Evolution

[Little Rik]

Little Rik:

No, it's not.  Evolution refers to change.  "Progress" would be your religious interpretation.

Darwin labeled biological evolution as "descent with modification."  That is the definition you, Little Rik, need to confront.  You need to show that consciousness goes from one life to the next, carrying the advantages with it, and that there is modification of consciousness somewhere within that process (learning doesn't actually modify consciousness).  According to you, humans are the pinnacle of evolution, and that when they reincarnate, they don't remember their past life.  So, by definition, there can be no descent with modification for humans as they are at the end of the line.  And we have no evidence of NDEs in plants and animals, so you're shit out of luck there.  Where's your evidence for "descent with modification" ?

So, that's the burden you have assumed, and by my lights, you haven't come close to meeting it for consciousness.

1) According to me, humans are NOT the pinnacle of evolution. (when I ever said that   ?)
The pinnacle of evolution is to merge in the ocean of cosmic consciousness or to become one with God.

2) How can plants and animals can have an NDE?
As far as they are driven by mother nature instinct they can not possible have the free will so NDEs would not make sense in this case.

3) I don't give a fart what Darwin labelled as biological evolution.
As far as Darwin didn't know the meaning of the Latin word evolution his idea is a distortion of the original meaning.

4) Consciousness going from one life to the next DOES NOT NECESSARY carry advantages with it.
It really depend.
How can a rapist or a killer carry a better consciousness in the next life?
It will be just the opposite.

5) Finally NDEs already proved that consciousness carry on in the next life.

To conclude..........FAIL ONCE AGAIN ON ALL POINTS.






(color mine)