Question:
I have been reading Upanishads, yoga literature, Buddhist books and Ayurvedic texts for about 8-10 years. I am also working on my PhD. I have chosen a spiritual path for fulfillment and contentment. Since, November 14, 2008, I feel that my energy runs up my body and gets all stuck in my head. I have had quite a bit of chakra work done to anchor my root chakra. With loads of meditation, mantra chanting, yoga practices, reiki practices (self treatment), massages and finally Panchakarma, I have learned to bring my energy down quite a bit, but not completely, and when I do it does not stay down very long. Growing up I learned that vignaya marg is the highest path, hence I have focused on knowledge. My solar plexus is the root cause of my problem, where manomaya kosha has created a barrier with my anandamaya kosha. For a while I could feel my heart chakra having a strong protective layer around it. Previously, it was not there, but some major life incidences and situations built a strong layer that prevented me from feeling in the heart for about two years. Seven days of Panchakarma treatment helped me open up my heart. However, my energy still runs up in my neck and head. Do you have any suggestion for me on how to break the cycle of that my mind has gotten stuck , so that my spiritual growth continues and I can function and feel better. I am taking some Ayurvedic herbs (shank pushpi, bacopa, gotu kola). Chakra tuning, chakra shudhi, meditation, and shri yantra mantra chanting and such efforts do help, but not enough. I live in Cheyenne Wyoming where I do not have access to many of spiritual activities or spiritual gurus that metropolitan city often offers.
In the recent chakra balancing by a woman, I learned that my heart chakra has changed its color from green to dusty rose/pink? During her chakra balancing work, she informed me that my heart chakra changed its color from dusty rose to green only in the center. Is there any significant meaning behind the color change and spiritual journey?
Answer:
There may be some significance to your heart chakra changing color, but I really don’t know what that might be in your case.
You seem to have determined that your major issue is that your mind is stuck and it is impeding your further progress. What occurs to me in reading your letter is that you have taken an extremely intellectual and problem-solving approach to overcoming your mental limitation. You have thoroughly analyzed the situation, and utilized a long list of very effective procedures and practices to address it. But when the mind’s limited, linear thinking habits are the problem, using the mind’s same analytical habits will not free you.
Another book or technique to wrap your mind around won’t help. What you need is something that takes you utterly outside your typical patterns of thinking. Falling head over heels in love is probably the most radical cure for that, but there are other more controllable things you can do as well. You live in a beautiful part of the country. Make a point of spending time outdoors communing with Nature—the trees, the streams, the sunlight, the grasses and flowers. Allow yourself to feel all these aspects of Nature as an extension of your own self.
Go dancing and singing and don’t worry what anyone else may think. Just let whatever feelings inside you express themselves freely. You may want to write poetry or paint or photograph as well. Creative expression is beautiful way to free oneself from the prison of the critical , task-oriented mind.
If you have relatives and friends with young children, seek out opportunities to play and laugh with them. Let your Being absorb the joy and wisdom in their simplicity and purity.
The path of knowledge or Vignaya marg is a great path, but the highest knowledge is not intellectual knowledge of the mind, but the pure, simple, joyful knowledge of the cosmic mind that you cannot be taught, but rather you must become.
Love,
Deepak




Deepak, what a crock of BS! Anyone trying to make any sense of that would
find themselves in a home for the clinically insane.
None of this can be reconciled with any sense of rational thought, it is a mystical
journey of a mind let loose of it’s moorings. I don’t know where you received your
Doctoral degree, but I would make a strong appeal for the return of your tuition.
Deepak, I notice you never respond to any responses to your postings.
I suppose you think you’re above the intellectual aptitude of your “students”.
I submit that you views are indefensible and to debate that would expose
the bankruptcy of your teachings. You might lose some revenue from your
book sales?
WoW! I needed this today
) …… thank you!
Dear Deepak:
What a beautiful reply to an interesting question!
All those “intellectuals” out there, please “feel” Deepak’s answers, not “think” about it.
I can relate to both the question and the answer from my own personal experience and realization. I had a similar problem as the questioner. When answer came to me, it took the form of the publication of a book of poetry, aptly titled “The Heart of the Mind” available online at http://www.lulu.com/content/paperback-book/the-heart-of-the-mind/600599
Here is an excerpt from the back-cover of the book:
The poet in me started to rise when my Mind started to yield its way to my Heart. “Knowledge, when reaches its peak, melts into nothing but Love and Devotion,” declared the great Adi Shankaracharya. When the Mind has been saturated with its cravings for intellectual knowledge and cultured through the practice of Yoga, the resulting quiet and still Mind is the fertile ground for creative endeavors.
Furthermore, when the chattering Mind takes refuge at the home of the pulsating Heart, such Mind gets awakened by the pulse of the Heart. The Thinker then becomes a Feeler, a Poet.
From, “The Heart of the Mind” (http://www.lulu.com/content/paperback-book/the-heart-of-the-mind/600599)
Bijay,
No thanks, I’ll continue to pass everything through the filter, using the rational
thought and critical thinking God gave me.
Gosh, do you (or any other of Deepak’s lemmings) really think this is wise?
And you guys critisize conservatives for being brainwashed by Fox news!
Seems to me you folks are exposing your true colors here, aye?
Oxymoron
ox⋅y⋅mo⋅ron
–noun, plural
a figure of speech by which a locution produces an incongruous,
seemingly self-contradictory effect, as in “cruel kindness”
or “to make haste slowly.”
Critical thinking and Christianity do not mix, sir.
Critical thinking Christian = Oxymoron
Rational Christian = Oxymoron
Brilliant Trevor!
By the way, how would YOU spin Bijay’s response to
Deepak’s post?
“All those “intellectuals” out there, please “feel” Deepak’s answers, not “think” about it.”
Snap out of it Trevor, You’ve fallen into Deepak’s trance!
I disagree with that statement. Simple as that.
Snap out it Dale, You’ve fallen into Jebus’s trance!
Trevor, you must get paid to do this…. I can think of know other reason
you would keep up this charade,
What charade would that be?
The one where I go around pointing out the ridiculous claims you make?
You got me, sir.
Trevor,
You better check the color of your heart chakra…
And you say I make rediculous claims???
that’s a real laugher!
One of us here believes in talking snakes, a man lived
inside of a whale, a guy with a magic staff parted the ocean,
another that walked on water, and some evil boogieman
keeping track of your wrongdoings so he can burn you….
after you’re already dead……
Let’s see who is making the ridiculous claims again?
Yep, all woven together to explain the nature and purpose of
the Creator of the Universe.
Christ told the thief on the cross, (after he acknowledged Him
as God) that he would be with him in Paradise. Then their was the woman
at the well and many others. Doesn’t sound like a “boogieman” to me.
Especially if what he said was true, that the purpose of his coming, death,
and resurrection was the reason we can escape that judgment.
Trevor, I already know that you pick and choose which parts of
the Bible that you wish to agree with. Jesus was just a good ole boy
with lots of good advice, right?
The problem with your view is that their is no purpose. Heck, Deepak’s
going to have to produce a dictionary just to explain all these new words
he’s creating.
DALE! What is your deal, dude? Actually, don’t answer that…everyone already knows the answer.
What are you doing, my friend? You have a zillion comments all over this blog about your hate
for Deepak, but you don’t realize that all you are doing is hating yourself. For some one who
supposedly believes in Jesus so much, I find it strange that all your comments are so critical
and hardly spread the love that Jesus shares with the world. I’m with Trevor on the “Oxymoron”
thing…you claim Deepak and other people on here are hypocrites, but it is so clearly you.
Stop being so self-righteous. I saw this thought on Deepak’s twitter today and immediately
thought of you:
Completely desist from defending your point of view. When you have no point to defend, you do not allow the birth of an argument.
If you haven’t noticed, nobody is listening to you. You attack everyone for making any comment
without realizing they aren’t talking to you. You come off as a crazy extremist. Wake up.
Dale said: “Yep, all woven together to explain the nature and purpose of
the Creator of the Universe.”
Not so fast. You can’t just skip over all that talk of fairy tales with that.
Where is your critical thinking, empirical evidence and rational thought now, Dale?
You push it all aside for faith.
Not good enough, sir. Not good enough.
I hate to be the one to tell you this, but snakes do not talk. They lack the very
basics to produce speech. Your holy book is wrong within the first chapter.
I need not go any further if you can’t prove this.
Hello everyone,
Dale, I think it is perfectly natural of you to be
questionable, wheres, thats how you find your
own answers. But, in this little post here, all that
was written in the answer was for him to play with
children, gets some fresh air, and go do some
fun creative hobbies. is that so wrong?
Come on DALE! That is a perfectly reasonable
answer and good advice, one that I wouldnt be
suprised my mother told me.
I’m not trying to argue with you, and prove your
wrong, I just want to tell you, like a good christian
should, that what you doing is condeming, rather
harshly, and the poisen of your tounge is lashing
nonstop, which only invites others to argue
with you. Do you not see the irrelevence of this all,
and how your actions, and the others as well, only
fuel a war, so to speak?
I believe that Deepak’s world view (moral relativism) is harmful.
Most of my angst has been in response to Deepak’s rant in his article
criticizing Fox News and the those who watch it.
He preaches all this moral relativism and tolerance. Yet he clearly
despises Christians, well only Christians who believe in Christianity,
I’m here to defend against his attacks.
Sorry.
You’re creating your own battles sir. I just did a search, and nowhere
in the Fox News article was Christianity or Religion mentioned. In fact,
all 4 times the word Christian pop up on the page are from YOU.
You are doing exactly what the people at Fox News do. You create chaos
so that you have something to be angry over.
You’re at war with yourself.
Calm down Trevor, I was at the Satan debate, I know his views toward Christianity.
And you, as his disciple portray your feelings very clearly. Look, let’s
not mince words here. You cannot hold to a relativistic view and tolerate
an absolute standard of moral values… I believe strongly that this is
a dangerous and destructive world view. I don’t know how many times
I have to say it but many people have died as direct result of believing
there is no one to answer to but themselves. I say that without accusing
anyone here of being that extreme, far from it.
What people believe has consequences. As an exercise, assume for a
moment that my view is correct. That as a result of man turning from
the laws set forth by his Creator, that the Killing Fields, Buchenwald,
the now millions of unborn children who never saw the light of day are
a direct consequence of that. People who believe that there are no moral
laws tend to make up their own, and history shows us that some people
who hold extreme views justify the most horrific deeds if it suits their
best interest.
To me, this argument is worthwhile.
Okay, the exercise is over, you can go back to thinking I’m the crazy one.
Wow, I just sat through church debating the insanity of what I was reading and hearing.
I’m new to the exploration of spirituality. So I looked up Deepak,( just reading one of his books).
Only to find Trevs posts and his confusion over talking snakes. I was reading Revelations about
a lamb with 7 horns, and 7 eyes. and you know the rest of the story. I have a Dog that talks to me.
2 horses that talk to me, and a cat that wanders in and out of my life, I think he talks to me also.
And God talks to me, through people such as Trevor. And those animals and so many others.
All I have to do is quiet my mind long enough to listen.
Thank you Trevor, oh ya. Deepak too. And the rest of you who take the time to post your views.
It’s an amazing, wonderful journey. I sometimes wish I’d noticed it earlier. Better late than never.
Food for thought > ” There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof
against all augments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance – that principle
is contempt prior to investigation” Herbert Spencer
You’re changing the discussion again. It’s great that you were at
the debate, and that you think you know where Deepak stands on
Christianity, but your argument was with his post. You claimed he
was attacking Christians. I showed he did no such thing, and that
you are making up your own imaginary battles.
It’s fine for you to disagree with his views, but to claim they are destructive
is pure nonsense. I am holding you accountable to show me facts to back up
your claim. Until then, your words are meaningless vitriol. You clearly have very
little understanding of what these views are and what they mean. One group to
reference are Buddhists. Their views are very similar to Deepak’s, yet they are
one of the most peaceful groups on the planet. You don’t see Buddhists
starting holy wars, or condemning people for having different beliefs.
Come on man, you’re smarter than this.
Deepak, has written prolifically about his views on Jesus. They are clearly
anti-Christian to anyone who believes in the Biblical Jesus. His comments
about Fox News and those who watch it was offensive to those who hold
a Biblical world view. I wan’t the only one posting here that got that
message.
Trevor, did you watch the debate? I didn’t see it on TV, so I’m not sure the
audience questions were aired, but here is an excerpt from an article
written about an exchange between an audience member and Deepak.
“You said that belief was a cover-up for insecurity, do you believe that?”
Chopra answered, “Yes” to outbursts of laughter and applause. The joke
was totally lost on him…for someone with such a higher enlightenment
I would have expected more, but he repeatedly looked silly and revealed
the incredible short comings of his philosophical worldview.
you should have been there to see the “Deer in headlights” look on his face.
It was classic!
Chris T.
Uh, I don’t know what kind of “church” you are attending…..
You sound like your letting loose from your moorings a bit from
that last post.
I saw the debate, and I saw the guy you are referring to do his
“i’ll show him” question. It was stupid, childish and he missed the
entire point.
This is a problem with semantics that was clearly lost on him and
you. Let me spell this out for you. He attempted to use the words
“belief” and “believe” interchangeably. This is where he is wrong.
In this context, “belief” was being used in the noun form:
be⋅lief
–noun
a religious tenet or tenets; religious creed or faith: the Christian belief.
Now, in this context, “believe” was used in its verb form:
be⋅lieve
–verb
to have confidence in the truth of (a positive assertion)
Now, let me word this in a way that you might understand:
“You said that [religious faith] was a cover-up for insecurity,
do you [find that to be true?]”
Class time is over. Now do you see what a fool that guy was,
and those that cheered for him? It doesn’t take a college education
to understand this. This is Elementary School vocabulary.
I think you owe everyone here an apology for wasting our time with
your lack of knowledge and baseless insults.
Trevor, I’ll give you this… You’re a great spin artist…
I was there, Deepak had “vacant” signs in his eyes.
Trevor, I think you are missing the point.. Deepak is
the “enlightened one”…. He was speechless!
Sorry, no apologies forthcoming… I’ll let the reader decide.
hmm..
Well I was a bit surprised to find this blog post littered with so much conflict.
Can I just point out that Jesus main and one of his most important commands is to Love others.
by arguing what view is right and wrong goes 100% against it. Arguing of individual ideals, and
concepts that you yourself cannot grasp as your own. Conflict does not breed love, and love
is not evident where hate is.
Rational mind? please, you have to know by now that the human mind built around fractions
of the truth cannot possibly be rational especially when the individual ego is involved (which
is seen through each person in this post.) Semantics? spirituality isn’t a game of semantics
nor is it a game of views, these are just purely egoic ignorance. (even my own individual ideas
that i may feel are mine are not mine at all, whos to say they are?) Humans are Irrational beings,
as long as you’re arguing a point, you are not aware of the Truth. Words a fractions of the Truth
but never can they be the full truth, you can’t get a whole out of a fraction, but the whole does
encompass the fraction.
All arguments are only based on some concept that you are those beliefs, why argue something
that you are beyond to begin with, why the striving to becoming something that you innately are?
“To lose your life you gain your life”, does Jesus not state this, that it isn’t about the individual ego
and to be fully bereft of the individual to be receptive to the Absolute?
I mean all this is a distortion of Truth but what I don’t understand is the conflict that has arisen.
The thought of being right or wrong is selfish, even being righteous and to think that this might be
some kind of charity, showing someone the “light” still comes from the sense of the ego wanting
to become something or to feel good about leading someone else, no matter what it fuels the
ego in selfishness, so drop conflict. Take the log out of your eyes before you can even think to
take out the speck in another.
No one is in a place to judgement. To judge and condemn another is to judge and condemn
yourself. Judgement and Condemnation do not come from love, and therefore goes against
Jesus teachings.
Whats so hard about that?
Dale,
I just spelled out the facts for you, and you’re calling ME a
spin artist? The guy was wrong. It’s on video here on this
site. You can’t ignore it. If you interpret what you saw as
speechlessness, it was probably at the lack of intelligence
displayed by the guy asking the question. That guy completely
missed the point, not Deepak. There was nothing for Deepak
to respond to. The very essence of the question was wrong.
If you go back and watch the video, Deepak did give that guy an
answer. You probably didn’t like it, so it must have slipped your memory.
He said “If something is real, you don’t need to believe in it…”
Now that I have completely dismantled your argument, I wonder what
you’ll come up with next.
Trevor,
I will take your word for it on the response. I think I mentioned that I
did not watch the running of the debate on TV, and his response did
not come across from where I was sitting in the audience.
“If something is real, you don’t need to believe in it…”??
I would say this is overly simplistic……
Are you sure you haven’t contradicted this statement? Didn’t you tell
in a previous post that “everything is an illusion”? You went on to
explain using physics why you believed that?
You are entitled to your view on ther exchange. I disagree with your
statements and hold to my previous remarks.
Trevor,
look my original argument appears to be getting lost in all this and I think it’s
important to get back to it. Deepak has alway preached intolerance, and
then accused Christians (and Fox News) listeners as being intolerant.
If you go back and read his article, you can clearly see the hypocrisy.
It is clearly counter to his teachings and as a Christian I take offense to it.
If you held my views wouldn’t you respond?
Reality is an illusion. It’s not simply my view.
This is what science has found through our observable findings.
I’m pretty sure I already explained this, so I’ll just give a quick
review. When you view the world under a microscope, everything
is just protons and electrons bouncing around in an open void.
With huge gaps and open spaces, energy is just flying around in
a seemingly formless way. It is our nervous system that senses
this energy and our brain decodes this to put it into solid form. The
very same way a TV converts info into a picture on your screen. It’s
just information flying through space, but your TV picks up on it, and
makes it into a solid visible object.
“If something is real, you don’t need to believe in it…
No, I don’t think it’s overly simplistic. Occam’s Razor holds that
the simplest explanation is the preferred one.
The rest of Deepak’s response goes on to say “if something is real,
you don’t need to believe in it, you just experience it.”
Everything I’ve listed we can experience. It is observable, and testable.
You can then conclude that my “world view” is based on facts and evidence.
Going back to the Christian topic. There is a difference between pointing out the
faults in a line of thinking, and intolerance. If you wish me to explain further, I will.
Why do you take offense to the argument, because you associate that person to that particular
article in defense for something that you are not. A concept, what is it to be a concept? when
the concept is gone and you are left, then what is the concept to begin with, it is not you. So
why get offended for the concepts sake?
You go beyond concept, that like Trevor says, when something is Truth, you do not need to
believe it, it merely IS. Facts and evidence do not even be put into play but you’re trying to draw
conclusions from information that is not even coming from Truth either way, you’ll never
Discover it unless you know the limitations of the mind. The mind only knows of knowledge at
the human level until it discovers its True Nature.
To argue whether your teaching is right or wrong, is ignorance, this does not come about from
love, but from darkness. We as humanity can’t possibly know or pin down the Absolute as the
Absolute is free from all perceptualisation or conceptualisation. If you want to believe in words,
thats fine, but i’ll take the constant over the fraction any day.
Words are only dopplegangers of the Truth (including these), you cannot find Truth through
second hand information but living with the question in that unknown.
Deepaks teaching isn’t something that changes the way christianity is seen but merely stating
that it goes beyond the word itself, you know, reading a little meister eckhart could help out with
that traditional sense the body has attached itself to.
Your sentences were getting cut off, so it was a little hard
following your points. What exactly are you disagreeing with
me on again?
Oh no, I wasn’t disagreeing with you at all. Not with either one of you really.
Hehe, OK. Just making sure. The way the page is displayed
cuts off words sometimes, so I wasn’t sure.
“Reality is an illusion”… “Everything I’ve listed we can experience.
It is observable, and testable.”…
If reality is an illusion… What are you “testing” and observing”?
Trevor, you better dislodge this hokum from your thought life
before you have nothing left to think with!
I mean that with no malice my friend….
Liberatedself, You’re another who needs to find some solid ground.
Your notdisagreeing with either of us? Well, I can tell you Trevor
and I are about as far apart as one can get from agreement. If you don’t
disagree with either of us, you have some serious logical issues to address.
Our views could not be more conficted = You’re conflicted!
You’re testing the observable. While part of the system,
you can only test that system.
By the way Trevor, the webmaster here is been blocking my IP
address. You might want to tell him that it isn’t a good reflection
on the Deepak ideology to censor differing viewpoints….
You might also tell him that I have found my address to be an illusion..
I just have to concentrate and it changes!
Strange how logical these computers are, huh? Hmmm…Logical, like the
intelligence it took to create the code language which governs its behavior….
No relativism involved with that!
There is a difference between differing viewpoints and inflammatory
trolling. You have not come here to learn or even share a different
perspective. You came here to “expose” and degrade. Your claims
have been shot down at every turn. Someone who is honestly interested
in debate and learning, would recognize when they’ve lost and perhaps
see the flaws in their argument.
You do not, however, and persist with the same delusional thinking time
and time again. Looking through your posts on various threads, almost
every single one is an attack on the author or the posters. It’s not a very
constructive way to go about things.
As you can see, no one is coming to your rescue or even defending you.
It is not because everyone here is ‘drinking the same kool-aid’, in fact there
are many differing views here that coexist without conflict. You are an extremist
that is determined on ‘informing’ everyone who isn’t an evangelical christian, just how
wrong they are.
Remember what site you are on, and why you keep coming back.
Trevor, once again I will direct you to the “Fox News” post by your fearless leader.
If you don’t think that is offensive you are dillusional.
Like I said, this viewpoint you folks espouse has dangerous consequences and
if I can convince one then that is a victory.
I disagree that their is no one who agrees with me here. I have seen several…
Thsy are probably stuck at the “take the vow” website right now.
If you take offense to it, it must have struck a chord of insecurity.
If you’re comfortable with your beliefs, there is no reason to ever
take offense.
Refer to my previous statement about how you have been discredited
every single time. You “believe” our viewpoint to be dangerous, yet you
can not show a single shred of evidence to support your claim. All you
have are extremist beliefs and superstitions.
Trevor, Reread your last post please…. First you attack me for my
“inflammatory trolling”. I respond by saying that I have every only responded
in kind to Deepak’s hypocritical attack on Fox News…
Then you say this:
“If you take offense to it, it must have struck a chord of insecurity.
If you’re comfortable with your beliefs, there is no reason to ever
take offense.”
Does the light go on? I could have made this statement to you!
Are you insecure because you take offense to my “inflammatory
trolling”. I’m simply turning your argument against you here.
I continue to support my claims with evidence. I took you on on
your assertions about evolution being a fact. You proved yourself
to be speaking on something you know little or nothing about.
You eventially ended the discussion by deciding that I was the one
who had to prove it false, not you had to prove it true…..
Pretty classic tact of a person on the losing end of an argument..
Before you respond, let’s remember how it went….
You continually maintained evolution to be a fact. I disagreed and asked
for the evidence… You came back with no hard evidence and outdated ideas on
the theory which revealed that you don’t even understand where the theory
stands today…
You eventially did what I call the – jump up and down and scream- and then
told me I had the burden to prove otherwise!
It’s not my theory, It’s yours!
Anyway, I’m up to the task again if your so willing. I do suggest you read up
a bit before doing so..
I assure you, I take no offense to anything you write.
In fact, I enjoy it greatly. Every day I come to see what
delicious things you have left for me.
Your “evidence” isn’t evidence at all, but opinion and belief.
You cannot prove a negative, and as I have told you, debating
me on the existence of evolution is meaningless. It is accepted
throughout the world and scientific community. Nothing you have
presented is new and enlightening. When Einstein proved Newton’s
theory of gravity wrong, he didn’t do away with the entire set of data, but
he showed a better way to explain how things worked using that data.
Our data shows that things can change over time. You reasoning for
why this happens is “God did it.” Not exactly the beacon of scientific thought,
don’t you think?
Trevor, I see a problem with that… You believe in evolution
because “it’s widely believed”…
Well, tell you what, I don’t believe that Christ is real because
lots of other cool people do. I believe it because I put the evidence
proves it’s believable.
Listen, one of the rules I established before discussing evolution was
that no religion could be used in the debate… You were the first who
brought your faith into the argument.
You did it again in your last post. You can’t defend you belief in evolution,
you simply have faith that it exists because “it is accepted by the scientific
community”…
Tell me Trevor, without using your last “proof”, give me one reason why you
believe evolution is true…. I don’t even know why I ask, during our last discussion on
it you said that It was a fact but did not necessarily explain the origins of life!
No scientist would agree with you on that! And yet you are so convinced!
You better start putting things to the test Trevor, I promise that if you
do you’ll run from this Deepak garbage!
Hi there Straw Man.
Because “it’s widely believed” is not my reasoning for accepting
that things evolve. All of our observable evidence from all different
areas of science agree that things evolve. What other areas do you not
trust science in? Why aren’t you arguing the theory of relativity or gravity?
The only reason you and other extremists refuse to accept evolution is
because you believe your religion claims otherwise. That is not rational
thinking or critical thought. It is brainless submission. If you had never heard
of Christianity, you would not be questioning evolution. There is your fallacy.
Again, I don’t need to defend evolution. It has plenty going for it already. You, who have
stated that you have no more than a high school education, think you know the inner
workings of science and nature? You have no place to argue because you have no
where near the understanding to be able to do so. You are embarrassing yourself.
You are so full of yourself, you fail to keep your arguments and facts straight.
I did say evolution does not try to explain how life originated. THIS IS FACT.
Any reputable scientist would agree. For you to claim otherwise shows your
outright stupidity and lack of knowledge on this subject.
You use straw man after straw man, and I doubt you even realize it.
Seriously man, grab a dictionary, look up evolution.
You probably won’t, so here you go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution
“In biology, evolution is change in the genetic material of a population of
organisms from one generation to the next. Though the changes produced
in any one generation are small, differences accumulate with each generation
and can, over time, cause substantial changes in the organisms. This
process can culminate in the emergence of new species. Indeed, the similarities
between organisms suggest that all known species are descended from a common
ancestor (or ancestral gene pool) through this process of gradual divergence.”
Where in there does it say “…and here’s how life began”? It doesn’t. Imagine that!
I also suggest you look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_theory_and_fact
Common misconceptions:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_misconceptions#Evolution
Biological evolution does not address the origin of life; for that, see abiogenesis.
The two are commonly and mistakenly conflated. Evolution describes the changes
in gene frequencies that occur in populations of living organisms over time, and
thus, presupposes that life already exists. Evolution likewise says nothing about
cosmology, the Big Bang, or the origins of the universe.
Scientists most often use the word “fact” to describe an observation.
But scientists can also use fact to mean something that has been tested
or observed so many times that there is no longer a compelling reason to
keep testing or looking for examples. The occurrence of evolution in this
sense is fact. Scientists no longer question whether descent with modification
occurred because the evidence is so strong.
Evolution = Fact
Processes of Evolution = Theory
These include processes such as Natural Selection and Genetic Drift.
The first 3 sites that pop up on search.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/misconceps/index.shtml
http://listverse.com/science/top-15-misconceptions-about-evolution/
All 3 say evolution doesn’t explain how life began. So where are all these
scientist who disagree with me, Dale? In fact, forget a few, you said
NO SCIENTIST WOULD AGREE with me. It looks like they all do so far.
How are you gonna justify this? Are you going to ignore this information
like all others I’ve posted for the past month? My guess is, probably.