• Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Indian education minister dismisses theory of evolution because no-one 'ever saw an a

Status
Not open for further replies.
#1
[h=1]“We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God.” Said Pope Benedict XVI[/h][h=1]Who really knows, and who can swear,
How creation came, when or where!
Even gods came after creation’s day,
Who really knows, who can truly say
When and how did creation start?
Did He do it? Or did He not?
Only He, up there, knows, maybe;
Or perhaps, not even He.

— Rig Veda 10.129.1-7[/h][h=1]Indian education minister dismisses theory of evolution because no-one 'ever saw an ape turning into a man'[/h]
TELEMMGLPICT000151987588_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqaBJSHwufYM_Fh0ArUj1hen6jm8JmtdbOYDNXtsUnvuU.jpeg?imwidth=450

[FONT=&quot]Satyapal Singh, MP for Baghpat, said Darwinism is a myth[/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot]CREDIT: PUNIT PARANJPE/ AFP
[/FONT]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


A junior education minister has been accused of pandering to religious hardliners after dismissing Darwinism as a myth because nobody had witnessed the literal process of ape turning into man.

Satyapal Singh, MP for Baghpat in the state of Uttar Pradesh, and a former Mumbai police commissioner, challenged the idea that Charles Darwin’s writings on evolution should be automatically taught in science classes.

"Our ancestors haven't mentioned anywhere that they ever saw an ape turning into a man. No book we have read or the tales told to us by our grandparents had any such mention," he said.
[h=1]He reiterated his comments in a television interview yesterday.[/h][h=1]"Darwin's theory is being challenged the world over. Darwinism is a myth," he said, adding: "If I'm making a statement I can't make it without a basis. I am a man of science. I have completed my PhD in Chemistry from Delhi University."[/h][h=1]Read more at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...n-minister-dismisses-theory-evolution-no-one/[/h]
 

prasad1

Well-known member
#4
if apes turned man, why apes exist still?
Humans originated in Africa, then some of them migrated out of Africa, their features became Europian, Indian etc. It does not mean Africans do not coexist.
If you only believe what is at the end of your nose, one will not go too far.
Not everyone can understand Science, but if you deny science you are not the smartest person in the world.
 
Last edited:

prasad1

Well-known member
#6
[FONT=q_serif]We didn't evolve from modern apes; [/FONT][FONT=q_serif]we share an ancestor with them, and we are all currently extant, we modern primates, because we are well enough fitted to our environments to avoid being selected against (for now!).[/FONT][FONT=q_serif]Here is a pretty basic primer on how natural selection works:[/FONT]

[FONT=q_serif]http://evolution.berkeley.edu/ev..[/FONT]
 
#7
A religion with largest population in the world reject this theory


[h=1]Muslim scholars rejecting Darwin's theory of evolution as 'unproven'[/h][h=2][/h][h=2]Muslim scholars around the world are increasingly rejecting Darwin's theory of evolution as an "unproven".[/h]
Muslim students and academics also said they felt they were being asked to make a "binary choice" between Darwinism and creationism, rather than both having a place.

The claim was made by Nidhal Guessoum, Professor of Physics and Astronomy at the American University of Sharjah in the United Arab Emirates, at a conference organised by the British Council to celebrate the bicentenary of Darwin’s birth.

He told his audience that in countries such as Tunisia, Egypt, Turkey, Pakistan and Malaysia, only 15 per cent of people surveyed believed Darwin’s theory was “true” or “probably true”.

A poll he conducted at his own university showed that 62 per cent of Muslim professors and students believed evolution to be an “unproven theory”, compared with 10 per cent of non-Muslim professors.

“The rate of acceptance of evolution and of the idea of teaching evolution was extremely low,” he said. “I wondered, who are all these educated people rejecting evolution? They are even rejecting the fact that it should be taught as scientific knowledge.”

Read more at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/sci...-Darwins-theory-of-evolution-as-unproven.html
 
#8
It is reported that only a minority of Americans fully accepted this scientific explanation!

[h=1]5 facts about evolution and religion[/h]


FT_14.10.29_evolution-promo.jpg


Are faith and belief in evolution necessarily at odds? According to Pope Francis, the answer is no. Indeed, the pope recently reaffirmed the Roman Catholic Church’s view that “evolution in nature is not inconsistent” with church teaching on creation, pushing the debate on human origins back into the news.

Although most U.S. Catholics accept the idea of evolution in some form, a substantial percentage of American adults reject the scientific explanation for the origins of human life, and a number of religious groups in the U.S. maintain that Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution through natural selection is not correct because it conflicts with their views of creation.

Here are five facts about evolution and faith:

1
The Roman Catholic Church has long accepted – or at least not objected to – evolutionary theory. Pope Francis is not the first pontiff to publicly affirm that evolution is compatible with church teachings. In 1950, in the encyclical “Humani Generis,” Pope Pius XII said that Catholic teachings on creation could coexist with evolutionary theory. Pope John Paul II went a bit further in 1996, calling evolution “more than a hypothesis.”

Read more at: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/30/5-facts-about-evolution-and-religion/
 

renuka

Well-known member
#9
None of us saw God..so does God exists?
Can we prove or disprove existence of God?

Nope we cant.

Btw no religion talks about Dinosaurs yet fossils exist as evidence.

So if all religious text is word of God why no mention of dinosaurs?
All only talk about animals that existed post jurrasic era..cos at that time no rishi or prophet had any evidence of dinosaurs hence no mention of it.

Clearly shows religious text could be just word of man.
Knowing us Hindus if any rishi had any evidence of a dinosaur we would be praying to T Rex by now!
 
#11
We Hindus go by Vedas and there is no single story of creation or evolution.

There is mention of Hiranya Garbha…the ‘Golden embryo’

And the Samkhya text state that Purusha and the prakriti made the embryo

And there is Shatapatha Brahmana which states that the current human generation descends from Manu

And there is order of Dashavathara

Nothing corroborate exactly with theory of the science...?
 

renuka

Well-known member
#12
Physically an Ape does resemble a human very much...especially an Orangutan...they at times seem very human.

But DNA wise we humans have very similar pattern with Pigs.

So who are we?

Apes or Pigs? Ko' ham?

God knows or He who surveys the skies too doesnt know?
 

prasad1

Well-known member
#13
History of Mankind is a lot older than any religious texts.
Evolution predates Humanity.
History of Earth is much older.

The universe is between 10 and 20 billion years old, and the commonly accepted age is 15 billion years.

In the beginning, there were simple chemicals. And they produced amino acids that eventually became the proteins necessary to create single cells. And the single cells became plants and animals. Recent research is revealing how the primordial soup created the amino acid building blocks, and there is widespread scientific consensus on the evolution from the first cell into plants and animals. But it's still a mystery how the building blocks were first assembled into the proteins that formed the machinery of all cells. Now, two long-time University of North Carolina scientists - Richard Wolfenden, PhD, and Charles Carter, PhD - have shed new light on the transition from building blocks into life some 4 billion years ago.

Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2015-06-evidence-emerges-life.html#jCp

 
Last edited:

prasad1

Well-known member
#14
The scientific community recognizes that 3.6 billion years ago there existed the last universal common ancestor, or LUCA, of all living things presently on Earth. It was likely a single-cell organism. It had a few hundred genes. It already had complete blueprints for DNA replication, protein synthesis, and RNA transcription. It had all the basic components - such as lipids - that modern organisms have. From LUCA forward, it's relatively easy to see how life as we know it evolved.

Before 3.6 billion years, however, there is no hard evidence about how LUCA arose from a boiling caldron of chemicals that formed on Earth after the creation of the planet about 4.6 billion years ago. Those chemicals reacted to form amino acids, which remain the building blocks of proteins in our own cells today.

"We know a lot about LUCA and we are beginning to learn about the chemistry that produced building blocks like amino acids, but between the two there is a desert of knowledge," Carter said. "We haven't even known how to explore it."


Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2015-06-evidence-emerges-life.html#jCp
 
#15
It is scientists who concluded that his gradual evolution is not supported by geological history.

Some of the members are making more noise over science, theory, etc etc

Some of the religions don't seems to have accepted and scientists say that it is not supported.

Then who else accepted the theory.....?


[h=1]Darwin's theory of gradualevolution not supported by geological history, scientist concludes[/h][h=1] [/h][h=1]Charles Darwin's theory of gradual evolution is not supported bygeological history, New York University Geologist Michael Rampino concludes inan essay in the journal Historical Biology. In fact, Rampino notesthat a more accurate theory of gradual evolution, positing that long periods ofevolutionary stability are disrupted by catastrophic mass extinctions of life,was put forth by Scottish horticulturalist Patrick Matthew prior to Darwin'spublished work on the topic[FONT=&quot]


[/FONT]
[/h][h=1]Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2010-11-darwin-theory-gradual-evolution-geological.html#jCp[/h][h=1] [/h]
 
#16
For the eyes of those who advocate Darwin's theory of evolution


[h=2]DARWIN'S THEORY OF EVOLUTION DEBUNKED[/h]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:
[h=1]Read more at: http://vedicsciences.net/articles/darwin-debunked.html[/h][h=2][/h]
 
#17
[h=1]New wave of anti-evolution bills hit states[/h]

teacherclassroomstudents01272017getty.jpg?itok=U3hrLteX


New legislation introduced in a handful of states would allow alternatives to the theory of evolution to be taught in classrooms, the latest wave of measures backed by religious conservatives targeting broadly accepted scientific curriculum.

The measures could also allow teachers to question whether humans are contributing to climate change, something widely accepted by the scientific community.

South Dakota’s Senate this week approved a measure that prohibits school boards from preventing teachers from questioning established scientific theories. Similar bills are making their way through legislatures in Oklahoma and Indiana.
[h=1]………….[/h]“They’re no longer trying to ban teaching evolution. They’re no longer trying to balance teaching evolution. They’re now trying to belittle evolution,” Branch said.

Proponents of the measures say they do not allow teachers to inject religion into science classes. Model bills make clear that teachers are to question theories in an “objective” manner by focusing on “scientific information.”

“Good science is based on critical inquiry, not unthinking dogmatism,”
said John West, vice president of the Discovery Institute, a group that advances the idea of intelligent design. “If we want to equip today’s students to be tomorrow’s innovators, we need to teach them how to be out of the box thinkers who know how to sift and analyze competing explanations in light of the evidence.”
[h=1]………….[/h][h=1]The legislation is marching forward amid worries that the Trump administration will lead an onslaught against policies combating climate change.[/h][h=1]Read more at: http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/316487-new-wave-of-anti-evolution-bills-hit-states[/h]
 
#18
[h=1]New wave of anti-evolution bills hit states[/h]

teacherclassroomstudents01272017getty.jpg?itok=U3hrLteX


New legislation introduced in a handful of states would allow alternatives to the theory of evolution to be taught in classrooms, the latest wave of measures backed by religious conservatives targeting broadly accepted scientific curriculum.

The measures could also allow teachers to question whether humans are contributing to climate change, something widely accepted by the scientific community.

South Dakota’s Senate this week approved a measure that prohibits school boards from preventing teachers from questioning established scientific theories. Similar bills are making their way through legislatures in Oklahoma and Indiana.
[h=1]………….[/h]“They’re no longer trying to ban teaching evolution. They’re no longer trying to balance teaching evolution. They’re now trying to belittle evolution,” Branch said.

Proponents of the measures say they do not allow teachers to inject religion into science classes. Model bills make clear that teachers are to question theories in an “objective” manner by focusing on “scientific information.”

“Good science is based on critical inquiry, not unthinking dogmatism,”
said John West, vice president of the Discovery Institute, a group that advances the idea of intelligent design. “If we want to equip today’s students to be tomorrow’s innovators, we need to teach them how to be out of the box thinkers who know how to sift and analyze competing explanations in light of the evidence.”
[h=1]………….[/h][h=1]The legislation is marching forward amid worries that the Trump administration will lead an onslaught against policies combating climate change.[/h][h=1]Read more at: http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/316487-new-wave-of-anti-evolution-bills-hit-states[/h]
 
#20
even tigers resemble cats.

could you conclude cats gradually evolved to tigers!!!

utter factual inaccuracy!!! there cannot be a greater factual inaccuracy than darwin's theory!!!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top