ruling goes one way or the other…